It's up to Geohot to prove his claim. Althoug he may have insider information, he isn't in a position known to have inside information. It might be more correct to phrase it that way but we all got the meaning.

That's not how it works out in practice. For example, journalists who have insider info from sources and leak it on the regular don't do anything to prove they have insider information, they build up reputation based on how many predictions they make.

There's no point in outing your sources, that's how you lose them.

Until reputation is built you aren't trusted. It seems geohot's reputation still doesn't convince everyone.

He has a reputation but it's for being untrustworthy.

Prove a negative you mean?

It's up to anyone making a claim, if they want people who aren't yet convinced to become convinced, to provide some supporting evidence. This basic rule of discourse applies whether one makes a positive claim or a negative claim.

Bluedevilzn made a negative claim, so naturally I'm asking if they can prove their negative.