Crypto Milzy 🍬

Verified account

@Crypto_Milzy

More x’s than your mum 🫵 😹 | Degen Trade Journal | Nothing I post is financial advice 🚫

Joined February 2021

2.6K Following

391 Followers

1.8K Posts

Pinned Tweet

Crypto Milzy 🍬

over 2 years ago

Q1 Public Calls: Accuracy: 95.2% Average Return: 35.6x $CWIF - 300x $OBEMA - 200x $BOZO Hybrid - 70x $CAN - 60x $SOLJUH - 24x $CASH - 20x $LEH - 15x $MPIX - 12x #EVERMOON - 11x $GEMS - 10x $BIAO - 6.5x $HENTER - 5x $WIFAI - 4x $SHIBU - 3x $ROSE (sol) - 3x $SPOODY - 2.5x #SAFEMARS (sol) 2x #DOGECOIN (sol) 30% #BITCOIN (sol) 30% $PEPE (sol) 15% #DRAGGIN (sol) -59%

3

6

0

0

2K

Crypto Milzy 🍬

11 months ago

@asparagoid L👀K

0

1

0

0

186

Crypto Milzy 🍬

over 1 year ago

@theionicXBT A VC

25

0

0

0

1K

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

@bdp_399 Cutting 50% at 100M mcap > into long term bags From there, will review overall market strength and make my next decision Strong narrative that I think has $500M+ potential, but lets crack $100M first

0

1

0

0

103

Who to follow

Elisabet Grasel

#BTC #ETH #BNB #SOL Occasional shitcoiner

@farkhondehasan

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

$GINNAN $35M market cap A bit late, but given the bipolar market trend and ongoing https://t.co/9lRyPDT7hu nonsense, I’ve been very weary of micro/small caps. Got a strong feeling $GINNAN bottomed and is likely the next big Sol runner. GinNabffZL4fUj9Vactxha74GDAW8kDPGaHqMtMzps2f https://t.co/cMQByMKvGT

Crypto_Milzy's tweet photo. $GINNAN

$35M market cap

A bit late, but given the bipolar market trend and ongoing https://t.co/9lRyPDT7hu nonsense, I’ve been very weary of micro/small caps.

Got a strong feeling $GINNAN bottomed and is likely the next big Sol runner.

GinNabffZL4fUj9Vactxha74GDAW8kDPGaHqMtMzps2f

https://t.co/cMQByMKvGT

0

11

2

1

799

Crypto_Milzy retweeted

about 2 years ago

Many never got to experience 2020-2021 when the Twitter feed was filled with actual alpha Now it’s utter garbage, arguments, mass accounts who can’t trade farming followers via useless threads, celebrities and bots The glory days are over & only the strongest will survive

139

689

56

19

81K

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

RT @ChifoiCristian: The only way boomers keep their fortune is to sell their physical property, inflated for 100 years And to buy now,chea…

0

0

3

0

10

Crypto_Milzy retweeted

Tyler Reed - TruthLabs 🫡

about 2 years ago

🚨 User Funds across Ethereum Layer 2 Blockchains are at MAJOR RISK, including Blast, Optimism, Mantle, and Coinbase's Base!!! We audited 4 of the Largest Layer 2 Blockchains, and found a major concern. Layer 2 Blockchains use Multisig Wallets, short for "multiple signature", to perform actions to their Blockchain. These actions include anything from moving Treasury funds, to making upgrades to the blockchain, to anything else imaginable. Multiple signatures are required as a security measure to make sure that one rogue employee doesn't drain the Company Treasury, or delete code or steal user funds... By having multiple wallets sign a transaction, it is supposed to mean that the preapproved amount of "core members" approve of the transaction being proposed. We audited 4 of the Top Layer 2 Blockchains, accounting for over 80% of the Total Value Locked across all Layer 2's, and here is what we found 👇 🔴@blast: 3 of 5 signatures required to perform a transaction. All 5 of their Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain. 🔴@Optimism: 5 of 7 signatures required to perform a transaction. We found that 5 of the 7 Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain. 🔴@0xMantle: 6 of 13 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see 6 of 13 of their Multisig wallets were setup and funded by the same wallet. In addition to this 4 more of their wallets have never had any activity at all, and could very easily also be controlled by the same Entity. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain. 🔴 @coinbase's @base: 4 of 9 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see that their one Dev wallet originally setup and funded 6 of their 9 multisig wallets. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain. @martypartymusic wrote about the risks of L2's here, which inspired me to put out some of our L2 research shown above. The link to that post can be found here: https://t.co/3XbfUIoqZ0 What is even more concerning is that BLAST, BASE, and OPTIMISM each had a connection to the same Developer that setup their Multisigs, meaning one person could drain all three. This calls into question not only their security issues, their integrity, their centralization, but also their relationship, and lack of differentiation of tech. Are they just white label Layer 2 chains spun up to sell you a token? It sure does appear that way. What are your thoughts? 🫡

BoringSleuth's tweet photo. 🚨 User Funds across Ethereum Layer 2 Blockchains are at MAJOR RISK, including Blast, Optimism, Mantle, and Coinbase's Base!!! We audited 4 of the Largest Layer 2 Blockchains, and found a major concern.

Layer 2 Blockchains use Multisig Wallets, short for "multiple signature", to perform actions to their Blockchain. These actions include anything from moving Treasury funds, to making upgrades to the blockchain, to anything else imaginable. Multiple signatures are required as a security measure to make sure that one rogue employee doesn't drain the Company Treasury, or delete code or steal user funds... By having multiple wallets sign a transaction, it is supposed to mean that the preapproved amount of "core members" approve of the transaction being proposed.

We audited 4 of the Top Layer 2 Blockchains, accounting for over 80% of the Total Value Locked across all Layer 2's, and here is what we found 👇

🔴@blast: 3 of 5 signatures required to perform a transaction. All 5 of their Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@Optimism: 5 of 7 signatures required to perform a transaction. We found that 5 of the 7 Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@0xMantle: 6 of 13 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see 6 of 13 of their Multisig wallets were setup and funded by the same wallet. In addition to this 4 more of their wallets have never had any activity at all, and could very easily also be controlled by the same Entity. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴 @coinbase's @base: 4 of 9 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see that their one Dev wallet originally setup and funded 6 of their 9 multisig wallets. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

@martypartymusic wrote about the risks of L2's here, which inspired me to put out some of our L2 research shown above. The link to that post can be found here:

https://t.co/3XbfUIoqZ0

What is even more concerning is that BLAST, BASE, and OPTIMISM each had a connection to the same Developer that setup their Multisigs, meaning one person could drain all three.

This calls into question not only their security issues, their integrity, their centralization, but also their relationship, and lack of differentiation of tech. Are they just white label Layer 2 chains spun up to sell you a token? It sure does appear that way.

What are your thoughts?

🫡

BoringSleuth's tweet photo. 🚨 User Funds across Ethereum Layer 2 Blockchains are at MAJOR RISK, including Blast, Optimism, Mantle, and Coinbase's Base!!! We audited 4 of the Largest Layer 2 Blockchains, and found a major concern.

Layer 2 Blockchains use Multisig Wallets, short for "multiple signature", to perform actions to their Blockchain. These actions include anything from moving Treasury funds, to making upgrades to the blockchain, to anything else imaginable. Multiple signatures are required as a security measure to make sure that one rogue employee doesn't drain the Company Treasury, or delete code or steal user funds... By having multiple wallets sign a transaction, it is supposed to mean that the preapproved amount of "core members" approve of the transaction being proposed.

We audited 4 of the Top Layer 2 Blockchains, accounting for over 80% of the Total Value Locked across all Layer 2's, and here is what we found 👇

🔴@blast: 3 of 5 signatures required to perform a transaction. All 5 of their Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@Optimism: 5 of 7 signatures required to perform a transaction. We found that 5 of the 7 Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@0xMantle: 6 of 13 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see 6 of 13 of their Multisig wallets were setup and funded by the same wallet. In addition to this 4 more of their wallets have never had any activity at all, and could very easily also be controlled by the same Entity. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴 @coinbase's @base: 4 of 9 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see that their one Dev wallet originally setup and funded 6 of their 9 multisig wallets. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

@martypartymusic wrote about the risks of L2's here, which inspired me to put out some of our L2 research shown above. The link to that post can be found here:

https://t.co/3XbfUIoqZ0

What is even more concerning is that BLAST, BASE, and OPTIMISM each had a connection to the same Developer that setup their Multisigs, meaning one person could drain all three.

This calls into question not only their security issues, their integrity, their centralization, but also their relationship, and lack of differentiation of tech. Are they just white label Layer 2 chains spun up to sell you a token? It sure does appear that way.

What are your thoughts?

🫡

BoringSleuth's tweet photo. 🚨 User Funds across Ethereum Layer 2 Blockchains are at MAJOR RISK, including Blast, Optimism, Mantle, and Coinbase's Base!!! We audited 4 of the Largest Layer 2 Blockchains, and found a major concern.

Layer 2 Blockchains use Multisig Wallets, short for "multiple signature", to perform actions to their Blockchain. These actions include anything from moving Treasury funds, to making upgrades to the blockchain, to anything else imaginable. Multiple signatures are required as a security measure to make sure that one rogue employee doesn't drain the Company Treasury, or delete code or steal user funds... By having multiple wallets sign a transaction, it is supposed to mean that the preapproved amount of "core members" approve of the transaction being proposed.

We audited 4 of the Top Layer 2 Blockchains, accounting for over 80% of the Total Value Locked across all Layer 2's, and here is what we found 👇

🔴@blast: 3 of 5 signatures required to perform a transaction. All 5 of their Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@Optimism: 5 of 7 signatures required to perform a transaction. We found that 5 of the 7 Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@0xMantle: 6 of 13 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see 6 of 13 of their Multisig wallets were setup and funded by the same wallet. In addition to this 4 more of their wallets have never had any activity at all, and could very easily also be controlled by the same Entity. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴 @coinbase's @base: 4 of 9 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see that their one Dev wallet originally setup and funded 6 of their 9 multisig wallets. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

@martypartymusic wrote about the risks of L2's here, which inspired me to put out some of our L2 research shown above. The link to that post can be found here:

https://t.co/3XbfUIoqZ0

What is even more concerning is that BLAST, BASE, and OPTIMISM each had a connection to the same Developer that setup their Multisigs, meaning one person could drain all three.

This calls into question not only their security issues, their integrity, their centralization, but also their relationship, and lack of differentiation of tech. Are they just white label Layer 2 chains spun up to sell you a token? It sure does appear that way.

What are your thoughts?

🫡

BoringSleuth's tweet photo. 🚨 User Funds across Ethereum Layer 2 Blockchains are at MAJOR RISK, including Blast, Optimism, Mantle, and Coinbase's Base!!! We audited 4 of the Largest Layer 2 Blockchains, and found a major concern.

Layer 2 Blockchains use Multisig Wallets, short for "multiple signature", to perform actions to their Blockchain. These actions include anything from moving Treasury funds, to making upgrades to the blockchain, to anything else imaginable. Multiple signatures are required as a security measure to make sure that one rogue employee doesn't drain the Company Treasury, or delete code or steal user funds... By having multiple wallets sign a transaction, it is supposed to mean that the preapproved amount of "core members" approve of the transaction being proposed.

We audited 4 of the Top Layer 2 Blockchains, accounting for over 80% of the Total Value Locked across all Layer 2's, and here is what we found 👇

🔴@blast: 3 of 5 signatures required to perform a transaction. All 5 of their Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@Optimism: 5 of 7 signatures required to perform a transaction. We found that 5 of the 7 Multisig Signee wallets were setup and originally funded by the same Dev wallet. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴@0xMantle: 6 of 13 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see 6 of 13 of their Multisig wallets were setup and funded by the same wallet. In addition to this 4 more of their wallets have never had any activity at all, and could very easily also be controlled by the same Entity. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

🔴 @coinbase's @base: 4 of 9 signatures required to perform a transaction. Below you can see that their one Dev wallet originally setup and funded 6 of their 9 multisig wallets. One person controls enough wallets to drain, delete, or do anything they want to this Blockchain.

@martypartymusic wrote about the risks of L2's here, which inspired me to put out some of our L2 research shown above. The link to that post can be found here:

https://t.co/3XbfUIoqZ0

What is even more concerning is that BLAST, BASE, and OPTIMISM each had a connection to the same Developer that setup their Multisigs, meaning one person could drain all three.

This calls into question not only their security issues, their integrity, their centralization, but also their relationship, and lack of differentiation of tech. Are they just white label Layer 2 chains spun up to sell you a token? It sure does appear that way.

What are your thoughts?

🫡

56

586

189

159

135K

Crypto_Milzy retweeted

about 2 years ago

imagine being shaken out lmfao that’s so embarrassing 😭 anyways, higher

121

625

57

14

30K

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

@KamelaHorris Not hurtful just honest Wishing you the best of luck though 🙏

0

1

0

0

47

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

$KAMA 4x 7.5M market cap

Crypto_Milzy's tweet photo. $KAMA

4x

7.5M market cap https://t.co/3B3nZBDgGM

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

$KAMA 1.8M market cap Sleepy Joe seems to barely know where he is most of the time nowadays. I think a good chunk of the $BODEN money flows into $KAMA, followed by further attention from there. HnKkzR1YtFbUUxM6g3iVRS2RY68KHhGV7bNdfF1GCsJB https://t.co/Rpe1AUTAfX

Crypto_Milzy's tweet photo. $KAMA

1.8M market cap

Sleepy Joe seems to barely know where he is most of the time nowadays.

I think a good chunk of the $BODEN money flows into $KAMA, followed by further attention from there.

HnKkzR1YtFbUUxM6g3iVRS2RY68KHhGV7bNdfF1GCsJB

https://t.co/Rpe1AUTAfX https://t.co/LMZuZnid5e

0

5

0

1

1K

4

8

2

0

1K

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

$KAMA 8x 338% for the day 😏

Crypto_Milzy's tweet photo. $KAMA

8x

338% for the day 😏 https://t.co/AiviA1WyNu

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

$KAMA 4x 7.5M market cap

Crypto_Milzy's tweet photo. $KAMA

4x

7.5M market cap https://t.co/3B3nZBDgGM

4

8

2

0

1K

0

2

0

0

309

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

@Solidgem1 Agreed 🤝 and cheers have given a follow back No tg at the moment bro.. just some degen calls on here Might change in the future

0

0

0

0

10

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

@KamelaHorris Chart and mc say different

1

0

0

0

21

Crypto_Milzy retweeted

over 2 years ago

Here is #Bitcoin overlayed with the most recent US Presidential Elections. Very interesting to see how price navigates leading into the election & then afterward. Notice the grey boxes at each cycle top - Historically, price has rallied for roughly 1 year after each election

MaxBecauseBTC's tweet photo. Here is #Bitcoin overlayed with the most recent US Presidential Elections.

Very interesting to see how price navigates leading into the election & then afterward.

Notice the grey boxes at each cycle top - Historically, price has rallied for roughly 1 year after each election https://t.co/Y8fFtw9j7B

69

953

209

291

426K

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

@Overdose_AI So true It’s unreal how much this game desensitises you to money others would do anything for

1

3

0

0

226

Crypto_Milzy retweeted

about 2 years ago

Funny how all the "UTILITY ONLY! ONLY IDIOTS BUY MEME COINS" accounts have slowly disappeared from our timeline. Who's the idiot now?

102

250

20

2

41K

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

@IHunt100xGems 🤣🤣

1

1

0

0

172

Crypto Milzy 🍬

about 2 years ago

@epainxyz Nice call 🫡

2

0

0

0

80

Crypto_Milzy retweeted

Artchick 🔥👠

@digitalartchick

about 2 years ago

Crypto Twitter TA accounts are like: "Oh the price is going down, if this continues we'll probably go lower (good thing I'm short)" "Nice bounce today, if this goes higher I can see things going even higher (good thing I'm long)"

16

81

10

0

5K

Last Seen Users on Sotwe

Trends for you

Most Popular Users