4 ms·

Hi folks! I wrote the article (and woke up surprised to find it on HN). I initially compiled this prior to Dorian's definitive written denial. Prior to that de

Hi folks! I wrote the article (and woke up surprised to find it on HN). I initially compiled this prior to Dorian's definitive written denial. Prior to that development, it genuinely seemed like the Newsweek article was going to (a) simply fade into obscurity and (b) never be retracted. The possibility of "b" was unacceptable, because without a final nail in the coffin, most news organizations would still treat it as though it were legitimate – e.g. referring to Dorian with phrases like "the alleged Bitcoin founder", and so on. I think Dorian's written denial probably served as that final nail, but I still released this because despite the denials, I think Newsweek easily could have done the same research I did in compiling this, and come to this conclusion before they published the feature and damaged their rep.

ds9 13y ago
I stopped in here to say, I really like the idea of listing points for and against a proposition being true, in ambiguous cases like this. Often in relation to, say news stories or other controversial claims or ideas, the public have an interest in knowing which of conflicting versions is true, but lack access to primary sources of info. Then people who need to make a "best guess" are forced to rather subjectively estimate the plausibility of various statements, based on more subjective factors including estimates of general credibility of sources. In such cases, it's probably best to make explicit the grounds for any conclusion - it clarifies for oneself, and may enable improvement by allowing others to review the estimates.
- natdempk 13y ago
  This was what I really liked about this article as well. I wish there was more news presented in this format, as it is making a point, but also presents counterarguments to its claims and the evidence for both sides.
aestra 13y ago
>referring to Dorian with phrases like "the alleged Bitcoin founder", and so on That is a correct way to refer to him, even if you didn't believe it was him. al·leged əˈlejd/ adjective adjective: alleged 1. (of an incident or a person) said, without proof, to have taken place or to have a specified illegal or undesirable quality. "the alleged conspirators" synonyms: supposed, so-called, claimed, professed, purported, ostensible, putative, unproven How the heck else would you refer to him? Someone publicly alleged him to be the Bitcoin founder.

ds9 13y ago

I stopped in here to say, I really like the idea of listing points for and against a proposition being true, in ambiguous cases like this. Often in relation to, say news stories or other controversial claims or ideas, the public have an interest in knowing which of conflicting versions is true, but lack access to primary sources of info. Then people who need to make a "best guess" are forced to rather subjectively estimate the plausibility of various statements, based on more subjective factors including estimates of general credibility of sources. In such cases, it's probably best to make explicit the grounds for any conclusion - it clarifies for oneself, and may enable improvement by allowing others to review the estimates.

natdempk 13y ago
This was what I really liked about this article as well. I wish there was more news presented in this format, as it is making a point, but also presents counterarguments to its claims and the evidence for both sides.

aestra 13y ago

>referring to Dorian with phrases like "the alleged Bitcoin founder", and so on That is a correct way to refer to him, even if you didn't believe it was him. al·leged əˈlejd/ adjective adjective: alleged 1. (of an incident or a person) said, without proof, to have taken place or to have a specified illegal or undesirable quality. "the alleged conspirators" synonyms: supposed, so-called, claimed, professed, purported, ostensible, putative, unproven How the heck else would you refer to him? Someone publicly alleged him to be the Bitcoin founder.