
I know $ICP will win just don’t know when. I don’t give financial advices, activity just for fun.
ROMAN EMPIRE
Joined December 2025
- Tweets3.9K
- Following399
- Followers940
- Likes11.7K
hahaha the thief 5 years ago
Wait is there actually a paper on Chain Key? @dfinity @dominic_w
forum.dfinity.org/t/canonica…
forum.dfinity.org/t/chain-ke…
Everyone is asking, nothing actually provided. Nothing on dfinity.org either.
Dom I support you if your tech is stolen, but start thinking about us - the people who are financially rekt by internet-computer:native
‼️‼️‼️ Did my own research and reassessed the situation: there’s a real chance NEAR used stolen tech and DFINITY wins a massive lawsuit against them.
I think this is bullish so I just bought 2000 internet-computer:native tokens 🚀🚀🚀
BREAKING!!! near:native holders found the only way to make money because of dominic - it's with his meme coin. GREAT internet-computer:native use case!
octavian augustus.icp retweeted
Replying to @dominic_w
@dominic_w please understand that this is the result of attacking NEAR, people will come out the woodwork to attack you. Which is fine as long as you’re ready for it, but terrible if you’re not. If you really intended for the predictable consequences of your actions, you would know that your next step will have to be ending Justin’s career via public humiliation. If you are not prepared for that follow through, don’t start the swing.
ICP's reported TPS numbers are fake! ⚠️
They claim 6k+ TPS, but in reality, ICP only does 0.4 TPS. It is a ghost chain!
By counting basic chain functions as TXs, they are fraudulently misleading the public
Do not be fooled; there is real usage in crypto, but ICP is not it: 🧵
ICP's foundation, DFINITY, is again caught red-handed lying to the public. This time to a preposterous degree:
The Lie:
The 6k TPS figure comes from DFINITY's own official website. Here comes the kicker: 4k of that "TPS" are read-only queries!
The remaining 2k "TPS" are application steps, something ALL other smart contract chains have, but no other blockchain actually counts as TPS. These include contract-to-contract calls, timers, replies & heartbeats. ICP's leadership counts all of these as "TPS" today
The Truth:
Once we subtract all of those phony forms of TPS, ICP ends up with a mere 0.4 TPS, or 0.7 TPS if we also counted every token ledger
That means DFINITY is inflating the usage of ICP by a whopping factor of x16245
All while the biggest user of ICP today is DFINITY's own subnet where they host their apps! The ckBTC & ckETH minters, along with their ETH & SOL relays. Together, produce 31.5% of this fraudulent TPS count
One Example:
There was a particularly interesting incident in 2022 when a developer was loading a database into his app at less than one call a second
DFINITY's own dashboard showed his subnet doing 1.3k Transaction Per Second, a third of the network's usage that week
The developer then went on to the forum to ask how that was possible. The ICP engineer frankly explained it:
"Each upload put 500 records into three indexes, and the code did each insert as a call from the program to itself. Every call counts, and every reply to a call counts again. So one upload became about 3,000 "transactions". Written as one batched call, the same work would have shown "500x fewer transactions".
Following that up with one of the most damning statements in this case:
"DFINITY's own benchmark had deliberately left such messages out, because counting them "might have been deemed as cheating (after all we care about user-triggered transactions rather than artificially generated traffic)".
DFINITY's own dashboard counts them anyway & still does to this day. On this day, the 21st of October 2026, replies to calls between programs were 57 percent of the "update" count! This mechanism is also not rate-limited at all
In conclusion, their own engineer said counting internal messages would be cheating in a benchmark; their own dashboard counts them to this day; that is the number they sell as TPS! Under ICP accounting, 1 TPS turns into 1.3k "TPS". Now that is a fraudulent & misleading design!
Discrepencies
That is how they can claim to do "6k TPS" while only bringing in less than 7k of fees per day, while its own "Internet Identity" ICP's login system registers a mere 3112 users in the last day
Their physical presence in our ecosystem is also not at all congruent with their claim of being the second most used blockchain in the world
Such inconsistencies are hard to reconcile. Which is why this expose was needed. As it turns out, they have been straight-up lying about their usage this entire time!
Chainspect
Why Chainspect, the blockchain explorer & metrics tracker, would unquestioningly repeat these lies. Taking its data directly from DFINITY's API is unknown
Chain Inspect is not a registered company & for that reason & more, I was unable to find any connection to DFINITY, but it cannot be ruled out. They claim to be fiercely independent
Chain Inspect only reports the 2k "TPS" figure, but that is still wildly misleading
Especially since they do carry out more due diligence with other chains, such as by subtracting consensus messages in SOL, for example, as they very well should
Weirdly, their own policy demands that they adjust their figures accordingly:
"We aim to include only user-initiated transactions and exclude system ones, to enable fair comparison of different networks (e.g. for Solana we exclude “voting” transactions related to their custom consensus mechanism)."
As a community, we need to point the finger here & ask @chainspect_app to update their policy on how they count ICP's "TPS".
The correct number is below 1; reporting 2k+ instead is wildly misleading
Do better, Chain Inspect! We are kindly holding you accountable today, as your website & service are otherwise great!
Conclusion
ICP is a ghost chain: There is nothing wrong with that, as we all need to start somewhere
However, what is wrong is that they are actively lying about this fact. In the investment world, that is called fraud!
Honesty & integrity matter far more to serious investors, as we are, myself included, willing to invest in "ghost chains", making a bet on a superior team & tech
It is a shame, as ICP could be a great chain if they enshrined their subnets as I have previously recommended. If they also cleaned up their marketing, it could become a real contender
Instead, the community will most likely respond with denial again. Exposing a sickness that is endemic within many small cryptocurrency communities
Groupthink with cult-like dynamics, combined with both financial & peer pressure, creates one hell of a toxic soup
Despite all of the personal attacks that will likely follow this critique, the truth speaks for itself. That is also one of the most wonderful things about crypto
It is open-source code running a transparent blockchain. The scammers & crooks can not hide anymore with sufficient due diligence, of the sort we did here today
To the ICP community, there are genuinely good, smart & well-meaning people there. We should never paint any community with a single brush
For those of you receptive to this critique, I hope it will inspire ICP to clean up its act. Operating with more honesty & integrity is not only the right thing to do. It is also the best possible long-term strategy for success in our industry today
When all is said & done. It is the truth that sets us all free! 🔥
I just opened a $50k short position on $ICP
I still hold my spot bag with more than 50k tokens but at least one time in my life I can profit from this garbage.
$1.80 is programmed.
octavian augustus.icp retweeted
The market cap of $NEAR is about to 5x that of base:0x00f3c42833c3170159af4e92dbb451fb3f708917
p.s. Attacking other chains is NOT a good look
This is craazy. I asked one of our PhD engineers to look into NEAR *Confidential* Intents wondering how they designed their system. Unredacted, word-for-word, this was his answer 😱😱😱
"Everything I found out about the privacy claims and confidential intents is so bad that it seems almost comical and I cannot believe what I am seeing. Apparently they run a completely separate instance of the protocol, which is called FAR (as an opposite to NEAR), and that has a permissioned operator set. The entire confidentiality claim seems to rest upon the fact that it is a permissioned chain and the nodes are trusted to keep things private, there doesn't seem to be any deep technology behind it and it also does not seem to be open source. The entities running the nodes are also not publicly known.
I almost feel weird writing this because it is so absurdly bad that it feels like ... I don't know ... a simulation? I know the usual level of overpromising in Web3 but this is so many levels beyond believable that it still feels unreal."
octavian augustus.icp retweeted
After this post, it’s one of two things: either you’re crazy and completely out of options, or you’re damn sure about your product. But words aren’t enough anymore—I hope you at least realize that. As long as this thing is under 5 dollars, it won’t mean a thing.
This is craazy. I asked one of our PhD engineers to look into NEAR *Confidential* Intents wondering how they designed their system. Unredacted, word-for-word, this was his answer 😱😱😱
"Everything I found out about the privacy claims and confidential intents is so bad that it seems almost comical and I cannot believe what I am seeing. Apparently they run a completely separate instance of the protocol, which is called FAR (as an opposite to NEAR), and that has a permissioned operator set. The entire confidentiality claim seems to rest upon the fact that it is a permissioned chain and the nodes are trusted to keep things private, there doesn't seem to be any deep technology behind it and it also does not seem to be open source. The entities running the nodes are also not publicly known.
I almost feel weird writing this because it is so absurdly bad that it feels like ... I don't know ... a simulation? I know the usual level of overpromising in Web3 but this is so many levels beyond believable that it still feels unreal."
I initially thought this is the good guy of crypto.
Unfornately he is not.
$ICP
Replying to @dominic_w
Dom, no one gives a shit. Focus on your pile of shit. When is cloud engines? When is adoption? You bankrupted many investors and all you have is soon and tick tock and throwing shades at other piles of shit. At least other piles of shit are making their investors money.
octavian augustus.icp retweeted
Replying to @OWHistory
I got to admit, such posts show either weakness or lack of confidence . Dom must stop talking about others, let the results of your own products speak for itself.
No actually I didn’t. He is a loser.
Have you ever seen a bigger loser in crypto than the founder of "Soon Protocol" ($ICP) @dominic_w? First he bankrupts countless people and now he is so salty that he can't live with other's success. Embarrassing display.
This is a disaster! So embarassing! Poor Dom!
This is craazy. I asked one of our PhD engineers to look into NEAR *Confidential* Intents wondering how they designed their system. Unredacted, word-for-word, this was his answer 😱😱😱
"Everything I found out about the privacy claims and confidential intents is so bad that it seems almost comical and I cannot believe what I am seeing. Apparently they run a completely separate instance of the protocol, which is called FAR (as an opposite to NEAR), and that has a permissioned operator set. The entire confidentiality claim seems to rest upon the fact that it is a permissioned chain and the nodes are trusted to keep things private, there doesn't seem to be any deep technology behind it and it also does not seem to be open source. The entities running the nodes are also not publicly known.
I almost feel weird writing this because it is so absurdly bad that it feels like ... I don't know ... a simulation? I know the usual level of overpromising in Web3 but this is so many levels beyond believable that it still feels unreal."
internet-computer:native is the next eos:native
Send it to $0 thanx to scamfinity shitty team.
Every day I will remind you what fking lier dom is.
internet-computer:native is a garbage I regret I bought.
























