51–60 of 123 posts
I'm holding to my comment! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6828576 >I am only certain of one thing when it comes to bitcoin, the creator(s) are not Japanese.
But actually, what makes you say the creator of Bitcoin ("the real Satoshi") is not Japanese?
I do not believe him. There are just too many coincidences there. This is not a common name. What are the chances you find someone that has the math and engineering knowledge to create bitcoin and has not been busy with anything else during the relevant period among the "several" people that newsweek found having that name in the entire world. He is probably scared for his life and scared for the safety of his family…
So Newsweek, returning to print newsstands after several years, runs with a cover story that is debunked on the internet in a matter of hours? Is this not a perfect metaphor for the print journalism industry? Can we bet on when Print Newsweek 2.0 also goes belly-up?
Do editors and journalists not read what is being published? Feels like we've all been transformed back 7 to 10 years ago where this kind of "investigative journalism" was prevalent and hardly investigative at all. NewsWeek either need to put up some conclusive proof or retract everything they've said and give mr Satoshi an apology.
It'll be interesting if from a legal perspective Dorian Satoshi has a case against NewsWeek considering this has already gone to print. If it causes Satoshi's life to crumble, make it hard for him to get employment, subjects him to harassment from armchair Internet investigators and whatnot, he might have some kind of case. But having said that, this would mean if it went to court, he would have to offer up access to info that NewsWeek and others don't have and if he is the real Satoshi, it would come back to bite him.
The real question is, if this is the real Satoshi, why isn't he using his incredible stash of Bitcoin to live a little more comfortably? Hiding in plain sight perhaps. Just let the poor guy be. Nobody should be subject to this kind of speculative journalism. It's the Boston bombing situation all over again.
Edit: the real Satoshi responded to his original announcement here, his first communication in 5 years: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/forum/topics/bitcoin-open-sour... — a simple one liner.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bill Gates spends millions a year on personal security. What if this guy is not actually worth millions of dollars?
Then he has to suffer through the horror and agony of having someone knock on his door, and having the police escort them off his property. I'm not sure if he'll fully recover from that kind of trauma.
That's the worst that will happen to him.
Oh wait, people have reason to think he has est.~400 million in bitcoins. But it's okay, I'm sure he'll recover from this (https://xkcd.com/538/) kind of trauma, too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm thinking more like a huge lawsuit.
Libel? Slander? Where's the suit? If this guy actually is Satoshi the last thing in the world he wants is to be on a witness stand. Opening a case against Newsweek lets them subpoena all sorts of records that they aren't entitled to with out a case, primarily because the truth is a defence to slander / libel, and if this guy loses then he's forever Satoshi. Also it's going to be pretty difficult to prove that he suff…
So Newsweek, returning to print newsstands after several years, runs with a cover story that is debunked on the internet in a matter of hours? Is this not a perfect metaphor for the print journalism industry? Can we bet on when Print Newsweek 2.0 also goes belly-up?
It's not a very good metaphor at all, especially when the story first appeared online, and was (edit: possibly)debunked by a massive news corporation that has been in print for decades. If it turns out this guy isn't Satoshi, it's just plain good reporting by the AP. As for Newsweek, that would be it, I think. They'd be a laughing stock.
It turns out they were wrong about something far worse than claiming that some guy created Bitcoin. And yet, the AP is still around today...and is now being cited by the tech community as a paragon of journalism.
So is there any way to verify either account, beyond nudging the benefit of the doubt in the company with higher journalistic integrity's favor (AP)?
The two stories arent mutually exclusive. According to Newsweek the man acknowledged that he had worked on bitcoin: "I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it" AP says the main is denying he ever worked on bitcoin. He very well could have said both of those things.
A woman started (from his perspective) stalking him, emailing him under false pretenses, phoning him, calling his son, and then showing up at his house in person. He called the cops to keep this stalker (again, from his perspective) away from his house. She yelled some questions at him from a distance and he might have thought she was asking about DoD work. "No longer involved and cannot discuss" is a reasonable answer. As well as: Don't come back.
I asked Newsweek's editor in chief a few hours ago about any recording: https://twitter.com/declanm/status/441713108763951104
No response.
According to the Newsweek article this Satoshi Nakamoto: 1. Dropped all contact with the reporter when the topic of Bitcoin was brought up over email. 2. Called the cops when the reporter went to his house to ask him about Bitcoin. 3. Said to the reporter: "I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it," "It's been turned over to other people. They are in charge of it now. I no longer have any connection."…
Ok, I'm sorry but there are some serious inconsistencies here. Leah McGrath Goodman said that after she asked him about BitCoin he promptly stopped emailing her. The timeline is unclear, but it seems like this was before Goodman contacted his family members. Why would she contact his family members if she was directly talking to him and they could blow her pretext of wanting to talk about model trains? This strongly…
That said, if the guy wants his privacy, we can afford it to him, and if the only way to do that is to pretend he isn't the founder, so be it. So that is how I am going to interpret these denials and those agreeing with them.