CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain) profile picture

Mined BTC LTC & DOGE as a hobbyist in 2013, Left in 2014. 2017 felt like luck 2021 woke me up. never throw away a hard drive

Joined June 2024
Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)Photo by CryptoJake (@JustJakeOnChain)
History lesson. In July 2023, the SEC filed its lawsuit against Richard. Nobody knew where he was or what was happening. Speculation about his location, service of process, "DOJ indictment coming for sure" fud, etc, happened for MONTHS. We didn't know anything until Quinn Emanuel appeared in Jan 2024 and said they'd be filing a motion to dismiss, which of course they did. But the point is: the entire time people were freaking out and selling their coins, RH was doing shit behind the scenes. Why do people think the same thing hasn't been happening all along here? Whether this arrest was part of the overall plan or not (and it would suck if it was, really), I still believe there *is* some BTS shit we don't know about, because RH doesn't want us to know yet. Just like in 2023. I've done very little criminal work in my career, and only when I first started out in 2001-2002. So I'm not even the guy to talk to about criminal procedure in the US, much less in Europe. But I can refer you all back to a months-long gap in our recent history where we had no idea what was going on, and one day, he showed us all he's been one step ahead the entire time. And people think this time is different? Receipts:
41
79
6
451
14,530
CryptoJake retweeted
Bitcoin has gone parabolic 4/4 times when the business cycle crosses above zero line. 2009 - 2012 - 2016 - 2026 5th cross has triggered.
96
449
46
3,588
277,921
FUCK NOOO
JUST IN: Pitbull unveils "Pitcoin."
5
1
33
2,036
CryptoJake retweeted
The wait is over. Onion-routed privacy is coming to your desktop. Anyone Desktop VPN 26/08/26
31
117
7
632
21,569
CryptoJake retweeted
KEYSTONE Investigation — Maker (pDAI) Leg: Case File Chain: PulseChain (chain 369, 0x171) Fork block: 17,233,000 (state+history copy of Ethereum; blocks ≤ this are copied mainnet, blocks > this are chain-369-native) Scope of this file: the MakerDAO / pDAI leg only. Compound (cTRL/CCTP), bridge, and Atropa legs are separate. Status: core mechanism node-verified end-to-end. Several downstream questions remain open (Section 6). Method note: every finding below is grounded in a named script run against a synced chain-369 node. Fork-gating (pre/post fork-block) and reading Maker’s own ledger (Vat/DaiJoin LogNotes) rather than inferring from ERC-20 transfers are the two controls that make the claims defensible. Executive summary Against fork-minted liquid-staking collateral (wstETH, rETH) copied into PulseChain’s Maker deployment, an operator drew ~3.4 billion pDAI post-fork through a programmatic Sybil fleet of ~2,000 urns, then fired an inherited Emergency Shutdown Module (ESM) to cage the Vat and strip legitimate governance — freezing the system with its own emergency brake. Tracing the drawn pDAI to where it was minted as an ERC-20 (via DaiJoin.exit) revealed the operation is larger than the wstETH leg alone: ~106 billion pDAI (gross) was exited to a single address, c108, alongside a dozen further billion-scale recipients. Those recipients are not liquidity pools — they are bespoke Maker-integrated contracts, operator EOAs, and at least one previously-unknown Vat-authorized contract. c108 (0xc108f4…df3) sits at the center: it fired the ESM, it is the largest single pDAI recipient, and it is tied to the distribution hub (KEYSTONE) and the fleet deployer (BOT) through shared infrastructure. Framing caveat (load-bearing): “drawn” and “exited” totals are gross throughput, not net holdings. pDAI cycles (exit → deploy → join → re-exit). Whether the 106B represents value held/extracted vs cycled as liquidity is not yet resolved (Section 6). This file deliberately avoids “theft”/“stolen” language pending that resolution. The mechanism, end-to-end (all steps node-verified) 1.Copied collateral. PulseChain copied Ethereum’s Maker state at the fork, including the wstETH-A / wstETH-B / rETH-A ilks and the liquid-staking token contracts. The forked staking tokens are mintable on the fork. 2.Post-fork draws. A fleet of ~2,000 urns each performed frob() on the Vat, drawing pDAI against the forked staking collateral. Fork-gated frob census confirms these draws occurred at blocks > 17,233,000 (i.e. genuine chain-369 activity, not copied debt). Net post-fork drawn: •WSTETH-A: ~2.74B pDAI •WSTETH-B: ~304M pDAI •RETH-A: ~361M pDAI •Total ≈ 3.4B pDAI against fork-minted staking collateral. 3.Sybil fan-out. The urns are not organic borrowers. In the frob data the per-urn dart values descend in a near-perfect ~100-unit sequence across dozens of distinct urns (e.g. WSTETH-B: 14,745,584 / 14,745,484 / 14,745,383 / 14,745,182 …). That signature is a single script minting urns in a loop, the small decrements being rate drift between blocks. 4.Self-credit. In every frob, the destination w, collateral source v, and urn u are the same address (w = v = u). The drawn vat.dai is credited to the urn itself — there is no routing at the frob layer. 5.ERC-20 conversion. Each urn calls DaiJoin.exit(usr, wad), burning internal vat.dai and minting pDAI ERC-20 to usr. This is where the money actually lands and where convergence appears (Section 4). 6.Governance capture + freeze. At block 23,225,241, c108 called fire() on the inherited ESM (0x09e05ff6…4c58). Because this ESM holds direct Vat auth, its fire() executed, in one transaction: deny(MCD_PAUSE_PROXY) (stripping MakerDAO’s legitimate governance executor) followed by cage() (freezing the Vat). This is why Vat.live = 0 while End.live = 1 — the cage bypassed the End module entirely.
4
2
1
30
1,585
Anyone butt hurt about $PRVX chart doesn't understand how liquidity pools work. You're actually screaming and crying about dozens of dollars of liquidity. You realize you can do this yourself with your own coin. It's just silly to be upset about this. It's not real, but it IS funny. Post those 2 million % gains and $1 quadrillion dollar tokens all day. Market, market, market.
5
3
1
64
4,086
Jane Street stepping back from crypto market making isn’t a “headline” it’s a liquidity regime shift. Market makers don’t trade direction. They sell rips. They buy dips. They compress volatility by capturing spread, funding, and cross-venue inefficiencies. Structurally, they are: → passive offer-side absorption → mean reversion engines → arbitrage-driven mitigation So what happens when they leave? • Less passive sell pressure into breakout moves • Slower spot/perp & cross-exchange arb • Thinner top-of-book liquidity Result: Imbalances persist longer. FVGs take more time to fill. BOS continuation sees greater range expansion before mitigation. Same notional market order now moves price further. Which means: Momentum regimes extend. Displacement prints cleaner. Continuation models get more follow-through. In microstructure terms: MMs in the book = volatility dampening MMs out of the book = imbalance expansion This is supportive for trend & breakout conditions and hostile to mean reversion & VWAP-based strategies. Liquidity providers exiting doesn’t “pump price” it reduces the market’s ability to say no to directional flow. — 62ndAlpha
3
21
724
CryptoJake retweeted
Yesterday Jane Street got sued. Today the 10 AM manipulation stopped, Bitcoin and ETH started pumping again.
469
783
85
8,066
823,326
CryptoJake retweeted
CA: 0x625F49ADC6364D17D18794A2031199171b7434ef Market Cap; $22,000 Liquidity: $16,000 (PLS+PCOCK LP) Holders: 190 Age: 6 months on PulseX 1,000x gains to $22M market cap... When the bull season ignites on PulseChain, these low cap opportunities will become less and less Currently $250 for 1% supply of $TOM
Resharing this before the next Pump.tires wave kicks off. We are not behind or affiliated with any previous or current projects, nor do we “launch” any PumpTires coins. All our engagement is simply to help keep PulseChain trading active and alive. We’re all adults here: buy and sell whatever coins you want. If you make money, that profit is yours, you earned it, and it’s your decision. If you lose money trading memecoins (which will happen to almost everyone eventually), own your losses and adjust your risk tolerance accordingly. No one owes you anything. This is PulseChain. The only coin we directly adopt and support is $PCOCK, where the community controls the vast majority of the supply.
5
6
28
2,437
CryptoJake retweeted
We are in “Bitcoin is dead” territory Historically this is where millionaires are made, accumulating here is always profitable. Are you connecting the dots?
413
294
13
2,080
145,420
❤️💛💚💙 Highest Bitcoin VIX spike in 5 years. Last two big ones: 1. FTX Nov 2022 (the $16k low) 2. USDC DePeg Feb 2023 ($19.5k low) Both of them was The Bottom of the Year
19
9
92
2,508
2010: Hal Finney is Satoshi 2012: Nick Szabo is Satoshi 2014: Dorian Nakamoto is Satoshi 2016: Craig Wright is Satoshi 2018: Adam Back is Satoshi 2020: Jack Dorsey is Satoshi 2022: Elon Musk is Satoshi 2024: Peter Todd is Satoshi 2026: Epstein is Satoshi Increasingly retarded.
304
385
52
3,670
123,899
CryptoJake retweeted
For all the morons thinking the drunk geriatric Dan Pena was talking about Epstein, he was talking about Putin being the creator of bitcoin. Even grandparents are clout hungry
64
39
13
259
28,984
CryptoJake retweeted
Did Epstein influence Bitcoin core development? Short answer: No. This is not how Bitcoin works. Here’s what happened: Epstein donated to MIT Media Lab…who in turn supported MIT Digital Currency Initiative…which in turn funded Bitcoin developers. These devs used to be funded by The Bitcoin Foundation (which I used to run as volunteer Executive Director) there are many devs and no dev or team had power or control over Bitcoin. Under MIT’s patronage the devs had the same deal they had with us at The Bitcoin Foundation: that they could work on the code and not have direction from the org. More importantly — how Bitcoin works is that *even if* a dev was compromised then the nodes and miners would still have to run that code to make it included in Bitcoin. So for example if I had somehow asked the devs paid by Bitcoin Foundation to “add 1000 coins for Bruce” 1) they wouldn’t have done this / it would have been counter to our agreement 2) no miners would run that code & no nodes would recognize it. It would be a laughing stock and completely rejected. Does this mean code dev is not an attack vector? No. It’s still a risk. Particularly with nation state style actors and very careful efforts to co-opt which are much more sophisticated than “give Bruce coins” or something. This is one reason I’m cautious of Bitcoin core funding - especially from actors who’ve had bad judgment in the past. I think we should be cautious of who does the dev and view it as an attack vector. Bitcoin code is transparent and has lots of eyes on it. So in this case especially there isn’t even a solid accusation, let alone evidence that MIT directed nefarious code changes. If that was an allegation the first question should be: well what code specifically did MIT direct and what proof is there and how was it harmful? I think claims around this would collapse. There’s obviously plenty to criticize about Epstein and MIT working with him — and when it comes to digital assets MIT’s work with Gensler and especially its work on CBDCs is much more suspect than the chance that malicious code was pushed through on Bitcoin. Be cautious but this is a nothing burger
307
363
87
1,705
232,176
Replying to @cryptosolv
@CryptoSolv is a fucking pussy. Dude can't handle the truth but they believe they preach it. nitter.gq/i/status/2015303041935…
Replying to @cryptosolv
Right, as always the only thing you want to explain is your own retarted bias. Investigate it, solve the mystery you dipshit. That's what I really don't understand here, the account that brags about knowing every goddamn thing won't even look at the shit that makes every independent thinker go "hmm that's fucking weird". You really need to stop inhaling your own fumes.
1
1
100
CryptoJake retweeted
Hearing the entire alphabet by saying it in just one word. Goodnight X Family!!!
311
1,666
158
26,772
1,219,484
Replying to @crypto_birb
It's not like the fed loan buyback period changed from 4 years to 5 years in 2022... Lol This is where everyone learns that halvings were the noise hiding the liquidity cycle that dictates all risk assets. If the halvings were solely responsible due to cutting supply ETH would have gone up drastically when changing from PoW to PoS and cutting emissions by 87%. Nothing changed for a reason.
1
3
71
Here’s the core truth nobody is willing to say publicly yet: If Railgun opens while $pDAI is mispriced, it creates a cross-chain infinite arbitrage loop. The only prevention is: Parity must occur before the route opens. Not after. Not during. Before. That’s the forbidden sentence. Once someone says it, they admit: $pDAI cannot exist in its current state anymore; a hard structural correction is mandatory. That’s why everyone is talking around it.
20
11
1
143
5,849
CryptoJake retweeted
btc didn’t dump because of bad news. it dumped because the clock flipped. utc close, new day, new week, new month... and an obscene amount of algos fired almost simultaneously. it’s not traders making decisions, it’s portfolios rebalancing in real time. inventory adjusted. hedges reset. risk flushed. the candles look emotional, but the behavior is mechanical.
391
425
83
4,896
761,560
CryptoJake retweeted
When #Bitcoin's weekly RSI goes below 37, it's time to pay attention. 🫣
32
47
4
392
34,152