Cena Matrix AI NetworkMAN

Corbin Fraser, CEO of Bitcoin.com, recently addressed a common misconception within the crypto community regarding the creation of bitcoin cash ( BCH). While Roger Ver is frequently credited—or blamed—for the inception of BCH, Fraser set the record straight in a recent appearance on Vlad Costea’s podcast, The Bitcoin Takeover Podcast. Contrary to popular belief, Roger Ver did not create Bitcoin Cash. Fraser pointed out clearly that Amaury Séchet did. Amaury Séchet, known for his leadership as the lead developer behind Bitcoin ABC (Adjustable Blocksize Cap), played an essential role in defining the initial Bitcoin Cash protocol. Fraser provided context on the origins of BCH, starting with a pivotal Slack group named BTC Forks. “There was a Slack group called BTC forks,” Fraser recalled, describing it as a mix of “Bitcoin Unlimited people, Bitcoin XT people, Bitcoin ABC people,” and other key “big blockers” like Jonald Fyookball, Peter Rizun, and perhaps Jeff Garzik. In the context of Bitcoin’s history, a “big blocker” is someone who advocated for increasing the block size limit in Bitcoin’s blockchain protocol from 1MB to accommodate more transactions per block. This stance emerged during the contentious scaling debate that dominated Bitcoin’s community from around 2015 to 2017, often called the “Block Size Wars.” The BTC Forks Slack group served as an open, real-time discussion forum that existed on the periphery of the more mainstream (and slower paced) places like Reddit’s r/ BTC. Fraser recalls that after “years of trying to get a modest increase in block size,” Séchet boldly decided to take decisive action. “Amaury went full French,” said Fraser,” he was like, ‘I’m just doing it. Screw it. I’m going to do it, and if anyone wants to follow, good luck.'” This bold initiative from Séchet galvanized support from other community members and groups such as Bitcoin Unlimited, eventually culminating in the formal establishment of Bitcoin Cash. Fraser described it as a “group effort” among numerous participants from that Slack discussion who recognized that “S2X is not happening,” anticipating a “rug pull” from Bitcoin Core proponents—a prediction Fraser said came true. S2X was a proposal to increase Bitcoin’s block size. While Séchet began the Bitcoin Cash movement, Fraser also pointed out the complexity surrounding Séchet’s role, particularly after the BCH community fractured due to internal disputes. Séchet, according to Fraser, faced significant opposition due to his proposal for a developer funding mechanism—often dubbed a “dev tax”—and his exploration of Avalanche protocol integrations. Fraser described the ensuing split not simply as Séchet abandoning BCH but rather as a “hostile takeover” by other BCH community members, driven partly by their desire to oust the self-described benevolent dictator of Bitcoin Cash. “I think there were enough people in the BCH community that just wanted the French man out,” Fraser explained, noting that Séchet had become a divisive figure akin to a “Donald Trump figure” in terms of community perception—controversial and polarizing. Although Fraser clarified that Séchet himself never behaved maliciously or overly combatively, community perception often painted him in that light. “I don’t think he actually went full Donald Trump,” Fraser clarified, “but I think that the perception from the community was that he did.” The split resulted in the creation of eCash, a separate cryptocurrency spearheaded by Séchet. Fraser noted that the BCH community’s rejection of Séchet marked a turning point: “That was like the pin where I was like, ‘ BCH, what have you done?'” Fraser lamented the repeated fragmentation within the BCH community, pointing to the eCash fork as an example of lost momentum and diluted influence. Fraser said he remembers a critic of the Bitcoin Cash fork, former Googler and Bitcoin Core contributor Mike Hearn, saying that one split would increase the likelihood of more splits, and that continual splits would stunt growth, thereby harming overall crypto adoption. “After the BSV fork happened… and then eCash fork happened, it was just like, alright, maybe [the critics] were right all along,” he reflected. There was a silver lining. I wouldn’t have probably become DeFi pilled, had it not been for more of those big block debates that just kept going. Man, they just kept going… I know countless people that that was kind of the breaking point for folks to say there’s more to crypto than having one team and being a monotheist. And nothing wrong with being diversified. Fraser believes these forks drove a lot of tech-minded early adopters to Ethereum where things shipped a lot faster and in a more permissionless environment. Having lived through the paralysis of heated debates and forking, Fraser believes Bitcoin needs an innovation layer where people can ship things permissionlessly. Whether that’s drive chains or Layer twos (L2’s), building on Bitcoin in some manner is a net benefit for capturing more utility and value on the largest blockchain. Despite the controversies within the Bitcoin and then again in the Bitcoin Cash communities, Fraser expressed admiration and respect for Séchet, emphasizing his significant contributions to the “big block” movement. “I have nothing but respect for Amaury and what he did and the work that he contributed,” Fraser stated. As of the publishing of this article, bitcoin’s market cap is $1.7 trillion, bitcoin cash is $6.5 billion, and ecash is $448 million. 免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到[email protected]，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。

Man is buying up #Bitcoin supply while you're selling the bits that you've got Keep it up, genius.

Bitcoin update 24.03.25 - 30.01.25: HTF: We closed another weekly candle in no man's land, still below the 89K SL. At this level, there’s nothing solid to trade on HTF until we either push for new ATHs or drop to the 72K level. Patience is key here—either focus on other timeframes or shift to different assets entirely. Expanding into other markets also helps ease the constant pressure of always wanting to find a trade in crypto. MTF/LTF: A lot more is happening here—nice levels to trade around. While we’re still in a downtrend, we’re slowly forming HHs. The key swing highs are still quite far away, but we might be spotting early signs of a trend shift. Of course, targeting ATHs wouldn’t be wise until these HTF SHs are broken, but we can still look for long setups and trail them properly. This allows us to gain exposure while ensuring we lock in profits along the way. Sentiment/Orderflow: While crypto-related news remains highly bullish, TradFi seems gripped by deep fear, creating a mixed sentiment overall. The best approach here is to focus on MS and base our next moves accordingly—sentiment and news should only serve as secondary confluence, while MS takes priority. As mentioned earlier, we’re starting to form HHs below HTF, which gives me a reason to look for local longs. However, this doesn’t rule out the possibility of further downside, including a potential move toward the 72K level, which remains the most significant level on BTC. Order flow clearly reflects the current mixed sentiment. Traders are quick to short the lows and long the highs, showing a lack of conviction. Many seem confused and desperate, reacting rather than planning. Outlook: With BVOL still in supply and BVOL24H at support, something big is about to happen. The key is to be prepared for every outcome. As you all know, I’ve already allocated significant funds at HTF key levels while keeping some dry powder in case we reach lower key levels. This ensures I won’t miss a potential rally from here while maintaining the flexibility to react. I’m also actively looking for LTF/MTF long and short setups. Once these trades move into profit, they pay me already and become risk-free. This strategy keeps me exposed in every direction with the potential to trail them way higher or lower—exactly how I want to be positioned as trader. Have a great week ahead you all. ✌️

As Bitcoin brushes against $85,000, a quiet tension stirs the markets. Behind this apparent resistance lies a paradoxical movement: “whales” are silently preparing their offensive. Their strategy? Massive bets on the downside, despite a technical rebound that would make optimists dream. A risky game, indicative of unprecedented distrust, but also of an invisible battle where every dollar counts. Strategy of the man. The recent rebound of Bitcoin to $87,000 has sparked a fleeting hope. Yet, data from Alphractal delineates another reality: big holders have taken advantage of this rise to lock in their gains… and open record short positions. A brutal, almost cynical turnaround. As if these actors, accustomed to reversals, see in every ascent an opportunity for a fall. This distrust is explained by a rising financial leverage, signaling an overheated Bitcoin market. The Aggregated Open Interest/Market Cap Ratio, a key indicator, is dangerously climbing. Bets with leverage are multiplying, creating a powder keg ready to explode at the slightest shock. Cascade liquidations are looming, reminiscent of past crashes where excess confidence precipitated the falls. But why are these seasoned investors defying the trend? Perhaps they anticipate a technical pullback after a consolidation that’s gone on too long. Or, are they fearing an unstable macroeconomic environment — stubborn inflation, geopolitical tensions? In any case, their massive movement weighs like a sword of Damocles over the prices. In the shadow of bearish bets, one signal intrigues: whale wallets have grown by 62,000 BTC since March. Discreet accumulation or mere repositioning? IntoTheBlock highlights this contradiction. Some see it as a sign of long-term confidence, despite current turbulence. As if major players are already preparing for the post-crisis period, playing across multiple timelines. Technical analyst Captain Faibik adds fuel to the fire of the optimists. His thesis? A “Falling Wedge” in formation, a chart pattern heralding an explosive rebound. According to him, 10 to 15 days of consolidation would be enough to propel Bitcoin towards $109,000, shattering its ATH. An enticing scenario, but one that assumes a clear break from current resistance and, above all, a market capable of withstanding the manipulations of big holders. A crucial question remains: who, algorithms or whales, will dictate the next trend? On-chain and technical indicators clash, creating unprecedented uncertainty. Small investors are navigating through murky waters, torn between the fear of missing the rebound and the dread of a bearish trap. Bitcoin today embodies a fascinating duality. On one side, large investors, armed with their short positions, are betting on a collapse. On the other side, technical and on-chain signals suggest historical potential. This tension illustrates a market in search of bearings, where each actor shapes their own vision. On the institutional side, 83% intend to increase their exposure to cryptocurrencies .

Infini Labs, a crypto-focused neobank, has filed a lawsuit against an engineer it accuses of embezzling nearly $50 million from the platform. The stablecoin digital bank accuses Chen Shanxuan of retaining “super admin” authority as the crypto platform’s smart contract went live in mainnet. As a result, the engineer stole approximately $49.5 million in USDC ( USDC ) from the firm. Infini Labs filed its lawsuit in Hong Kong, via its subsidiary BP SG Investment Holding Limited. The allegation is that as a lead developer, Chen secretively retained ‘super admin’ access and used this privilege to embezzle millions of dollars in crypto from the firm. Interestingly, the lawsuit paints the picture of Chen as a man in debt and a massive gambler. The case follows the cryptocurrency credit card provider’s suffering from an exploit that saw $49.5 million drained from its coffers. The initial reaction to the loss was tha this was the work of hackers. However, the lawsuit puts Chen on the spot, with documents presented before the court asking that the accused person’s assets be frozen. Infini Labs has also asked the court to compel its former lead smart contracts engineer to disclose further transaction details. In the crypto heist Infini suffered in February, funds had vanished without the multi-signature authorization. Chen used his full access to steal, the firm notes in the lawsuit. The lawsuit against Chen comes days after Infini founder Christian Li, asked the “hacker” to take the firm up on a white hat agreement. Li’s on-chain message also highlighted a 20% bounty the company offered to the suspected attacker. Li also reiterated that Infini Labs was not going to take any legal action if the hacker complied with the white hat offer and returned the funds as requested. Trugard CTO and co-founder Jeremiah O’Connor told crypto.news in a statement the exploit is a “textbook example of an insider attack” within the Web3 space. Specifically, when a single engineer holds “unchecked power” over a smart contract it creates a central point of failure. “Instead of revoking their super admin privileges as promised, this engineer kept a secret backdoor, deceived their own team, and made off with $50 million,” O’Connor added. “If the allegations are true, their motive—covering gambling losses—makes the situation even more alarming. When financial desperation meets unrestricted control, the results are almost always catastrophic. This serves as yet another wake-up call about the dangers of centralized authority in DeFi.” Security in DeFi must rely on more than just trust, he said. If Infini had in place decentralized safeguards like multi-signature wallets, on-chain transparency, or timelocks for admin changes, an exploit would have not been likely. As such, any project that allocates “absolute control” to one individual is “asking for trouble.” In Web3, security isn’t about trust; it’s about verifiable, enforced protections before things go south,” O’Connor concluded.