8 ms·
Alleged Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Denies Bitcoin Involvement
- rachellaw 13y agothis thing's a mess and full of he said she said they said. Honestly I expected better of Newsweek, running an unverified story. Even if he <i>is</i> the bitcoin creator, it's now forever going to be tainted with uncertainty since there's absolutely no verifiable proof that he is, only a lot of speculation.
- ChuckMcM 13y agoThis mentions 'anger' as in "After a full day of wild speculation and anger, the LA press have finally tracked down Nakamoto and he’s receiving a grilling." I don't get it, who is angry? This guy could be angry about having his life invaded but where is the emotion coming from here?
- anigbrowl 13y agoYou were posting in the other HN thread, there were plenty of angry people in that one.
- canistr 13y agoSome of it is from Reddit/Twitter/Bitcoiners who want Nakamoto to be left alone.
- fragsworth 13y agoThe anger is coming from the bitcoin community, mostly because they're afraid for Satoshi's life. Someone could kidnap/torture him to try to get his bitcoins.
- GuiA 13y agoHim, or any member of his immediate family, which the journalist of the original piece made sure could easily be tracked down.
- drcross 13y agoOr his family. At his departure from the project he made it obvious that he wanted to be left alone so people should respect his wishes.
- Steko 13y agoMaybe he wants a pony too, why should anyone give a shit?
- VMG 13y agoethics
- Steko 13y agoI missed the ethics class where we decided to give the superrich whatever they want.
- VMG 13y agoYou also missed the class where you should have learned that human rights are universal and are not diminished by being wealthy. It's also the wrong guy by the way.
- Steko 13y agoBecause asking a (possible) rich guy a question is a huge violation of his human rights.
- dinkumthinkum 13y agoYou actually have a good point but the first was a bit mean and a little much.
- VMG 13y agoNo, it's perfectly legal but unethical. In the words of Lebowski: It's not wrong, it's being an asshole.
- ssprang 13y agoIs there a particular reason why he'd be at risk for this versus any other well known wealthy person? Are lottery winners worried about this?
- dllthomas 13y agoLottery winners usually don't have millions in hard-to-trace cash sitting around.
- Amezarak 13y agoI'd think Bitcoins would be a whole lot easier to trace than dollar bills. The real reason behind this fear is that some consider Satoshi their hero and icon. Anything, therefore, that he doesn't or wouldn't (if you maintain this isn't the real Satoshi) approve of especially as it relates to himself inspires strong feelings and irrational justifications like "he could be kidnapped and tortured." Or at least that's the only reason I can imagine this argument keeps coming up. Any other wealthy person could also be kidnapped and tortured. Heck, most wealthy (100m+) people probably have pretty valuable things just laying around their house that are far less traceable than Bitcoins.
- dllthomas 13y agoBitcoin is certainly easier to trace than dollar bills - I'm not confident about "a whole lot easier". But few people have the kinds of sums Satoshi purportedly has in BTC sitting around in any liquid asset in their home. I certainly hope Satoshi doesn't, either, but it's significantly more likely that he can move tremendous amounts of value without involving intermediaries (and thus more risk) than it would be for really any other individual. Of course, in this case, I hope the bitcoin network would resign itself to coloring those coins, if Satoshi was extorted out of his coins.
- ssprang 13y agoSure, but his bitcoins probably aren't just sitting around either. The fear was that he'd be kidnapped/tortured in order to acquire them. If we're allowing for that, it seems like anyone with sufficient wealth would be a target.
- minimax 13y agoThey obviously think this because wealthy Americans are constantly being kidnapped and tortured for their money. Happens all the time right?
- cschmidt 13y agoI suppose the difference is that most people with a reported $400 million don't keep it in cash at home. As I understand it, Bitcoin is more like cash in that possession is ownership.
- dinkumthinkum 13y agoWell then bitcoin is definitely the currency we want in the revolution ... ...
- bertil 13y agoWell, there isn’t openly violence from the hackers, but three exchange has been hacked recently (that we know of), leading to at least one suicide… More importantly, such public heist seem to have been able to merge in the mass too fast for anyone to track them: that comes off as a step above a suitcase of unmarked bills. And, yes, it does happen: South Americans, in general, but the order of magnitude of the amont, and the lack of security makes it possible. It’s hard to assess the actual risk: cartels haven’t necessarily been associated with cryptographers, but Silk Road made a connexion, and home-made submarines have proven a track record of adopting innovation fast and efficiently. The sliver of risk, no mater how thin, seems not worthy of openly naming the person, as opposed to offering close-up photo and a third party confirmation that the details appear consistent.
- drawkbox 13y agoIt could be safer to be known publicly.
- spinchange 13y agoOne doesn't even have to be in the bitcoin community (or a redditor) to feel sympathy for an obviously private guy who has had a reporter stalking him and his family and publishing photos of him, his house, etc., in a major news publication. Whether he's the creator of bitcoin or not, he and his family are now the focal point of an intense amount of attention and as you highlight, possibly danger.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- lucb1e 13y ago> I don't get it, who is angry? I am, for the poor guy that may or may not be the author of Bitcoin but who, and whose family, is now being watched and constantly approached with questions.
- skwirl 13y agoIn the video he says "I'm not involved in Bitcoin" (present tense) which is not inconsistent with what was reported in the Newsweek article: >"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." I say this because the headline is trying to imply that Newsweek identified the wrong man, and as a result people are on twitter gloating about Newsweek being "wrong." Even if they do end up being wrong, this article and the corresponding video aren't evidence one way or the other.
- vilhelm_s 13y agoWell, according to LA Times reporter Andrea Chang he denied both present and past involvement, so that's something. https://twitter.com/byandreachang/status/441687863222996992 https://twitter.com/byandreachang/status/441687863222996992
- skwirl 13y agoShe is referring exactly the very exchange that took place in video linked in this submission I just described above. Where do you see anything denying past involvement in what you linked? edit: I saw this (separate) tweet almost immediately after submitting, but HN went down when I tried to edit - https://twitter.com/byandreachang/status/441696297964158976 https://twitter.com/byandreachang/status/441696297964158976. So she is claiming he said "No no no I was never involved." Which would imply that he wasn't telling the truth to either Newsweek or to this reporter, unless you believe Newsweek makes things up.
- codeulike 13y agohow about this tweet by same reporter: Nakamoto, when I asked him in elevator why he told Newsweek he used to be involved with #bitcoin: "No no no I was never involved." https://twitter.com/byandreachang/status/441696297964158976 https://twitter.com/byandreachang/status/441696297964158976
- 13y ago
- bishnu 13y agoHere's a good roundup on Reddit about how Dorian Sakamoto likely isn't Satoshi Nakamoto: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zpuer/the_newsweek_article_is_probably_incorrect_look/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zpuer/the_newsweek... Given all this, it's incredible Newsweek ran the original story in the first place.
- rfrank 13y agoThey go back to having a print edition tomorrow, need a big story.
- Phlarp 13y agoWell they need a lesson in proper internet hype cycles then. step 1. Find a scoop that can actually be verified. step 2. Don't give it away for free on the internet the day before.
- dmunoz 13y agoForgot about that. The staff of the "new new Newsweek" did an AMA a month ago [0]. Interesting discussion under a reply [1] to this question: > Do you feel like you are able to avoid the reliance on fear-mongering tabloid journalism and human interest that seems to be the focus of cable news sometimes? [0] http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1vy457/were_the_staff_of_newsweek_ask_us_anything/ http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1vy457/were_the_staff_... [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1vy457/were_the_staff_of_newsweek_ask_us_anything/cewwhmt http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1vy457/were_the_staff_...
- Cless 13y ago"Not involved with Bitcoin" leaves the door open to having been involved with Bitcoin in the past. I wonder if he was trying to deny past involvement with Bitcoin but worded it poorly, or if he was merely being clever in his wording, like a politician. Perhaps we'll find out.
- ufmace 13y agoUnfortunately, this doesn't really tell us much. Of course with the initial info, the rest of the media would track this poor guy down eventually and hassle him until he gave them something. All that's really clear is that he's a bit of a shut-in with no interest in media attention. The only thing he could do that would really be conclusive is to somehow produce enough evidence that he really is the Bitcoin creator Satoshi. He can deny all he wants, but it'll be impossible to prove that he isn't that guy unless a "real Satoshi" pops up somewhere. Conspiracy theorists on all sides will continue to spin plenty of plausible scenarios both ways. And of course, if he did confirm it, people would still doubt it until there was really solid proof.
- lotsofmangos 13y agoI'm Satoshi Nakamoto, and so is my wife. But seriously, if this really is the Satoshi Nakamoto and he has been seriously ill with two seperate life threatening illnesses in the recent past, how come none of those bitcoin he supposedly owns have shifted on medical bills?
- bcoates 13y agoThe claim that he'd have to publicly go onto MtGox to get funds out of his Bitcoin supply is absurd as well. If you're going to move a few million dollars, you can afford to do it right as a private sale using agents who won't blab to the press or anyone else (as long as you pay your taxes) Everyone would know that an early adopter moved some coins, but the IP address of the Starbucks that his lawyer's tech guy makes the transaction from isn't going to leak much.
- aarondf 13y ago> I'm Satoshi Nakamoto, and so is my wife. You aren't the only one, apparently[1]. I am Spartacus. [1] http://teespring.com/satoshi-nakamoto http://teespring.com/satoshi-nakamoto
- gamblor956 13y agoIt's been suggested that Satoshi lost or deleted his keys when he left Bitcoin around 2009. It's entirely possible he no longer has (access to) these Bitcoins.
- philfreo 13y ago> As we see above, the man identified as the father of bitcoin vehemently denies any involvement in this video shot" No... in the video he denies being presently involved with Bitcoin ("I am not involved in Bitcoin"), he doesn't deny "any involvement".
- hooo 13y agoPerhaps he is an actor paid by Newsweek?
- georgemcbay 13y agoRegardless of what you think of Newsweek, they are savvy enough to know that a story like this would kick up a lot of secondary reporting and staging this and using an actor would essentially equate to suicide of their news organization.
- georgemcbay 13y agoWhile I do feel bad for this guy's current situation (he clearly doesn't want any attention... sort of like the bitcoin Satoshi...hmm!), I really don't understand why so many people are jumping to the conclusion that this story is wrong/fake/some sort of conspiracy or whatever. If there were a reasonable way to settle it for sure, I'd bet a substantial amount of money that this is the bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto. The pieces laid out fit pretty well. I think there's a lot of weird denial going on because people built up this crazy fantasy of an assumed identity, highly advanced mathematician guy and learning the dude's real name is actually Satoshi Nakamoto and he's a pretty regular joe (for a near recluse) is causing a cognitive dissonance.
- VMG 13y agoIf you look at the internet comments of Dorian Nakamoto, it is obvious that he is not the same person that wrote the whitepaper or participated in the bitcoin forums: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zpuer/the_newsweek_article_is_probably_incorrect_look/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zpuer/the_newsweek... His skill level is completely different.
- hnha 13y agoor he just manages multiple online identities? It's not hard, especially if you are smart...
- Steko 13y agoThe idea that these reddit links are some kind of smoking gun is a bad case of rationalizing. FWIW, my Father in law is a first generation Asian immigrant who is an engineer and for whom English is a second language. His emails to my wife are like the one above - broken English, poor grammar. But I've seen some documents that he's written for work - the early stages of patent applications, for instance - and they read like someone else wrote them, even though my FIL is the one who wrote them as they'd yet to have been submitted internally. Proper grammar, more formal prose. There is, every now and then, a phrase or word that seems out of place and not something a natural speaker would say, but the difference between in grammar between work and personal emails is night and day.
- ck2 13y agoWhy do the press feel entitled to show up on someone's doorstep in mass? That is quite literally trespassing. They just feel like they can get away with it. Leave him alone, if he wanted to be found he would have shared it awhile ago.
- anigbrowl 13y agoIT's not trespassing to go up to someone's front door, otherwise the mail wouldn't get delivered. You can step on to the curtilage of someone's property, but you must leave if you are asked to do so - although nothing prevents you hanging around on the street in front of the property in hopes of getting an interview. If this becomes onerous, one can get a restraining order, but courts are cautious about handing them out to journalists engage din legitimate news gathering. In short, they feel like they can get away with it because they can legally get away with it.
- bertil 13y agoI don't think you need to be 150 to “gather information”.
- anigbrowl 13y agoI don't know what you mean.
- bertil 13y agoYou wrote: > courts are cautious about handing them out to journalists engage din legitimate news gathering. I doubt that it it News Worthy to be the 150th person with a TV camera standing at a recently declared news-worthy spot, or that most of those are gathering something that isn’t being recorded.
- ck2 13y agoSo, serious argument: What if you purposely did not have a mailbox on your home but at the edge of your property (like much of rural America vs suburban) and you had no obvious front-door. Would a person then be entitled to wander around your property looking for you? I would hope not. So by having a front-door you are suggesting people are allowed to just walk onto your property, up to the door, anytime they feel like it and harass you? If no door or you do not answer, how about your back window? Bathroom window? I'm curious how the logic works.
- fchollet 13y agoThis is obviously not the Satoshi they were looking for. The Newsweek article reads like a ridiculous pageviews grab, sloppy with facts and extremely disrespectful for Dorian Nakamoto. The foundation of why the journo thought he was Satoshi was... his birth name (which he actually changed years ago, and that is not a particular rare name). Yeah, no contradictions whatsoever here: >> "He went to great lengths to protect his anonymity" >> "He used his real name"
- dinkumthinkum 13y agoI didn't know that the origin of the bitcoin was in so much doubt. But after seeing this story, the reddit stuff, and other comments around the web, this just seems like a lot of complicated drama. I don't see how serious people will take Bitcoin seriously let alone have it bring about a libertarian revolution.
- lucb1e 13y agoWell it's not the origin of Bitcoin itself, it's about which human individual or group wrote the initial paper and the initial version of the software. It's a side-issue that is mostly pursued out of curiosity. Note that this doesn't mean that I agree that curiosity justifies the current witch hunt, but that's another matter.
- lucb1e 13y agoI wonder why he doesn't outright deny it all, current and past involvement. He doesn't want to be involved, as far as we know, so why would he care if it's a lie that he has never been involved? Would he not lie out of integrity (assuming it is him)? Or does he have some plan to out himself at some point, and is it just that he hadn't wanted it to happen like this? Hmm. Well this last part is only wild speculation, in my opinion this hunt and questioning of him and his family should stop right now, but I still wonder. Curiosity killed the cat...
- gwern 13y ago> I wonder why he doesn't outright deny it all, current and past involvement. This may well be what he's done in his 2-hour long interview with the AP reporter, an article on which should come out very soon, according to https://twitter.com/JoeBelBruno https://twitter.com/JoeBelBruno
- wmhtet 13y agoI would like to argue on the possibilities of him not being Satoshi Nakamoto. Other than having the career, which could profile him as the likely Satoshi Nakamoto, the Bitcoin inventor, the article build up him to be one. I am going to argue against the most convincing statement: "It's been turned over to other people. They are in charge of it now. I no longer have any connection." As someone who has engineering background in CS field, he will be aware of the Bitcoin and a peculiar case of having similar name (He is Dorian S Nakamoto). Thus, he will be a bit more interested in it(People with unique name can share that sentiment) and know enough about the Myth of the disappearance of the Satoshi Nakamoto, the Bitcoin inventor. We(including him) all know the kind of disturbance we will face if we were identified as mysterious Bitcoin Inventor. There is also a cloud of uncertainty over legality of Bitcoin. I don't think the news about Silk Road with Bitcoin and the FBI issue will help either. For him, he has to be more weary since he shares part of the name. So when this privacy invading journalist come knocking on his door, he pull the Bitcoin inventor act saying that he relegate the task to other to shoo her away thinking it will be over. An easy way out, he might have thought. The fact that he cannot disappear like the Bitcoin inventor did not register in his mind at that time. He could have been pestered by people about Bitcoin before, just like the journalist started asking him about Bitcoin in the middle of model train email exchanges. He is the real Dorian S Nakamoto. He cannot deny his name but he is not a mythical Satoshi Nakamoto. If you were an introvert, how would you react in that situation? You most likely shut up just like he did. Around these assumption the journalist build up the theory that Dorian is the Bitcoin Inventor. Anyway, I am pissed at the NewsWeek on violating the privacy of individuals(Dorian S Nakamoto and Satoshi Nakamoto) who wants to be left alone.