DOGEUSDT
Dogecoin / Tether USD
crypto Composite

>Now that he made enough by manipulating the stock market, he’s going <back> to manipulate the crypto market 
He was manipulating DOGE like crazy five years ago

Not trying to say I'm right even though I have bought a lot of TVTX recently, but after some time of debating the odds with claude (and chatgpt and grok) this is what he said:
**Why I say 72-75% and not 50%:**
**Reason 1: The FDA already approved this exact drug once** Same molecule, same safety profile, same REMS program. The FDA isn't evaluating a stranger — they approved FILSPARI for IgAN in September 2024. Rejecting it for FSGS requires them to contradict their own prior decision on the same drug.
**Reason 2: Four consecutive precedents in the same category** Tarpeyo, FILSPARI IgAN, Fabhalta, Vanrafia — all approved in rare kidney disease on proteinuria surrogates alone, without proven eGFR benefit. The FDA has established a clear and consistent pattern. Rejecting FILSPARI for FSGS now breaks that pattern with no scientific justification.
**Reason 3: The Type C meeting** This is underappreciated. Travere had a formal meeting with the FDA before submitting where the FDA pre-agreed the proteinuria endpoint was acceptable. The FDA essentially blessed the filing strategy before it was submitted. You don't get that meeting, agree to it, and then reject on those exact grounds.
**Reason 4: Active comparator advantage** Every precedent approval used placebo comparators. FILSPARI beat an FDA-approved drug at maximum dose. That's a stronger evidentiary standard than what got the others approved.
**Reason 5: The kidney failure number** 6.5% vs 11.2% — nearly half the rate of kidney failure vs the best available treatment. This is not a surrogate. This is real patients not reaching kidney failure. The FDA cannot easily ignore this in a disease with zero approved options.
**Reason 6: The sensitivity analysis** When you exclude the confounding immunosuppression variable, the eGFR difference becomes statistically significant. The authors published a legitimate scientific explanation for why the primary missed. The FDA has smart reviewers — they read this explanation.
**Reason 7: No safety concerns** Zero drug-induced liver injury in FSGS trials. The FDA extension explicitly stated no safety or manufacturing concerns. The only question is efficacy — and on every clinical outcome except one statistical endpoint, the drug clearly works.
**Reason 8: Advisory committee waived** The FDA convenes advisory committees when they're genuinely uncertain. They waived it. That's an internal signal of confidence.
**Reason 9: Zero competition for patients** 40,000 US patients with nothing. The FDA has a humanitarian mandate in rare disease. Rejecting a drug that halved kidney failure rates against an active comparator in a disease with nothing leaves those patients with nothing.
**Why it's not 90%:**
The primary endpoint miss cannot be explained away entirely. It's real. The FDA has rejected drugs in similar situations before — Applied Therapeutics being the most recent example. The confidence interval on the eGFR difference crosses zero. Some FDA reviewers will weight that heavily regardless of the clinical outcome data.
The fraud investigation overhang adds noise. The DOGE FDA staffing cuts add process uncertainty.
**How sure am I of my 72-75% estimate?**
Honestly — moderately confident in the direction, less confident in the exact number.
What I'm highly confident about: the odds are meaningfully better than a coin flip. The Reddit crowd saying 50-50 or worse is not weighing the precedent history, the Type C meeting, or the kidney failure data properly.
What I'm less confident about: whether it's 68% or 75% specifically. The honest range is 65-78%. I can't be more precise than that because ultimately one FDA reviewer's judgment call determines the outcome and no model fully captures that.
**The most honest single sentence:** The data and precedent support approval more than rejection, but anyone claiming certainty either way hasn't read the trial properly. Not financial advice.

From what it seems it is actually only DOGE being mined. Not really sure why they chose to do that but in that case it won't affect the other merge mined coins

Qubic is launching DOGE mining tomorrow. Will the hashrate claims be true?

Still waiting on my $5k DOGE & $2K tarrif stimi check to arrive so I can gamble on Gulf War 3.0 Electric Mango Bugaloo

I like this mindset
I keep a split approach — stack most long-term, but always keep some aside to actually use (tips, small payments, supporting projects). Feels like that’s the real spirit of DOGE.
If everyone only hoards, it dies. If people use it, it lives

We don’t even have the National Renewable Energy Lab in Golden, CO anymore. The administration renamed it the National Lab of the Rockies. I wonder how much a rebranding of a 45 year old lab costs. I’m sure the cost to changes on the IT side alone will be countless man hours. Maybe someone should let DOGE know.

I've been seeing the "not a joke" messaging building over the past couple of weeks and it's caught my attention more than most recent launches.
For context, it's a network that previously contributed a significant chunk of Monero's total hashrate. They've been teasing something related to DOGE mining going live around April 1.
The angle of deliberately launching on April Fool's Day is either very clever or going to backfire spectacularly. I've been watching the live dashboard they're previewing and the hashrate numbers look real.
Curious what the DOGE community here thinks about external compute networks contributing hashrate to the network. Is that generally seen as good for security, or does it raise questions about where the compute is coming from?

feed it to your DOGE.

This after DOGE defined my job 😔 

When in doubt, zoom out - 12 Years of DOGE Price Action in Review

The Tor Project removed their Bitcoin Cash donation address a few months before the 2024 US election. They appear to be the last (or one of the last) major general software organizations to comply in advance on this issue.
These are the relevant captures from the Internet Archive:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240720042540/https://donate.torproject.org/cryptocurrency/
https://web.archive.org/web/20240828021533/https://donate.torproject.org/cryptocurrency/
***
The world has learned a lot about the nature and character of some of the people who influenced or supported various cryptocurrencies and various forks since August of 2024.
We know a lot more now about what Jeffery Epstein was doing with Coinbase and Brock Pierce in 2013-15. We've learned a lot more about the characters who supported ETH and pumped DOGE as well.
The meaning of *DOGE* as a word has been completely transformed. DOGE is now the name of a fascist wrecking ball that irreparably damaged US National Security, the privacy of American citizens and the capacity of the US government for generations (or perhaps permanently).
That 2013 fork of Junkcoin is still listed on the Tor Project's donation page, so there's that.
And the world is seeing the true face of one of the founders of PayPal, and early supporters of ETH, as he builds a total surveillance system (like Lavender or the threat classifier systems used in Afghanistan and Iraq), but for the American people.
The Tor Project states clearly on their site that acceptance of a currency is not an endorsement, but maybe the exclusion of Bitcoin Cash at the last minute could be interpreted as an endorsement of the project.
Regardless, as a signal of who will comply in advance, the fact that they stopped accepting Bitcoin Cash right before the election is both telling and disconcerting given the nature of the software they develop.
The Tor Project is not alone accepting early forms of internet monies.
The [Electronic Frontier Foundation](https://www.eff.org/pages/other-ways-give-and-donor-support#crypto) has also found they can neither bring themselves to list a Bitcoin Cash address nor even a P2PKH style Bitcoin address (although they have in the past).
They initially took down their donation address because they didn't want to be a party to a legal proceeding, but they're certainly a party to whatever is happening now!
The Wikimedia Foundation accepted some proxied crypto payments from [2014-22](https://decrypt.co/99170/after-eight-years-wikipedia-stops-accepting-bitcoin-and-ethereum-donations), but has never held cryptocurrencies, only accepted them through Coinbase, then BitPay. They stopped due to "public" backlash around emissions.
The Internet Archive had an early bitcoin address (1Archive1n2C579dMsAu3iC6tWzuQJz8dN) from prior to the 2017 fork. The address can still readily receive Bitcoin Cash donations. For the operators of the wayback machine, removing their own donation address like the other organizations would be a self-defeating and self effacing problem.
The Mozilla Foundation [accepted bitcoin payments (through coinbase)](https://web.archive.org/web/20151013173638/https://sendto.mozilla.org/page/content/give-bitcoin/) from 2014 to 2022 but stopped due to backlash about greenhouse gas emissions too. They're now integrating AI by default into their browsers.
The open internet that is responsible for so much of the freedom and progress we saw in the last 30 years is [increasingly under a broad and persistent DDoS attack from ever expanding AI data centers, as well as from the crumbling democracies that once fostered them.](https://www.anildash.com/2026/03/27/endgame-open-web/)
But what the world is seeing now isn't really shocking for people who used the freedom of the magic internet money from 2009-2018. We watched everyone comply in advance and fold already. We already know where the institutions that have benefited from the free labor and trust of billions of people are gonna land when it comes to compiling with a few dozen people.
We know. Your core principles for a free open internet are missing on your donation page.
Organizations that can't list a plain P2PKH bitcoin address (because it's also a Bitcoin Cash address) were never going to make it. Institutions that refused to accept freedom money on the internet were never going to stand up for the freedom of eight billion people when the chips were down. The fascists never stop coming, they're always advancing an inch at a time. The wicked never rest.
Handling direct payments were the third error code for http. We started with such high hopes for what the internet could have been.
Imagine if content creators and publishers didn't have to sell ads or personal information for revenue. Imagine if small businesses weren't beholden to payment processors. Imagine if all the institutions crumbling now had substantial trusts from prior to 2017. Imagine if anyone could just take 1/10th of a penny to stop millions of AI bot requests from DDoSing their site.
Instead we just got a succession of collectibles, casinos and bucket shop instruments. It seems only taking money for nothing in return is allowed on our "free" internet with our feckless regulators.
We never built the internet as it could have been because individually (and institutionally) everyone was too afraid. Everyone let the cohorts of the Epstein class do as they pleased.
What we believed was a free open internet was in fact just a tool to entrap democracy and empower a conglomerate of autocracies. And the institutions that built and safeguarded it seem now to have always been compromised, they were frauds. They took the hope of giant collective project and watched it burn.
The users of peer-to-peer magic internet currency understand. We're going to keep on the project none of you would accept or use or contribute toward advancing.
We can have our own archive. We can publish what we want without intermediaries or censorship. We can say what you could not. Our processor fees are not going up. We can have a form of internet using the one tool everyone else scoffed at.
We opted into freedom.
We understand that the fascists don't like what we're doing specifically, and that's why we're still here.
In the same way it'd be funny to have an Internet Archive without an archive, you can't really completely take the currency out of all peer to peer digital currency.

Much wow, what a post 😂 I thought he’d mention me or point me out for my ‘posting until DOGE hits $1’ thing 😂

DOGE is the people's coin.

Today when I searched dogecoin on my mobile browser and clicked on the news tab these people mining doge where the top news article. I am not naming them as I dont want the fud, shill, ai slop stuff I AM GENUINELY WONDERING AND UNCERTAIN AS TO WHAT IT MEANS
I've been seeing mentions of this "not a joke" campaign from this project and sat down and looked into it for half an hour.
From what I can tell, it is some kind of AI network that has been doing things with mining. They previously 51% attacked the Monero network and now apparently have something DOGE-related going live around April 1?!?
I'm coming at this from a "what does this mean for the DOGE network and community" angle rather than a mining profitability angle - I don't mine, I just hold and use DOGE. u/Fluvio-55 I am hoping you may see this and help explain what's going on with these guys please!
The question I want to discuss is if an AI compute network starts mining DOGE, is that a good thing for network security? Or does it raise concerns about where the hashrate comes from and who controls it (can they 51% attack us?).
I understand that having the majority of hashrate can be dangerous, can they do this with doge or is our hashrate too high? I read they did this with XMR (monero) but I dont understand what they actually did when they hit it? How will this impact our price (up/down/sideways?)
Would love to hear from people who actually understand the network security side of this better than I do🙏 .

>Dont even like the guy
>Prays to God that he won
>Says this with a straight face during highs in gas, new war in the Middle East costing billions every week, providing billions to Israel and their universal healthcare, inflation out of control, deficit running to new records, geopolitical destruction through threatening to invade our allies, economical stagnation, employment dropping, DOGE costing us billions and didnt save a dime, gutted many national public programs, somehow managing to split and fail passing bills despite holding Republican majority in House and Senate, and interest rates look like theyre racing to a recession
>”But Kamala and Waltz wouldve been the WORST!!”
When the crash or recession happens, youll be crying about how it wouldve been soooo much worse if a democrat were in charge LOL the cope is nuts, you should be praying for a better tomorrow not some guy who doesnt think about you or your best interests

I keep my DOGE, hope it is growing.

Feels like they’re leaning hard into the April 1 angle just to farm attention tbh. Whenever something is marketed as “not a joke,” it usually ends up being either underwhelming or already priced in by the time it drops.
If I had to guess, the DOGE angle is probably some kind of merged mining or resource-sharing play with their existing setup, not some massive breakthrough. The tech might be interesting on paper, but whether the market cares is a different story. Crypto moves more on narrative than specs most of the time.
I’d watch the reaction more than the announcement itself. If it doesn’t immediately grab attention, it’ll probably fade fast regardless of what they built.

This feels exactly like the kind of thing my friends hype up for two weeks straight and then we’re all watching the announcement like it’s a game kickoff lol.
The April 1 timing makes me automatically skeptical though. Not saying it’s fake, but it kinda sets expectations weirdly. Half my group would assume it’s a meme play unless they drop something really concrete.
If I had to guess, it’s probably some kind of multi-mining or shared infra angle with DOGE, like stacking rewards or optimizing idle hash. That’s the kind of thing people I know get excited about for a day, then immediately ask “okay but is it actually profitable.”
Market-wise, I feel like it only moves if there’s clear upside for regular users. If it’s just “look at our tech,” people will talk about it for a bit then move on. If it actually lets people earn more with the same setup, that’s when my group starts paying attention fast.

They couldn't be expected to do shit before DOGE either