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

Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

bitcointalk.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 186 posts

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#161

Post by icebraining »

Karunamon wrote: post #149
InclinedPlane wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy crap, get over yourself. Bitcoin is a flash in the pan fad. Maybe eventually there will be a cryptocurrency that's worthwhile but bitcoin having the "potential of changing humanity" is utter bullshit. Also, your argument is completely ass-backwards. It doesn't matter how important the issue is, means are just as important as ends. Look at it this way, consider some other examples. Finding out whether or not some…

>Bitcoin is a flash in the pan fad. Huh. I swear I've heard such comments before.. "This internet thing isn't going to go anywhere" -- Most companies, early 1990's "No wireless, less space than a Nomad. Lame." -- CmdrTaco, the original iPod release "I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year."…

CmdrTaco's doesn't fit the rest. He wasn't predicting anything, he just found the iPod lame. And it was, to him and many of us.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#162

Post by icebraining »

Karunamon wrote: post #160
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the "they laughed at Galieo" Gambit http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Galileo_gambit It's a lot older than your examples and is a reliable crutch for quacks. Yes, most important advances are initially dismissed. But almost all things that are initially dismissed are not important advances. You cannot infer importance from initial dismissal. Dismissal does not in itself make anything more likely to be important.

Indeed. The only thing this proves is that people are really, really bad at determining what things are going to catch on and which aren't. Which is why I take such "Feh! Bitcoin is a fad!" statements as the uninformed nonsense that they are.

The only thing this proves is that people are really, really bad at determining what things are going to catch on and which aren't.

No, it really doesn't. It just proves that in some particular cases, some particular people were bad at determining that.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#163

Post by vl »

dbroockman wrote: post #14

Should we change our beliefs based on this post? Based on Dorian's denials today, isn't this post just as likely in the world in which Dorian is Satoshi and the world in which Dorian is not? I don't have a strong belief one way or the other, but this doesn't seem like good evidence.

More interesting question why people even care? I doesn't really matter if this guy or anyone else is creator of bitcoin. Bitcoin is already established, lets say we know for a fact Al Gore invented bitcoin. What changed? Nothing.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#165

Post by goldenkey »

schoen wrote: post #138
adventured wrote: post #125

One thing is for certain, if Dorian is the real Satoshi, the Feds - NSA and FBI - are all over him, and they will know for certain whether he is the Satoshi (if they didn't know a long time ago). If Dorian = Satoshi, he's going to be forced in front of the NSA, and interrogated about bitcoin, he will have no choice in the matter (it won't matter if he's no longer involved, and it won't matter if there are no weakness…

NSA isn't a law enforcement agency. If you get contacted (or arrested or detained) by a law enforcement agency, you could ask to have a lawyer present before answering any questions. Your lawyer can help you assert your fifth amendment rights against self-incrimination. I don't mean to deny that the Federal government might already know who the creator of Bitcoin is. They may, and they may have quite strong evidence.…

And the Patriot Act craps all over the 5th amendment unfortunately. A bitcoin founder could be called a domestic terrorist for creation of a "terrorist" money source.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#166

Post by 6d0debc071 »

It would seem odd for someone who's otherwise been so careful about security to use his or her real name. It would seem less odd for them to flick through the phone book and choose someone else's name though (or pick it off a grave stone, randomly mash forename and surname together - whatever.) Sharing the name is weak evidence at best. With so many people, odds are if you pick something vaguely okay someone in the world will have it too.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#167

Post by nicky0 »

pdeuchler wrote: post #93

Hmmmmm. Assuming the post was made by the actual Satoshi... Dorian Nakamoto is Satoshi: This is an attempt by him to throw people off his scent, which would be foolish and desperate since chances are the millions of eyes focused on him will find more concrete proof than the Newsweek article, rendering the posting moot. Almost guaranteeing the drama will continue, if not whip it into a larger frenzy. Dorian Nakamoto i…

So you are essentially saying "being a decent human being" = "fail".

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#168

Post by psykovsky »

euank wrote: post #94
flylib wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dorian is claiming he never heard about Bitcoin until a few weeks ago so if he was using them in 2011, then he is obviously Satoshi

That still does not follow. It proves that he lied about not knowing what bitcoin is and it proves that he had bitcoins. Those two facts do not prove that he is Satoshi. It is not obvious. Here, I'll give you an alternative explanation: Dorian was an early bitcoin adopter or otherwise had a small number. When reporters started asking his son if he was Satoshi, he realized that that would damage his reclusive lifestyl…

But... he IS Satoshi. Maybe not the right Satoshi, but Satoshi nonetheless.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#169

Post by aestra »

ufmace wrote: post #64
danielnaab wrote: post #47

I'm confused by all this. I find the drama interesting, but Newsweek quoted this: "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." Did the reporter really lie about this statement? That seems like really a massive stretch, to me.

The trouble with that statement is that, even if you believe it's a verbatim quote, it isn't clear exactly what he said that in response to. We're meant to assume that it's a response to something like "Are you the creator of Bitcoin?", but the fact that the question isn't part of the quote implies that it isn't that clear. This guy was involved in classified Government work at several companies, and the question cou…

I don't believe the quote in the article, but I believe a cop might have known about bitcoin. The reason being is they might have been briefed about it because of the silk road and its reputation as a drug currency.

Re: Satoshi Nakamoto denies being Dorian Nakamoto

#170

Post by aestra »

fallinghawks wrote: post #75
danielnaab wrote: post #47

I'm confused by all this. I find the drama interesting, but Newsweek quoted this: "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." Did the reporter really lie about this statement? That seems like really a massive stretch, to me.

Reporters misquote and put their personal or editorial spin on even the most trivial stuff. (Speaking from personal experience.)

I know someone who is a reporter. She reported on something involving a mutual friend. She interviewed the mutual friend's boss. When she reported she misquoted the boss and even got the boss's name(!) completely wrong.
Post reply on HN