Aisar retweeted
A man bet $110 on an NFL game and thought he had turned it into $82,610. FanDuel refused to pay, blamed a technical glitch, and offered him $500 and tickets to three New York Giants games instead.
– Anthony Prince from Newark, New Jersey, was watching the Denver Broncos play the ember 2018.
– With just over a minute left, the Broncos were trailing 19-17 but had moved into range of a potential game-winning field goal.
– FanDuel was updating its live betting odds as the game unfolded.
– But something went wrong.
– For approximately 18 seconds, FanDuel’s system displayed the Broncos at 750-to-1 odds to win the game.
– Prince spotted the odds and placed a $110 bet on Denver.
– At those odds, his betting ticket showed a potential payout of $82,610.
– Other bettors reportedly managed to place similar bets during the same brief window.
– Then the Broncos kicked a field goal with six seconds remaining and won the game 20-19.
– Prince had picked the winning team. He went to collect his money.
– But FanDuel refused to honor the $82,610 payout, saying a technical error had generated incorrect odds.
– According to FanDuel, the Broncos should have been heavy favorites at that point, not 750-to-1 underdogs.
– Instead of paying the amount printed on his ticket, the company offered Prince around $500 and tickets to three Giants games.
– Prince rejected the offer and said he planned to get a lawyer involved.
– New Jersey gambling regulators began examining the incident, raising questions about how the sportsbook’s system had produced such wildly incorrect odds.
– With prediction markets, payouts are governed by the contracts traders agree to and the rules for resolving them.
– FanDuel initially stood by its decision, arguing that its rules allowed it to correct obvious pricing errors.
– But the story attracted widespread media attention, and the company consulted with state gambling regulators.
– On September 20, FanDuel reversed its decision and announced it would pay Prince the full amount, along with other customers affected by the same glitch.
– The company acknowledged that the error had spoiled the experience for its customers and said it would honor the erroneous tickets.
He risked $110 and appeared to win $82,610 in the final seconds of an NFL game. FanDuel blamed a glitch and offered him $500 and football tickets instead. But after regulators got involved and the story made headlines, the company changed its mind and agreed to pay him the full amount.
– Anthony Prince from Newark, New Jersey, was watching the Denver Broncos play the ember 2018.
– With just over a minute left, the Broncos were trailing 19-17 but had moved into range of a potential game-winning field goal.
– FanDuel was updating its live betting odds as the game unfolded.
– But something went wrong.
– For approximately 18 seconds, FanDuel’s system displayed the Broncos at 750-to-1 odds to win the game.
– Prince spotted the odds and placed a $110 bet on Denver.
– At those odds, his betting ticket showed a potential payout of $82,610.
– Other bettors reportedly managed to place similar bets during the same brief window.
– Then the Broncos kicked a field goal with six seconds remaining and won the game 20-19.
– Prince had picked the winning team. He went to collect his money.
– But FanDuel refused to honor the $82,610 payout, saying a technical error had generated incorrect odds.
– According to FanDuel, the Broncos should have been heavy favorites at that point, not 750-to-1 underdogs.
– Instead of paying the amount printed on his ticket, the company offered Prince around $500 and tickets to three Giants games.
– Prince rejected the offer and said he planned to get a lawyer involved.
– New Jersey gambling regulators began examining the incident, raising questions about how the sportsbook’s system had produced such wildly incorrect odds.
– With prediction markets, payouts are governed by the contracts traders agree to and the rules for resolving them.
– FanDuel initially stood by its decision, arguing that its rules allowed it to correct obvious pricing errors.
– But the story attracted widespread media attention, and the company consulted with state gambling regulators.
– On September 20, FanDuel reversed its decision and announced it would pay Prince the full amount, along with other customers affected by the same glitch.
– The company acknowledged that the error had spoiled the experience for its customers and said it would honor the erroneous tickets.
He risked $110 and appeared to win $82,610 in the final seconds of an NFL game. FanDuel blamed a glitch and offered him $500 and football tickets instead. But after regulators got involved and the story made headlines, the company changed its mind and agreed to pay him the full amount.
28
54
278
45,717
A man bet $110 on an NFL game and thought he had turned it into $82,610. FanDuel refused to pay, blamed a technical glitch, and offered him $500 and tickets to three New York Giants games instead.
– Anthony Prince from Newark, New Jersey, was watching the Denver Broncos play the ember 2018.
– With just over a minute left, the Broncos were trailing 19-17 but had moved into range of a potential game-winning field goal.
– FanDuel was updating its live betting odds as the game unfolded.
– But something went wrong.
– For approximately 18 seconds, FanDuel’s system displayed the Broncos at 750-to-1 odds to win the game.
– Prince spotted the odds and placed a $110 bet on Denver.
– At those odds, his betting ticket showed a potential payout of $82,610.
– Other bettors reportedly managed to place similar bets during the same brief window.
– Then the Broncos kicked a field goal with six seconds remaining and won the game 20-19.
– Prince had picked the winning team. He went to collect his money.
– But FanDuel refused to honor the $82,610 payout, saying a technical error had generated incorrect odds.
– According to FanDuel, the Broncos should have been heavy favorites at that point, not 750-to-1 underdogs.
– Instead of paying the amount printed on his ticket, the company offered Prince around $500 and tickets to three Giants games.
– Prince rejected the offer and said he planned to get a lawyer involved.
– New Jersey gambling regulators began examining the incident, raising questions about how the sportsbook’s system had produced such wildly incorrect odds.
– With prediction markets, payouts are governed by the contracts traders agree to and the rules for resolving them.
– FanDuel initially stood by its decision, arguing that its rules allowed it to correct obvious pricing errors.
– But the story attracted widespread media attention, and the company consulted with state gambling regulators.
– On September 20, FanDuel reversed its decision and announced it would pay Prince the full amount, along with other customers affected by the same glitch.
– The company acknowledged that the error had spoiled the experience for its customers and said it would honor the erroneous tickets.
He risked $110 and appeared to win $82,610 in the final seconds of an NFL game. FanDuel blamed a glitch and offered him $500 and football tickets instead. But after regulators got involved and the story made headlines, the company changed its mind and agreed to pay him the full amount.
– Anthony Prince from Newark, New Jersey, was watching the Denver Broncos play the ember 2018.
– With just over a minute left, the Broncos were trailing 19-17 but had moved into range of a potential game-winning field goal.
– FanDuel was updating its live betting odds as the game unfolded.
– But something went wrong.
– For approximately 18 seconds, FanDuel’s system displayed the Broncos at 750-to-1 odds to win the game.
– Prince spotted the odds and placed a $110 bet on Denver.
– At those odds, his betting ticket showed a potential payout of $82,610.
– Other bettors reportedly managed to place similar bets during the same brief window.
– Then the Broncos kicked a field goal with six seconds remaining and won the game 20-19.
– Prince had picked the winning team. He went to collect his money.
– But FanDuel refused to honor the $82,610 payout, saying a technical error had generated incorrect odds.
– According to FanDuel, the Broncos should have been heavy favorites at that point, not 750-to-1 underdogs.
– Instead of paying the amount printed on his ticket, the company offered Prince around $500 and tickets to three Giants games.
– Prince rejected the offer and said he planned to get a lawyer involved.
– New Jersey gambling regulators began examining the incident, raising questions about how the sportsbook’s system had produced such wildly incorrect odds.
– With prediction markets, payouts are governed by the contracts traders agree to and the rules for resolving them.
– FanDuel initially stood by its decision, arguing that its rules allowed it to correct obvious pricing errors.
– But the story attracted widespread media attention, and the company consulted with state gambling regulators.
– On September 20, FanDuel reversed its decision and announced it would pay Prince the full amount, along with other customers affected by the same glitch.
– The company acknowledged that the error had spoiled the experience for its customers and said it would honor the erroneous tickets.
He risked $110 and appeared to win $82,610 in the final seconds of an NFL game. FanDuel blamed a glitch and offered him $500 and football tickets instead. But after regulators got involved and the story made headlines, the company changed its mind and agreed to pay him the full amount.
28
54
278
45,717
Aisar retweeted
Over $900M in shorts will be liquidated if bitcoin:native hits $88K
Over $950M in longs will be liquidated if bitcoin:native drops to $72K
Which one of these will happen first?
Over $950M in longs will be liquidated if bitcoin:native drops to $72K
Which one of these will happen first?
1
5
6
734
Aisar retweeted
A man stole 50,000 Bitcoin from the dark web worth $3.4 BILLION at the time, hid it in a popcorn tin, and was caught because of an $800 transaction.
> In 2012, James Zhong discovered a flaw in Silk Road, one of the internet’s biggest dark-web marketplaces.
> He found a way to trick nto sending him far more Bitcoin than he had deposited.
> On September 19, 2012, he deposited 500 bitcoin:native.
> Less than five seconds later, he made five withdrawals of 500 BTC in the same second.
> He walked away with a net gain of 2,000 bitcoin:native from that sequence alone.
> Zhong repeated the exploit across multiple accounts, eventually stealing approximately 50,000 Bitcoin.
> At the time, the Bitcoin was worth hundreds of thousands of dollars not BILLIONS.
> He kept the fortune hidden for years while Bitcoin’s value climbed.
> Then, in 2017, Bitcoin Cash split off from Bitcoin. Because Zhong held the original Bitcoin, he also received roughly 50,000 Bitcoin Cash.
> He later exchanged the Bitcoin Cash for thousands more Bitcoin, increasing his holdings connected to the theft.
> But hiding a fortune that large came with a problem: eventually, he needed to move some of it.
> In 2020, an $800 Bitcoin transaction reportedly helped investigators connect the stolen funds to an account at a cryptocurrency exchange.
> The exchange’s records gave investigators a lead toward the person behind the wallets.
> On November 9, 2021, federal agents searched Zhong’s home in Georgia.
> They found a computer containing Bitcoin hidden inside a popcorn tin, buried under blankets in a bathroom closet.
> More Bitcoin was concealed inside an underground floor safe.
> Agents also seized cash, precious metals and physical Bitcoin coins.
> In total, authorities recovered more than 50,000 Bitcoin worth approximately $3.36 BILLION at the time, making it one of the largest financial seizures in U.S. history.
> In November 2022, Zhong pleaded guilty to wire fraud.
> In April 2023, he was sentenced to one year and one day in prison.
He pulled off one of the biggest Bitcoin thefts in history, kept the fortune hidden for nearly a decade, and watched it grow into billions.
But an $800 transaction reportedly helped investigators find the man behind it all.
> In 2012, James Zhong discovered a flaw in Silk Road, one of the internet’s biggest dark-web marketplaces.
> He found a way to trick nto sending him far more Bitcoin than he had deposited.
> On September 19, 2012, he deposited 500 bitcoin:native.
> Less than five seconds later, he made five withdrawals of 500 BTC in the same second.
> He walked away with a net gain of 2,000 bitcoin:native from that sequence alone.
> Zhong repeated the exploit across multiple accounts, eventually stealing approximately 50,000 Bitcoin.
> At the time, the Bitcoin was worth hundreds of thousands of dollars not BILLIONS.
> He kept the fortune hidden for years while Bitcoin’s value climbed.
> Then, in 2017, Bitcoin Cash split off from Bitcoin. Because Zhong held the original Bitcoin, he also received roughly 50,000 Bitcoin Cash.
> He later exchanged the Bitcoin Cash for thousands more Bitcoin, increasing his holdings connected to the theft.
> But hiding a fortune that large came with a problem: eventually, he needed to move some of it.
> In 2020, an $800 Bitcoin transaction reportedly helped investigators connect the stolen funds to an account at a cryptocurrency exchange.
> The exchange’s records gave investigators a lead toward the person behind the wallets.
> On November 9, 2021, federal agents searched Zhong’s home in Georgia.
> They found a computer containing Bitcoin hidden inside a popcorn tin, buried under blankets in a bathroom closet.
> More Bitcoin was concealed inside an underground floor safe.
> Agents also seized cash, precious metals and physical Bitcoin coins.
> In total, authorities recovered more than 50,000 Bitcoin worth approximately $3.36 BILLION at the time, making it one of the largest financial seizures in U.S. history.
> In November 2022, Zhong pleaded guilty to wire fraud.
> In April 2023, he was sentenced to one year and one day in prison.
He pulled off one of the biggest Bitcoin thefts in history, kept the fortune hidden for nearly a decade, and watched it grow into billions.
But an $800 transaction reportedly helped investigators find the man behind it all.
95
58
1,148
506,093
Over $900M in shorts will be liquidated if bitcoin:native hits $88K
Over $950M in longs will be liquidated if bitcoin:native drops to $72K
Which one of these will happen first?
Over $950M in longs will be liquidated if bitcoin:native drops to $72K
Which one of these will happen first?
1
5
6
734
Aisar retweeted
$ANSEM is down 85% from its $440M all-time high.
Meaning if you invested $1,000 at the peak, you'd be left with just $150 today.
And this is why I think most memecoins will eventually die.
Not because they have bad narratives.
But because too many are designed to extract create lasting value.
Most of these coins are run by insiders. Retail buys the story at the top. Then everyone is left fighting over the exit.
You can't build a sustainable market when the game is designed for most people to lose.
Eventually people stop playing.
Meaning if you invested $1,000 at the peak, you'd be left with just $150 today.
And this is why I think most memecoins will eventually die.
Not because they have bad narratives.
But because too many are designed to extract create lasting value.
Most of these coins are run by insiders. Retail buys the story at the top. Then everyone is left fighting over the exit.
You can't build a sustainable market when the game is designed for most people to lose.
Eventually people stop playing.
6
8
10
1,157
$ANSEM is down 85% from its $440M all-time high.
Meaning if you invested $1,000 at the peak, you'd be left with just $150 today.
And this is why I think most memecoins will eventually die.
Not because they have bad narratives.
But because too many are designed to extract create lasting value.
Most of these coins are run by insiders. Retail buys the story at the top. Then everyone is left fighting over the exit.
You can't build a sustainable market when the game is designed for most people to lose.
Eventually people stop playing.
Meaning if you invested $1,000 at the peak, you'd be left with just $150 today.
And this is why I think most memecoins will eventually die.
Not because they have bad narratives.
But because too many are designed to extract create lasting value.
Most of these coins are run by insiders. Retail buys the story at the top. Then everyone is left fighting over the exit.
You can't build a sustainable market when the game is designed for most people to lose.
Eventually people stop playing.
6
8
10
1,157
Aisar retweeted
Dear Algorithm,
Please show this to the people who are still passionate about crypto.
The ones who keep showing up, sharing ideas, supporting others, and building even when the timeline feels quiet.
Let the real ones find each other.
Thank you 🤝
Please show this to the people who are still passionate about crypto.
The ones who keep showing up, sharing ideas, supporting others, and building even when the timeline feels quiet.
Let the real ones find each other.
Thank you 🤝
6
7
14
927
Dear Algorithm,
Please show this to the people who are still passionate about crypto.
The ones who keep showing up, sharing ideas, supporting others, and building even when the timeline feels quiet.
Let the real ones find each other.
Thank you 🤝
Please show this to the people who are still passionate about crypto.
The ones who keep showing up, sharing ideas, supporting others, and building even when the timeline feels quiet.
Let the real ones find each other.
Thank you 🤝
6
7
14
927
Aisar retweeted
In 2011, a Bitcoin user woke up to discover that 25,000 BTC had been stolen from him.
At the time, they were worth around $500,000.
Today, those Bitcoin are worth about $2 BILLION
He posted about the theft online, describing how his computer had apparently been compromised.
with a fortune and waking up to find someone had taken it all.
Could you ever recover from a loss like that?
At the time, they were worth around $500,000.
Today, those Bitcoin are worth about $2 BILLION
He posted about the theft online, describing how his computer had apparently been compromised.
with a fortune and waking up to find someone had taken it all.
Could you ever recover from a loss like that?
5
6
13
1,363
In 2011, a Bitcoin user woke up to discover that 25,000 BTC had been stolen from him.
At the time, they were worth around $500,000.
Today, those Bitcoin are worth about $2 BILLION
He posted about the theft online, describing how his computer had apparently been compromised.
with a fortune and waking up to find someone had taken it all.
Could you ever recover from a loss like that?
At the time, they were worth around $500,000.
Today, those Bitcoin are worth about $2 BILLION
He posted about the theft online, describing how his computer had apparently been compromised.
with a fortune and waking up to find someone had taken it all.
Could you ever recover from a loss like that?
5
6
13
1,363
Aisar retweeted
solana:So11111111111111111111111111111111111111112 has just dropped below $100 again.
Time to pivot to McDonald's again 😭
Time to pivot to McDonald's again 😭
9
4
16
865
solana:So11111111111111111111111111111111111111112 has just dropped below $100 again.
Time to pivot to McDonald's again 😭
Time to pivot to McDonald's again 😭
9
4
16
865
Aisar retweeted
A hacker stole data from the Pentagon, Europol and 40+ companies, built one of the dark web’s biggest stolen data marketplaces, and was eventually caught after accepting a $250 payment in Bitcoin.
> Kai West, better known online as IntelBroker, was accused of running a major stothe dark web.
> His alleged victims included Apple, AMD, Cisco, Nokia, General Electric and Europol.
> The operation was also linked to claims involving sensitive US government data, including information about members of Congress.
> For years, IntelBroker operated under a pseudonym, selling stolen data while trying to keep his real identity hidden.
> He reportedly preferred Monero, a cryptocurrency designed to make transactions harder to trace.
> Then came a $250 deal.
> In January 2023, an FBI agent allegedly persuaded him to accept Bitcoin for a purchase of stolen data.
> That payment became a crucial lead in the investigation.
> Investigators spent years connecting online accounts, cryptocurrency activity and other digital evidence to identify the person behind the alias.
> In January 2025, IntelBroker announced he was stepping away from the forum he had been running.
> Three weeks later, French authorities arrested him.
> The case involved allegations of MILLIONS of dollars in damage and attacks affecting dozens of organizations.
> He allegedly spent years hiding behind an online identity, only for one transaction to help investigators close in on him.
The hacker who relied on crypto to hide his tracks may have made one of his biggest mistakes by accepting a different coin.
> Kai West, better known online as IntelBroker, was accused of running a major stothe dark web.
> His alleged victims included Apple, AMD, Cisco, Nokia, General Electric and Europol.
> The operation was also linked to claims involving sensitive US government data, including information about members of Congress.
> For years, IntelBroker operated under a pseudonym, selling stolen data while trying to keep his real identity hidden.
> He reportedly preferred Monero, a cryptocurrency designed to make transactions harder to trace.
> Then came a $250 deal.
> In January 2023, an FBI agent allegedly persuaded him to accept Bitcoin for a purchase of stolen data.
> That payment became a crucial lead in the investigation.
> Investigators spent years connecting online accounts, cryptocurrency activity and other digital evidence to identify the person behind the alias.
> In January 2025, IntelBroker announced he was stepping away from the forum he had been running.
> Three weeks later, French authorities arrested him.
> The case involved allegations of MILLIONS of dollars in damage and attacks affecting dozens of organizations.
> He allegedly spent years hiding behind an online identity, only for one transaction to help investigators close in on him.
The hacker who relied on crypto to hide his tracks may have made one of his biggest mistakes by accepting a different coin.
34
78
606
65,034
Aisar retweeted
A man launched a cryptocurrency, lost control of it within weeks and watched the community take it in a completely different direction. That project became Monero, one of crypto’s best-known privacy coins.
> In April 2014, an anonymous developer known as thankful_for_today laucalled BitMonero.
> It was built on CryptoNote technology, which focused on making cryptocurrency transactions more private.
> But within days, the project ran into trouble.
> The founder wanted to introduce merged mining with Bytecoin, the cryptocurrency BitMonero had been forked from.
> Other developers strongly opposed the idea.
> The disagreement turned into a fight over who would decide the project's future.
> The community eventually forked the code and continued building without him.
> They shortened the name from BitMonero to Monero.
> The original founder was no longer steering the project.
> The community kept developing it, introducing major privacy upgrades over the years.
> Today, Monero remains one of the most recognized privacy-focused cryptocurrencies in the industry.
A founder launched it but his community broke away and the project survived without him.
Imagine creating something that becomes bigger than your own control over it.
> In April 2014, an anonymous developer known as thankful_for_today laucalled BitMonero.
> It was built on CryptoNote technology, which focused on making cryptocurrency transactions more private.
> But within days, the project ran into trouble.
> The founder wanted to introduce merged mining with Bytecoin, the cryptocurrency BitMonero had been forked from.
> Other developers strongly opposed the idea.
> The disagreement turned into a fight over who would decide the project's future.
> The community eventually forked the code and continued building without him.
> They shortened the name from BitMonero to Monero.
> The original founder was no longer steering the project.
> The community kept developing it, introducing major privacy upgrades over the years.
> Today, Monero remains one of the most recognized privacy-focused cryptocurrencies in the industry.
A founder launched it but his community broke away and the project survived without him.
Imagine creating something that becomes bigger than your own control over it.
9
7
15
977
Aisar retweeted
A man built a profitable crypto trading business, shut it down after FTX collapsed, and used his own money to build one of crypto's biggest decentralized exchanges.
> Jeff Yan studied mathematics and computer science at Harvard.
> After graduating, he joined Hudson River Tradineading quantitative trading firms.
> But eight months later, he quit.
> He didn't want to spend his life improving a system that was already successful. He wanted to build something of his own.
> He started writing trading algorithms and eventually built Chameleon Trading, a crypto trading operation that grew from $10,000 into a highly profitable business.
> For years, he focused on trading. Then FTX collapsed in November 2022.
> The exchange had become a symbol of everything that could go wrong when people trusted a centralized platform with their money.
> Jeff decided he wanted to build something different.
> He shut down Chameleon Trading and began building Hyperliquid.
> A decentralized exchange designed to deliver the speed and trading experience people expected from centralized exchanges.
> But he made an unusual decision.
> He would fund the project himself instead of raising venture capital. He believed outside investors could compromise the neutrality he wanted the platform to have.
> In 2023, Hyperliquid launched.
> As it grew, investors eventually approached him with offers to fund the business at a valuation of around $1 BILLION.
> He turned them down.
> He believed Hyperliquid should operate as a neutral protocol, not a company whose direction was shaped by investors.
> Hyperliquid went on to become one of the biggest names in decentralized crypto trading.
A man built a profitable trading business, walked away from it after FTX collapsed, and used his own money to build a competitor to the very kind of exchange that had just failed.
Imagine if he'd decided trading was enough.
> Jeff Yan studied mathematics and computer science at Harvard.
> After graduating, he joined Hudson River Tradineading quantitative trading firms.
> But eight months later, he quit.
> He didn't want to spend his life improving a system that was already successful. He wanted to build something of his own.
> He started writing trading algorithms and eventually built Chameleon Trading, a crypto trading operation that grew from $10,000 into a highly profitable business.
> For years, he focused on trading. Then FTX collapsed in November 2022.
> The exchange had become a symbol of everything that could go wrong when people trusted a centralized platform with their money.
> Jeff decided he wanted to build something different.
> He shut down Chameleon Trading and began building Hyperliquid.
> A decentralized exchange designed to deliver the speed and trading experience people expected from centralized exchanges.
> But he made an unusual decision.
> He would fund the project himself instead of raising venture capital. He believed outside investors could compromise the neutrality he wanted the platform to have.
> In 2023, Hyperliquid launched.
> As it grew, investors eventually approached him with offers to fund the business at a valuation of around $1 BILLION.
> He turned them down.
> He believed Hyperliquid should operate as a neutral protocol, not a company whose direction was shaped by investors.
> Hyperliquid went on to become one of the biggest names in decentralized crypto trading.
A man built a profitable trading business, walked away from it after FTX collapsed, and used his own money to build a competitor to the very kind of exchange that had just failed.
Imagine if he'd decided trading was enough.
10
9
18
1,107
A man launched a cryptocurrency, lost control of it within weeks and watched the community take it in a completely different direction. That project became Monero, one of crypto’s best-known privacy coins.
> In April 2014, an anonymous developer known as thankful_for_today laucalled BitMonero.
> It was built on CryptoNote technology, which focused on making cryptocurrency transactions more private.
> But within days, the project ran into trouble.
> The founder wanted to introduce merged mining with Bytecoin, the cryptocurrency BitMonero had been forked from.
> Other developers strongly opposed the idea.
> The disagreement turned into a fight over who would decide the project's future.
> The community eventually forked the code and continued building without him.
> They shortened the name from BitMonero to Monero.
> The original founder was no longer steering the project.
> The community kept developing it, introducing major privacy upgrades over the years.
> Today, Monero remains one of the most recognized privacy-focused cryptocurrencies in the industry.
A founder launched it but his community broke away and the project survived without him.
Imagine creating something that becomes bigger than your own control over it.
> In April 2014, an anonymous developer known as thankful_for_today laucalled BitMonero.
> It was built on CryptoNote technology, which focused on making cryptocurrency transactions more private.
> But within days, the project ran into trouble.
> The founder wanted to introduce merged mining with Bytecoin, the cryptocurrency BitMonero had been forked from.
> Other developers strongly opposed the idea.
> The disagreement turned into a fight over who would decide the project's future.
> The community eventually forked the code and continued building without him.
> They shortened the name from BitMonero to Monero.
> The original founder was no longer steering the project.
> The community kept developing it, introducing major privacy upgrades over the years.
> Today, Monero remains one of the most recognized privacy-focused cryptocurrencies in the industry.
A founder launched it but his community broke away and the project survived without him.
Imagine creating something that becomes bigger than your own control over it.
9
7
15
977