Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Meeting Satoshi

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–123 of 123 posts

Re: Tell HN: Meeting Satoshi

#121

Post by andypag »

Zikes wrote: post #70
gtirloni wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound like the CIA saying the leaked documents are not public information. There is no 'doxxing' to be done anymore. Satoshi has been 'doxxed' as much as anyone can be in real life. If you are worried about the anonymity of his Bitcoins transactions (and all other's that could be identified from that), I'm sorry, there is no such thing as complete anonymity (as the Bitcoin community apparently still has to learn)…

This is not about anonymity. He posted his name in the original Bitcoin white paper after all. This is about an individual's right to privacy. His finances and personal life have just as much right to protection as yours or mine, and just because you may have the power to disclose that information does not mean you should. For god's sake, you even cite the leaked documents in your argument. Do you remember why that's…

If he really wanted privacy he should have used cash.

Re: Tell HN: Meeting Satoshi

#122

Post by andypag »

georgemcbay wrote: post #116
duaneb wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you were well within your rights (and even the bounds of politeness for a cash transaction). If Dorian is not Satoshi, then this won't be a problem. If he is, this wouldn't be what would prove it. His problems are far, far larger than any one person's claim to resolve, I think.

This wouldn't prove anything one way or another but if it turns out that Dorian was in New York in the later half of 2011 (presumably he would have flown since he lives in CA and thus flight records could probably show one way or another), that would be pretty convincing circumstantial evidence.

He stated in his denial he'd not heard of "bitcom" until his brother told him about it 3 weeks ago, so if it transpired he'd used it in 2011 then that would prove that he wasn't being entirely truthful.
Post reply on HN