An investigation over the past three months has led us to amend our complaint after we discovered that Barry Silbert engaged in an 11-year long racketeering Enterprise against me and my company.
Among other things, we proved that Silbert hacked our mining pool PROHASHING and conducted $22 million in hacks against it, allying himself with Chinese miners to sabotage an American business. The purpose of his theft was to win the "block size war," which limited the bitcoin protocol's capabilities so that people were forced to "invest" in Wall Street ETFs (which he profited from) and "lending" companies (which generally abused and lost customers' funds.)
After the theft, he then spent this entire decade in a series of increasingly desperate coverups - signing a $1.1 billion promissory note, creating a sham contract with investment bank Jefferies, assisting in the filing of a baseless lawsuit, and more. As DCG would not exist but for the destruction of PROHASHING, which was a prerequisite for Silbert's "Digital Gold" strategy, the best damage estimate of what PROHASHING would have been is the enterprise value of DCG, with RICO trebling, to $14 billion.
The complaint contains the "Digital Gold Logs," a set of A1Z26-encoded messages left by an insider detailing everything that happened inside DCG for a decade.
The full complaint is located at https://stevesokolowski.com/sokolowski-v-fraud/#mdpa-second-amendment and contains 967 pages of evidence.
This market will resolve to the date (Eastern time) when the story breaks in the first mainstream media outlet. Cryptocurrency-specific outlets are excluded, although widely read technology focused sites count. Places with user-submitted content, like social media sites, are also excluded, and blogs with only one contributor also don't count.
The complaint does not need to be linked for the market to resolve, not does the article even have to mention me or PROHASHING or Christopher's name. The article simply needs to cover the facts or consequences of the complaint and also explain the reasoning, like that the Bitcoin protocol was stolen from America by foreigners, why DCG declared bankruptcy, that Jefferies stock is crashing because the bank's shareholders have found out about the lawsuit, that Microstrategy dumped bitcoin because of allegations made about "Digital Gold," or that BCH has soared to $2,000 because of something that happened in Pennsylvania.
In the unlikely chance that the facts are not covered by any mainstream media outlet by December 31, 2026, the market will resolve to December 31, 2026. More date ranges may be added before then.
Update 2026-01-29 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Due to a Third Amended Complaint being filed (which will be ~100 pages and summarized), the market will resolve based on media coverage of facts from either the Second Amended Complaint or the Third Amended Complaint.
If media reports reference any of the 660 pages of evidence from the Second Amended Complaint, this counts for resolution
If media only includes the summary story from the Third Amended Complaint without referencing the evidence from the Second Amended Complaint, that is insufficient for resolution
1,000People are also trading
The recent R&R granted leave to amend the complaint as we requested, which requires that the new complaint is not futile or meritless - but at the same time stated that he wanted a summarized version that was 100 pages instead of 250 with a few easy fixes. This will be a Third Amended Complaint and will not contain as much evidence. This version will be filed on or before April 2.
When the media reports on the story, they will likely look at the Second Amended Complaint because it is the version that has all the evidence. Therefore, if any of the 660 pages of evidence reaches the news, this market will resolve to YES. If a reporter only includes the summary story without referencing the evidence in the second complaint, that is insufficient. If any news is reported before the Third complaint is filed, the market resolves to YES.
@SteveSokolowski Why don't you make a settlement demand for $1 billion instead of $14 billion? They might be interested.
@KevinBlaw It is correct that the censorship, particularly on reddit, is not organic or natural.
However, it is not correct that I plan to create a rap video to solve that problem.
@KevinBlaw Oh, I'm sure it can. But, given that the "system" has succeeded in banning my reddit accounts (again), and for the first time marking my X account as "limited reach" due to spam, I doubt the rap video would make waves.
Isn't it interesting how the "Digital Gold" secret you imply is nonsense seems to warrant such censorship? I suppose I just never realized that the average grandmother had 10 accounts banned from social media sites.
@Ziddletwix , I think I figured it out.
What we're seeing right now is that this is the first time that AI will change the real world in a dramatic way. Everyone - the government, the defendants, the journalists - had absolutely no idea that GPT-5.2 blew past the human level until Friday.
This is not a math proof of an Erdos problem. This is something that is going to crash the stock market and unwind the Digital Gold bitcoin scheme, and it was not possible to figure out in 2024.
These people are stunned because they believe they are living in a world where humans can surpass what a model can do. I think that many of these people are writing off the story because it is too well researched and has TOO MUCH EVIDENCE to sound believable.
@ItsMe No. The complaint was written by us. The models were used to determine the legal strategy, and they churned away on that for months. They then checked what we wrote to ensure that we didn't make admissions or mistakes.
As to a lawyer, the case is seeking to be stayed to find funding right now. Despite that, the complaint exceeds what most law firms can produce.
As we pointed out, the fact that bitcoin itself was taken over by a racketeering enterprise, and the fact that the corruption spread into Wall Street and Big Law, and that regulators had been deceived, made it in the urgent public interest to get the evidence out to the docket as soon as possible.
As I just posted on X, this is unbelievably weird.
The story is bigger than FTX, and not a single journalist has mentioned it. The first journalist to report that the entire history of bitcoin was a fraud engineered with the help of the Chinese will make his career.
And, unlike FTX, there's 967 pages of evidence attached on the public docket, including a sworn declaration about the hack and the plain text of the contract.
Whatever the case, I sent this to 20 more journalists and am going to target 100 more tomorrow. Whenever this does break, I'll be curious to see whether someone will write about the "behind the scenes" at these news desks and why it's going on four days now that nobody has even mentioned it. I wonder if it's because the Venezuela news sucked up all the staff attention over the weekend.
OK, so I submitted whistleblower tips to 9 agencies. I've been tracking downloads - they have accelerated and I know that there are 120 downloads of this complaint from my site so far (many more downloaded it from PACER and the sites that mirror it, of course.)
Tomorrow I plan to spend the day submitting "tips" to media outlets, and then on Thursday, I'll write that article that @Ziddletwix suggested.
It's more important right now to create a media firestorm than it is to actually work on the case, because media attention may lead to lawyers and funders contacting us, so that's what I'm focused on. It's also good for YES bidders in this market.
@SteveSokolowski if the goal is to get media coverage of the complaint, it might be helpful to write a short blog post summarizing the claims in simple (non-legal) language? (to pique their interest before they wade into a 300 page complaint)
@Ziddletwix Right now I'm focusing on submitting whistleblower tips to as many regulatory agencies as possible.
I am not an expert at determining what people want to read; I've never been successful at marketing. If someone who is good at at that (like you) is interested in doing it, then I'll pay you.