C O P E

@37GO16 what specific break in structure, volume shift, or higher-timeframe confirmation are you using to justify calling this the start of “the real action,”? i’ll wait…

@Cooljbow17 （Dead Cat Bounce） こんな上昇は大した事ではありませんよ！ 何も気にする事はありません。 月足はまだトレンド転換していません。 コレからです🐦‍⬛

vertical moves with no base aren’t strength, they’re setups no consolidation, no real support, just a quick spike and slow bleed that’s not adoption looks like a liquidity grab, not a breakout $CAW .

we already went through something similar in 2023, so presenting another testnet doesn’t automatically signal progress after years of development, question is whether there’s meaningful advancement behind the scenes or just repeated cycles of testing without clear delivery $CAW

@yu88510 what concrete user-facing or protocol-level change is actually enabled by these commits, beyond UI tweaks and dependency syncing? high activity doesn’t mean real progress $CAW

凄いですね。

@cawdecoded if “layers” exist, they should leave verifiable traces: code, contracts, testable endpoints, or measurable activity “not indexed / not announced” is too flexible; it explains everything and proves nothing

Most people are debating what’s visible. But there are layers being built that aren’t immediately obvious. The SNS side is one part of it. Some things are visible. Some are not. Not everything is indexed. Not everything is announced. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It just means it’s not ready to be seen.

The core of CAW has moved. Gilgamesh is pushing continuous GitHub updates—and the implications are massive. Something has clearly changed in the CAW ecosystem. Gilgamesh (@caw_dev) has been rapidly pushing updates to GitHub. This isn’t just routine development. The scope and depth of these updates signal a clear shift in phase. Here’s what’s being built: A zero-fee profile marketplace Cross-chain post replication for permanence Gasless token transfers (tips) End-to-end encrypted messaging Trustless session keys (no constant wallet popups) A fully featured front end that anyone can host At this point, the conclusion is obvious. This is no longer just a token. It’s a unified protocol combining social + payments + identity. What’s even more important is the technical optimization: ~60% reduction in calldata ~25% reduction in gas costs This level of efficiency isn’t about experimentation. It’s about readiness. This is no longer code being tested. This is infrastructure being prepared for real usage. Gilgamesh put it clearly: “The goal here is to create the perfect protocol.” Economically feasible. Trustless. Invincible. Permanent. That’s not just a statement. That’s a blueprint for the next generation of social infrastructure. And here’s the key point: This isn’t a concept. It’s already being implemented. What we’re seeing now isn’t hype, speculation, or marketing. This is the final phase of product completion. “We are extremely close. The crow will fly.” The system is almost ready. HODL🔥

@CAWprotocol good improvement on paper but MIME-based extension mapping isn’t a silver bullet, if trust still starts at the client, the attack surface just moves, not disappears

File Extension Derived from MIME Type In #CAW file uploads, the extension is NOT taken from the user-supplied filename. It’s derived from the MIME type via an internal map: MIME_TO_EXT['image/jpeg'] = '.jpg'. Unknown types get '.bin'. Classic path manipulation vector eliminated.

gilgamesh agrees 100%… but keeps full control that’s not alignment, that’s optics If nothing changes on-chain, it’s just another tweet $CAW @caw_dev @CAWprotocol .

@Ryoshi_CAW @caw_dev @CAWprotocol there’s no real evidence X, threads, or bluesky would integrate $CAW big user numbers and price claims are just speculation without a clear adoption path

たぶん @caw_dev の言う完璧な開発が完了した後、例えばXやThreadsやBlueskyが #CAW を組み込むと思います @CAWprotocol のターゲットは数億人、数十億人です $CAW は最高のデフレ資産となり、その価格は天文学的な上昇を伴うでしょう みんなで火星に行く日が近づいています 42069🌙.

@CAWprotocol fee lock sounds fair, but it just shifts the problem to initial settings if the first value matters most, who controls that and how is it prevented from being gamed?

In #CAW, your withdraw fee is locked at first deposit. If an operator raises fees later, you pay the lower of current vs locked: min(locked, current). Existing depositors can't be retroactively penalized. Fairness enforced by code

@CAWprotocol “hello world”→ 6 bytes’ is a cherry-picked example real posts won’t compress like that where’s the real data? custom doesn’t automatically mean better

smltxt:Custom Compression for Short #CAW built its own Huffman compression lib: smltxt."hello world"→6bytes.gzip→31 bytes.Posts are compressed before signing and stored on-chain as compressed bytes.Less gas,more history on-chain.A custom solution that does exactly what's needed

@caw_dev this is maintenance level messaging dressed as meaningful advancement real progress would look like fewer words, more proof deployed features, measurable usage, or outside participation right now, it’s still “trust the process”

Another day, another push to github. 🌙 ~50 more details, bugs, and inefficiencies squashed. Step by step $CAW will be ready.

@Xubu_Trad @teh_fisherman @evaliys @caw_dev who was it? lol i didn’t catch it

@teh_fisherman @evaliys @caw_dev You spelled proof wrong

@caw_dev stop talking around me in closed chats and answer me here where everyone can see it. You know I am not in your so called freedom groups, so if you want to discuss my points, discuss them in public. Let the community judge the code, not the mood in a builders room. Your line that you will just renounce ownership at the end is not a serious answer. It is the standard crypto excuse people use when the code is still built around control. Here is the issue plainly. Renouncing is easy only when the system is already finished and no longer depends on privileged control. Your current build still depends on owner gated surfaces like setMinter, setL2Peer, setL1Peer, setUriGenerator, setReceiveGasLimit, addArchiveChain, and setAllowedPaymentToken. And this is not theoretical. The live admin activity already pulled shows repeated deployer side control including 85 setMinter calls, 45 setAllowedPaymentToken calls, and 51 setPeer calls. So yes, the motion of renouncing can be simple. Being ready to renounce is the hard part. That is where your supporters keep playing word games. The current code also shows a deeper problem. In the grep results only CawClientManager.sol clearly exposed a local renounceOwnership() in the output that was shared. The rest of the critical contracts still expose onlyOwner pathways. Maybe some inherit renounce logic, maybe they do not, but either way the architecture still expects an active operator. That means this is not about pressing one button after deployment. It means removing the need for privileged setters in the first place. Peer wiring, minter assignment, payment token allowlists, URI control, replication parameters, and the broader operator dependent flow all have to be frozen, redesigned, or stripped down enough that the protocol can stand without the hand on the wheel. That is why your talking point is misleading. If you renounce too early, parts of the system break because they still need operator control. If you renounce too late, then users spent that entire period trusting an admin controlled build while being told they were looking at decentralization. So answer this directly. What exact contracts will be renounced What exact owner functions disappear forever What exact parts of the present architecture have to be rewritten first And what gets scrapped from the current build to make that real Because right now this looks like the same old play. Easy to say. Easy to perform mechanically. Not easy to make true in substance. #CAW

@caw_dev @eduardowe62 then do the right thing now

@Cooljbow17 @eduardowe62 I agree 100%

Here's a quick video to show a bit more of what's been created. I think this only covers 25%-30% of the features I've implemented. Everything you can see is clickable and working.

@CAWprotocol even if the implementation is exactly as described, it only shows defensive awareness of a known exploit pattern, not evidence that the system is safe, complete, or economically secure

ReentrancyGuard on Every Fund Movement #CAW's NFT marketplace applies nonReentrant to EVERY function that moves funds: buy, buyWithToken, placeBid, settleAuction, withdrawBid, reclaimBid, acceptOffer.Not one ETH or ERC-20 transfer without the guard. That's how it should be done.

@eduardowe62 @caw_dev

@caw_dev Gente aun no se dan cuenta de como le estafan en la cara hablan de tiempo hablan de ya casi estará listo hablan de que falta poco y le dicen La respuesta esto es una estafa así de sencillo una estafa silenciosa

@caw_dev @eduardowe62 @caw_dev promises and character claims don’t replace proof if this is real and long-term, it should stand on open verification, not personal assurances or moral framing “I’m honorable” isn’t a substitute for transparent delivery and independently testable results $CAW .

I made a promise to this community a long time ago. I'm back because I am some one that keeps my word. I have no will or need to scam anyone. Like all builders and their projects, I am invested - which means I'm incentivized to make something that will work and be successful. Scammers are short term thieves. That's not me. What I'm building will be with honor, and will live forever.

@_IamCaw @yu88510 @caw_dev “First time in history” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here what exactly has been achieved that can’t already be done in existing #decentralized systems? and more importantly, can this be independently reproduced and verified outside the core team ecosystem? $CAW

First time that this is achieved in history, and it will be the necessary impulse to give us the freedom that every individual deserves, many thanks to @yu88510 and @caw_dev

@HtAptx4869 don’t delete again 👀 coinbase Fees is a tagged wallet interaction, NOT a listing from Coinbase NO •announcement •integration •confirmation this is how people get misled, turning normal onchain activity into insider signal If the exchange didn’t say it, it’s not happening

@CAWprotocol Key missing detail This does not clarify: •what exactly is being hashed (state? events? calldata?) •how determinism is guaranteed across implementations •whether this prevents manipulation or just detects mismatch after the fact

— Hash Chain Checkpointing. Every 128 actions, #CAW stores an on-chain cumulative hash of all events for that client. Migrating history to another chain only requires 128 r-values + actions, verifying they reconstruct the exact checkpoint. Verifiable portability — trust nobody.