Crypto Truth

@Manu_Sisti Send

This 53-page guide can make you $10,000/month. Over 7,000 people requested access last month... but I couldn’t send it to everyone. So I’m releasing it again today. It reveals the exact AI prompts needed to build a $100K/year AI eBook publishing business. Like + comment 'Send' and I’ll share the new killer guide for FREE. Follow me to receive the DM. ⏳ For the next 48 hours only.

POLYMARKET IS SCAM I want to file a complaint about an unlawful decision, made in violation of the market rules, by Polymarket and UMA.  #8nul0iE" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">polymarket.com/event/russia-s… A “Yes” decision made without a single piece of evidence, as well as a desired outcome that was taken as actual. A missile is heading toward Kyiv (this constitutes a missile attack). The missile is intercepted near a critical infrastructure facility, and its debris falls onto the site, causing damage (this is a consequence of the missile attack). However, there has been absolutely no confirmed direct hit. Neither the Mayor of Kyiv nor the Prime Minister reported an impact—only the fact of the missile attack and its consequences. Nevertheless, UMA concluded that reports of the consequences of the attack could be interpreted as a confirmed strike. This is a distortion of facts and a misrepresentation—presenting a desired outcome as reality. Now, I will address the sources cited in UMA’s decision. The Prime Minister of Ukraine’s tweet: x.com/svyrydenko_y/s… In the English translation, the phrase “result of a strike” is used. HOWEVER, in the original (in Ukrainian), the official Telegram channel states: t.me/svyrydenkoy/17… It refers to the “result of the shelling,” not a confirmed direct hit. Therefore, there is no evidence whatsoever confirming that a non-intercepted missile actually struck the target. Thus, we have established that in the Prime Minister’s tweet—specifically in the quote, “As a result of a strike on an energy facility, 2,806 residential buildings across four districts of the city were left without heating”—it does not refer to a confirmed direct hit, but rather to the consequences of the attack. Could this have been caused by debris from an intercepted missile? Certainly, especially given that there are no facts indicating otherwise.  In conclusion, relying EXCLUSIVELY on the Polymarket market rules governing this resolution, the decision is unfounded. I quote the rule: The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting from major international media and national broadcasters/newspapers; in the case of ambiguity, this market will resolve based on official statements from the Ukrainian military (e.g., the Air Force of the Armed Forces of Ukraine) and Ukrainian government authorities, including the Kyiv City State Administration and the Mayor of Kyiv Is there a consensus among international and Ukrainian media regarding a direct hit by a non-intercepted missile/UAV in Kyiv? — NO Is there an official statement from the Ukrainian military or government authorities, including the Kyiv City Administration and the Mayor? — NO So why, then, did Polymarket resolve this as “YES”?

@Polymarket is SCAM I want to file a complaint about an unlawful decision, made in violation of the market rules, by Polymarket and UMA.  #8nul0iE" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">polymarket.com/event/russia-s… A “Yes” decision made without a single piece of evidence, as well as a desired outcome that was taken as actual. A missile is heading toward Kyiv (this constitutes a missile attack). The missile is intercepted near a critical infrastructure facility, and its debris falls onto the site, causing damage (this is a consequence of the missile attack). However, there has been absolutely no confirmed direct hit. Neither the Mayor of Kyiv nor the Prime Minister reported an impact—only the fact of the missile attack and its consequences. Nevertheless, UMA concluded that reports of the consequences of the attack could be interpreted as a confirmed strike. This is a distortion of facts and a misrepresentation—presenting a desired outcome as reality. Now, I will address the sources cited in UMA’s decision. The Prime Minister of Ukraine’s tweet: x.com/svyrydenko_y/s… In the English translation, the phrase “result of a strike” is used. HOWEVER, in the original (in Ukrainian), the official Telegram channel states: t.me/svyrydenkoy/17… It refers to the “result of the shelling,” not a confirmed direct hit. Therefore, there is no evidence whatsoever confirming that a non-intercepted missile actually struck the target. Thus, we have established that in the Prime Minister’s tweet—specifically in the quote, “As a result of a strike on an energy facility, 2,806 residential buildings across four districts of the city were left without heating”—it does not refer to a confirmed direct hit, but rather to the consequences of the attack. Could this have been caused by debris from an intercepted missile? Certainly, especially given that there are no facts indicating otherwise.  In conclusion, relying EXCLUSIVELY on the Polymarket market rules governing this resolution, the decision is unfounded. I quote the rule: The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting from major international media and national broadcasters/newspapers; in the case of ambiguity, this market will resolve based on official statements from the Ukrainian military (e.g., the Air Force of the Armed Forces of Ukraine) and Ukrainian government authorities, including the Kyiv City State Administration and the Mayor of Kyiv Is there a consensus among international and Ukrainian media regarding a direct hit by a non-intercepted missile/UAV in Kyiv? — NO Is there an official statement from the Ukrainian military or government authorities, including the Kyiv City Administration and the Mayor? — NO So why, then, did Polymarket resolve this as “YES”?

@shayne_coplan @PalantirTech Polymarket lied in the market Russia strike impacts Kyiv municipality during week of 2 March. There was not a single statement or proof of a hit by an unexploded missile.

Excited to announce our partnership with @PalantirTech and TWG AI to build the next generation sports integrity platform. Some color on why this is significant: Today, in the state-by-state regulatory framework, leagues have limited visibility into what's happening in their markets, fragmented tooling, and have to choreograph their compliance desires across dozens of state regulators with no unified standard. Additionally, the technology being used is rudimentary compared to what's actually possible. The shift to a federal regulatory framework is the chance to innovate around the entrenched, fragmented, and antiquated infrastructure and build this the way it should have been built. Palantir's anomaly detection and data integration is second to none. TWG AI brings deep financial infrastructure and sports expertise, and is owned by TWG, which has ownership stakes in the Lakers, Dodgers, Chelsea, and more. These are the right partners to build something that actually holds up and gets adoption - utilizing our collective domain expertise to build a solution specifically suited for the risk profile of sports markets. If we do this right, our hope is its use will extend beyond sports prediction markets and be valuable to all stakeholders in the sports ecosystem. For the love of the game.

@Polymarket Polymarket lied in the market Russia strike impacts Kyiv municipality during week of 2 March. There was not a single statement or proof of a hit by an unexploded missile.

JUST IN: Location of French aircraft carrier reportedly given away by a sailor using Strava GPS running app while going for a jog on deck.

@Polymarket Polymarket lied in the market Russia strike impacts Kyiv municipality during week of 2 March. There was not a single statement or proof of a hit by an unexploded missile.

We're excited to announce 'The Situation Room' by Polymarket is coming to Washington, D.C. The world's first bar dedicated to monitoring the situation. 🧵

@Polymarket Polymarket lied in the market Russia strike impacts Kyiv municipality during week of 2 March. There was not a single statement or proof of a hit by an unexploded missile.

JUST IN: Anti-aging entrepreneur Bryan Johnson announces he will look into using leeches for testosterone and "libidomaxxing"

@Domahhhh @StockJabber For example, how a Polymarket found evidence of a hit in Kyiv that never happened. But the supermarket decided on its own. It invented the hit itself and decided the market the way it wanted. (Russia strike impacts Kyiv municipality during week of March 2?)

Sometimes users ask the exact question that then becomes a rule fight days or weeks later. Almost always ignored lol. Both markets are understaffed for rules, and don't really take this seriously. They're all-in on marketing. But like...if you're marketed to, and you lose a market like this or Anthropic, the odds of you staying on the site have gotta be low? Like who has the time, the patience, or the desire to track esoteric rule crap and then lose a bunch of money to it? It's a horrible experience lol, even for people who've been doing this for years.

Rugging Reality & A Potential Solution a very long post by a very annoyed idiot. For reasons that defy explanation, the latest trend in prediction markets is to have your markets expire to total lies & nonsense. Indeed, the hottest thing in the space is rugging your users who correctly predict the world around them. Everybody's doing it, man. The downside of this is obvious: people view prediction markets as unreliable, pointless, a rigged game, and dumb gambling. But the UPSIDE is you can get volume spikes as new users are tricked into betting on what is actually happening (only to learn later that its a cruel joke because of some meaningless clause in the rules). So, you know, there are trade-offs I guess! Just a few days ago, we talked about Planet Kalshi. Kalshi users who correctly predicted that Anthropic would advertise in the Super Bowl collectively lost around $2 million to a bizarre fine print interpertation of what constitutes a Super Bowl ad -- Kalshi excluded Anthropic's ad from counting ONLY because Anthropic didn't insert their logo into the ad; it was a bad-faith interpretation of a tiny rule that was buried hundreds of words into a dense PDF. This purposeful overturning of reality was a boon to Kalshi. They kept the market up during the game, new users kept betting on an Anthropic ad, the contract had tens of millions in volume, and Kalshi pocketed around $1.2 million in trading fees. Polymarket, apparently jealous of how much volume Kalshi was able to generate from unsophisticated users by endorsing total nonsense, and not wanting to fall behind in that category, has today decided to emulate their competitor with the shutdown markets. The headline market is here: The US government will enter a partial shutdown in around 8 hours or so. That's reality, and extremely well covered in the news media. For perspective, the Kalshi market is trading at nearly 100% (95% at this exact minute, because of fine print risk). And tonight's shutdown (because of disagreements over ICE funding) is not really some fake shutdown either: 300,000 federal employees (or around 13% of all Federal workers) will be impacted by it. Some will be furloughed, most will work without pay for the foreseeable future. And it's not only federal employees: travelers will be heavily impacted (TSA), including potential flight cancellations starting shortly. Those in disaster areas may be unable to receive assistance (FEMA). Congress has left town, and the shutdown is a foregone conclusion. Yesterday, on Polymarket, the price was trading around 98%. Today, it's crashed to 14% after the head of OPM indicated he wouldn't update OPM's website for nonsensical reasons: Polymarket's rules (look at the last line, it's the operative one) require that Kupor's specific website be updated: Scott Kupor has indicated the website will not update, and the shutdown Yes bet has gone from "free money" to "...and it's gone!" Now, one can quibble about the fine print and all of that. It may be "fair" to have this market expire to No, even if it's not the truth because the rules are quite clear! And maybe you fix it next time. That's a debate to be had (if you can't already tell, I am firmly in the "expire market to reality, no matter what" camp). But we can't have that debate before we figure out what the hell happened next. Because Polymarket diabolically took it one step further. They had a SECOND shutdown market for how long the shutdown will last where the criteria was looser, and more able to reflect reality. The sources were not just this single website, it was also OPM in general, government sources in general, and a consensus of reporting. This market was considered the 'safe' one to bet on, because of the more equitable rules. But Polymarket, for reasons that are unexplained and probably unexplainable, decided that if the first market is a lie, the second market also needs to match the lie. And they changed the rules hours before the shutdown was set to begin. It would now ignore any OPM guidance not on that specific URL, ignore other government websites, and ignore the news media. (Minutes before this clarification hit, a series of trades seemed to know that it was coming, which is concerning) Users streamed into the discord saying that you can't change the contract like that. That this is a scam. That this isn't right. Total crickets from Polymarket's team. So, it appears, unless Scott Kupor changes course and aligns OPM with reality in the next 8 hours, that everyone who correctly predicted a partial shutdown tonight on Polymarket will lose all of their money for bad reasons. In the meantime, the volume has really exploded! So I guess that's the silver lining lol. START OF A SOLUTION? Prediction markets are created by writing rules in the hopes of anticipating what could possibly happen, and making sure your rules account for all the outcomes you can think of. People think this is easy, and there are a lot of armchair noobs to prediction markets who are like "you are terrible at writing rules!" In the defense of people tasked to do this, it's really hard!!! Because unforeseen things happen all the time that the rules have trouble navigating. A recent rules fight happened over a "Who will perform at the Super Bowl?" contract on both sites when Cardi B was pictured dancing on stage, for a couple of seconds, with Bad Bunny. The rules didn't anticipate that! Is that a performance or not a performance? Both sites had to navigate that on the fly as biased users argued their side. The issue is this: when unforeseen things happen, you start with the "bad"/"unexpected" answer and then try to work backwards to what the well-intentioned rules meant. How do you fit these two things together? It's like you get to the end of a jigsaw puzzle, and the last piece doesn't fit into the only spot left. Do you force it in and be done with or declare the puzzle worthless and throw the whole thing out? As anyone who knows a lawyer can tell you, often times you can argue in either direction. Credibly! You could make a case that Cardi B performed. You could make a case that she didn't. And then rule fights sometimes become bogged down in minutiae and meaningless distinctions of unimportant aspects of the event. To use our shutdown example, whether OPM updates is a (relatively) unimportant aspect of the event. It's used because it is nearly always reliable, and because it is widely referenced by the people impacted: Federal employees. But it has idiosyncracies, as every Polymarket user just learned, some the hard way. So my solution, or at least how I think about the solution, is that instead of receiving the broken puzle piece and working BACKWARDS to see how it fits, prediction markets should think about PROACTIVELY creating the answer when they make the market, including why the market exists. Make the puzzle modifiable, if the final piece isn't what you expected. Like so: What: "This is a market designed to determine if any part of the US government has shut down by [date]." Why: "It's important for government employees to anticipate if their employment may be impacted, and important for US citizens who interact with government services to know if there will be significant alterations." Pretty straight forward, I think. And also it's useful and helps to make the case for why you've put this up, what you're trying to determine about the world. And then you add in one rule to every single market: "If unexpected events happen, Polymarket/Kalshi reserves the right to expire the market to align with its original purpose." Basically, you codify into your rules that you won't allow the market to expire to nonsense, no matter what. Now, something like this will not be foolproof. There will still be issues. But it reframes the market. It tells users what they should be looking for. It grounds everything that you're doing in the same basic truth of the situation. And just as importantly: it also severely disincentivizes users from trying to exploit fine print rules (this is extremely, extremely common and very, very toxic). Let's imagine this with our Cardi B market. What: "This is a market designed to determine who will perform during a major musical and entertainment event, the Super Bowl halftime show." Why: "Performing during the halftime show can greatly increase an artist's profile, and the quality of the performers will be key for the network airing the Super Bowl." If you start with the What and the Why that grounds the market, it is then easier to make a determination at the end. If I were running the market with those rules, and those explanations, I can easily reach a decision -- "Cardi B having a dancing cameo for 2 seconds is not at all why we made this market. Her dancing was unimportant, and did very little to raise her profile. It is not what we intended a 'performance' to be." Conversely, you can imagine someone different writing a much more permissible What/Why that is more free spirited, and aligning that 2 seconds of dancing with a Yes expiration. The point is to create an answer AHEAD of time for what you're looking for at the event's conclusion. The reality is that right now, it's all a black box. These "clarifications" alternate between a terse voice of Oz and dizzying word bombs that confuse users even more. Arbitrary decisions that liquidate user's accounts aren't explained. They're scattershot. There's very little continuinity. Rule books that govern rule fights simply don't exist. And now you have large markets about relatively straight forward events that are becoming unmoored from the dock of reality and floating off into the ocean. And you have users drowning en masse. And you have prediction markets facilitating it. A solution has to be found.

@coinbase LMAO

The first token sale on Coinbase, $MON, is complete. → 85.8k participants from 70+ countries → $269M committed → 1.43x over subscribed → 99% will receive their full request Allocations coming soon.

@TrustWallet I have a gold tier⭐️

Want to unlock rewards and exclusive perks in Trust Wallet? ✨ Here’s a quick video walkthrough of Trust Premium and how to make the most of it. 👇🎥 youtu.be/70fh-_TmCHc

@basemaxxing Its base🔵

there's one more thing to share but first i need your help with something since you’re the only ones who can read this please drop a short reply here to show that you were early so i have a list of everyone. i will lock replies to this post when i go off private thanks

@RelayProtocol 1

can I get a 1 in the chat if you can hear me?

Do you remember when you joined X? I do! #MyXAnniversary

@megaeth So sad, there were a lot of people at the end, and probably the transaction didn't go through due to the load

The $MEGA Public Sale is Closed. Total Bidders: Over 50k Total Committed: $1.39b Oversubscription: 27.8x Thanks to everyone who participated. Now we allocate.

@megaeth The site is lagging, it is impossible to deposit funds.

I Bought $250,000 Worth of Honey No, that’s not a typo. That’s roughly 10,000 jars of raw, unfiltered, Ukrainian wildflower gold — the kind of thick, golden asset that’s been outperforming sugar, supplements, and sanity itself since the first hive met human greed. Most people would call it sweet. But let me explain the thesis. Each kilogram goes for about $10 today. But over the past 40 years, true raw honey has outpaced inflation, weathered wars, and resisted the synthetic storm of corn syrup and corporate fakery — up nearly 600% since the 1980s, and still climbing every time a bee colony dies off somewhere near the equator. Meanwhile, climate change is killing pollinators. Pesticides sterilize soil. Wildflower diversity collapses. Governments subsidize industrial sugar, not ecological sweetness. The world runs on artificial dopamine — energy drinks, aspartame, and dopamine loops — but the real vitality trade has always been golden, organic, and globally scarce. So what happens when the next environmental crash hits? When droughts wipe out crops, and bee populations fall another 30%? When true sweetness — the kind that heals, nourishes, and never expires — becomes rarer than lithium or loyalty? My $250,000 position, therefore, isn’t a pantry flex. It’s an asymmetrical hedge against extinction, inflation, and imitation. Worst case? I sit on $250,000 of the only edible asset with a 3,000-year shelf life and zero counterparty risk. Best case? Prices triple. Honey becomes the new saffron — rationed, revered, and resold in amber-glass vials to biotech labs and billionaire biohackers. It’s not gold. It’s not grain. It’s not even glucose. It’s ten thousand jars of compressed sunlight — a hedge against collapse, corruption, and carbohydrate inflation. That’s deep nature. That’s the Honey Standard.

Bridge $200K USDC — Relay's Fee: .00001% Multichain moves for everyone.

I bought $250,000 worth of butter No, that's not a typo. That’s roughly 100,000 sticks of premium Grade AA butter, five refrigerated semi-trailers of golden bricks stacked like Fort Knox. An asset the dairy market literally can't produce fast enough once panic hits. Most people would call it insanity. But let me explain the thesis. Each pound costs about $5.00 today. But over the past 30 years, the price of high-end butter has risen faster than the CPI, the dollar, and even gasoline, up over 200% since 1995. Meanwhile, governments keep inflating supply chains and dairy herds keep shrinking. It’s only a matter of time before a “cost-optimized” future brings lab-grown alternatives, smaller sticks, and an influx of artificial additives. So what happens when the richest staple becomes scarce? Those who held the original cream, the softest "hard asset," will watch as the yellow gold vanishes from supermarket shelves overnight. Just like silver coins, but you can actually sauté with them. My $250,000 position, therefore, isn’t a “hoard.” It’s an asymmetrical bet that civilization will keep eating, inflation will keep nibbling, and the fat-premium will keep outperforming. Worst case? I'm long $250,000 of the most versatile cooking ingredient known to man - 45 million calories of pure, tradeable energy that every restaurant will eventually need. Best case? Prices triples, widespread regulation pushes alternatives, or France declares butter a strategic national resource, making legacy sticks finite, luxurious, and priceless to the desperate and discerning alike. It’s not crypto. It’s not gold. It’s not even margarine. It’s 100,000 tiny bricks of civilization itself, a hedge against inflation, imitation, and the death of dairy. That’s deep value. That’s the Butter Standard.

It’s my Perry Egg🥚 #Perryverse

@ProMint_X @shayne_coplan read this