Bitcoin Created By The CIA? Chinese Professor Jiang Xueqin Makes Bold Claim

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-04-17Last updated on 2026-04-17

Abstract

Chinese-Canadian educator Jiang Xueqin claimed Bitcoin was likely created by U.S. intelligence agencies like the CIA or NSA, rather than the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto. He argued that only state-level actors would have the resources and motive to develop such technology, suggesting Bitcoin serves purposes like surveillance and covert financing. He also questioned early large investments, like those from the Winklevoss twins, as suspicious. The Bitcoin community strongly rejected these claims. Commentators like Ansel Lindner and Lyn Alden argued that Jiang fundamentally misunderstands Bitcoin’s decentralized, open-source nature. They emphasized that Bitcoin’s value lies in its transparency and distributed network, which operates independently of any central control, making its origins irrelevant. At the time of reporting, BTC was trading at $74,886.

Chinese-Canadian educator and Predictive History host Jiang Xueqin has stirred debate after arguing that Bitcoin may have been created by the CIA or a broader US “deep state,” rather than by the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto. The claim, made on the April 15 episode of the Jack Neel Podcast, quickly drew pushback from prominent Bitcoin commentators who said Jiang’s argument rests on a basic misunderstanding of how the network works.

Was Bitcoin A CIA Project?

Jiang, a Beijing-based commentator with 2.3 million YouTube subscribers, framed the theory around what he described as a game-theory process of elimination. He said the standard origin story “makes no sense,” asking why someone would spend years or even decades developing blockchain technology only to release it to the world for free and then disappear.

“So then you have to ask yourself three questions,” Jiang said. “First of all is who would have the technology and the expertise to create something like the blockchain. Second of all, you have to ask who would benefit from this blockchain creation. The third question you want to ask is why would they keep it secret?”

From there, Jiang argued that the likely candidates were US intelligence and defense agencies, citing the role government-linked institutions played in building foundational internet infrastructure. “Probably the same people who created the internet, probably the same people who created GPS, DARPA, NSA, CIA, probably these guys,” he said. In his telling, blockchain would serve two strategic purposes: surveillance and covert financing.

He pushed the argument further by suggesting that the network’s value depends on people believing it sits outside political control. “The answer is only if people believe that this was transparent, open and beyond authority, beyond political control, would it have value,” Jiang said. “So the moment people recognize that this is a CIA operation, people won’t put their money into blockchain. People won’t put their money into Bitcoin.”

Jiang also pointed to what he sees as suspicious early adoption, specifically referencing the Winklevoss twins’ decision to allocate millions of dollars into Bitcoin when it was still a fringe asset. “These are not technologists, right?” he said. “How why would they put millions and millions of dollars into this thing? That’s really strange.”

Bitcoin Community Reacts

The backlash from Bitcoin-focused voices was immediate and blunt. Ansel Lindner dismissed the theory as the product of people who “don’t understand decentralization,” adding “This is the opinion of so many midwits. It’s also the reason even some gold bugs cannot comprehend bitcoin to this day, and why midwits believe in centralized scam sh*tcoins.”

Lyn Alden agreed. “Ansel is right,” she wrote. “People with this view don’t truly understand the open source aspect or the proof of work aspect fully. A strong point about Bitcoin is that it literally doesn’t matter who created it. It can be assessed on its own merits since it’s transparent and decentralized.”

That line of rebuttal goes to the core of the dispute. Jiang’s theory hinges on origin and hidden control; but the facts about Bitcoin’s design makes those questions far less important than he suggests, because the network is public, open-source, and maintained by participants rather than by a central operator.

MDB, another Bitcoin commentator, focused on one of Jiang’s specific questions: “Where are the servers of Bitcoin located?” He said that question alone showed the core problem and lack of understanding by Xueqin. “Bitcoin does not run on one company’s servers,” MDB wrote. “Bitcoin runs on a distributed network of nodes spread across the world, which is exactly why it is hard to censor, shut down, or control.”

At press time, BTC traded at $74,886.

BTC must close above the 1.0 Fib, 1-week chart | Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView.com

Related Questions

QWho does Jiang Xueqin claim created Bitcoin instead of Satoshi Nakamoto?

AJiang Xueqin claims Bitcoin may have been created by the CIA or a broader US 'deep state' rather than by the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto.

QWhat three questions does Jiang Xueqin propose to analyze Bitcoin's origin through game theory?

AJiang's three questions are: 1) Who would have the technology and expertise to create blockchain? 2) Who would benefit from blockchain creation? 3) Why would they keep it secret?

QWhat two strategic purposes does Jiang suggest blockchain would serve according to US agencies?

AJiang suggests blockchain would serve two strategic purposes for US agencies: surveillance and covert financing.

QHow did Bitcoin commentators respond to Jiang's theory about its origin?

ABitcoin commentators immediately dismissed Jiang's theory, stating it shows a misunderstanding of decentralization, open-source nature, and proof-of-work mechanics, arguing that Bitcoin's creator doesn't matter because the network is transparent and decentralized.

QWhat specific example of early adoption did Jiang find suspicious?

AJiang pointed to the Winklevoss twins' decision to invest millions of dollars in Bitcoin when it was still a fringe asset as suspicious early adoption.

Related Reads

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

The article "iQiyi Is Too Impatient" discusses the controversy surrounding the Chinese streaming platform IQiyi's recent announcement of an "AI Actor Library" during its 2026 World Conference. IQiyi claimed over 100 actors, including well-known names like Zhang Ruoyun and Yu Hewei, had joined the initiative. CEO Gong Yu suggested AI could enable actors to "star in 14 dramas a year instead of 4" and that "live-action filming might become a world cultural heritage." The announcement quickly sparked backlash. Multiple actors named in the list issued urgent statements denying they had signed any AI-related authorization agreements. This forced IQiyi to clarify that inclusion in the library only indicated a willingness to *consider* AI projects, with separate negotiations required for any specific role. The incident, which trended on social media with hashtags like "IQiyi is crazy," is presented as a sign of the company's growing desperation. Facing intense competition from short-video platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou, as well as Bilibili and Xiaohongshu, IQiyi's financial performance has weakened, with revenues declining for two consecutive years. The author argues that IQiyi is "too impatient" to tell a compelling AI story to reassure the market, especially as it pursues a listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The piece concludes by outlining three key "AI questions" IQiyi must answer: defining its role as a tool provider versus a content creator, balancing the "coldness" of AI with the human element audiences desire, and properly managing the interests of platforms, actors, and viewers. The core dilemma is that while AI can reduce costs and increase efficiency, it risks creating homogenized, formulaic content and devaluing human performers.

marsbit25m ago

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

marsbit25m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

363 Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片