Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
CFD
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
There's something that's been bothering me about the whole Anubis saga from October 2021. You know, that infamous rug pull where users lost around 13,256 ETH? Well, new details keep surfacing about who might have been behind it, and the connections are raising some serious questions about conflicts of interest in crypto.
So here's what we're looking at: evidence suggests that 0xSisyphus - an anonymous wallet involved in the Anubis incident - could actually be Kevin Pawlak, who holds a director position at OpenSea Ventures. The timeline checks out, the addresses match up, and the implications are pretty wild when you start connecting the dots.
The whole thing gets messier when you look at the chat records from the Anubis team in late October 2021. There are direct mentions of Sisyphus, Beerus, and even Alameda Research discussing the project right before the liquidity got pulled and users got wiped out. We're talking about $60 million in ETH that vanished through Tornado Cash afterward.
What really stands out to me is the potential conflict of interest here. If this person really is Kevin Pawlak working in crypto at a major platform like OpenSea, how is he operating anonymous accounts in pump & dump schemes? Was he trying to influence OpenSea's decisions to benefit from these operations without disclosing his involvement? Did he approach Alameda about acquiring ANKH tokens? And most importantly - did OpenSea know any of this was happening?
The silence around this is pretty telling. Because of how well-connected this person is in the space, not many people are willing to speak up publicly about what looks like a coordinated fraud operation. But the evidence is there if you dig into the public records and on-chain data.
This raises fundamental questions about how platforms are supposed to handle employee conflicts of interest and insider trading. If someone in a position of power at a major exchange is running anonymous schemes on the side, what does that say about oversight? And how many other situations like this are flying under the radar because people are too afraid to call them out?