--- title: "Bitcoin’s Original Sin: Epstein Files Prompt a Reassessment of Its Origins" date: 2026-02-04T15:54:46+00:00 canonical: https://funkyonchain.pages.dev/en/p/비트코인의-원죄-앱스타인-파일이-쏘아-올린-신화의-재평가/ original: https://t.me/funkyonchain/2193 publisher: Funkyonchain lang: ko license: CC-BY-4.0 --- # Bitcoin’s Original Sin: Epstein Files Prompt a Reassessment of Its Origins > 🪙 Bitcoin’s Original Sin: Epstein Files Prompt a Reassessment of Its Origins 🪙 Bitcoin's Original Sin: The Epstein Files and the Structural Repricing Eng ver. 🪙 Bitcoin’s Original Sin: Epstein Files Prompt a Reassessment of Its Origins 🪙 Bitcoin's Original Sin: The Epstein Files and the Structural Repricing Eng ver. https://x.com/funky_onchain_/status/2019076888535429441?s=20 This report draws on public documents and data to examine structural hypotheses raised within the community about the recent decline in the market, using a financial engineering perspective. To explain the unusual decoupling now visible in markets, it brings together structural hypotheses and new perspectives put forward by some market analysts, based on public documents and data. Markets across the asset spectrum are surging. The Nasdaq is setting new highs and gold prices are soaring. Bitcoin (BTC), however, is experiencing a different kind of chill. After approaching $100,000, it has fallen roughly 30% from its previous high. An increasingly prominent hypothesis holds that this is more than a correction: it reflects a shift in the market’s trust in Bitcoin’s origins. Investors are asking: Why is Bitcoin falling so much more than everything else? Behind this unsettling decoupling, which simple profit-taking cannot explain, lies the structural uncertainty raised by the 3.5 million pages of Epstein files released by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on January 30. 1. Trust Risk in the Technical Engine: The MIT DCI Funding Controversy Bitcoin’s value rests on neutrality that no one can control. But the release of the files has renewed market questions about the historical funding sources of the MIT Digital Currency Initiative (DCI), which is central to Bitcoin’s technology. Public evidence: Official investigations and reporting have previously established that former MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito received donations from Epstein and that some of the money was used to fund the operations of DCI, which supports Bitcoin Core developers. Structural hypothesis: The market sees this historical financial link as a blemish on Bitcoin’s technical neutrality. Under this analysis, however clean the code may be, doubts about the funding of those who maintain it pose a serious reputational risk for institutional investors. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/07/business/mit-media-lab-jeffrey-epstein-joichi-ito.html 2. A Forced Institutional Exodus: ESG and AML Barriers The current decline is not simply retail panic selling. A scenario in which compliance teams at major asset managers drive risk-based portfolio adjustments is gaining attention. Public evidence: Under institutional investors’ internal ESG and AML rules, assets potentially linked to criminal proceeds may be deemed ineligible for holding. A new perspective: Documents include records of Epstein claiming during his lifetime that he was in contact with Bitcoin’s creators. Following their release, institutions have begun to treat this as a practical compliance trigger rather than mere gossip. The view gaining traction is that Bitcoin selling while the Nasdaq rises reflects institutions whitelisting assets for legal survival, rather than a question of returns. Source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-publishes-35-million-responsive-pages-compliance-epstein-files 3. Supply Overhang: Market Questions About 80,000 BTC The most tangible potential pressure on prices comes from the possibility of U.S. government seizure and sale of assets. “Authorities have yet to make an official statement on the ownership of the 80,000 BTC. But the market’s doubts about a possible connection may themselves be triggering a decline in prices.” Public evidence: Records show that in July 2025, 80,000 BTC moved from early wallets that had been dormant for 13 years into exchange custody accounts. Structural hypothesis: Some market analysts have raised questions about the ultimate owner of the holdings and a possible connection to a particular trust. If future legal rulings lead to the assets being frozen and confiscated, the market could face a volume of selling it would struggle to absorb. According to this analysis, whales are selling in advance to avoid that legal uncertainty. Source: https://www.theblock.co/post/363286/og-bitcoin-whale-moves-remaining-btc-galaxy A Shift in Narrative and a New Order The current decline is a process in which Bitcoin’s once-unblemished digital gold myth is being repriced against real-world regulatory risks. First, a changing narrative: The romantic era of “uncensorable money” has given way to the institutional world’s exacting demand for proof of asset transparency. Second, a shift in capital: Smart money is moving away from Bitcoin’s uncertainties of origin and toward new assets based on “clean tech” that are relatively free of those risks. Third, decisive data: A congressional report expected in mid-February and whether the true beneficiary of the 80,000 BTC is identified will be key indicators in determining this cycle’s bottom. In conclusion, the market is moving beyond its reverence for the “myth of anonymity” and toward the hard realities of data and legal transparency. For informational purposes only. This report represents a market hypothesis and does not constitute financial or legal advice. Invest at your own risk. [@kirawhale](https://t.me/kirawhale): Thank you to the person whose idea made this article possible. --- 출처 / Source: Funkyonchain — https://funkyonchain.pages.dev/en/p/비트코인의-원죄-앱스타인-파일이-쏘아-올린-신화의-재평가/ 원문 / Original Telegram post: https://t.me/funkyonchain/2193