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

Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#91

Post by declan »

kaishiro wrote: post #88
michaelt wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both 'libel' and 'liable' are real legal words. Libel refers to written/printed/online defamatory statements [1] - as opposed to slander, which is spoken defamation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel#Libel

I believe declan is referring to the fact that libel, being a civil tort, exposes one to be liable for defamation, not guilty of it (being that it's not criminal).

Yep. My point is that criminal libel no longer exists in the United States, so you can't be "guilty of libel."

You can held liable for libel, but that's an awkward phrasing, so "liable for defamation" is broader and better.

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#92

Post by declan »

eli wrote: post #27
zaidf wrote: post #23

How long before he denies this under oath? At that point he's risking criminal charges if he is found to be lying.

Why do you think he would have to say anything under oath?

I didn't make the above comment, but a sworn declaration would be good ammunition on the part of the plaintiff. Also given the difficulty of prevailing, it could help force an early settlement.

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#93

Post by [deleted] »

eatitraw wrote: post #81
blhack wrote: post #35

Here is what doesn't make sense about Dorian Nakamoto being the Satoshi behind bitcoin: Here's a guy who code switches during conversations and emails to maintain either the secret identity of an old Japanese man living in CA and playing with model trains, or to maintain the secret identity of a sophisticated programmer who created a proof-of-work system called bitcoin. But then this advanced guy maintaining a secret…

Many people like to picture the bitcoin inventor as some sort of god who knew everything in advance. The truth is in 2008/2009 (almost?) nobody was sure that bitcoin will succeed. Even Hal Finney(famous cypherpunk, who actively participated in the developing of the idea of the bitgold by creating RPOW: http://www.finney.org/~hal/rpow/ ), even Hal Finney was sceptical: "turned [bitcoin] off because it made my computer…

[deleted]

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#94

Post by tptacek »

gamblor956 wrote: post #47
abvdasker wrote: post #37

I tend to believe the Newsweek article because a reputable journalistic source of that caliber would not run a story like that unless they had enough evidence to prove it. Because this guy is not a public persona they would probably otherwise be guilty of libel. -- EDIT: As gamblor956 pointed out they would be "liable" rather than "guilty". It does sound like he may have a case though, especially if Newsweek is wrong…

Newsweek is not guilty of libel or defamation because those are torts for which criminal "guilt" is meaningless. Newsweek would not be liable for libel or defamation because being labeled the creator of Bitcoin is generally not something that would harm one's reputation. Libel or defamation claims are generally applicable where one person claims another person did some heinous act, like rape, or a felony, and told ot…

Nit: you appear to be describing per se defamation (accusations of heinous actions), but this is just a small subset of all defamation claims. So long as damages are incurred, false statements of fact can and do routinely incur liability, turning on the credibility of the statements, the recklessness (or deliberate deceptive intent) with which they're made, &c.

It's definitely not the case that a newsmagazine would be in the clear simply because designing Bitcoin isn't a crime (although other factors probably do rule defamation out).

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#95

Post by Hypx »

ceallen wrote: post #19

"I haven't been able to find steady work for ten years, and this article written a week ago is why."

This is the amazing part! The denial from Dorian contains an obvious lie in it and represents an enormous hole in his argument. I think this is extremely suspicious and makes me think that this guy really is the creator of bitcoin. But for some reason unknown, possibly tax-related, that he cannot let anyone else know about. Reminds me a lot of when Roger Clemens or Lance Armstrong vehemently denying they used steroids, when the evidence strongly suggests otherwise.

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#96

Post by ghshephard »

jcomis wrote: post #84
Borogove wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Untrue. Leigh claims that Satoshi "tacitly" admitted his involvement, in the most ambiguous part of an extremely ambiguous writeup.

This is hardly stated "tacitly": "I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it," he says, dismissing all further queries with a swat of his left hand. "It's been turned over to other people. They are in charge of it now. I no longer have any connection."

  Reporter: Tell me, are you the inventor of Bitcoin?
  Dorian: I don't want any trouble, please leave me alone.
  Reporter: As an engineer working for defense projects, 
            you clearly had the skill to build this type 
            of technology.
  Dorian: I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it,...
All the reporter had to do was click "voice memo" on her iPhone, and there would have no doubt as to what had actually transpired...

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#97

Post by philwelch »

blhack wrote: post #35

Here is what doesn't make sense about Dorian Nakamoto being the Satoshi behind bitcoin: Here's a guy who code switches during conversations and emails to maintain either the secret identity of an old Japanese man living in CA and playing with model trains, or to maintain the secret identity of a sophisticated programmer who created a proof-of-work system called bitcoin. But then this advanced guy maintaining a secret…

Of course it doesn't track. Satoshi Nakomoto always knew the last thing anyone would expect would be that his real name was Satoshi Nakomoto. It's a brilliant plan.

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#99

Post by nhaehnle »

VMG wrote: post #40
blhack wrote: post #35

Here is what doesn't make sense about Dorian Nakamoto being the Satoshi behind bitcoin: Here's a guy who code switches during conversations and emails to maintain either the secret identity of an old Japanese man living in CA and playing with model trains, or to maintain the secret identity of a sophisticated programmer who created a proof-of-work system called bitcoin. But then this advanced guy maintaining a secret…

This whole thing reminded me of the lesswrong.com post on Amanda Knox [1] Even the initial assumption that the creator of Bitcoin used his real name, contained in the headline, was extremely unlikely, and all other evidence was completely circumstantial. In my mind, it was nearly obvious that Dorian is not Satoshi after a few hours and was shocked to see that many believed the news story. I'm still not sure if this w…

the initial assumption that the creator of Bitcoin used his real name, contained in the headline, was extremely unlikely

I'm curious: Why do people actually believe that this is so unlikely? By the time that I first read about Bitcoin, it seemed to be already accepted canonical knowledge that Satoshi Nakamoto must be a pseudonym, and I guess I just accepted that. But now that this discussion has come up, I don't think I remember any positive argument to that other than "he does not like to talk about his private life" (not a particularly strong argument given the amount of discussion of private life in typical open source projects) and "the inventor of Bitcoin must be some pre-established genius, and there is no such genius named Satoshi Nakamoto" (also rather questionable, and quite contrary to the startup culture usually seen here).

Are those pieces of evidence enough to make the use of his real name "extremely unlikely"?

Re: Dorian Satoshi Nakamoto Denies All Bitcoin Ties in Verified Letter Via Lawyer

#100

Post by tanon500 »

stcredzero wrote: post #11
andrewhillman wrote: post #6

This proves that interviews really need to be done via email or audio recording. This would seemingly prevent a lot of basic reporting issues. Interviewee: "I did not say this." Interviewer: "Here's the email / audio as proof." Problem solved.

Audio would be better. Email is easy to forge for anyone with even modest resources.

Can you explain how? DKIM signatures would be pretty difficult to forge...
Post reply on HN