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

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 905 posts

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#761

Post by busterarm »

pas wrote: post #585
busterarm wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had the fortune/misfortune to be directly or peripherally involved in nearly a dozen situations that made it to press and there isn't a single case where the story represented in the article wasn't blatantly misinterpreted from the facts. In nearly every case what was mentioned in the article was the complete opposite of what actually happened. Biggest/Most-egregious offenders were Vice and Vox Media but include…

can you give some examples? I'm very interested in this. (after all we had about a decade of crying "fake news" - and as far as I understand the verdict was that big traditional outlets get the basic facts right - who what where when - but are absolutely clueless about or intentionally spin the "why".)

No meaningful ones that I'd want to reveal without doxxing myself. I can give you one of someone else's that can be independently confirmed.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/sugar-weasel-the-clown-escor... This article by Vice is 100% bullshit. Vice basically published this PR piece for the guy as a favor. A lot of articles that you read are really coordinated press releases -- like the initial Blake Lively v Justin Baldoni NYT hitpiece. Yes, I know this is dumb and totally entertainment and not "news", but this article actually harmed the business of the actual guy that Weasel ripped his shtick off from. Aaron Zilch used to rant about this guy and how bullshit this article was for years. There's a small clown kink/BDSM community in Vegas and those in it at the time this was published all called it out for the bullshit it was. Asked Vice for a correction/retraction and they did nothing.

Somebody handed them a clickbait story and they published it for the clicks.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#762

Post by timr »

Citizen_Lame wrote: post #687
timr wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how you know that, but even that argument is a straw man, unless you're asserting that all of the other currencies declined in value equally against whatever theoretical good(s) you're holding out as the objective standard for value.

I don't think you know what a straw man means, or purchasing power.

OK.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#763

Post by Akronymus »

dpark wrote: post #756
moomin wrote: post #719

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.

You are correct that there are multiple somewhat-conflicting definitions of racism but “taking past each other” isn’t really what’s happening. The “classic” definition of racism is something like “a system of oppression based on race”. People pull that out to explain why “[minority] people can’t be racist”, but that that definition isn’t about people. It’s about systems, so if we take that definition, no individual c…

the prejudice + power statement while still ascribing veing racist to individuals is a definite motte and bailey tactic in my eyes.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#764

Post by smoovb »

Satoshi Nakamoto was likely created in response to the December 2005 raid of e-Gold in Florida by U.S. Secret Service/FBI, and other similar incidents. e-Gold was the largest Digital currency at the time clearly showed the dangers of centralization. Douglas Jackson's indictment occurred about 18 months before the Bitcoin whitepaper.

So the risk of centrally founding another digital currency was clear at the time and e-Gold was discussed by both Back and Finney.

Launching without a single point of failure, a single arrestable founder was critical to the success of Bitcoin.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#765

Post by righthand »

chii wrote: post #368
righthand wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the person who harmed him will be prosecuted. And life will go on. The NY Times isn’t calling for violence.

> Then the person who harmed him will be prosecuted ... NY Times isn’t calling for violence. And the negligent driver also didn't mean to cause injury, yet we have laws on negligent driving. If the NY Times would have known that harm could come to someone by having information published, they should consult and/or take measures to prevent that harm (or at least, take measures to minimize it).

The negligent driver was driving the vehicle though. The NY Times writer isn’t holding Back hostage and holding a knife to his throat nor indicating anyone should do that. Your metaphor is nonsense.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#766

Post by empath75 »

mlrtime wrote: post #586
catcowcostume wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point, personally I had never considered that doxing could be considered not illegal/crime.

It's a horrible point, it assumes that the person being doxxed is the claim of the doxer. There is no wait they can be 100% sure, so they will ruin someone's life over what?

> There is no wait they can be 100% sure, so they will ruin someone's life over what?

What harm is caused by this article, do you think? He is already incredibly wealthy, already has security, and many people already assumed he was Satoshi Nakamoto. Claiming that someone invented a world altering technology is neither libel, nor defamation, _even if it an intentional lie_. If it is not a lie, or is merely a mistake it _certainly_ is neither.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#767

Post by righthand »

missingdays wrote: post #558
righthand wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the person who harmed him will be prosecuted. And life will go on. The NY Times isn’t calling for violence.

So if someone broke into your house, murdered you, and stole all your money, you would die peacefully, knowing that the thief will be prosecuted?

What? They murdered me then stole my money. I’m dead before I knew I was robbed so in your scenario I can’t die knowing the thief would be prosecuted, because I’m already dead. I literally dont care what happens then because I have no agency at that point in time.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#768

Post by righthand »

yreg wrote: post #369
righthand wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the person who harmed him will be prosecuted. And life will go on. The NY Times isn’t calling for violence.

And yet they would be responsible.

How? Knowing who Satoshi is, is a great thing. Don’t create a diety out of the pseudonym.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#769

Post by righthand »

hliyan wrote: post #422
righthand wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the person who harmed him will be prosecuted. And life will go on. The NY Times isn’t calling for violence.

Consider the following hypothetical: you have a safe in your home with a substantial sum of money in it, and you consider its presence, the location and contents private knowledge. However, someone uses publicly available information to infer the rough location and contents of your safe and makes it public. You are robbed shortly after. What percentage of responsibility lies with that person?

Responsibility is entirely your own fault for letting the “someone” know of your safe and it’s value. Do you know in America most gun safes are kept unlocked? Most gun safes are rather large too, hard to hide. Why doesn’t chaos ensue when this fact is known? Someone COULD go an steal all the guns and use the guns to kill everyone then rob everyone. But do you think they’d get away clean and no one would have any idea what’s going on? It could happen but hasn’t yet.

It’s another day, why hasn’t some nut captured Back yet and done any of the fearful things you’re insinuating yet?

In fact why didn’t someone just kidnap and torture ALL of the possible Satoshis? The names have been known for quite some time. I’m sorry but your theory that revealing who Satoshi is, is bad doesn’t hold water.

Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? My quest to unmask Bitcoin's creator

#770

Post by miyoji »

jibal wrote: post #408
creatonez wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I think you have that backwards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slate_Star_Codex#Anti-reaction...

No, unfortunately they don't. Scott Alexander Siskind is definitely sympathetic to race science and neoreaction, that's WHY he wrote the "anti"-reactionary FAQ. It's probably the most popular document about "neoreaction" on the internet and made many many people more aware of neoreactionary ideas. He did this intentionally because he likes neoreactionaries and thinks they are correct about race science and that they're useful allies.

There is simply no other way to explain this email [0] that he wrote.

One critical point, he discusses "criticizing" the neoreactionaries, and says he disagrees with them on several points.

> I want to improve their thinking so that they become stronger and keep what is correct while throwing out the garbage. A reactionary movement that kept the high intellectual standard (which you seem to admit they have), the correct criticisms of class and of social justice, and few other things while dropping the monarchy-talk and the cathedral-talk and the traditional gender-talk and the feudalism-talk - would be really useful people to have around. So I criticize the monarchy-talk etc, and this seems to be working - as far as I can tell a lot of Reactionaries have quietly started talking about monarchy and feudalism a lot less (still haven't gotten many results about the Cathedral or traditional gender).

There are a "few other things" he thinks they're right about, but he specifically lists all four things that he thinks are problematic. None of them are race science, which implies that race science is one of the "few other things" he thinks they're correct about.

You can put this together with enough of his public writing to see where he stands on the issue. He's clearly aligned with "race realism".

This entire email is also accompanied by a threat never to reveal these thoughts of Scott's. Why? Because he knows that being outed for his real views would do serious damage to his reputation. That's also why he got mad at the NYT, because they had his number and he didn't want anyone to find out about his real politics.

If you're the kind of person who is naive enough to think "He wrote an anti-reactionary FAQ, how could he be a reactionary?", I am sorry, but you're dealing with a lying snake.

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/lm36nk/comment/g...

Post reply on HN