ct/late 21. redacted and poor ..
Oblivion
Joined December 2019
- Tweets1.2K
- Following3.1K
- Followers288
- Likes13K
Jay retweeted
Binance will be "hacked"...
2026 or 2027.
There is no bottom in the market until Binance is hacked.
It's part of the script.
Jay retweeted
this $200m USDT top-up looks like just a regularly scheduled top-up from Binance 124->Binance 14? seems to happen when wallet goes below $200m.
txns below.
Jay retweeted
User funds are safe!
It does look like a hack on Binance. Appreciate the quick freeze from Tether (~$971m) and Circle (~$823m).
I don't manage Binance (.com) anymore, but as a shareholder, I expect all user funds will be fully covered.
Jay retweeted
Looks like wagyu dot xyz was hacked & all user data including swaps, ip addresses, countries & transactions details got leaked. @PerpetualCow refused to pay a $5 million ransom. All the information is posted on whiteArmors site
Jay retweeted
My father has never hugged me.
Not when I was born. Not at my graduation. Not when I left home.
That's normal for a Japanese father his age. Love is a full gas tank when you visit. A bag of oranges handed over without a word.
Last month, my friend from Texas came to dinner at my parents' house. When it was time to go, he did what Texans do.
He hugged my mother.
Then he turned around and hugged my father.
My father froze. Arms straight down. Like a soldier being hugged by a bear.
Three seconds. Nobody breathed.
After he left, my father sat at the table for a long time. Then he said:
"In America… do they do that with their fathers too?"
"Every time," I said.
He nodded. That was all.
Two weeks later, I went home for dinner. When I was leaving, my father stood up, walked to the door, and put his arms around me.
Badly. Like he was assembling furniture with no instructions.
I'm over forty. It was the first time.
He let go, looked at the floor, and said, "Drive safely."
My mother told me later he'd been practicing on the dog.
Jay retweeted
Withdraw all funds from CoinDCX if you value your assets.
Its co-founders are clowns running a circus.
They publicly and privately denied a theft of its assets occurred meaning they straight up lied or are negligently incompetent.
Later they disclosed the $16M theft and wasted everyone’s time instead of being transparent with the public initially.
Not the first time CoinDCX has done it.
Indian CEXs like CoinDCX, WazirX, BitBNS are all the same.
(I still helped freeze 6 figures for CoinDCX)
Jay retweeted
The most dystopian fitness video on the internet just dropped. 🚨💀
Paris is literally burning, protesters are shutting down the streets, and this woman is casually jogging past a burning barricade like it’s a treadmill session. She is literally running through thick black smoke because hitting her daily step count is a higher priority than whatever revolution is happening around her.
Pure, unfiltered main character syndrome. The absolute disrespect to the entire riot.
Jay retweeted
Statement : The removal of BitChat from the India App Store is unconstitutional. Section 69A permits the blocking of unlawful information, not of a messenger for working during internet shutdowns.
New Delhi, 3 October 2026
An Apple App Review notice published today by Jack Dorsey on X records that BitChat has been removed from the India App Store "per demand from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology", issued under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, on the ground that the application "includes content that is illegal in India". The notice adds that BitChat's TestFlight builds are no longer available for testing in India. It does not identify the content said to be illegal or the ground under Section 69A invoked. The blocking order has not been published. The Internet Freedom Foundation condemns the order and calls for its immediate publication and withdrawal.
BitChat relays end-to-end encrypted messages between nearby phones over Bluetooth mesh. It has no servers and hosts no content of its own. What travels through it is the private speech of its users, so the claim that the application "includes" illegal content is incoherent. The State's actual objection stands recorded in the notices the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre issued on 23 July 2026 to GitHub, Google and Apple against BitChat, Briar and Bridgefy which stated that such applications work even during internet shutdowns and hamper lawful interception, attribution and traceability. Those notices, issued under Section 79(3)(b) were reportedly withdrawn after public disclosure. The same end has now been pursued through Section 69A. The objection is to capability of an application, not to content it transmits. A citizen's ability to speak to another citizen while the State has switched the internet off is not a ground of restriction under Section 69A or Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
Section 69A survived constitutional scrutiny in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) because of its safeguards which included the need for a reasoned, recorded order, committee review, and a hearing to the originator under Rule 8 of the Blocking Rules, 2009, which the Delhi High Court enforced in Tanul Thakur v. Union of India (2022). Further, Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) requires that orders restricting fundamental rights be published and adopt the least restrictive measure. However, it appears in this instance, each safeguard has been evaded. A secret order blocking an entire application, rather than any identified unlawful information, is the most restrictive and disproprotionate measure available. Further, the confidentiality claimed under Rule 16 cannot defeat the right to challenge an order, and the constitutionality of this blocking regime is itself pending consideration before the Supreme Court.
While removal from the App Store does not delete BitChat from phones, it stops new downloads and security updates, leaving existing users on unpatched versions, and it ends security testing in India through TestFlight. During the Jantar Mantar protests, when mobile internet was suspended and jammers were deployed, Bluetooth mesh messaging was a channel of last resort through which young people coordinated their safety. To our knowledge, Apple has removed BitChat on a government's demand in only one other country. This is in China, in April this year.
Our demands
1. MeitY must publish the blocking order, the ground invoked and the record of the committee's proceedings, and serve the developers with a copy and an opportunity of hearing.
2. The direction must be withdrawn. Any specific unlawful use must be met with targeted proceedings under due process, not the removal of a communications tool for everyone.
3. Apple must disclose the demand in its transparency reporting and notify its users in India, and must state whether parallel directions have been received in respect of other app stores.
4. The secrecy of the blocking regime must end. The Blocking Rules, 2009 should be amended to require publication of orders and notice to originators, without awaiting the outcome of the pending constitutional challenge.
The Internet Freedom Foundation will file applications under the Right to Information Act seeking a copy of the order, and stands ready to assist the developers and affected users in India.