extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and this is not good enough.
Indeed, it is far from enough. No respectable media organization would have published such a tenuous story.
It's nice to have apparent confirmation from the police, but what are they confirming? They are confirming that the quotes were accurate. But Dorian Nakamoto has already confirmed that he was quoted accurately. He said that he misunderstood her and she apparently misunderstood him, and that seems entirely possible.
Her entire story relies on the confused 'admission' from Dorian Nakamoto during a few minutes interaction. She effectively ignores evidence that does not support her claim, such as the inexplicably huge difference in public writing styles of D Nakamoto and S Nakamoto.
What this new revelation does show, if you read the full reports of it, is that the reporter prompted the critical quote from the police officer, which opens her story, by first feeding him the suggestion that this old man was the creator of Bitcoin.
Comments
Indeed, it is far from enough. No respectable media organization would have published such a tenuous story.
It's nice to have apparent confirmation from the police, but what are they confirming? They are confirming that the quotes were accurate. But Dorian Nakamoto has already confirmed that he was quoted accurately. He said that he misunderstood her and she apparently misunderstood him, and that seems entirely possible.
Her entire story relies on the confused 'admission' from Dorian Nakamoto during a few minutes interaction. She effectively ignores evidence that does not support her claim, such as the inexplicably huge difference in public writing styles of D Nakamoto and S Nakamoto.
What this new revelation does show, if you read the full reports of it, is that the reporter prompted the critical quote from the police officer, which opens her story, by first feeding him the suggestion that this old man was the creator of Bitcoin.