Cryptocoin

Shitcoin launched by Mango Markets Exploiter to abuse bots, cautioned the Twitter community

A cryptocurrency with little to no value or a virtual currency with no obvious, immediate use is referred to as a “shitcoin.” The phrase is a pejorative expression that is frequently used to refer to alternative cryptocurrencies or altcoins that were created after bitcoins gained popularity. A shitcoin’s decreased value is frequently the result of disappointed investors because it was not launched in good faith or because its price was dependent on speculative activity. These currencies are therefore viewed as poor investments.

Last week, Mango Markets lost $115 million worth of cryptocurrency as a result of Avraham Eisenberg and his team’s “profitable trading approach.” Although the Mango Markets platform was technically exploited, no hacking techniques were employed in the operation, which so far appears to have been entirely lawful. Eisenberg then repaid $67 million to guarantee that the platform users would receive their money back.

Eisenberg’s mischievous spirit, however, persisted, and in a recent Twitter thread, he announced the development and subsequent rug pull of Mango Inu, a shitcoin he specifically intended to target cryptocurrency buying bots made by those seeking a quick moonshot. Eisenberg claims that within a half-hour, the targeted bots had acquired shitcoins worth $250k. Eisenberg also made it clear that, in order to maintain the operation’s rigorous legality, Mango Inu received absolutely no advertising. He also warned his followers against purchasing the shitcoins because doing so would only result in losses.

If Mango Inu had received a promotion, he might have been charged with fraud, selling securities without a license, etc. Since this was not the case, the quick-made shitcoin rugpull is still effectively a bots’ voluntary purchase of a worthless cryptocurrency under the guise of being avid traders. Eisenberg apparently harvested $250k in total, but he acknowledged he forgot to deploy flashbots, which led to part of the tokens being sold. In the end, Eisenberg asserts that he earned roughly $100k for every 30 minutes of effort. Unfortunately, the bots frontran the liq pull and neglected to utilize flashbots, so for a half hour of work, I only made about 100k instead of 250k.

Eisenberg went on to explain that he thinks it’s beneficial to employ bots for malicious purposes and that he got the idea for the joke from a friend who used to carry out similar operations during the previous altcoin bubble. Exploiting bots is beneficial, in fact. Last year, when the bots bought anything that moved, I spoke with someone who would deploy coins, add liq, and rug immediately after the bots bought.

Anyone who has attempted to buy highly desired items online – whether clothing, collectibles of any kind, cryptocurrency, etc. – have had to deal with bots and will likely feel a little schadenfreude about bots getting a taste of their own medicine. However, this “highly profitable trading strategy” is unorthodox, to say the least.