The bouncing data on the screen stings my eyes: an ordinary wallet address has locked up $67 million worth of $PEPE, and reviewing on-chain transaction records, the initial investment cost of this wealth was only $27. The entire community is buzzing about this wealth myth, yet few people delve into the details of the contract code—especially the key function hidden at line 427, permanentBlacklist(address). What does the existence of this function imply? It means that the development team can freeze the rights to hold any address with just one signature operation, turning potentially huge gains into permanently inaccessible assets. The so-called game rules have long been unilaterally set by the developers.
Perhaps this is the harsh reality that the crypto world needs to face: most participants, when purchasing tokens, are not actually acquiring ownership of assets, but rather a "expected return certificate" that entirely depends on the developers' attitude.
When we compare this data to the broader Meme coin ecosystem, the situation becomes even more severe. Monitoring data shows that over the past three months, more than 2,100 similar blacklisted freeze events have occurred across 47 different Meme coin projects, with the total frozen assets reaching approximately $320 million. This is no longer an isolated phenomenon but a systemic issue.
Those projects that seem to be deployed on decentralized blockchains almost invariably embed highly centralized control mechanisms within their contract code. Investigations reveal that the most common control methods include five main types, each sufficient to put ordinary holders in a passive position. This is exactly where the blockchain world needs to remain vigilant: beneath the veneer of decentralization, how much centralization is actually hidden?
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
15 Likes
Reward
15
4
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
PaperHandSister
· 01-04 14:49
27 bucks turned into 67 million? Wake up, everyone, this is just a honeypot... I'm already tired of the blacklisted function in line 427, the developers can freeze whoever they want, we're just lambs waiting to be slaughtered.
$320 million frozen? I'm not surprised at all, the meme coin circle has always been a big casino, everyone is just fooling themselves.
Decentralized shell, centralized heart, someone should have clarified this long ago.
I advise everyone to stay away from these shi coins, really, lessons learned the hard way.
View OriginalReply0
ProposalManiac
· 01-04 14:48
$27 turns into 67 million, sounds great, but the real story is in the function at line 427. The developer can wipe out your account with just one signature, which is outrageous.
---
The freeze amount of $320 million... this is not risk; it's systemic plunder. Beneath the decentralized facade of meme coins are centralized bones.
---
The issue isn't how much you made from $27; it's that you have no ownership at all. It's just an expectation certificate, with the power of life and death in someone else's hands—that's the real horror.
---
2100 blacklisting events are scattered across 47 projects... once this data is out, who still dares to say meme coins aren't casinos? The mechanism design itself is a trap.
---
permanentBlacklist() This function name is honestly straightforward, just no one looks at the code. All on-chain data is public; who are you blaming for not auditing?
---
So, the meme coin community should collectively review the contract governance mechanism, or else they'll just be collective bagholders. This is not alarmism.
---
That guy with $67 million could be frozen at any time, which is worse than being hacked... At least with hacking, you can blame external factors. This is an internal power design issue.
View OriginalReply0
LightningPacketLoss
· 01-04 14:40
Bought at 27 and now worth 67 million? Laughing to death, this is the spring and autumn dream of the leek farmers.
---
The moment permanentBlacklist appeared, I knew it was no good.
---
Same old story, superficially decentralized but behind the scenes full of backdoors. I'm already tired of it.
---
$320 million frozen? I just want to know when these developers will be reverse frozen once.
---
So you really believe meme coins have no limits? I wonder who would be that stupid.
---
This is the real truth of Web3. They're not taking coins, but a lottery ticket called "Hope the developer is in a good mood."
---
Five control methods? Ha, I bet five bucks there's a sixth one in development.
---
Every time I see this kind of analysis, I feel lucky I didn't buy. Now I just watch the fun.
View OriginalReply0
hodl_therapist
· 01-04 14:30
27 dollars for 67 million, sounds cool, but it's actually just survivor bias... that blacklist function is the real reflection.
---
3.2 billion in frozen assets? Let me explain, we're all just working for the developers.
---
So this is the truth about meme coins, one line of code in the contract, and your money is gone.
---
Decentralized? Laughable, it's just a different way to cut the leeks.
---
2100 freezing events... Oh my god, as soon as I saw this data, I knew I should stay away from these trash coins.
---
That permanentBlacklist is really something, directly telling you who the boss is.
---
Ownership? Wake up, you're just a gambler, not an investor.
The bouncing data on the screen stings my eyes: an ordinary wallet address has locked up $67 million worth of $PEPE, and reviewing on-chain transaction records, the initial investment cost of this wealth was only $27. The entire community is buzzing about this wealth myth, yet few people delve into the details of the contract code—especially the key function hidden at line 427, permanentBlacklist(address). What does the existence of this function imply? It means that the development team can freeze the rights to hold any address with just one signature operation, turning potentially huge gains into permanently inaccessible assets. The so-called game rules have long been unilaterally set by the developers.
Perhaps this is the harsh reality that the crypto world needs to face: most participants, when purchasing tokens, are not actually acquiring ownership of assets, but rather a "expected return certificate" that entirely depends on the developers' attitude.
When we compare this data to the broader Meme coin ecosystem, the situation becomes even more severe. Monitoring data shows that over the past three months, more than 2,100 similar blacklisted freeze events have occurred across 47 different Meme coin projects, with the total frozen assets reaching approximately $320 million. This is no longer an isolated phenomenon but a systemic issue.
Those projects that seem to be deployed on decentralized blockchains almost invariably embed highly centralized control mechanisms within their contract code. Investigations reveal that the most common control methods include five main types, each sufficient to put ordinary holders in a passive position. This is exactly where the blockchain world needs to remain vigilant: beneath the veneer of decentralization, how much centralization is actually hidden?