741–750 of 905 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A third tweet posted by Jeong in 2014 said, “Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins.” It's not like she's any browner..
Incredible, some people think that minorities can't be racist, by that definition Japanese weren't at all racist in 1937 Nanjing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why should journalism engage in the implied pro-active censorship here? Because in this particular case it endangers subject's life.
Lol you guys are really in a cult aren’t you? You’re implying that journalists should never out people that are too wealthy? Do you not see the massive red flag here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Mr Carreyrou is such a good writer then he should be embarrassed to publish trash: > In keeping with this belief, Mr. Back made his Hashcash spam-throttling software open source. > Satoshi did a similar thing. He released the Bitcoin software under M.I.T.’s open-source license, which allowed anyone to use, modify and distribute it without restrictions. The numerous observations such as this only seem impressive to…
You’re talking about “Occam’s razor” while noticing things in an article that may not be relevant while informing huge swathes of the article. Occam’s razor suggests you’re doing this because you want the article to be wrong and want to pretend to be a genius, not because you actually think it is
The article is written as if it's by some crazed conspiracy theorist. It's dripping with confirmation bias at every turn. Tiny coincidences are seized upon to confirm the author's suspicions whereas other explanations are minimized.
This kind of one-track reasoning almost always turns out to be wrong. Did the author accidentally stumble upon the truth? It's possible. Back has all the right qualifications to be Satoshi. But so do many other people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, Szabo's whole reputation comes from bit gold and years of writing about exactly these ideas
I'm almost 100% certain he's the creator of Bitcoin. I didn't need to see his technical chops to suspect it -- all I needed was to read his article from 2002 which discusses the whole concept and key ideas that Bitcoin is currently based on: https://nakamotoinstitute.org/library/shelling-out/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s a context to that you’re missing. The people saying that are usually using the formulation that racism = prejudice + power. So can black people in the U.K. be prejudiced? Yes, definitely. Racist? They’d need to be in a position of authority for it to matter. Other people use the formulation racism = prejudice about race, and end up talking past each other.
There's a term for that: systemic racism. The redefining racism thing just comes from a bunch of people who wanted to be racist without admitting racism -- often, ironically, from a position of power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of their journalists also doxxed Naomi Wu, intruding on her personal life, making her lose her income, and possibly getting her in trouble with Chinese authorities: https://x.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1209815150376574976 The journalist themselves is a real piece of work: https://thehill.com/homenews/media/463503-sarah-jeong-out-at... Kinda goes to show you the kind of people who write these stories. Ethics haven'…
for a good counterbalance to those just finding out the nyt is a state dept mouthpiece at best, read about real journalists and why there seem to be so few of them, read Pegasus by laurent richard. Spoiler alert, real journalists who expose powerful peoples' wrongdoings simply get killed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a journalistic publication with a foundational value of transparency. If you study the history of institutions that favor transparency, they rarely ever need to further justify efforts of transparency beyond that underlying value. Transparency needs no further analysis of second order effects. “What is gained…?” is simply not a question asked, for the same reason that advocates for privacy rarely if ever circ…
As someone currently working there (in tech, not the newsroom), this is partially correct. Second order effects can become a consideration, but the bar is high. Usually “will this place someone in immediate, specific danger of harm” vs potential risks. As a recent example, journalists covering Iran in the past week had sources confirming the downed airman was located, but that the extraction planes had been unable to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> “Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men,” Jeong said in one tweet from 2014 that has since been deleted. You weren't messing, she seems lovely.. /s
[flagged]
Satoshi supported big blocks in his writings and empowered the pro-big block Gavin when he disappeared. Adam is a well known supporter of small blocks, ultimately the "winning" side of the debate. They are not the same person.
Did you miss the part where Satoshi came to Adam's rescue, to thwart big blocks? https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/6EC9DDF352DC4838AE9B088AB37...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read most of the article or what?
All 12,000 words. Kept expecting it to take a turn toward something beyond pre-judgment and insinuation. Instead it unfolded as a cautionary tale, of the power of a premature conclusion to close an investigator’s mind to reasonable alternative possibilities. About escalating commitment to an early hunch, even as it leads you down an investigative dead end. For example it sure seems like his mountain of circumstantial…
Does it? I didn't come to that conclusion. Do share!
>So, like—why are we coming at this one guy by name and spooky hacker photo in the New York Times, with the suggestion that he has $110 billion under his mattress? All these speculations and arguments have been done over and over—what does this reporting add that’s worth 12,000 words?
Well, they identified this guy and the reporting here is better than the others I've seen in the past. This article obviously has nothing to do with what past writers wrote, so I don't really get the point of pretending like it all comes from one place.
>The colorful journey down a dead end, fine—but leave it at “My Quest,” don’t do the weasel subhed “the trail of clues […] led to Adam Back” to insinuate that it proved what it set out to prove. Or even added anything significant to the well-trodden record.
Yawn