Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bitcoin Inventor Satoshi Nakamoto Outed By Newsweek

Posted by timothy on from the always-the-quiet-ones dept.

DoctorBit writes "According to today's Newsweek article, Satoshi Nakamoto is ... Satoshi Nakamoto — a 64-year-old Japanese-American former defense contractor living with his mother in a modest Temple City, California suburban home. According to the article, 'He is someone with a penchant for collecting model trains and a career shrouded in secrecy, having done classified work for major corporations and the U.S. military.' and 'Nakamoto's family describe him as extremely intelligent, moody and obsessively private, a man of few words who screens his phone calls, anonymizes his emails and, for most of his life, has been preoccupied with the two things for which Bitcoin has now become known: money and secrecy.' The article quotes him as responding when asked about bitcoin, 'I am no longer involved in that and I cannot discuss it, ... It's been turned over to other people. They are in charge of it now. I no longer have any connection.' I imagine that he will now have to move and hire round-the-clock security for his own protection."

16 of 390 comments (clear)

  1. Why? by Chalnoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why would he have to move/hire protection? I guess I can see that he might be paranoid enough to think it's necessary, but why would it be actually necessary?

    1. Re:Why? by johnsie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People do crazy things when money and power is involved. He's right to want to protect himself.

    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because it's now public that he's sitting on nearly half a billion dollars somewhere.

    3. Re:Why? by sunking2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are lots of rich people in the world. Most don't hire personal security. I've yet to see an entourage of folks accompany Warren Buffet into Dairy Queen when he wants a blizzard.

    4. Re:Why? by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oblig xkcd. He is the weakest link in the unbreakable encryption of his bitcoin wallet.

    5. Re:Why? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know not all journalists adhere to a code of ethics, but I believe that many do.

      Problem is, it can be tough to know which kind you've got until it's too late.

    6. Re:Why? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know about GP's experience, but any time I have explained anything to a reporter, it has come out printed as something completely twisted from it's original meaning. Case in point: told reporter "our technology has flown on Space Shuttle missions", printed in story: "Company Vice President says "their technology is going to the Moon!"" with the implication that the company stock is going to "rocket up" in value.

    7. Re:Why? by Copid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I could definitely see some of the people who lose a ton of money if/when the Bitcoin fad ends deciding to blame the guy who started it all rather than themselves for jumping in.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    8. Re:Why? by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even better: Why was his privacy violated by Newsweek in the first place?

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  2. Horrible Journalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, they put this guys life in danger. Shame on them.

  3. Conspiracy nuts are going to love this one! by johnsie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    a career shrouded in secrecy, having done classified work for major corporations and the U.S. military

  4. Gun + BC client = $1,000,000,000 by Idou · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Other billionaires require some kind of impossibly complicated strategy to steal their billions. . .

    Hope he takes the necessary precautions, though. . . Crypto-currencies are awesome. He deserves to spend the rest of his days in peace (For a crypto-genius, he could have picked a better pseudonym, though . . .).

    --
    Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
  5. Poor Guy by Metabolife · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He just wanted to be left alone, leave him alone.

  6. Why is this Article Beign Taken Seriously? by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's no actual concrete evidence of any of the author's claims, just tons of speculation. Yet it's being treated like it's undeniably true.

  7. Re:"It's been turned over to other people" ? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Typical anti-Bitcoin bullshit.

    Wikipedia: A pyramid scheme is an unsustainable business model that involves promising participants payment or services, primarily for enrolling other people into the scheme, rather than supplying any real investment or sale of products or services to the public.

    1) Where is the "promise" of payment or services that never gets fulfilled? Find a block and you get paid (in Bitcoin, sorry... a claim that Bitcoin isn't "real" doesn't hold water here).
    2) Where is the "enrollment" of other people in the scheme. I mine, I've never recruited anyone into a "scheme".
    3) Bitcoins have value. As a group people have assigned value to them. The fact I can go to an exchange and get money based on a bitcoin proves that. Just because the product is digital doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

    If you think it's a scam I can respect that, but write something that says why you think it is a scam. Don't come out and yell buzzwords like '"pyramid scheme" and "ponzi scheme" without justifying how it fits in to the accepted definition of the term.

  8. I wasn't aware this was unethical... by sirwired · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was not aware it was inherently considered unethical journalism to uncover those who wish to remain anonymous. Peeling back anonymity can help shed light on the reasons somebody does what they did. Background, motiviations, current involvement, etc. are certainly newsworthy things to examine.

    And why is his life in danger?