When the foundation is shaky, how solid can the structure really be? #Monero distanced itself from Bytecoin, just like Ethereum tried to distance itself from the DAO rollback—but the origins still matter. If something began with questionable ethics, how can you fully trust what follows?

Ethereum had its "oops, undo that" moment when they rolled back the blockchain after the DAO hack, proving it’s not immutable. Monero, while better in comparison, still carries the stain of Bytecoin’s shady pre-mine. Even if it started fresh, the fact that it was born out of a scammy project raises questions.

Bitcoin didn’t have to fork from a broken system—it was built right from day one. That’s the difference. Clean origins matter. No trust required.

It’s funny how many of these projects try to fix problems that only exist because of their own flawed beginnings.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Generic nonspecific FUD is generic and nonspecific.

Be specific.

WHAT questions does it raise?

Regarding "projects that try to fix things" you should know that Satoshi thought the best way to scale Bitcoin was with larger blocks. Adam Back and his BlockStream company cemented the small block into the code so that they could profit from layer 2 solutions (which are truly unneeded).

"It was built right from day one"

Then why were SegWit & TapRoot added, 8 years and 12 years AFTER bitcoin was created?

Monero community doesn't "distance" itself from Bytecoin. It's widely known and talked about all the time. You obviously aren't familiar with the Monero space if you think this.

Monero uses the same protocol (CryptoNote) as Bytecoin. That's about where it ends. Who cares?

If we're going to start doing this guilt-by-association thing you should bring up all of it - including how the cryptographic hash function used by Bitcoin is in the SHA-2 family that was created by the NSA 😱