
Alleged Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto Denies Bitcoin Involvement - lukashed
http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/06/alleged-bitcoin-creator-dorian-prentice-satoshi-nakamoto-denies-bitcoin-involvement/
======
georgemcbay
While 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
If 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...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zpuer/the_newsweek_article_is_probably_incorrect_look/)

His skill level is completely different.

~~~
Steko
The 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._

~~~
VMG
the burden of proof is on those who make the extremely unlikely claim that the
person who painstakingly tried to hide his identity used his _real name_ ,
communicates in native-level english on the Bitcoin forums and purposefully
communicates in low-level English on all other internet forums.

Does not make any sense at all.

~~~
georgemcbay
From where I'm sitting the burden of proof is on those who claim he ever
painstakingly tried to hide his identity. To me it looks like someone who
doesn't like a lot of personal attention (something I can certainly relate to)
creating something to scratch an intellectual itch and that thing grew far
larger than he imagined, so he bowed out.

I see no proof that he is someone who was planning complete anonymity from the
start, that seems to me like a bolted on rationalization from people confused
by his partial disappearing act.

~~~
VMG
The newsweek article itself claims that Satoshi tried to hide his identity.

He never posted any personal information and used an anonymous japanese
registration service for the bitcoin.org domain, payment in cash. An unlikely
effort for somebody who doesn't care about anonymity.

~~~
georgemcbay
The article quotes Gavin Andresen as saying "He went to great lengths to
protect his anonymity.", but other than that doesn't offer anything to show
that he actually was actively trying to hide his identity or was ever using a
pseudonym.

~~~
VMG
In that case, why is there no track record of a _programmer_ named Satoshi
Nakamoto on the internet?

All we have is a track record of a _model train hobbyist_ Dorian Nakamoto.

------
skwirl
In 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.

~~~
Sambdala
Well the newsweek article also included a back and forth with a police officer
that likely never happened, and they also just published an article that
"proves" heaven exists because a former scientist went into a coma and saw
some pretty things while dreaming. I'm not sure there's a high barrier to meet
here, or that we can't assume he was misquoted in the original article.

~~~
anigbrowl
_a back and forth with a police officer that likely never happened_

I find this complaint ridiculous, like there's _no possible way_ a police
officer could know such things because otherwise they'd been a l33t h4x0r.
Police officers read newspapers in about the same proportion as everyone else.

~~~
meowface
It's the nature of the quote that makes it seem like it comes out of a movie
or something. It is still plausible he said that verbatim, but unlikely in my
opinion.

------
bishnu
Here'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...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zpuer/the_newsweek_article_is_probably_incorrect_look/)

Given all this, it's incredible Newsweek ran the original story in the first
place.

~~~
rfrank
They go back to having a print edition tomorrow, need a big story.

~~~
dmunoz
Forgot 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_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1vy457/were_the_staff_of_newsweek_ask_us_anything/)

[1]
[http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1vy457/were_the_staff_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1vy457/were_the_staff_of_newsweek_ask_us_anything/cewwhmt)

------
fchollet
This 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"_

------
ChuckMcM
This 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?

~~~
fragsworth
The 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.

~~~
ssprang
Is 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
Lottery winners usually don't have millions in hard-to-trace cash sitting
around.

~~~
Amezarak
I'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
Bitcoin 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.

------
ck2
Why 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.

~~~
Phlarp
>Why do the press feel entitled to literally show up on someone's doorstep in
mass?

Mostly? The first amendment...

~~~
bertil
You are confusing their entitlement, a psychologically concerning lack of
proper upbringing, respect and human decency, with rights. I could fill your
inbox with abuse, threats and sickening images arguing it’s my god-given
privilege — you’d still wonder why on Earth I would feel like ruining your
life like that.

And as pointed out, you are wrong about to whom the First Amendment applies
to.

~~~
Phlarp
To clarify; I wasn't saying the first actually gives journalists the right to
trespass or harass individuals.

Just that some poorly trained journalists and misguided internet armchair
pundits choose to interpret it that way.

------
ufmace
Unfortunately, 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
I'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
The 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.

~~~
sarreph
He doesn't like to pay taxes, apparently...

------
wmhtet
I 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.

------
lucb1e
I 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
> 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)

------
dinkumthinkum
I 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
Well 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.

------
Cless
"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.

------
philfreo
> 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".

------
rachellaw
this 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.

------
hooo
Perhaps he is an actor paid by Newsweek?

~~~
georgemcbay
Regardless 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.

