Whether or not this man really is the creator of Bitcoin, Newsweek have behaved unconscionably in publishing personal details about him. This isn't some fame-seeking celebrity whose personal life is fair game, nor a powerful politician who is subject to public interest. This is a private individual whose privacy they have violated, despite him making it clear that he did not wish to speak about Bitcoin.

The article is pretty vague as to the evidence as to whether he is actually the inventor of bitcoin.

There's obviously privacy issues, but if newsweek have strong evidence as to him being the inventor there is a public interest argument due to the fact his background is working on classified projects for the US government.

I thought about posting the article text here since some people can't seem to get to it, but honestly, it's a hatchet job. They did everything they (legally) could to publish personally identifiable information about some guy who has severe health and money issues and just wants to be left alone. There are no compelling facts presented as to why he would actually be SN and several details seem to contradict this theory. It's just horrible reporting, whether it turns out to be true or not.

> Gavin Andresen: I'm disappointed Newsweek decided to dox the Nakamoto family, and regret talking to Leah.

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/441547758827474946

Previous discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7353109

Why was it deleted?

I was the OP of the original thread. I felt like Newsweek really violated the privacy of Satoshi, if it is allegedly him, as an individual, by making all of this public. So I decided to delete this for ethical reasons.

Because it's a creepy and pointless article that says absolutely nothing at all.

What the hell - they posted pictures of his house, mentioned his address, etc.

Woah - they even write about his _family_ including names, what they do, where they live and how many children they have.

Is this fucking disgusting or is it just me?

It's News. They would argue it is "in the public interest" and that this trumps an individual's right of privacy.

Compare and contrast to news coverage of the personal "private" lives of celebrities, royalty, sports personalities. Do these people have the same right of privacy? What's different in other people's cases? I'd imagine however that the average Hacker News reader is generally less interested in these stories, possibly finding them at best distracting and at worst distasteful. I find it distasteful and unnecessary. But I would be lying if I thought that this article was not of interest to many people (even if I am not in that group), and I would also feel uncomfortable endorsing the banning of this type of journalism.

Newsweek are a bunch of assholes for posting pictures of this guys house. Even if he isn't Satoshi, he needs to hire some bodyguards.

Paywall free: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:eIDjXrk...

Should have respected his privacy. He never wanted to be publicly known figure and this is anyway not an interview.

Seems very implausible indeed. The following passage is key: I am no longer involved in "that", probably means computer security not bitcoin.

"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."

Why would SN admit to it - risking his safety? And he invented bitcoin so that he can order model trains? give me a break.

Reporting like this puts this man's life in danger. Imagine all the other people's lives out there that have been significantly damaged due to bitcoin.

If we're having CEOs of companies dying and massive fraud in other companies all related to bitcoin, something this personal should never be published.

The reporter seems to have harass everone from him to his family. Interesting results but troubling ways of getting them.

The page just takes me to an ad. Mirror?