Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not a new thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
Please read other comments in the thread.
Which?
Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
91–100 of 167 posts
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#92It’s funny that people always guess that Satoshi is someone already famous as opposed to someone who is not known.
Just some lurker of that early mailing list, absorbing knowledge that eventually culminated into the code and paper. The number of unknown great programmers is a lot. What I think is interesting is that it was both code and a paper, not only code. So at least a grad student. And likely someone that starts many projects, because they left after only one year. Something else could have gotten more interesting.
Unless they really left… RIP.
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is curious to me that it seems okay to defer to the author's assumption that Satoshi is a singular person, while at the same time denouncing how they refer to that person. You are okay with one uncertain assumption but not another. I think if you are willing to defer to the author here that benefit of the doubt should extend to the rest of their writing. However, if we assume that Satoshi is a singular person, how…
The norm is follow the gender assumption based on the pseudonym. If the person picked a female name, everyone would happily call the person “she”, as it should be. It has nothing to do with the real person’s gender.
I don't believe this to be generally true but would believe that you have experienced communities that practice this convention. For the curious, in which communities do you find this to be the norm?
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem really upset about this. Why does a pronoun choice bother you so strongly?
Because it’s grammatically inconsistent.
It’s only inconsistent to you because your understanding of english language usage seems to also be inconsistent (at least with mine, others’ commenting on this thread, and the author’s of the linked article). I find this interesting in the abstract.
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#95In my opinion Satoshi Nakamoto is not a pseudonym at all. Don't underestimate weaponized autism.
>Don't underestimate weaponized autism. Meaning what, exactly?
Probably that there’s a real person named Satoshi Nakamoto out there, who’s an autistic savant that authored BitCoin v0.1.
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's Nick Szabo. This is the article that convinced me: https://www.bitcoininsider.org/article/78686/i-designed-bitc...
It's 100% Nick Szabo with Hal Finney's help. There's a non-zero chance that there's an NSA/IC employee who worked with them. Just based on the 1996 NSA paper "How to Make a Mint" and the potential that a government cryptocurrency is the ultimate solution for the inflation problem. Regulated stablecoins and/or a CBDC is the perfect way to disintermediate the banks from the dollar. Source: speculation but I was around…
[deleted]
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#97Satoshi came out of retirement in March 2014 to state that he was not Dorian Nakamoto, in the wake of a Newsweek article that falsely fingered the latter as Satoshi: https://techcrunch.com/2014/03/06/satoshi-dorian/ I still think it was Hal Finney, who was in similar cypherpunk circles, created the first PoW system, received the first Bitcoin transaction, lived in the same town as Dorian Nakamoto for 10 years, was di…
> Satoshi came out of retirement in March 2014 to state that he was not Dorian Nakamoto It appears far from certain that Satoshi posted that message on Ning in March of 2014: Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto targeted by email hack https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/09/bitcoin-c... > An administrator of the semi-official Bitcoin Talk forum, Michael Marquardt, posted on Monday night that he had received an…
[deleted]
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Don't underestimate weaponized autism. Meaning what, exactly?
Probably that there’s a real person named Satoshi Nakamoto out there, who’s an autistic savant that authored BitCoin v0.1.
Dorian graduated in physics and does programming for a living. I'm sure he can do anything if he puts his mind to it.
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
The individual used a male name, so it’s reasonable to make that assumption in common speech. In terms of individual vs group, it seems unlikely that a group would have the discipline to not do anything with billions of dollars or expose the individual with control of the same.
>The individual used a male name, so it’s reasonable to make that assumption in common speech. As long as you don't know it's a pseudonym, yes. I don't know when that became generally accepted.
Right. I’ve never experienced dialog or writing where somebody elects a gendered pronoun based on the pseudonymous handle used to reference the antecedent when their gender is either irrelevant, unspecified, or unknown. I’m curious which communities practice this colloquially?
Re: Len Sassaman and Satoshi: A cypherpunk history
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just some lurker of that early mailing list, absorbing knowledge that eventually culminated into the code and paper. The number of unknown great programmers is a lot. What I think is interesting is that it was both code and a paper, not only code. So at least a grad student. And likely someone that starts many projects, because they left after only one year. Something else could have gotten more interesting.
Unless they really left… RIP.
Sure, at least today that is more probable and maybe by now they truly did pass on. The range of possibilities are of course endless. But at that time, if we take their statement literally[1] they just moved on to other things.