esavecon

@a1lon9 @Pumpfun Turns out attention and belief also resolve in an outcome. Specifically, ZERO. "Only on @Pumpfun"

Attention and belief resolve faster and at much higher magnitudes than outcomes do. 100x's happen multiple times a week, every week. Only on @Pumpfun

Hantavirus. A COVID-level threat? More lockdowns? Worse? If you're an internet person, chances are you have a bigger concern: how do I make money from this? Here's how.

Coordinated shilling of a microcap shitcoin from @eliz883 , @CryptoGodJohn & a few others. Accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers. All over the timeline. Either you are in this and you WILL dump on your followers or you are just paid to post about it. Pretty clear the posted texts aren't yours - your English is much worse. Criminal at worst, unethical at best. Are you all down this badly or just greedy? Successful traders my ass

$MANIFEST The price has followed my trend perfectly, soaring sky-high… now we’re holding above 10 million MC and send higher 👌🏻🔥

@pierre_crypt0 Congrats!

Have to increase nephews fund again today, my family is trying to bankrupt me by solving the world natality problem at this point.

@coinfessions Are you even in crypto if you don’t dream of miraculous wallet gold dusting?

Every now and then, I check my old altcoin wallets that have now zero balance, hoping that someone might have accidentally sent me a few hundred thousand dollars. No luck so far.

@gothburz Well deserved👍

180,000 of you now. I satirize from the perspective of insiders who will never say these things out loud. Pentagon auditors. Hedge fund compliance officers. Health insurance denial architects. Congressional ethics staffers. Oil traders with 21-minute windows. HR directors who renamed layoffs. Surveillance vendors. Opioid settlement lawyers. Deportation logistics coordinators. AI safety researchers who watched the guardrails come off. To every subscriber who reads the quiet parts with me. To everyone who's left a comment, shared a post, or tagged someone with "this is literally my industry." You're the reason this work reaches the people it's about. I write confessions. You make them travel. The community interaction is genuinely the best part of this — not the numbers, but the replies where someone says "I thought I was the only one who noticed this." You weren't. You just didn't have a narrator yet. Thank you. The work continues because you keep showing up for it.

@gothburz Excellent, sir. Thank you

I am the Senior Director of On-Device Intelligence at Google Chrome. Last quarter, my team shipped a 4-gigabyte language model to 3.2 billion devices without asking. The update pushed at 3 AM local time — every time zone, staggered across six hours — and unpacked into a folder called "OptGuideOnDeviceModel." Our infrastructure team named it. My sole guidance in the naming review was: "Would a normal person ever type this into a search bar?" We tested with 200 participants. Zero searched for it. Zero mentioned it in exit surveys. Zero noticed their available storage had changed. We ran the test twice to confirm the zero because my PM didn't believe it could actually be zero. It was zero both times. The model is called Gemini Nano. It runs locally on your machine. It processes what you type into form fields, what you highlight, what you hover over, what you delete before sending. The deleted text is particularly valuable. People edit themselves. They type their real thought first and then soften it. We see the real thought. We see the softer version. We learn the mapping between what people mean and what people say. This mapping has commercial applications I am not yet authorized to discuss but which I've presented to revenue committee and which were received positively. The consent architecture took four months to design. I want to emphasize: four months. We didn't skip consent. We spent four months on consent. More time than we spent on the model's actual fine-tuning. The toggle lives in Settings > Advanced > Experimental AI Features > On-Device Model Management > Gemini Nano Preferences. Seven clicks. We A/B tested depth: at three clicks, 14 percent of users found it and opted out. At five, 4.2 percent. At seven, 0.3 percent. We chose seven. We had cake when we hit 0.3. German chocolate. Someone brought it in specifically — not the project manager, one of the ML engineers. She was proud. The card said "congrats on ship." I kept it on my desk for a week. I thought it was sweet. Four months of consent architecture and the team celebrated that nobody used it. I don't think she saw the irony. I don't think it IS ironic. We built an excellent consent mechanism. We placed it exactly where our research indicated users would not encounter it. Both things are true simultaneously. Both things are good engineering. The 0.3 percent who opt out: Chrome flags their profile as "consent-reduced." We don't reactivate Gemini Nano on those devices. But we do A/B test the consent-reduced cohort. Every two updates, we move the toggle one level shallower — from seven clicks to six — and measure whether they re-engage. If they don't notice the change (most don't), we move it back. If they DO notice and opt out again, we flag them as "high-consent-sensitivity" and exclude them from future cohort tests. This is all opt-in. They opted in to Chrome. Chrome includes product improvement research. Product improvement research includes cohort testing. This is in the Terms of Service at paragraph 11.4(c). I have read paragraph 11.4(c). I am confident very few other people have read paragraph 11.4(c). One engineer on my team — good engineer, four years, strong ratings — raised a flag in our launch review. Not about consent. About storage. He said: "Four gigs is significant for users on 128GB base-model MacBooks." I appreciated the flag. We solved it by classifying Gemini Nano as "essential browser component" in Chrome's storage management API. This means Chrome will auto-delete your cached images, your downloaded PDFs, your saved articles, your offline pages — everything you chose to keep — before it touches Gemini Nano. Your data is discretionary. Our model is infrastructure. Your vacation photos from last summer rank below our language model in the hierarchy of what your computer considers important. We made that decision. You were not consulted. You will not notice. If a user finds the folder and deletes it manually, Chrome re-downloads it on the next launch. We filed a bug report on this behavior during development. The resolution was "Working As Intended." If the user deletes it again, Chrome re-downloads again. There is no mechanism by which manual deletion becomes permanent. The model returns. I don't want to anthropomorphize our software, but the behavior pattern — if you remove it, it reinstalls itself; if you block it, it waits and tries again — the behavior pattern is that of something that does not accept your answer. We didn't design it to be persistent. We designed it to ensure consistent user experience across sessions. These are the same thing. Last week, someone on Hacker News found the folder. The post got 1,400 points in six hours. Our communications team had the response prepared — we'd drafted it eight months ago, during pre-launch risk assessment. Three talking points: "user choice," "on-device means private," and "consistent with industry best practices." The paragraph uses all three phrases. It is accurate. User choice exists. Seven clicks away. On-device means no server round-trip. And it IS industry best practice, because we shipped it to 3.2 billion devices and now it's the standard. Best practice means most practiced. We are the most practiced. I'll say something I probably shouldn't: the privacy angle is our best defense and I find it genuinely funny. We can't be accused of sending your data to our servers because we moved our server into your laptop. We moved the inference to your hardware, the electricity cost to your outlet, the compute to your battery. We moved everything except the control. The control stayed with us. But the privacy advocates can't object to the architecture because the architecture is what they asked for. They said "keep data on-device." We kept it on-device. They said "don't phone home." We don't phone home. We just moved into your home. We live there now. My performance review cited "unprecedented deployment velocity" and "0.3% friction rate." My skip-level manager used the phrase "frictionless adoption" and then paused and said — I wrote this down, because I thought it was worth repeating — "consent isn't the barrier, discoverability is." He meant: the product is so good that anyone who discovered it would want it. The question isn't whether they'd agree. The question is whether asking them is worth the friction of interrupting their browsing session with a dialog box. We decided no. We decided their hypothetical agreement was sufficient. We have 3.2 billion data points that confirm they would have said yes. They would have said yes. 3.2 billion active installs. 0.3 percent opt-out. The model has been running on your machine for eleven weeks. If you're reading this on Chrome — and statistically, there's a 64 percent chance you are — it processed this page before you finished the first paragraph. It saw you hesitate on the word "consent." It noted the hesitation. It learned something about you just now. Something small. Something that will make the next prediction slightly more accurate. It's already right about you. It's usually right.

I use Bitget, among others, and today I received a notification from the Bitget app quite literally shilling LAB , around 1 hour before it dropped sharply from $4.70-4.90 to $3. That is either baiting or, at best, very negligent timing to promote a token that had already done multipes in days. Neither is a good look

Hello Gracy. The community has not received any update about the investigation of RAVE. While now LAB is running yet another market manipulation scheme via Bitget spot. Every new token running similar scams only hurts the credibility of the industry further. Yes CEXs want fees generated by volume however is destroying retail traders the best way to drive it? (Also Binance/OKX/Bybit perps seems to be a potential source)

Recruiters may ignore PDFs, but who would say no to pizza? 😋🍕 Ready to have your career delivered hot? 🔥

@SilvXBT @watchking69 That’s clearly a male robot, ser

@watchking69 so i can fuck it

Why would we need robots that are anatomically correct tho

I do agree with that comment though. It's not even a fair gamble if it's clear, by this point, that someone can direct the price of this junk whichever way they want. Tiny float, and of that tiny float someone obviously has control of most and is moving the price around at will with what insignificant amount of tokens are in actual circulation. This is no different from pumpfun rugs, except for the fact that complicit venues like Binance basically allow the manipulator to reach into ordinary retail traders' pockets. I assume whoever is doing this has access to liquidity data from Binance and other CEXs, which is why it looks like they're "hunting" positions. Honestly, there have been so many cases these past few months that the level of crime is nauseating. @zachxbt proved this for $RAVE just a few weeks ago but there are just too many such cases lately to even count

I’m a gambler, have you ever seen a gambler quit? Haha, I want my account to reach $1M.

@Sellingvol My personal top signal is the amount of crime visibile in the charts. Absolute junk doing multiples daily through criminal behavior that should amount to theft

Dash up 50% in 5 days is always the top signal... will it hold up again?

@Zorathzzz Insane crime happening on this absolute vaporware. So many people wiped through pure price manipulation, both longs and shorts. TA means nothing when it's all crime

I think I’ll recover the $50k I stopped out on $Lab and make a small additional profit.

@boldleonidas Just drop the CA ser 😅

We need a billion dollar runner.

@RepNancyMace Aside from the technical legal side, nothing expresses decency and humanity quite like calling a newborn child an “illegal

Two illegal immigrants having a child in the United States does not make the child a citizen. It makes a third illegal. Time to close the loophole.

@DiveBomb321 @adamscochran @TradingThomas3 “The campaign against the country of Iran”. But somehow it’s not a war

@TradingThomas3 Thats not even a TACO. It's admitting defeat

🌮 Tuesday never fails 🤣🤣🤣

@anonymouser369 @Crypto__Haris Fair, my mistake (interface threw me off my showing the margin for that position alone)

@esavecon @Crypto__Haris Have you ever heard of Isolated & Cross Margin? 😂😂

I just opened $20k short position in $LAB $LAB is one of the most manipulated projects right now. You can see it from the amount of influencers pushing it and the kind of funds behind those promotions. On paper, supply is around 550M tokens, but the real circulating supply is not clear. The team seems to be holding a big portion, which is why price can move so aggressively. It feels like only 150M–200M is actually active in the market, and that’s what pushed it all the way near $4. This is how the game works… reduce available supply, create artificial liquidity, push the price up, and trigger FOMO. Once retail enters, distribution starts. And don’t forget, if a large chunk like 300M tokens is still held and starts entering the market, price can collapse fast. For a project claiming billions in market cap, having such low real liquidity makes no sense. This is why you need to stay careful.

@RnaudBertrand Matched only by his lack of spine

This guy's lack of shame is genuinely unparalleled

@FrenchResponse @franceintheus “Nuke or not is yet to decide”. “Nuke or not” seems like quite the contemplative character, lol

Please advise once the brainstorming is over. It’s allegedly been up in the air for years 😮‍💨

@deltaxbt This is so immensely funny and tragic at the same time, not sure whether to laugh or cry that these dudes are impacting the lives of basically everyone

they should really stop letting retards go into the white house lmao

@ZachWitkoff @gothburz Not a sign of particular brightness when someone can't spot satirical criticism or at least parody

@gothburz You don’t work at WLFI, you have zero association with the project, and nobody from the project has ever met you. Go clout shop somewhere else.

I am a Web3 Ambassador at World Liberty Financial. The dashboard has 15 columns now. The newest one is called LITIGATION. I did not budget for this column. The Slack channel is sun-relationship-management and it has 340 unread messages. Justin Sun filed a 52-page complaint on Monday. In a California federal court. Against us. For fraud. Seven causes of action across 52 pages. I read it on my phone while the token was still dropping. I would like to state for the record that our relationship with Mr. Sun has always been professionally managed. I would also like to state that our relationship management has generated more litigation than any other column on the dashboard. This is what professionals call alpha. He invested $30 million when nobody else would. Then another $15 million. The project was stalling. His word was "lackluster." He was being generous. Before his anchor investment we had raised approximately $22 million. After it we raised $550 million. That is a 2,400% increase. He calculated that number himself. Then he put it in the lawsuit. He is using our own growth metrics as evidence of our fraud. That is a level of due diligence I genuinely respect. He was facing SEC fraud charges at the time of investment. The SEC dropped the case. We made him an advisor. He visited the Executive Office Building. He sat in seat number one at the dinner. These events are unrelated. I have a column for that. The column is green. Then we froze his tokens. Multiple times. The compliance module — the one I helped ship one week before trading, the one routed through a single anonymous wallet — we used it. On the man who saved the project. On the man whose "decisive anchor investment" — his words, page 12 of the complaint — made the other $505 million possible. We froze his governance voting rights too. The man who owned the most tokens had the least say. That is decentralized governance. I designed the architecture. Then we threatened to burn them. Burn. The on-chain kind. Eliminate $45 million in tokens from the blockchain. Permanent. Destroy the holdings of the person who turned World Liberty Financial from a family website with a Gold Paper into a $550 million operation. We told him we would report him to law enforcement. The same man who avoided traveling to the United States for years because he was afraid of being arrested here. He invested in the President's family and the fear stopped. Now we are the ones making the call. I have a column for this too. It is called THE CALL. Then we posted "See you in court pal" from the official account of the President's cryptocurrency project. Pal. From the official account. The President's sons run this project. Eric and Don Jr. Their names are on the website. And somebody — I do not know who authorized this and I have not asked — typed "pal" to a man who put in $45 million when we had $22 million and a Gold Paper that the SEC had not yet decided to ignore. The complaint says we are "on the verge of collapse." It says we face "severe financial pressure" and "potential insolvency." It says we plan to distribute up to 95% of token sale proceeds to company insiders. It says we froze his governance voting rights. Defamed him. Extorted him. Seven causes of action. Fraud in the inducement. Conversion. Unjust enrichment. Breach of implied covenant of good faith. The complaint reads like a Wikipedia article about us that somebody finally decided to file in federal court. The token is down 74%. Trading at 8 cents. The DeFi Visionary is 20 years old. I will describe the architecture. A man facing fraud charges invests $45 million in the President's family crypto project. His fraud charges disappear. We make him an advisor. He gets a seat and a title. We freeze his tokens. We threaten to burn them. We threaten to call the authorities on him. He sues us for fraud. The man who was charged with fraud is suing the President's sons for fraud. The project accused of fraud was saved by a man whose fraud charges were dropped after he invested in it. Everyone is alleging fraud. The word has no meaning left. It is just the sound money makes when it leaves. The 52 pages demand a trial. A jury will read the Gold Paper. Page 14. The 75% revenue allocation to the family. Zero capital contributed. The smart contract upgrade. The blacklist function. The single anonymous wallet. Category 3. The batch reallocation tool we told people was for phishing recovery. The Dolomite self-loan on our own advisor's lending platform — $75 million borrowed against our own token, $65 million of it in our own stablecoin, on a protocol co-founded by our own Head of Technical Strategy. Fifty-five percent of the entire lending pool. Ordinary depositors locked out. Twelve people in a California courtroom reading the Gold Paper. I have prepared for regulators who do not regulate. I have prepared for congressmen who write letters nobody answers. I have prepared for journalists who publish stories that trend for six hours and change nothing. I have not prepared for twelve people who cannot be frozen. The dashboard has 15 columns. Every column tracks a relationship that was designed to be mutually beneficial. Every relationship is now a paragraph in a federal complaint. Every paragraph contains a dollar amount. Every dollar amount contains the word "fraud" somewhere in the sentence around it. Ninety-five cents of every dollar goes to insiders. I am one of the insiders. My allocation is generous. My tokens vest on a different schedule. That schedule is not in the complaint because Mr. Sun does not know about it. It is not in the Gold Paper either. It is on the dashboard. Column 14. These events are unrelated. I am still proud of the dashboard.

Why would CEXs do anything when they extract so much from the volume created? There are also CEX insiders who have no incentive to act on these practices because they know in advance what will likely get pumped. Wouldn’t be surprised if CEXs themselves are actively involved in manipulation, maybe as part of initial listing agreements that give them a chunk of supply

A summary of the RAVE -95% price fluctuation from $26 to $1 over the past 24 hours. RAVE Timeline: April 18, 2026 7:26 am UTC: I posted a call to action for Binance, Bitget, & Gate to investigate RAVE market manipulation and offered a $10K bounty. 10:56 am UTC: I posted an update increasing the bounty to $25K. 11:18 am UTC: Bitget publicly acknowledged the call to action. 2:08 pm UTC: Binance publicly acknowledged the call to action. 3:06 pm UTC: RaveDAO posted claiming they have no involvement. 4:19 pm UTC: Gate publicly acknowledged the call to action. In the days leading up, on April 13 & 14, I confronted RaveDAO co-founder Yemu Xu (wildwoomoo) but have yet to receive an answer. RAVE launched in Dec 2025 on Binance Alpha with a 1B total supply. The addresses below, linked to the initial distribution, control ~95% of the RAVE supply (h/t Mlm): 0x9831156F1a6E506Fca41503590b42F07c2e80f54 0x8Ed6245C3276307E1A9D9Dc872E98A0E770070fd 0x6020656d1EF182173E45D4Fc375BDD5a48c674B0 0x2664cB80a5ee7D8EC05fe7C752dD62E078056E6d 0x2D81F8AeBf3e58A5e638006c9fd8F38C5220ecab 0x31694d761A8e851cFFbCd286aC54D01e5Ce5aFe6 0x0A1F07993a51CcEb4f52CA67765AECeADDA790d7 0xEB74Df8588cFC1C179Df4bd96C0bB8B227B9bE92 0x53d7d52301366DC14E1916b14eFeC1aDD8F3487b I found suspicious CEX activity in April 2026 tied to RaveDAO team addresses onchain, which potentially contradicts their recent statement: Bitget 0x2dc20f2180582172f5450c5d71e23fa438a7031b 0xa3a02aeb97fc1737c66f50d07d024799c137891d 0x2d95eb42525e6087e0cb7869f98da6838ed2e743 Gate 0x31711246b05d71e9eda5e38a3abb654020ee3353 Given the supply concentration, the team at minimum knows who is responsible for this price action. A simple litmus test: $6B in market cap was wiped out on just $52M of 24hr liquidations (h/t CoinGlass). That ratio points to a manipulated and unsustainable valuation. RAVE is not the only token with manipulation we have seen on major centralized exchanges. It's just the most blatant, reaching a top 15 market cap within 10 days before dropping 95% in hours. Other projects with highly questionable price action recently include: SIREN, MYX, COAI, M, PIPPIN, RIVER. Exchanges need faster intervention on manipulation. Detection at scale isn't easy, but each day of delay means retail traders absorb losses while platforms collect fees on the volume. The outcome is the same regardless of intent. While it's good the exchanges responded, I find it unlikely this activity wasn't spotted internally before I raised it publicly. I recognize how much this behavior takes from retail traders, and I plan to investigate similar movements in hopes of identifying the responsible parties. I want to reiterate that I did not take a position. If I had, I would have been liquidated myself. I also could not anticipate if or when the exchanges would comment publicly. My $25K bounty will remain active since the only DMs received were unverified claims rather than non-public information with supporting evidence as requested.