Have you considered the possibility that:
1. Satoshi wanted to be outed someday. What good is being a genius without recognition?
2. Even though the world knows that he is rich, he will be okay. Bill Gates is the world's richest man and his life has not been compromised, yet. Satoshi's $600 million is tiny compared to Gate's $70 billion.
3. Even though the world knows that his invention is loosely tied to some shady activities(assassin for hire), he will be okay. Alfred Noble never intended explosives to be used for war nor did Einstein envision his E-mc^2 formula to be used to create the atomic bomb. At the root, only thing that Nakamoto did was create an internet cash-like currency.
4. Satoshi has the money to provide security for his family if he cashes in some of his coins; if he is already outed anyways.
Topic: **Breaking news** Satoshi Nakamotos identity revealed - page 29. (Read 77443 times)
DAMN SON!
SATOSHI GOT SOME SERIOUS SWAG!
SATOSHI GOT SOME SERIOUS SWAG!
The relevant probabilities are:
Probability that he faked his confession. He knows about bitcoin, because of his name. He thought in the past about what he would say if a journalist shows up at his door. He despises journalists and decides to play a practical joke. Seems plausible enough for me.
I would do the same if I was called Satoshi Nakamoto.
what's wrong with being King? ask Jeff Bezos
Not the king of Bitcoin, journalists lie and get away with, nothing new!
i think this is an old tactical move from the journalist. Firts they ruin a life of someone that has only the same name with the pseudonymous bitcoin creator name and after they lure out the real satoshi to track the real person.
I think they will wait a forum reactive to track him.
I think they will wait a forum reactive to track him.
The relevant probabilities are:
Probability that he faked his confession. He knows about bitcoin, because of his name. He thought in the past about what he would say if a journalist shows up at his door. He despises journalists and decides to play a practical joke. Seems plausible enough for me.
I would do the same if I was called Satoshi Nakamoto.
The quote attributed to Nakamoto does not contain a reference to bitcoin. See here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quote-attributed-to-nakamoto-in-newsweek-article-makes-no-reference-to-bitcoin-503956
Convinced she is performing some sort of sociological experiment. Will see in a day or two.
The relevant probabilities are:
Probability that he faked his confession. He knows about bitcoin, because of his name. He thought in the past about what he would say if a journalist shows up at his door. He despises journalists and decides to play a practical joke. Seems plausible enough for me.
Probability that she invented that confession. Such a lie would definitely ruin her career, so I'd put it at 10%.
Probability that he faked his confession. He knows about bitcoin, because of his name. He thought in the past about what he would say if a journalist shows up at his door. He despises journalists and decides to play a practical joke. Seems plausible enough for me.
Probability that she invented that confession. Such a lie would definitely ruin her career, so I'd put it at 10%.
The quote attributed to Nakamoto does not contain a reference to bitcoin. See here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quote-attributed-to-nakamoto-in-newsweek-article-makes-no-reference-to-bitcoin-503956
If it really is is him then Newsweek has put a target on him with address and his picture. how many lowlifes are willing to to do anything they can to get to his Bitcoins?
i think they'd first want to go to the Salvation Army to see if they could get any beer/cigarettes first
If it really is is him then Newsweek has put a target on him with address and his picture. how many lowlifes are willing to to do anything they can to get to his Bitcoins?
Does probability theory have anything to say about the likelihood that that this story is true?
For example, assume that the article is not a hoax, and that the hard facts presented within are true.
For example, assume that the article is not a hoax, and that the hard facts presented within are true.
The relevant probabilities are:
Probability that he faked his confession. He knows about bitcoin, because of his name. He thought in the past about what he would say if a journalist shows up at his door. He despises journalists and decides to play a practical joke. Seems plausible enough for me.
Probability that she invented that confession. Such a lie would definitely ruin her career, so I'd put it at 10%.
If this man is not Satoshi, it would be quite simple for the real Satoshi to come out and make an anonymous statement (signed tx) that it is not him.
Actually the real Satoshi could sign whatever he pleases to write. Even if it's wrong. So a message signed by Satoshi that says "this is not me" doesn't prove anything except the fact that Satoshi signed a message saying "this is not me".
I think she's just incredibly naive.
Her naivete is exemplified here: http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000253071
This is just some of the discussion that was happening in real time just before Newsweek published the story on their site. She gushes like a school girl.
If this man is not Satoshi, it would be quite simple for the real Satoshi to come out and make an anonymous statement (signed tx) that it is not him.
I think she's just incredibly naive.
Her naivete is exemplified here: http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000253071
This is just some of the discussion that was happening in real time just before Newsweek published the story on their site. She gushes like a school girl.
Yeah, she has turned presstitute. Sad.
If this man is not Satoshi, it would be quite simple for the real Satoshi to come out and make an anonymous statement (signed tx) that it is not him.
How so?
How would the 'real' Satoshi prove it?
If there was an easy way to just sign a tx and be done, surely the Newsweek Satoshi would just do that right?
If this man is not Satoshi, it would be quite simple for the real Satoshi to come out and make an anonymous statement (signed tx) that it is not him.
Yes, but if this man is the real Satoshi, it would still be quite simple for the real Satoshi to come out and make an anonymous statement (signed tx) that it is not him.
Who would believe?
I don't think he is satoshi, even if he says "yes i am satoshi" it means nothing, it is like if i say "i'm santa claus", ye well i'm not santa claus no matter what i say
He could sign a message from one of the first bitcoin addresses used, or one that he publicly used in the past.
I don't think he is satoshi, even if he says "yes i am satoshi" it means nothing, it is like if i say "i'm santa claus", ye well i'm not santa claus no matter what i say
He could sign a message from one of the first bitcoin addresses used, or one that he publicly used in the past.
then they'd kill him, cause he's not a true atheist
This is foolish. The article is not worth your time.
Don't read it.
Don't read it.
I doubt the real satoshi used his real name
Jump to: