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

bitcoinist发布于2026-04-17更新于2026-04-17

文章摘要

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

相关问答

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.

你可能也喜欢

你的黄金真的“拿得到”吗?代币化黄金背后的托管地理盲区

大多数投资者在评估代币化黄金产品时,通常关注流动性、费用、支持链种和审计频率等问题,但往往忽略了一个更根本的问题:实物黄金究竟存放在哪里?能否真正被提取? 与稳定币不同,代币化黄金的支撑是实体黄金,其价值实现高度依赖于黄金的存放地点、法律管辖和实际赎回机制。稳定币依托的是全球流通的信用工具,而黄金具有物理属性,其赎回必须依托具体的地理位置和司法体系。代币化黄金的价格锚定并非由技术自动实现,而是依靠跨市场的套利机制,而该机制的有效性又取决于实物黄金能否被高效、低成本地赎回。 如果黄金存放地与用户所在地区不一致,跨境赎回将面临物流、清关、法律等多重障碍,导致套利成本高、效率低,甚至影响价格稳定性。相反,本地托管的黄金更易嵌入区域金融基础设施,也更符合本地监管和抵押品使用需求。 因此,代币化黄金不会形成统一的全球市场,而将呈现区域化发展趋势。对于亚洲等地区的机构用户来说,黄金是否存放在本地、是否支持本地赎回和合规验证,才是决定其实际可用性的关键。 最终,问题不在于“是否有黄金支持”,而在于“是否能在需要时真正拿到黄金”。资产的物理属性和地理因素决定了代币化黄金的本质仍是一种具有强烈地域依赖的实物请求权。

marsbit30分钟前

你的黄金真的“拿得到”吗?代币化黄金背后的托管地理盲区

marsbit30分钟前

交易

现货
合约

热门文章

加密市场宏观研报:《GENIUS Act》法案取得重大进展,BTC突破历史新高,后市全新展望

2025年5月22日,比特币价格正式突破11万美元大关,创下历史新高。在政策面、宏观经济、资金面与投资者结构共同作用下,一场结构性牛市浪潮正在展开。而此轮上涨背后的核心驱动,是美国《GENIUS稳定币法案》的实质性进展以及多项利好的叠加。本文将从政策端突破、宏观环境转向、链上与ETF资金结构、交易行为演化,以及重点受益赛道五大维度,全面解析此轮BTC再创新高的深层逻辑,并前瞻下半年市场的潜在趋势。

1.3k人学过发布于 2025.05.22更新于 2025.05.22

加密市场宏观研报:《GENIUS Act》法案取得重大进展,BTC突破历史新高,后市全新展望

相关讨论

欢迎来到HTX社区。在这里,您可以了解最新的平台发展动态并获得专业的市场意见。以下是用户对BTC(BTC)币价的意见。

活动图片