There are some things that still don't make sense
--AP Report--
"
I got nothing to do with it," he said, repeatedly.
Several times during the interview with AP, Nakamoto
mistakenly referred to the currency as "bitcom," and as a single company, which it is not. He said he's never heard of Gavin Andresen, a leading bitcoin developer who told Newsweek he'd worked closely with the person or entity known as "Satoshi Nakamoto" in developing the system, but that they never met in person or spoke on the phone.
"Peer-to-peer can be anything," he said. "That's just a matter of address.
What the hell? It doesn't make sense to me."
Asked
if he was technically able to come up with the idea for bitcoin, Nakamoto responded: "Capability?
Yes, but any programmer could do that."
----------------
Is it weird that he seems to go from stumbling idiot who doesn't even know what a 'bitcoin' is, and keeps mistakenly calling it bitcom… to someone that feels they would have the understanding enough to even answer the question of "would you be able to technically come up with the idea for bitcoin"
Does his response to that question not imply he knows what bitcoin is and understands how it technically works? Or am I missing where the AP reporter may have enlightened him to what bitcoin is and how it works… and THEN asked the question on whether he was technically able to come up with the idea?
Any chance the AP reporter recorded the full 2 hour interview? I would love to hear the entire thing!
The problem is the interviewer probably didn't understand bitcoin very well. It would be pretty easy to for someone with a deep understanding of crypto to figure out if Dorian would have actually had the technical skill needed to develop the software. It's definitely not something that *any* programmer would have been able to write.
"Peer-to-peer can be anything," he said. "That's just a matter of address. What the hell? It doesn't make sense to me."
Technically speaking, this is correct. In fact, one of the things that made the Internet different from other networks was that it was every node was a "peer" and could talk to any other node. In fact, some of the oldest protocols that are still used are p2p in the modern sense, like SMTP email, the DNS system and newsgroups.
The modern sense of "p2p" really has nothing to do with network topology, it's really more like "peer to ad-hoc cluster", you're not communicating with another node, rather with every other node, or the system in general. It's really just an artifact of the fact that Napster was the first p2p file sharing program, and you actually got the files from other peers, rather then the central server. It's become a catch-all term. But it's not surprising an older coder would think it sounded somewhat nonsensical.
