The following are typical cases of merchants, scholars, experts, and politicians being slapped in the face or changing their attitudes due to inadequate understanding of Bitcoin, compiled from public information:
1. Merchant Representative: JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon
Early Position: In 2017, Dimon called Bitcoin a 'fraud' and asserted that it was 'worse than the tulip bubble,' even threatening to fire employees who participated in Bitcoin trading. Change of Attitude: After 2024, Dimon publicly expressed regret for his past statements, acknowledged the value of blockchain technology, and urged JPMorgan to explore blockchain applications, such as developing a crypto dollar (JPM Coin). Reality Check: Bitcoin's price continued to rise following Dimon's criticism, breaking $100,000 in 2024, while JPMorgan itself optimized its cross-border payment business through blockchain technology, starkly contrasting its early statements.
2. Scholar Representative: Nobel Laureate in Economics Paul Krugman
Early Criticism: Krugman long questioned the decentralization of Bitcoin, arguing that 'government-controlled currency is nonsense' and mocking its inability to replace the traditional financial system. Market Reality Check: In 2016, Bitcoin's price broke 6,600 RMB (annual increase of 130%) and reached multiple historical highs in subsequent cycles, with people in financially fragile countries like Venezuela adopting Bitcoin for hedging, validating its actual demand. Academic Reflection: Although Krugman did not publicly revise his views, his underestimation of blockchain technology's impact has become a typical case in the economics community discussing 'traditional theories lagging behind technological innovation.'
3. Expert Representative: 'Dr. Doom' Nouriel Roubini and Peter Schiff
Long-term Pessimism: Two economists have repeatedly claimed that Bitcoin is a 'bubble' and a 'scam.' Schiff still insists in 2024 that Bitcoin's rise above $100,000 relies on government intervention rather than a free market.
Slap in the Face Incident: After Bitcoin broke $100,000 in 2024, Binance founder Zhao Changpeng (CZ) dug up Schiff's 2019 prediction that 'Bitcoin will never reach $100,000' and mocked him to 'keep dreaming,' triggering widespread dissemination in the community.
Industry Response: The continued innovation of Bitcoin (such as the Lightning Network and institutional entry) proves that it does not rely on a single government endorsement, with its technology-driven value storage function gradually being accepted by the mainstream.
4. Political Representative: Former U.S. President Donald Trump
Early Position: Trump openly criticized cryptocurrencies, calling them a 'threat to the dollar's status' and supported strict regulation.
Change of Attitude: In 2025, Trump promoted the establishment of a 'Bitcoin Strategic Reserve Fund' by the U.S. government, and he and his wife Melania issued TRUMP and MELANIA meme coins, which briefly surged to a market value of $80 billion (before falling back to $10 billion).
Controversy and Reflection: Although Trump's policies temporarily stimulated market enthusiasm, the celebrity coin issuance trend triggered speculative bubbles, and the industry criticized him for instrumentalizing cryptocurrencies, deviating from the original intention of decentralization.
5. Institutional Representative: Traditional financial institutions and regulators
Early Rejection: In the 2010s, most banks viewed Bitcoin as a 'money laundering tool,' and the U.S. SEC long rejected Bitcoin ETF applications.
Reality Adjustment: In 2024, Bitcoin ETF was approved by the U.S., leading institutions like BlackRock and Fidelity to enter the market; the IMF will include Bitcoin in its international balance of payments statistics in 2025, recognizing its status as a 'non-productive asset.'
Deep Impacts: The acceptance by traditional finance marks Bitcoin's transformation from a fringe asset to a mainstream financial tool, but also raises concerns about its 'over-centralization.'
Summary
The above cases reflect three stages of the evolution of Bitcoin's perception:
1. Stigmatization Phase (2010-2017): When the technology was immature, it was simply labeled a 'scam.'
2. Controversy and Division Phase (2018-2024): Price fluctuations triggered intense debates in academia and the market.
3. Institutional Phase (after 2025): Technological iteration and improved regulatory frameworks promote mainstream acceptance.
These changes reveal a common rule in the perception of emerging technologies: early biases often stem from information asymmetry, while long-term value must be verified through practice. In the future, Bitcoin's challenge will shift to how to balance development between technological innovation and compliance.
Source of this article is shown in the screenshot.
Further Reading
Bitcoin-itip users participate in the airdrop process (community collection tutorial)
