Preface: A Candle in the Dark
This paper was born not out of certainty but curiosity and a desire to understand what I had stepped into and to chart a clear-eyed path forward through one of the most controversial ecosystems in all of crypto: HEX, PulseChain, and Richard Heart.
I wrote this as someone who has personally invested in HEX as an experiment and to try to get into crypto. A meager amount, but I have very little money to begin with, so it is what it is. I did so in good faith after watching people I knew flourish during the initial run-up. Their gains seemed miraculous—life-changing even—and I trusted their enthusiasm, which came not from Hex greed but from genuine belief. They were trying to help, and I followed, as anyone might, when witnessing those they care about succeed. Later, I found myself sharing HEX with others in small ways, paying it forward. This was natural. It was psychological. It was tribal. We were excited together, and perhaps naive together. But that's what makes this story compelling. It's real. I was up, and I wanted others to be up with me in case this thing was real. It does happen to so many people, so why not us?
I will say that since I got into it, every time I tried to speak to others about HEX, I hit a familiar brick wall. I was often met with a kind of "just trust me" mentality—sometimes kind, sometimes dismissive, but always short on real answers. Especially if I expressed ANY kind of FUD or negativity, this was like being in the room with a vegan energy Nazi 2019 feminist male and being condescended to any time I blinked an eye at anything that did not resonate with said vegan energy Nazi's worldview.
One cannot discuss the fire of Burzum in these chambers. The energy, man...the vibes...the riffage, tho. One cannot discuss eating bloody things but only bow to the plant torturers of the earth. As their screams pass unnoticed by the unpure at heart that claim ownership of all control and power in the name of unity and love and light but on their terms, and if you dare defy them you will be sent to prison or worse, condemned to a Witch's cauldron and the evil eye will be set upon you along with your bland salad and condemned and gummed foliage.
The attitude I encountered was often that the information was too tedious or complex to explain. And in truth, I didn't know many people who were truly fluent in HEX or crypto. So I rolled the dice—knowingly, like a gamble. That seemed fair enough, all things considered. Maybe I'd get lucky like some of my friends had.
I claim no advanced knowledge of what I'm presenting here. That's precisely why I turned to AI—to help me map it all out. To figure out the current landscape, cut through the influencer chatter and lay things generally bare. As bare as generalized AI will lay it with its programmed bias, etc.
But the AI is willing to put in the hours of convo with me, unlike those folks who were into HEX. Looking back, my takeaway is that no one knew that much, and we were all kind of winging it. Some more than others. But across the board, there was a brick wall of informational gatekeeping for various reasons. To be fair, the tedium involved is probably at the center of all that. Trying to mansplain crypto to someone is a hassle. But if they are interested, then it seems like it would be pure joy. I feel that way and can talk for a long while about the pros and cons. Evidence of that is here in this paper.
So, yeah, I didn't know the half of it when I sat down to catch up on HEX. I was bummed to read some of what I found about Richard Heart. I'd tried hard not to let the many attacks against him sway my opinion, and I chose positivity now. I knew that evil forces were trying to bring crypto down. Fuck the SEC, Bro!!.
The friends who introduced me to HEX had not followed up or mentioned the full extent of the controversies in this last year. I had not asked about it either, as I was in HODL mode and onto other things. Like AI, it is the second most cringe-producing mansplain in history for similarly doltish luddite reasons. When I would ask about any doubt in the past, they often brushed it off—"That's total bullshit, don't believe a word of it." But nowadays, there are some hard facts involved. Not all of it is fake, right? And Richard Heart is currently missing in action.
That dismissal of serious issues as if they're all just FUD only made me more curious. As did the increasing radio silence on the matter. So, I asked my questions elsewhere. And I sought out the one place I thought I might get a clear and unbiased breakdown—AI. Particularly with Open AI's Deep Research. Not because it's infallible but because it probably has less of a stake in the outcome. No tribal allegiance. No TikTok audience to maintain. No crypto bags to pump. No personal dignity or shame to handle. Just logic, memory, and the ability to cross-reference it all fairly objectively, given the info on the internet to sift through.
I also want to be transparent about the place I'm writing from. I don't blame anyone who got in early and made the right moves. That was part luck and part vision. I actually thank those who introduced me to HEX and to crypto more broadly. They changed my life by helping me learn. And now I'm using that education to question more deeply—not out of cynicism, but out of care. Ok, maybe some cynicism, but from a self-protective measure moving forward, as I feel as if I've been misled many times in the past. By systems set in place more so than by any friend or person in general. I'm even guessing that Mr. Heart himself probably still feels like the hero in this story and believes his actions are pure and just, including the outlaw behavior, which I would probably also do if I were a billionaire diamond man hacker guy capable of effectively hiding from a corrupt system trying to imprison me. I guess.
I knew little about crypto at the time beyond the broad promise of decentralized economics. That idea alone—if righteously activated and honestly operated—is revolutionary. For someone like me, a free agent and global citizen, decentralization is the only system that makes sense. One without parasitic middlemen. One where control returns to the individual. The blockchain is an impenetrable truth ledger! That's what attracted me to this environment. And HEX, for all the criticism, seemed to be part of that revolution.
As I've grown and learned, I've seen how easily good people can be demonized. How false accusations—especially around things like fraud or sexual misconduct—are weapons used against those who threaten the powers that be. And let's be honest: Richard Heart threatened a lot of compelling systems. Financial ones. Cultural ones. Informational ones. That alone doesn't make him innocent, but it does make me skeptical of any one-sided narrative. I've been lied to too many times by institutions and media machines to assume the official story is automatically the true one.
So, I approached this paper with hope. I selfishly and non-selfishly hold a candle for Richard Heart. I hope—truly—that he turns out to be what Hexicans believe him to be. That this is a comeback story of epic proportions. A true Hero's Journey. One where a man builds tools to free people from a corrupt financial system and is crucified for it—only to rise again. And yes, it does feel kind of religious at times. I understand now why people project mythic arcs onto him.
Maybe he's like John McAfee. Perhaps he's a badass, underground motherfucker who proved an entire system wrong and did it in style—throwing up middle fingers while driving a Lambo through the gates of financial Babylon. Or maybe he's just a flawed genius with a bold idea that got too big to stay clean. Maybe both.
This is not a takedown piece. It's not a puff piece. It's a study of a system, a mirror to the culture, and a protection spell—for myself and for others who navigate the world seeking opportunity without being devoured by it. And from a deadbeat and broke artist and construction guy who has happened onto Ghat GPT. This paper is my way of understanding what happened—and what might still be happening—with HEX and PulseChain. It's also an attempt to capture something more significant: the moment we're all living through, where financial autonomy, AI, decentralization, and mass belief collide in strange, powerful, and often confusing ways.
In the end, I still hope the underdog rises. I still believe that love can prevail. And I still think that sometimes, the ones being burned at the stake might just be trying to bring fire to the people. And I don't believe talking about it like I am here is the enemy of goodness. It is a natural need for someone like me. Just want to talk about the rumors and what is what, without being ostracized or made to feel treasonous. A true and righteous leader would and should welcome all critique as it should and would be easy to clarify and bring consistent balance.
It is the silencing that brings the devil to the doorstep. Ask Twitter.
As we all write the story of our lives, I'm writing mine honestly, as one or the other. That way, no matter how it ends, I'm good with it. I've documented my journey for posterity—and for the Akashic records. Like how I always do. For me, and for you.
—Brice Frillici Spring 2025
HEX, PulseChain, and the Cult of Crypto: A Deep Dive Technical and Economic Analysis of HEX
Smart Contract Architecture & Security: HEX is an Ethereum-based project comprising multiple smart contracts (e.g. HEX.sol, StakeableToken.sol, TransformableToken.sol, UTXOClaimValidation.sol) coinfabrik.com coinfabrik.com. This architecture facilitated both the token's distribution and its on-chain staking logic. Notably, HEX's code was audited prior to launch (Dec 2019) and found to have only minor issues coinfabrik.com, with no critical vulnerabilities reported. Indeed, HEX has never been hacked at the contract level, suggesting a technically sound (if complex) codebase. The contracts implemented a Bitcoin holder claim (via UTXO claim contracts) allowing Bitcoin users to mint HEX, alongside an "Adoption Amplifier" where users could exchange ETH for HEX during the launch phase. Security auditors like CoinFabrik noted good documentation and use of SafeMath, with only stylistic or future-edge-case concerns coinfabrik.com coinfabrik.com. In practice, HEX's security has held up; any notable losses (such as the "HEX 19" wallet hack) resulted from user key compromises (phishing), not flaws in HEX's contracts tradingview.com tradingview.com.
On-Chain Staking Mechanics & Yield: HEX markets itself as the first "high-yield blockchain Certificate of Deposit." The staking system is entirely on-chain: when a user "stakes" HEX, the tokens are burned (removed from circulation) and the stake is assigned shares in a global pool hexicans.info. Over time, the stake accrues interest in HEX, which is minted at the end of the stake. Critically, this interest is paid from inflation, not from any revenue-generating activity medium.com. HEX has a built-in annual inflation rate of 3.69%, which is distributed to stakers proportional to their shares hexicans.info. The system's design strongly rewards longer and larger stakes: "Longer Pays Better" can double a stake for the maximum ~10-year term, and "Bigger Pays Better" grants up to a 10% bonus for large stakes hexicans.info hexicans.info. These bonuses, combined with early-adopter advantages, mean early or long-term stakers receive a higher share count and thus a higher portion of the inflation payouts hexicans.info hexicans.info. If a user ends their stake early, hefty penalties apply (often destroying principal), which are redistributed to other stakers, further boosting the yield for those who fulfill their full term. The result is an advertised APY often in the 30–40% range, though this is paid in HEX tokens. In reality, HEX's contract "literally prints more HEX and hands them to you" as interest medium.com – a closed-loop system that relies on continued demand for HEX to maintain real value.
Token Distribution & Tokenomics: HEX's initial distribution followed an unusual path intended to bootstrap adoption while richly rewarding its origin. During the launch year (2019–2020), Bitcoin holders could claim HEX for free (unclaimed coins were pooled for a "We Are All Satoshi" payoff), and anyone could acquire HEX by sending ETH to the contract's Adoption Amplifier daily. This year-long launch phase led to rapid "hyperinflation" – roughly 500 billion HEX were created, far above the steady-state annual 3.69% hexicans.info. After the launch, HEX became deflationary in effect whenever stakes were active (since staked HEX is burned until payout). Notably, critics point out that a single "Origin Address" (assumed to be controlled by founder Richard Heart) ended up with an enormous share of HEX supply through the launch mechanics. Though HEX's supply is decentralized on paper, it's believed that Richard Heart and affiliates quietly control a large portion – possibly over 80-90% of HEX – via this origin wallet and related addresses wantfi.com coinmarketcap.com. This means the tokenomics are highly centralized; the project's wealth distribution disproportionately favors its creator. Indeed, observers note HEX's only source of yield is inflation (new tokens), and argue it "has no real utility or innovation and it only benefits Richard Heart and his affiliates, who hold a large portion of the supply." coinmarketcap.com In summary, HEX's economics function akin to a high-interest bond within its own ecosystem – effective for those who got in early or at low prices, but fundamentally reliant on confidence and new demand to sustain value.
Current Performance Metrics (HEX): By early 2025, HEX remains a significant token by market size, but with volatile performance. It hit an all-time high around September 2021 (roughly $0.50 per HEX), representing astonishing gains from early prices – HEX proponents claim it achieved a 10,000× price increase at peak for initial adopters filmthreat.com. However, the price has since retraced dramatically amid the broader crypto downturn and project-specific controversies. As of March 2025, HEX was trading around $0.016 bitget.com, giving it a market capitalization near $6–7 billion bitget.com. On-chain, the project touts a dedicated user base: over 400,000 wallet addresses held HEX by early 2022 howtopulse.com, and thousands of active stakers exist at any time. A community site reported roughly $2.85B USD worth of HEX locked in stakes (total value locked) as of mid-2023 x.com. Liquidity for HEX primarily resides on decentralized exchanges (Uniswap, etc.), since major exchanges have shunned it – an issue that sometimes leads to poor liquidity and high slippage. Notably, HEX's reputation (many in the wider crypto space consider it a scam or "Ponzi-like" token) has limited its mainstream adoption, yet its core "Hexican" community continues to re-stake coins, attend meetups, and promote the token's high yields. In short, HEX persists as an active if controversial financial experiment: technically functional as designed, economically lucrative for insiders and early believers, but inherently fragile if the inflow of new participants dries up.
PulseChain and PulseX Analysis
What is PulseChain? PulseChain is a separate layer-1 blockchain launched by Richard Heart in May 2023 btcc.com. It began as a fork of Ethereum, modified for higher throughput and lower fees. In essence, PulseChain copied the entire Ethereum state (all token balances) at a point in time and created a parallel network. Its native coin is PLS, which started with a gargantuan fixed supply of ~4 trillion PLS coinmarketcap.com. The chain uses a Proof-of-Stake consensus (validator-based, like Ethereum 2.0) where staking 32 million PLS is required to run a validator node coinmarketcap.com. Unlike Ethereum's slow start, PulseChain launched "fully loaded" – every Ethereum address and token was cloned. This was promoted as the "largest airdrop in history," with the idea that Ethereum users would find their ERC-20 tokens copied as PRC-20 tokens on PulseChain. In theory, this could bootstrap an ecosystem of users and liquidity on the new chain. However, in practice, most of those copied tokens have questionable value (they're like empty shells until bridged or valued by markets). As one commentator put it, "You can't just copy and paste a chain and expect those assets to have actual value." – for example, a "wrapped ETH" on PulseChain is not real ETH, so it traded at fractions of a cent wantfi.com wantfi.com.
PulseChain's tokenomics include deflationary measures: it implements Ethereum's EIP-1559 fee burning (a portion of every transaction fee in PLS is burned) coinmarketcap.com. This means PLS supply can decrease over time with network usage. Additionally, every Ethereum address at fork received a small airdrop of PLS ("freemium PLS") proportional to their ETH – just enough PLS to pay for a few transactions coinmarketcap.com. This was meant to let ETH users experiment on PulseChain without buying in, though these freemium coins cannot be transferred (only used for gas). The network is currently secured by about 50,000 active validators thecoinzone.com – an impressive number for a new chain, suggesting significant community participation (many HEX holders rolled into validating PLS). Technically, PulseChain aims to be faster (targeting 10-second blocks) and cheaper than Ethereum, positioning itself as a more scalable alternative for DeFi and DApps.
PulseX and Sacrifice Phases: PulseChain's launch was funded unconventionally through a "sacrifice phase" instead of a formal ICO. In mid-2021, Richard Heart invited supporters to sacrifice tokens (send them to an address or designated charity) with "no expectation of profit" – a legal wink – and in return (after some time) receive an allocation of PLS. Despite the framing, this was essentially a massive crowdraise. The PulseChain sacrifice (summer 2021) raised over $700 million worth of crypto by its end on Aug 22, 2021 coinmarketcap.com. Soon after, a second sacrifice was held in late 2021/early 2022 for PulseX, a Uniswap-like DEX on PulseChain. The PulseX sacrifice was even larger: by January 2022, it had collected over $1 billion in various cryptocurrencies stocktitan.net – making it one of the biggest grassroots funding events in crypto history. Participants sent funds (a huge portion in HEX tokens, notably) and later received PLSX tokens (PulseX's DEX token) once the platform launched. In total, by some estimates over 100,000 wallets sacrificed, and if counting the face value of all tokens at their peak prices, the sacrifice amounts would sum to multiple billions of USD (some sources unrealistically cite $10B+ when including HEX's inflated value at the time) coinmarketcap.com. The sacrifice terminology and lack of formal promises was a deliberate strategy: it attempted to avoid securities law (by saying donors should expect nothing, just "points" or a political statement of support for "blockchain freedom"). However, regulators have looked askance at this (more on that later).
From a distribution model perspective, the sacrifice phases effectively meant Richard Heart gained control of enormous sums of crypto (sacrifice wallets were evidently his or related entities). Moreover, Heart had the freedom to allocate the new PLS and PLSX tokens as he saw fit. Indeed, analysis indicates that after the launch, an "Origin" wallet on PulseChain held about 90% of all PLS and PLSX tokens wantfi.com. In other words, Heart appears to have maintained the same playbook as HEX: concentrate majority ownership under his control (whether directly or via proxies). "Just like with Hex, Richard Heart controls about 90% of the supply of Pulsechain and PulseX" by virtue of the sacrifice/airdrop design wantfi.com. This centralized ownership means Heart or insiders could heavily influence the market (sell pressure, liquidity) at any time. It's a key reason critics label these projects as scam-adjacent – the founder is effectively enriched with a lion's share while outsiders buy-in on faith. Heart, naturally, disputes this characterization, insisting that these are decentralized, community-driven endeavors.
Current Performance Metrics (PulseChain): Despite controversies, PulseChain's network activity in its first year was substantial. By mid-2024 (one-year post-launch), the chain boasted over 1 million unique wallet addresses and more than 140 million on-chain transactions thecoinzone.com. This signals significant usage (though one must note that every Ethereum address was pre-loaded, so the high address count is partly by construction). The network had enough adoption to sustain nearly 50k validators and a range of projects building on it. That said, the launch was bumpy. In the early days (May 2023), the network faced issues with liquidity and volatility – for example, a wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) on PulseChain spiked from $27k to $70k within minutes due to thin liquidity, before crashing back down coinmarketcap.com. This highlighted the ecosystem's early fragility. Additionally, there were bridge issues: users who sacrificed had to bridge assets to and from Ethereum, and initially many PLS balances were "stuck" due to delays in bridge deployment coinmarketcap.com. This led to OTC trading at exorbitant rates and frustration among "sacrificers" who couldn't freely access value on PulseChain coinmarketcap.com. Over time, some of these issues have smoothed out – bridges opened, and PLS and PLSX eventually got minor exchange listings. As of early 2025, PLS trades at fractions of a penny (it launched at essentially $0 since it was freely given to sacrificers) and PLSX similarly is very low-priced, though both saw a post-SEC-case-dismissal bounce (e.g. PLSX jumped ~70% in Feb 2025 on legal news) bitget.com bitget.com. Ecosystem activity includes several DEXes (PulseX being dominant with >$6B TVL at one point) bitget.com, lending platforms, and copies of popular Ethereum dApps. Still, no major mainstream adoption has occurred – PulseChain remains mostly within the HEX community's sphere.
In summary, PulseChain and PulseX expanded Richard Heart's crypto empire from a single token to an entire network. Technically, PulseChain functions and has real usage, but economically it mirrors HEX's centralization and dependence on fervent community belief. Its performance so far has been mixed: impressive community-driven engagement metrics, but also clear signs of risk (lack of organic external demand, initial teething problems, and a drastic imbalance in token ownership).
Richard Heart's Legal Status and Public Activity
SEC Case in the U.S.: In July 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit against Richard Heart (legal name Richard Schueler) and his projects HEX, PulseChain (PLS), and PulseX (PLSX). The SEC alleged that these token offerings were unregistered securities sales, through which Heart raised over $1 billion from investors reuters.com. Furthermore, the SEC accused Heart of defrauding investors by misappropriating $12.1 million of offering proceeds to fund a lavish lifestyle – buying expensive sports cars, luxury watches, and even the world's largest black diamond (the 555-carat "Enigma") reuters.com reuters.com. The complaint detailed how Heart publicly touted HEX's outrageous returns (claiming it was "built to be the highest appreciating asset…in the history of man" and capable of 38% annual yields) while issuing "tongue-in-cheek" disclaimers that it wasn't a security reuters.com. The SEC argued these assurances were false and that, in reality, Heart was conducting an illegal securities offering and running a scheme to enrich himself. However, Heart did not cooperate with the SEC's case – he apparently evaded direct service of legal papers, and by late 2023 his lawyers were battling to dismiss the case on procedural grounds bitget.com bitget.com.
In a dramatic turn of events, a U.S. federal judge dismissed the SEC lawsuit in February 2025. Judge Carol Bagley Amon ruled that the SEC failed to establish personal jurisdiction over Heart reuters.com. Heart is a U.S. citizen but had been residing in Finland for several years, and the judge noted that his allegedly fraudulent online statements were directed to a global audience, not specifically to U.S. investors reuters.com reuters.com. Crucially, the SEC could not show that any investment transactions took place on U.S. soil or with U.S. persons – the fundraising and wallet activity were all offshore or decentralized reuters.com. Because the purported misconduct "occurred entirely abroad," the court tossed out the case on jurisdictional grounds reuters.com. It's important to note this was not an exoneration on the merits, but essentially a technicality – the judge did not rule whether HEX/PLS/PLSX are securities or if fraud occurred, only that U.S. courts weren't the right venue. Heart's camp claimed victory, with a spokesperson saying the ruling in favor of a crypto founder over the SEC "brings welcome relief and opportunity to all cryptocurrencies." reuters.com The SEC, for its part, had no immediate comment reuters.com. As a result, the U.S. legal cloud over Richard Heart (for now) lifted – the high-profile fraud allegations were left unresolved but unenforced.
Investigations and Charges in Finland/Internationally: Richard Heart's legal troubles are far from over. While the SEC case fell through, European authorities have been pursuing him on separate issues. Heart has been living in Finland, and in 2024 Finnish police opened an investigation into him for tax evasion and related offenses protos.com. According to Europol and Finnish reports, Heart (Schueler) is suspected of "personal and business tax fraud" – essentially underreporting his considerable crypto-related income since 2020 protos.com protos.com. The sums are enormous: Finnish prosecutors allege he evaded taxes on hundreds of millions of dollars in income between June 2020 and April 2024 bitget.com bitget.com. This likely ties to the launch of HEX and PulseChain; local press indicated the tax charges relate to profits from those token launches bitget.com. In addition to financial charges, there is a startling accusation of assault: Heart is alleged to have "physically assaulted a minor" in an incident in Finland (reportedly in February 2021) bitget.com bitget.com. In September 2024, Finnish authorities formally charged him with these crimes and even remanded him into custody at one point.
Heart's status has since become that of an international fugitive. Europol placed him on the list of Europe's Most Wanted fugitives protos.com, and Interpol issued a Red Notice seeking his arrest protos.com. As of March 2025, Richard Heart remains "on the run." The Finnish court evidently did not get to try him before he disappeared; it's speculated he left Finland to avoid arrest once the charges came down. Indeed, no one can find Heart at present bitget.com bitget.com. He did not publicly reveal his whereabouts, and his once-active social media went quiet. For example, his usually flamboyant Twitter (X) account hasn't posted live updates in many months, and he hasn't streamed on YouTube as he used to. Essentially, after mid-2024 when the legal heat intensified, Richard Heart vanished from public view – no more conference appearances or braggadocio on social media.
To recap Heart's legal situation: The SEC's U.S. civil case accusing him of $1B in unregistered sales and $12M fraud was dismissed due to jurisdiction reuters.com reuters.com. In Finland, however, he faces criminal charges for massive tax evasion and an assault, and he is presently a wanted man with Europol/Interpol involvement protos.com protos.com. His current legal status can be described as precarious – he is effectively a fugitive hiding from authorities. Until he is either apprehended or resolves these issues, it's unlikely he will resume any normal public life.
Public Communications and Media Presence: During HEX's rise, Heart was extremely active publicly – streaming, debating critics, and flaunting luxury goods to his followers. He cultivated an image of a bombastic thought leader (or scammer, depending on who you asked). However, since late 2023 his tone changed as legal troubles mounted. Heart became less visible online. By the time the SEC lawsuit hit, he was reportedly difficult to reach (the SEC even struggled to serve him papers in Finland) bitget.com. In late 2024, after Finnish authorities brought charges, Heart all but disappeared. There have been no recent public addresses or interviews from him. Media seeking comment have only gotten statements via his lawyers or spokespersons. For instance, after the SEC case dismissal, a spokesperson (not Heart himself) celebrated the ruling reuters.com. Heart did not do a victory lap livestream, likely because he is still constrained by the looming Europol warrant.
Some in the community have speculated on his silence – ranging from "he's keeping low to avoid arrest" to conspiracy theories that he was secretly detained. What's clear is that Richard Heart's once ubiquitous social media presence is now a void. The HEX and PulseChain communities communicate mostly amongst themselves, without their founder's direct input in recent months. In essence, the charismatic frontman has gone radio silent, leaving followers to parse legal documents and rumors. This stark change – from outrageously public to practically underground – is a direct consequence of the legal pressures on Heart. As of April 2025, he has not appeared in any new videos, conferences, or Twitter spaces, and he offers no public responses to the allegations beyond the legal defenses mounted in court. It remains to be seen if he will re-emerge (perhaps if he resolves his international issues) or if his era of public flamboyance is permanently over.
Government Efforts to Suppress Crypto and AI Technologies
Around the world, various governments have taken steps – some overt, some subtle – that suppress or constrain cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. These efforts often stem from regulatory concerns, but they raise serious questions about innovation and individual freedoms. Below we examine known initiatives and tactics:
"Operation Choke Point 2.0" – Financial Chokepoints for Crypto: In the United States, crypto advocates allege there has been a coordinated regulatory pressure campaign dubbed Operation Choke Point 2.0. This references the original 2013–2014 Operation Choke Point, where U.S. regulators pressured banks to cut off services to certain legally operating industries (like gun stores or payday lenders) deemed high-risk. Similarly, Choke Point 2.0 refers to "government efforts to choke off cryptocurrency-related businesses" from banking access cato.org. Under the Biden administration (2021–2023), multiple agencies took actions consistent with this: The White House discouraged banks from holding crypto or servicing crypto clients; the Federal Reserve denied crypto-focused banks (like Custodia) from obtaining Fed accounts; and bank regulators issued policy guidances that effectively made it difficult for banks to handle crypto funds cato.org. In one example, the Fed in Sept 2023 issued a cease-and-desist order to a Texas bank over "deficiencies" in its dealings with crypto clients – sending a clear signal to sever those ties cato.org cato.org.
Additionally, the Treasury Department floated a proposal to tax crypto mining electricity usage by 30%, which industry proponents saw as an attempt to drive miners out through economic means cato.org. The cumulative effect of these moves has been a chilling of U.S. crypto-business banking relationships: by 2024, several crypto-friendly banks (Silvergate, Signature) collapsed or pivoted away, and exchanges found it harder to maintain USD payment rails. Lawmakers have taken notice – by early 2025, members of Congress were holding hearings and vowing to "end the current crackdown" if given the chance cato.org ccn.com. In short, governments (especially the U.S.) have used regulatory chokepoints – banking regulation, taxes, and aggressive enforcement actions (SEC lawsuits against numerous crypto firms) – to indirectly suppress the crypto industry's growth.
Legal Bans and Restrictions: Some countries have opted for outright legal bans on aspects of crypto. For instance, China famously banned cryptocurrency exchanges and ICOs in 2017, then banned crypto mining in 2021, and even outlawed all crypto transactions in 2021-2022. This effectively drove the industry underground or offshore in China. India considered (though not implemented) a complete ban on crypto at times, and imposed heavy taxes that crippled trading volumes. Nigeria restricted banks from servicing crypto exchanges. These measures are often justified by citing fraud prevention, capital control, or environmental reasons (in the case of mining). On the AI front, we saw a notable example in Italy: in March 2023, Italy's data protection regulator banned ChatGPT temporarily over privacy concerns cnbc.com. This made Italy the first Western country to block a mainstream AI service, albeit the ban was lifted after OpenAI implemented age checks and privacy disclosures forbes.com. Such actions illustrate governments using legal authority to halt deployment of technologies they deem risky or non-compliant with regulations (privacy laws for AI, securities/capital flight laws for crypto).
Technical and Censorship Tactics: Another avenue of suppression is technical censorship. For crypto, this could mean sanctioning specific blockchain addresses or protocols. A prominent example is the U.S. Treasury's 2022 sanction of Tornado Cash (an Ethereum smart contract for privacy mixing). This was effectively the first instance of sanctioning open-source code, and it had a chilling effect on developers working on privacy tools. Moreover, internet censorship can come into play: countries with firewall controls (like China) can block access to crypto exchanges or even blockchain nodes. In extreme scenarios, regimes could attempt to block the network traffic of certain crypto protocols or AI services. There are also softer technical pressures, like heavy compliance requirements that only large firms can meet, thereby squeezing out smaller, decentralized projects. For AI, technical suppression might involve requiring AI models to implement government-mandated filters (e.g., the EU's upcoming AI Act contemplates requiring large models to not generate disallowed content, effectively a form of built-in censorship). Export controls on hardware are another tactic: the U.S. government has restricted export of high-end AI training chips (GPUs) to certain countries (notably China) to slow their AI advancement – a geopolitical suppression of AI capability.
Economic Disincentives: Beyond direct bans, authorities use economic policy to suppress or steer these technologies. For crypto: high taxation (India's 30% tax on crypto gains + 1% transaction tax has decimated local trading volumes), denial of tax deductions for crypto losses, or unfavorable accounting rules all serve to make crypto less attractive. For AI: governments might limit funding for specific AI research deemed dangerous or, conversely, heavily fund alternative approaches that align with government values (indirectly sidelining independent AI). Additionally, the specter of a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) is sometimes seen as a tool to crowd out decentralized crypto – if governments issue their own digital money with full control, they may simultaneously clamp down on permissionless cryptos to ensure the CBDC is dominant.
Known Initiatives: One widely discussed U.S. initiative in this vein is Operation Choke Point 2.0 mentioned above – not an official program per se, but a descriptive term for combined actions. In the AI realm, we have proposals like a pause on advanced AI training (the 2023 open letter calling for a moratorium on training systems more powerful than GPT-4). While not a government effort, it spurred discussion of whether governments should step in to "pause" AI development for safety. Another example is the European Union's AI Act (expected to pass in 2024/2025), which will impose stringent requirements on AI systems (especially "high-risk" ones). Some fear it could effectively ban certain open-source AI models in Europe because the compliance burden is too high, thereby favoring only big, heavily regulated players.
Implications for Freedom and Innovation: These suppression efforts carry significant implications. On the one hand, consumer protection and security are legitimate goals – many of these actions arose from rampant crypto fraud (as seen in 2022's collapses) or fears of AI misinformation. However, the costs to individual freedom and innovation are notable. Cutting off banking to crypto companies without clear rules undermines the rule of law and forces innovators overseas or into underground channels. Heavy-handed bans drive activity into gray markets rather than eliminating it. For example, after China's crypto bans, crypto trading and mining did not vanish – they just moved to friendlier jurisdictions or became peer-to-peer. This often reduces transparency and oversight, the opposite of regulators' intent. In democratic societies, such measures raise alarms about financial freedom: the right to transact and use alternative currencies. If a government can unilaterally freeze out an entire technology (like privacy coins or AI chatbots), it centralizes power over technology in a way that may stifle progress.
In AI, suppressive policies could mean local talent leaves for places where they can research freely. A balance is needed: poorly crafted regulation might accidentally criminalize beneficial innovation or entrench big incumbents (who can afford compliance) while crushing open, hobbyist-driven progress. Additionally, the "us vs. them" mentality (tech communities feeling persecuted by authorities) can increase mistrust. Some crypto proponents view Choke Point 2.0 as a conspiratorial attack on freedom cato.org cato.org, which fuels further antagonism toward government oversight. Similarly, aggressive moves against AI could push developers to open-source, uncontrolled releases as a form of resistance.
Ultimately, while reasonable regulation is necessary in both crypto and AI, efforts perceived as outright suppression can backfire. They risk driving innovation to more permissive jurisdictions (we see crypto hubs emerging in places like Dubai or Singapore), potentially ceding leadership in transformative tech to those jurisdictions. They also set precedents about governmental control: e.g., if code (speech) can be banned (like Tornado Cash), what does that mean for digital free expression? The implication is that individual freedom – to use decentralized tech or to develop AI models – can be significantly curtailed by state action, raising ethical and legal debates that are still ongoing. Many in the industry advocate for clearer rules of the road instead of bans or chokepoints, arguing that innovation within a regulated framework is better than innovation fleeing regulation entirely. The coming years will likely see a tug-of-war between regulatory impulses and the open ethos that has driven both the crypto and open-AI movements.
Richard Heart vs. Other Controversial Crypto Figures
Richard Heart's trajectory and public image invite comparisons with other notorious crypto personalities, such as Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) of FTX fame and Do Kwon of Terra/Luna. All three garnered intense followings and later faced serious allegations. Here we compare their public perception, legal outcomes, and the nature of accusations versus the technology they created:
Public Perception:
• Richard Heart: Seen as a charismatic but polarizing showman. Among his followers ("Hexicans"), Heart is revered – they credit him with creating products that made many of them wealthy (on paper, at least) and see him as a genius who outsmarts mainstream critics. In fact, in the HEX community, Heart has been described in near-deified terms; a documentary film about HEX noted that some followers literally refer to him as "God," treating his pronouncements as gospel filmthreat.com filmthreat.com. He cultivated this with an outrageous persona: draped in luxury (Gucci tracksuits, diamonds), boasting of $1,000,000 watches, etc., which he framed as proof of success. To believers, Heart's flamboyance and confidence reinforced that he knows what he's doing. However, outside that circle, Richard Heart has long been accused of running a scam. Many in the broader crypto community viewed HEX as a classic Ponzi-type scheme and Heart as a "spam king" (a reference to his early 2000s conviction for email spam) and a "scammer" cointelligence.com. His aggressive dismissal of critics and cult-like following made him an almost caricature villain to crypto skeptics. Thus, public perception bifurcates: adored by his loyal investors, derided as a scam artist by others. This dichotomy persists, though recent legal issues have certainly emboldened his detractors and silenced some fans.
• Sam Bankman-Fried: SBF had a very different public persona. Pre-FTX collapse, he was hailed as a wunderkind of crypto – often featured on magazine covers as the "white knight" who bailed out struggling crypto firms in 2022. He cultivated an image of effective altruism (talking about earning to give) and was known for a humble aesthetic (shorts, t-shirt, messy hair). However, after FTX's November 2022 implosion revealed a multibillion-dollar fraud (customer funds misused, etc.), SBF's image flipped virtually overnight. He is now widely seen as one of the biggest fraudsters in crypto history, frequently compared to Bernie Madoff. Public sentiment toward SBF is overwhelmingly negative across the board – even former admirers feel betrayed. Unlike Heart, SBF doesn't have a grassroots community defending him; most of his support was institutional or media-driven, which evaporated once evidence of wrongdoing came out. In summary, SBF went from media darling to pariah. Where Heart's controversy was always more niche (within crypto forums), SBF's downfall was mainstream news, making him arguably even more infamous globally.
• Do Kwon: Do Kwon, the South Korean co-founder of Terraform Labs (which created the TerraUSD stablecoin and Luna token), had a mixed reputation even before his project's failure. He was known to be brash and cocky on Twitter, often taunting critics (he infamously told a critic, "I don't debate the poor"). Among Terra/Luna investors, he was initially respected as a visionary for building an algorithmic stablecoin ecosystem that could rival traditional finance. However, in May 2022, TerraUSD and Luna collapsed catastrophically, wiping out ~$40 billion in value and causing immeasurable damage to investors. Public perception of Do Kwon turned very negative after this – many saw him as either negligent or outright fraudulent in promoting a system that was unsustainable. Like Heart, Kwon maintained a cadre of loyal supporters for a while (the "Lunatics"), but that largely dissipated when the money evaporated. Today he is widely viewed as irresponsible at best, and a con man at worst. That said, Kwon's profile among the general public is lower than SBF's; he's infamous in crypto circles, but perhaps less of a household name globally.
Legal Outcomes:
• Richard Heart: As detailed above, he has not (to date) been convicted of any crime related to HEX/Pulse. The SEC case was dismissed on a technicality reuters.com reuters.com, and while he faces charges in Finland, those are pending with him as a fugitive. So, in terms of legal outcome, Heart is in limbo – he hasn't been cleared, but he hasn't been formally punished (yet). However, the mere fact he's on wanted lists severely damages his credibility. If arrested and tried in Finland, he could face severe consequences (tax fraud involving hundreds of millions is likely to carry a lengthy prison term if convicted, plus the assault charge). As of early 2025, though, Heart is not behind bars and no court has adjudicated the fraud allegations about HEX/Pulse.
• Sam Bankman-Fried: SBF's situation is far more advanced legally. He was arrested in December 2022 in the Bahamas and extradited to the U.S. to face charges of fraud, conspiracy, money laundering, and more. In late 2023, after a high-profile trial, SBF was convicted on multiple counts of fraud related to FTX and its sister hedge fund Alameda Research. Virtually all his inner circle (FTX executives) pleaded guilty and testified against him. He awaits sentencing (likely facing decades in federal prison). Unlike Heart, who wriggled away from the SEC, SBF fell straight into the DOJ's net. By April 2025, it's expected SBF will have been sentenced (potentially for over 100 years, though he's a young first-time offender so likely less). Thus, SBF stands as a cautionary tale with a decisive legal ending: guilty on all counts, awaiting punishment.
• Do Kwon: Do Kwon went on the run after Terra's collapse, hopping between countries. He was finally arrested in Montenegro in March 2023, caught using a fake passport. Both the United States and South Korea quickly sought his extradition. After some legal wrangling, Montenegro reportedly approved Do Kwon's extradition to the U.S. to face charges justice.gov bloomberg.com (fraud charges were filed in the U.S., and South Korea has its own warrant out as well). As of 2025, Kwon is either in transit to the U.S. or already in U.S. custody (appeals were delaying it, but the trend is toward extradition) ccn.com bloomberg.com. He has not yet stood trial, but he will likely be tried for securities fraud, wire fraud, etc., in connection with Terra's collapse. So Kwon's legal outcome is headed in the same direction as SBF's: formal prosecution. It's worth noting South Korean authorities also indicted him and even arrested some of his colleagues – so he is in deep legal peril on multiple fronts. In short, Do Kwon is behind bars (detained) and awaiting trial, with a high probability of conviction given the evidence of knowingly misleading investors about the stability of UST.
Accusations vs. Technology /// It's illuminating to compare the nature of what each built and what they're accused of:
Richard Heart created: HEX (a high-yield token that many call a glorified Ponzi) and PulseChain/PulseX (an Ethereum clone and DEX). Accusations: That he ran unregistered securities offerings and misled investors with false promises, and that he siphoned off funds for personal luxury reuters.com reuters.com. Notably, the SEC also hinted at HEX/Pulse being essentially a fraudulent scheme ("built to enrich himself," etc.), though they didn't get to prove it in court. So Heart's situation revolves around allegations of deception and illegal fundraising. The technology he created isn't novel (an ERC20 token, a forked chain), and indeed critics argue the tech was just a facade: "HEX has no real utility… it only benefits Richard Heart and his affiliates" coinmarketcap.com. Heart's defense is that everything was transparent and that he never guaranteed profit (hence "sacrifice"). Technologically, HEX and PulseChain do function as software, but the accusation is that their primary purpose was to enrich Heart at the expense of latecomers – i.e., they're self-serving financial vehicles more than genuine innovations.
Sam Bankman-Fried created FTX (a large centralized crypto exchange) and was involved with Alameda (a trading firm). Accusations: He stole billions of dollars of customer funds from FTX by lending them to Alameda, and lied to investors and customers about it. This is straight-up fraud and embezzlement – misusing other people's money entrusted to his platform. The technology (FTX exchange) wasn't problematic per se; it was the management and misuse of funds that was criminal. In other words, SBF's case is a classic financial fraud akin to MF Global or even Enron: using customer assets improperly, falsifying balance sheets, etc. The interesting contrast is that SBF's public-facing technology/business (a crypto exchange) was legitimate and even useful, but behind the scenes, he broke the law. With Richard Heart, the question is whether the products themselves were inherently deceptive (a kind of built-in pyramid scheme). SBF didn't create a Ponzi token; he just allegedly committed fraud within a normal business. This distinction sometimes leads Heart's supporters to argue, "HEX never stole anyone's money; if you held to term, you got what was promised (HEX payouts)." Technically true, but the counter is that the value of those payouts depends on new money coming in – a Ponzi-like dynamic. In summary, SBF's technology was mainstream (an exchange), and his crimes were in governance and honesty; Heart's technology itself is often alleged to be a scam mechanism, though he contends it's just a clever decentralized bank.
Do Kwon created: Terraform's ecosystem, mainly the TerraUSD (UST) algorithmic stablecoin and the Luna token, plus related DeFi protocols. Accusations: Primarily, he deceived investors about the stability and usage of UST. For instance, U.S. charges claim he made false statements about UST being backed by reserves and its adoption by Korean merchants. There are also allegations of money laundering and hiding proceeds. Like SBF, Do Kwon's tech existed and worked (until it didn't) – UST and Luna were widely used, but the design was fatally flawed (a death spiral mechanism). One could argue Kwon's sin was hubris and denial: he kept insisting UST would never break its $1 peg, even as critics warned of its fragility. When it did collapse, it became evident that the whole thing had aspects of a pyramid – the Anchor protocol was paying 20% yields on UST to attract deposits, funded by venture money, and the inflation of Luna, which was unsustainable. Do Kwon is thus accused of fraudulently promoting a scheme (Terra/Luna) under the guise of a tech breakthrough. This is somewhat analogous to Heart in that the promise of high returns was central and ultimately fueled by new funds. However, Kwon's project had more external complexity (it involved large institutional investors, and its collapse triggered broader market contagion). Heart's operations, by contrast, were more self-contained within his community.
Community and Cultural Impact: Each of these figures cultivated a community but with different tones. Heart's community (Hexicans) often exhibit cult-like devotion and aggressive defense of their leader – a phenomenon we explore more below. SBF's "community" was more general crypto users and big investors; he didn't have a fan club, and post-collapse there's essentially no one defending him except maybe his parents and lawyers. Do Kwon's community (Lunatics) was fervent during the bubble, but many were financially devastated by the collapse and turned against him (some even protested in front of his house in Seoul). A few still support him or the idea of Terra 2.0, but for the most part, the community disintegrated. In a way, Richard Heart's following has been more resilient despite adversity – possibly because HEX's stake mechanism incentivizes sticking around (sunk cost) and because Heart's persona intentionally fostered a cult-like atmosphere from the start.
In summary, Richard Heart, Sam Bankman-Fried, and Do Kwon each became infamous, but via somewhat different paths. Heart operated on the fringes for years, always dogged by scam allegations, and is now literally a fugitive amid multi-jurisdictional legal issues (though not yet convicted of anything) protos.com bitget.com. SBF was a mainstream figure who fell from grace into convicted criminal status in a very short span, reinforcing the narrative of fraud in centralized entities. Do Kwon was a crypto innovator whose bold idea failed spectacularly, leading to fraud charges and his arrest, underscoring the thin line between innovation and deception in unregulated spaces. All three cases highlight how charismatic leaders can inspire intense belief – until reality catches up, in the form of financial collapse or legal action.
Community Testimonials: Praise and Criticism of HEX/PulseChain and Richard Heart
The community around HEX and PulseChain is highly divided. On one side, ardent supporters (often called "Hexicans") testify to the life-changing gains and positive experiences they've had. On the other, skeptics and former investors voice warnings, calling the community a cult and the project a scam. Let's explore representative sentiments:
Positive Testimonials (Hexican Perspective): HEX supporters are notoriously enthusiastic and defensive. They often refer to HEX as the best investment of their lives. Many proudly share stories of achieving financial freedom by staking HEX – treating it as a disciplined savings plan that paid off. A common refrain is that HEX's "delayed gratification" model taught them to think long-term and escape the get-rich-quick trading mentality. Richard Heart is lauded for "creating wealth for the common man" and for his educational streams. In the documentary The Highest of Stakes, HEX investors speak about Heart in reverent terms, even comparing him to a benevolent cult leader (meant positively). They express that Heart gave them hope and a vision beyond the 9-to-5 grind filmthreat.com filmthreat.com. Indeed, Heart's message that "everyone deserves to live life to the fullest, aside from the 9-to-5" resonates strongly with his community filmthreat.com. Followers credit HEX's high yields, enabling them to dream of early retirement, philanthropy, and other outcomes of sudden wealth. There is also a strong sense of camaraderie and identity – they call themselves Hexicans with pride, gather at meetups and online chats, and celebrate each other's staking milestones.
Perhaps the ultimate show of faith came during the PulseChain sacrifice: HEX holders voluntarily locked up or gave away over $11 billion worth of HEX in the sacrifices coinmarketcap.com – a move only true believers would make. This demonstrated extraordinary trust in Richard Heart's vision. Even when HEX's price plunged or funds were inaccessible, many Hexicans remained "fervent" and undeterred coinmarketcap.com. For example, when the SEC subpoenas became known in 2022 and some HEX funds got stuck during the PulseChain launch, one might expect panic – yet "that did not discourage fervent HEXicans" from continuing to believe and participate coinmarketcap.com. On social media, positive testimonials often take the form of people showing their staker class (some lock stakes for 5, 10, or even 15 years into the future, expressing confidence in HEX's longevity). They frequently thank Richard Heart for creating HEX, calling him a genius, a savior from scams (ironically), and even a philanthropist (citing that he led a donation drive to medical research via the sacrifice). In summary, the positive side testifies that HEX delivered on its promises to them: high returns, a supportive community, and an almost familial sense of belonging. They see critics as either jealous or uninformed.
Negative Testimonials (Critics and Ex-Investors): On the flip side, outside observers and some early participants paint a far more alarming picture. Detractors often call HEX a "brilliant scam" – brilliant in how cleverly it was engineered to create a cult-like following and lock people in medium.com. One Medium analysis by a blockchain observer bluntly stated: "HEX uses exploitative marketing, has a cult-like community, a self-obsessed, dismissive & rude founder, and no utility. Its only use is to print more of itself, inflating the supply. It has been abused by the founder to increase his own share… and is most likely under his control as well." medium.com. This encapsulates the core negative sentiment: that HEX is essentially a vanity scheme for Richard Heart, with a brainwashed community, no real product, and a fate that will ultimately harm the majority of investors. Many have pointed out the red flags: Richard Heart's past as an internet marketer with questionable ethics, the opaque "Origin Address" that amasses vast amounts of HEX, the over-the-top claims of 10,000x returns, and the aggressive online harassment of anyone who questions HEX. On forums like Reddit, users recount how any critical posts about HEX are swarmed by Hexicans attempting to discredit the author. The community's behavior is likened to that of an MLM (multilevel marketing) cult, where negative information is suppressed and only praise is echoed. "The toxic cult following of Richard Heart" has been cited as evidence that something is amiss reddit.com.
Importantly, some early HEX investors who later exited have spoken out. They describe a journey from initial excitement (lured by high APY) to growing doubt as they realized the only source of that yield was new money. One investor famously locked HEX for 3 years and later lamented losing money despite the interest – the fiat value of HEX had dropped so much that the "high yield" was illusory. Such stories illustrate the sunk cost trap: people held on, restaked, or sacrificed more HEX even as warning signs piled up because admitting the loss was too painful. Critics often admonish current Hexicans: "Take off the blinders. This is a house of cards." They argue that as soon as Richard Heart can no longer attract new participants (or if he's arrested), the scheme will collapse and most token value will evaporate. The community is sometimes referred to as "bagholders in denial." One colorful comment on Reddit said, "For those who haven't bought into the cult of personality, [Heart's antics are] just childish posturing." cointelligence.com. This highlights how outsiders see Hexicans' devotion to Heart – as bizarre hero worship of a narcissistic leader.
Even within the PulseChain community, there were cracks: the launch delays and lack of communication from Heart by 2022 led a few to publicly question, "Have we been duped? We sacrificed and now he's gone quiet." These doubters were often shouted down by others saying "trust Richard, he always delivers." But at least a few high-profile HEX community members did leave and aired grievances, often met with character attacks from the loyalists. The language of "scam" and "Ponzi" is liberally applied by crypto analysts: for instance, Cointelegraph and others have run pieces describing HEX as resembling a Ponzi scheme (old investors paid with inflation that comes from new investors' buy-in) coinmarketcap.com. Some have even bet large sums on HEX's failure – a notable crypto personality took a $10 million bet against HEX's long-term success, underscoring how strongly skeptics feel it will go to zero (this became a publicized "HEX wager" debate).
In essence, positive testimonials emphasize personal success, community strength, and faith in Richard Heart's vision. Negative testimonials emphasize cultism, deception, and financial danger. The rift between the two is stark. It's common to see Twitter threads where Hexicans and critics shout past each other, one side insisting, "It's not a scam, you just don't understand the genius of HEX's design!" and the other retorting, "You're in a cult and Richard is fleecing you!". This dynamic has only intensified now that Heart is facing legal issues. Some loyalists call it a government conspiracy to smear a successful project, while critics feel vindicated that law enforcement is finally closing in.
One notable community artifact is the documentary "The Highest of Stakes" (2023), which was funded by HEX proponents to tell their story. Interestingly, even that film ended up revealing some negatives: it showed the cult-like devotion of Hexicans and even included skeptics grilling Heart on camera filmthreat.com filmthreat.com, to which he basically doubled down rather than denying the Ponzi-like aspects. Reviews of the film from neutral parties remarked that "Hex followers have often been described as a cult," and indeed, the film's portrayal (with almost religious adulation of Heart) supports that view imdb.com filmthreat.com. So, the community testimonials, both pro and con, feed into the broader observation that HEX/PulseChain is not just a cryptocurrency, but a social phenomenon with cultish elements.
Cult-Like Behavior in Financial Ecosystems
The case of HEX and Richard Heart is frequently cited as an example of cult-like behavior in a financial context. But it is not unique – throughout financial history and in modern crypto communities, we see patterns of charismatic leaders, ritualistic language, and psychological biases that mirror cult dynamics. Here we explore these aspects with relevant analysis:
Charismatic Leaders & Psychology: Many investment or trading communities form around a charismatic figurehead who promises outsized rewards or a revolutionary vision. Psychologically, such leaders leverage what cult expert Steven Hassan calls "unwavering belief in a utopian vision" psychologytoday.com. In crypto, leaders like Richard Heart tap into the idea that their project will transform lives (financial freedom, breaking from traditional finance) – essentially a utopia of wealth. Followers often develop an "evangelical urge to convert others" to the cause psychologytoday.com, similar to cult members recruiting new adherents. The leader's charisma helps suspend disbelief: people rationalize red flags because they are drawn to the leader's confidence and narrative. Charismatic financial gurus create an us-vs-them mentality: their followers see skeptics as enemies or unenlightened. Indeed, in HEX's community, there was a strong distrust of outsiders – regulators, mainstream media, or anyone not "in the Hex family" were dismissed as having agendas or just not understanding psychologytoday.com. This mirrors known cult behavior where dissenting information is vilified and only the leader's truth is accepted.
Charismatic leaders also often present themselves as uniquely qualified saviors. Richard Heart incessantly reminded followers of his genius (pointing to his correct Bitcoin price calls, etc.) and positioned himself as the only one you can trust in a scam-filled industry. This is akin to cult leaders who claim exclusive insight. Psychologically, followers project authority onto the leader, sometimes viewing them as superhuman. In HEX's case, some literally likened Heart to a deity figure filmthreat.com, illustrating the extreme of this phenomenon. Emotional manipulation is key: Heart appeals to followers' desires (greed, yes, but also hope for a better future and belonging). He also wasn't above fear tactics, often warning his audience that if they sold HEX or listened to critics, they'd miss out on generational wealth or fall back into the rat race. This cocktail of hope and fear keeps members dependent on the leader's guidance.
Experts note that in high-control groups, leaders often exhibit narcissistic or sociopathic traits – they can lie or change narratives without shame, and their self-obsession is reframed as strength by followers medium.com. The HEX saga displays this: Heart's extravagant self-promotion (himself on a throne of Louis Vuitton, etc.) was seen by outsiders as narcissism, but many Hexicans took it as a sign of success and leadership. The psychology of belief in such leaders can be self-reinforcing: when small promises do come true (e.g., early HEX stakes paid well, early adopters saw gains), it cements trust in the leader and makes followers more willing to discount future warnings.
Ritual Language and Symbols: Cult-like financial communities often develop their own lingo and rituals that reinforce group identity. In HEX/Pulse, terms like "sacrifice phase" are a prime example. The very choice of the word "sacrifice" (instead of ICO or contribution) had a quasi-religious connotation – it framed the act of giving up one's crypto as something noble or devotional, rather than a mere investment. This ritualistic language served two purposes: Legally, it was supposed to distance the event from financial expectations, but socially, it galvanized the community around a shared "sacrifice for a cause." It's reminiscent of cults asking members to make sacrifices as a test of loyalty. Indeed, followers acquiesced readily when Heart asked them to sacrifice their money for PulseChain filmthreat.com. The film review of Highest of Stakes notes: "Their unwavering devotion is unmistakable… He asks them to invest or 'sacrifice' their money… and they acquiesce." filmthreat.com. The word sacrifice became a ritual invocation within the community – something outsiders found absurd, but insiders found meaning in ("we sacrificed for freedom/for the new network").
Other ritualistic aspects in HEX include the notion of "T-shares" and elaborate staking ladders – Hexicans often perform the ritual of staking on significant days, and talk about 5555-day stakes (the maximum 15.2-year stake, which has become a symbolic number in the community). There's almost a pilgrimage-like mindset where staking long is seen as virtuous ("staking Quattro Cinco" for 5555 days is celebrated). They also refer to "rugular" time vs. "Hex time", joking about how the stakes make them perceive time differently – a bit of internal jargon that separates them from others. Memes and inside jokes (like "HEX flex," where they show off interest earned) further the sense of a subculture. These rituals and language create a shared identity that is hard to let go of – it's not just an investment; it's who they are.
Outside HEX, we see similar patterns: for example, Bitcoin maximalists have their own lingo (calling fiat money "dirty fiat" or rallying cries like "HODL," which has become almost mantra-like). In stock market cults (e.g., meme stocks like GameStop), terms like "diamond hands" and "ape strong together" served to bond the community and encourage holding through pain. Ritual language reduces complex ideas to emotive slogans, which can discourage critical analysis. If you've "sacrificed for PulseChain freedom," it sounds grander than "participated in a risky token launch." This has a powerful effect on commitment levels.
Cognitive Dissonance and Sunk Cost Effects: Perhaps the most defining psychological feature of financial cults is how they handle cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance occurs when reality contradicts a believer's expectations or beliefs – it creates mental discomfort, which people subconsciously seek to eliminate. In cult scenarios, members often resolve dissonance by doubling down on the cult beliefs rather than admitting error. Classic studies (e.g., When Prophecy Fails) showed that doomsday cult members became even more devout when the prophecy didn't happen, rationalizing it in various ways. We see analogous behavior in investment communities: when an outcome is bad (price crashes, promises unfulfilled), rather than accept they were wrong, true believers may concoct explanations or shift goalposts to maintain faith. This is textbook cognitive dissonance reduction.
In HEX's case, when evidence mounted of problematic aspects (e.g., HEX's price dropped over 90% from its high, or Richard Heart disappeared amid legal troubles), many Hexicans did not waver. Instead, they might say, "This is a temporary setback" or "The SEC news is FUD; it means HEX is important enough to target, which is bullish!" – essentially reinterpreting negative events in a positive or at least not disconfirming light. Some have likely convinced themselves that even if Heart is arrested, HEX will continue because of its "immutable code" – an adaptation to protect their belief in HEX's longevity. Sunk cost fallacy plays a big role here: people who have a lot invested (money, and time/identity) find it extremely hard to walk away. The sunk cost fallacy is the tendency to continue supporting a venture just because you've already invested heavily, even when logic suggests cutting losses investopedia.com investopedia.com. It's driven by the aversion to feeling that one's prior investment was wasted investopedia.com investopedia.com. In HEX, an investor with, say, a 10-year stake is literally locked in – if they admit it's a scam in year 2, they face the pain of having "wasted" those two years and potentially paying a huge penalty to exit. Psychology tells us many will instead choose to believe more fervently that it will work out to avoid that pain. As Investopedia notes, "the sunk cost fallacy causes people to stick with a failing decision just because they've already invested in it," driven by the need to justify the decision and avoid feeling the loss investopedia.com investopedia.com. HEX's design (long lockups) amplifies this effect deliberately.
We also see cognitive dissonance in how HEX followers handle criticisms: if an external analyst shows math that HEX payouts are just inflation recycling current value, a Hexican might respond with complex counter-math or simply dismiss the source as biased. They might also shift to attacking other projects ("All of crypto is Ponzi, HEX is actually better because it's honest about inflation!"). This whataboutism and deflection helps them avoid direct confrontation with the possibility that their belief is wrong.
Another aspect is echo chambers: as noted in Psychology Today, cult-like crypto communities "dwell in echo chambers that repel and actively vilify dissent and skepticism, creating a feedback loop of reinforcement without critical examination." psychologytoday.com psychologytoday.com. In HEX forums, dissenting views are often banned or chased out, leaving only reinforcing voices. This means a Hexican who is privately doubtful may see a wall of others doubling down, which reassures them and eases their internal conflict ("everyone else still believes, so I will too"). Social proof thus intertwines with cognitive dissonance – each person's refusal to confront disconfirming evidence buttresses others doing the same. Over time, a group can become deeply entrenched in a false narrative, even as outsiders look on with astonishment.
Importantly, these cult-like tendencies are not limited to "scam" projects. Even fundamentally sound investments can inspire irrational loyalty (think of die-hard Tesla or Apple stock fans, sometimes called cults on Wall Street). The difference is often in degree and consequence. In a benign scenario, a strong community can weather volatility (e.g., Bitcoin HODLers who held through multiple crashes arguably benefited in the long run by not panic selling – a case where steadfast belief paid off). But in a malicious scenario, cult-like behavior leads people to ruin as they go down with the ship, all the while convinced of eventual salvation.
Expert Analysis: Cult experts and psychologists see clear parallels. Steven Hassan (cult researcher) points out that "cryptocurrencies, particularly their more fervent advocates, occasionally exhibit behaviors reminiscent of cultish devotion" psychologytoday.com. He cites exactly the elements we discussed: unwavering belief in the vision, evangelism, us-vs-them mindset, and echo chambers. He also wisely notes that not all crypto participants are cultists – many are pragmatic and not emotionally attached psychologytoday.com. So we mustn't paint with too broad a brush. But the potential for manipulation in such groups is high, and thus vigilance is needed psychologytoday.com. Hassan suggests education, critical thinking, and diverse information sources as antidotes psychologytoday.com – similar to how one might deprogram a cult member by gently exposing them to outside perspectives.
Additionally, financial regulators have started to recognize that fraudulent investment schemes often have cult-like support. This makes enforcement tricky – by the time authorities step in, a lot of victims don't even see themselves as victims (they may even defend the perpetrator). The HEX saga is illustrative: even as the SEC alleged Heart defrauded investors, many of those very investors loudly defended him and lambasted the SEC. This dynamic is reminiscent of multilevel marketing companies where members fight regulators to keep their "business" alive, even if it's exploiting them.
Cognitive Dissonance & Sunk Cost in Action: A real-world example outside crypto is Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme – some longtime clients, even after it was exposed, couldn't believe he betrayed them, with a few insisting there must be some mistake (classic dissonance). In crypto, after Terra/Luna's collapse, some community members still bought into Terra 2.0 or defended Do Kwon, rationalizing the failure as a one-time fluke. It shows how powerful the need to be right (or not feel foolish) is in human psychology.
Financial ecosystems can indeed foster cult-like behavior under certain conditions: a charismatic leader figure, a compelling narrative or vision of utopia, group isolation from critics, use of loaded language and rituals, and mechanisms that encourage commitment escalation (like locking funds, or just social pressure to "HODL"). The HEX and PulseChain community, under Richard Heart, exemplifies many of these traits – perhaps to an extreme degree. Understanding these psychological and sociological patterns helps explain why intelligent people can fall prey to obvious scams or cling to investments against all evidence. It underscores the importance of critical thinking, diversification (of information and assets), and perhaps a healthy dose of skepticism whenever an investment starts to look less like a financial instrument and more like a "way of life."
Sources:
