<entry id="2119792" stat="A" corpus="jmnedict" type="jmnedict">
<ent_corp type="jmnedict">jmnedict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>5743214</ent_seq>
<k_ele>
<keb>中本哲史</keb>
</k_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>なかもとさとし</reb>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<misc>&person;</misc>
<gloss>Satoshi Nakamoto (pseudonymous inventor of Bitcoin)</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2021-07-15 06:18:38" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Nicolas Maia</upd_name>
<upd_refs>https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B5%E3%83%88%E3%82%B7%E3%83%BB%E3%83%8A%E3%82%AB%E3%83%A2%E3%83%88</upd_refs>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-07-15 12:41:02" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_diff>@@ -12 +12 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (creator of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (presumed creator of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-07-15 13:12:41" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Nicolas Maia</upd_name>
<upd_detl>Not presumed. The 'presumed' part is whether this name is real or a pseudonym for one or more people. But this name is credited with creating bitcoin. I don't think we need that level of detail, though.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Nakamoto</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -12 +12 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (presumed creator of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (creator of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-07-16 01:57:32" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>There's no way we can have just "(creator of Bitcoin)" when there's uncertainty as to "his" existence. Some qualification is needed.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -12 +12 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (creator of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (reputed creator of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-07-16 04:26:13" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Nicolas Maia</upd_name>
<upd_detl>'Reputed', or 'presumed' here give off the impression that the authorship of bitcoin is uncertain, when it's not. The paper that first described bitcoin was explicitly authored by a Satoshi Nakamoto. Whether that is a pseudonym or not is up for debate, and one I don't see the usefulness for us to get into, since no one has a definitive answer to that.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-07-16 05:15:44" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Hmmm. "[G]ive off the impression that the authorship of bitcoin is uncertain, when it's not."って. Good to know that people who think it's actually by Ian Grigg or Nick Szabo, not to mention Craig Wright, are so totally wrong.
I'll back off here. Someone else can decide whether "reputed" or a similar qualification are appropriate.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-07-16 11:32:50" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>robin1354</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Robin Scott</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>How about this? Safe to assume it's a pseudonym.
By the way, I'm not sure we need this kanji form. "Satoshi Nakamoto" has no official kanji. I've only ever seen サトシ・ナカモト used in Japanese media.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -12 +12 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (reputed creator of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;Satoshi Nakamoto (pseudonymous inventor of Bitcoin)&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-07-16 21:03:24" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I like it. Covers all bases.</upd_detl>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>