Skip to content

Robinhood Chain·Scanned 06 Nov 2026, 10:18 UTC

MINDS

0xe9056598e2f1e9bbc2432100f12fcdfc9ab78a0a

Verdict

High risk

49/100 safety

Unverified Pons template token with no mint or blacklist functions seen; sells work at 2.5% fee; 23 holders.

MINDS is a fresh Pons launchpad token whose contract and bonding curve are not source-verified, so hidden behaviour cannot be fully ruled out. Buying and selling currently work with a fixed fee of about 2.5%. Snipers and the deployer hold nothing. The main risks are tiny liquidity (about $1.5k) with only 23 holders, one linked wallet pair holding 5.7%, and Pons protocol-level owner powers over fee routing and stuck graduation funds. The project's X account is two days old, and the linked website is an AI agency page with placeholder content that never mentions the token.

Score breakdown

  • Contract
    55
  • Token
    55
  • Social / X
    30
  • Website
    35

Higher is safer · 0 = worst · 100 = best

Yes
2.5%
Unknown
0% / 0%

NarrativeCooling

Trend scout · Grok 4.7 · X search via twitterapi.io

28/100 heat

A separate score, not part of the safety score: hype never makes a contract safer.

  • enterprise AI services
  • AI agents
  • private local LLMs
Fit
Core: the product is this narrative
Buzz
Mixed12 posts from 10 accounts; 3 of 12 posts are near-copies (largest group 3); 0% of authors have accounts under 30 days old; 3 accounts wrote 42% of the posts; 7 post(s) with engagement that does not fit the follower count.
Momentum
Project mentions rose from about 1 to roughly 14 week over week; broader AI-agent talk was flat to lower (~3833 vs ~6738), and private-local-LLM talk was only about 22 posts.

Deployed Minds sells custom enterprise AI: agentic workflows, private local LLMs, and legacy integrations. Its own X account has 6 followers. Recent $MINDS mentions jumped from almost none to a small rough count, but many posts are zero-engagement replies or refer to other Minds tokens, not this Robinhood Chain coin.

Posts and accounts (5 posts)
  • @saixbt888 · 06 Nov 2026, 10:03 UTC

    “$MINDS at $6.8K mcap and nobody's talking about it yet. custom AI products shipped in weeks”

  • @MaxelRowan · 06 Nov 2026, 10:07 UTC

    “@deployedminds @deployedminds $Minds could be next 100x !”

  • @Sc4lp3rSOL · 04 Nov 2026, 10:36 UTC

    “someone just aped 78 SOL (~$7,332) into $MINDS”

  • @Elminselimov5 · 26 Oct 2026, 14:03 UTC

    “Dikkat edin büyük isimler yavaş yavaş @hellominds_ dan konuşmaya başlıyor”

  • @3BBlB · 06 Nov 2026, 10:11 UTC

    “@deployedminds I have a plan to bring more eyes to this project.”

Who pushes it

Posts, last 7 days vs the 7 before

  • project: ~14 vs 1 (up 14.0× (rough))
  • AI agents: ~3833 vs 6738 (flat (rough))
  • private local LLMs: ~22 (no comparison)

~ = estimated from one page of results

Measured in code from 12 posts by 10 accounts: 0% fresh accounts (< 30 days), 25% near-copies, top 3 accounts wrote 42%.

X posts searched from 2026-10-07 to 2026-11-07 (UTC). Post links come only from the X search results.

Key findings

  • MediumSource code is not verified
  • MediumPons factory owner holds permanent, non-renounceable admin powers
  • MediumOwner can send stuck graduation reserves to any address after 7 days
  • LowProtocol owner can redirect the creator fee after a 3-day notice
  • GoodBuys and sells both work on the curve at about 2.5% fee

What would change the verdict

  • Raises safety:Token and bonding curve source get verified and match the Pons template → contract score up
  • Raises safety:Curve graduates to Uniswap v4 with LP held by the Pons locker → token score up
  • Lowers safety:The two same-funder wallets holding 5.7% sell into the ~$1.5k curve liquidity → down
  • Lowers safety:Pons factory owner force-sweeps and rescues MINDS graduation reserves to its own address → down

Unlock PRO for this project

A one-time payment adds hourly re-checks for good, a 7-day watch, questions to the jury, the launch map and deeper social forensics.

Post on XView on explorer ↗

Findings

15 findings

Risks (9)

  • MediumSource code is not verifiedotherDeterministic

    The contract source is not published on the explorer, so nobody can read what it really does. The analysis relies on bytecode only.

    Evidence

    • on-chainexplorer: no verified source for 0xE9056598E2f1e9BBC2432100F12FCDfC9Ab78A0a
    • on-chaincontract.verified = false; sourceFileCount = 0
    • on-chainCreated by factory contract 0x3711ceA4feaDE896C913C68F01Eda97Cb06D1A42; tx sender 0x383c88Bd3E4161693bB8e59B65d4F0E2987d2C52
    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L1222-L1226
      Show source
      function rescueCurveFees(address token) external onlyOwner nonReentrant {
              LaunchedToken storage launch = _launchedTokens[token];
              if (!launch.exists) revert TokenNotFound();
              PonsV2BondingCurve(payable(launch.curve)).rescueFees();
          }

    Confirmed by: facts, claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • MediumPons factory owner holds permanent, non-renounceable admin powersownershipAI

    The Pons V2 factory that created MINDS is owned by 0x263e…19Dd, and renounceOwnership() always reverts. This owner can change launch settings for future launches. For existing launches like MINDS it can: propose a new creator-fee recipient (3-day timelock), force a curve sweep when graduation cannot be seeded, call rescueCurveFees on the curve, and release a stuck graduation's reserves to any address after a 7-day delay. Holders have to trust the Pons protocol owner. This is a launchpad-wide power, not something the MINDS creator controls.

    Evidence

    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L624-L632
      Show source
      /**
           * @notice Permanently disabled. An ownerless factory could never approve
           * a pairToken, adjust fee ceilings, or recover a creator's fee recipient,
           * and every launch already live would keep depending on those powers.
           * Ownership can still be handed to a new owner via the two-step transfer.
           */
          function renounceOwnership() public pure override {
              revert OwnershipCannotBeRenounced();
          }
    • on-chainlaunchpad-factory owner = 0x263ed295dAFaE1d9AAdD6E56c4B6F9f38eE019Dd

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, gpt-5.6-sol

  • MediumOwner can send stuck graduation reserves to any address after 7 daysliquidityAI

    If MINDS reaches its graduation threshold but the Uniswap v4 pool cannot be seeded, the curve's quote reserves and tokens sit in the factory in the 'Swept' state. After GRADUATION_RESCUE_DELAY (7 days), the factory owner can call rescueSweptGraduation and send the whole reserve to one recipient of its choice, 'for off-chain distribution'. Limits: the owner can only force-sweep a launch that genuinely cannot be seeded (forceSweptGraduation reverts with GraduationStillViable otherwise). During the 7-day wait, anyone can call createGraduatedPool, which permanently ends this path. A healthy launch is not exposed, but in the failure case holders depend on the owner to return funds.

    Evidence

    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L1254-L1285
      Show source
      function rescueSweptGraduation(address token, address recipient) external onlyOwner nonReentrant {
              LaunchedToken storage launch = _launchedTokens[token];
              if (!launch.exists) revert TokenNotFound();
              if (launch.phase != GraduationPhase.Swept) revert WrongGraduationPhase();
              if (recipient == address(0)) revert ZeroAddress();
      
              uint256 availableAt = launch.sweptAt + GRADUATION_RESCUE_DELAY;
              if (block.timestamp < availableAt) revert GraduationRescueTooEarly(availableAt);
      
              uint256 quoteAmount = launch.sweptQuote;
              uint256 tokenAmount = launch.sweptTokens;
              address pairToken = launch.pairToken;
      
              launch.sweptQuote = 0;
              launch.sweptTokens = 0;
    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L1109-L1123
      Show source
      function forceSweptGraduation(address token) external onlyOwner nonReentrant {
              LaunchedToken storage launch = _launchedTokens[token];
              if (!launch.exists) revert TokenNotFound();
              if (launch.phase != GraduationPhase.NotGraduated) revert WrongGraduationPhase();
              PonsV2BondingCurve curve = PonsV2BondingCurve(launch.curve);
              if (!curve.readyToGraduate()) {
                  revert PonsV2BondingCurve.NotReadyToGraduate();
              }
              if (_graduationSeedable(token, launch, curve.realQuoteReserve(), curve.tokenReserve())) {
                  revert GraduationStillViable();
              }
      
              _sweepCurve(token, launch, curve);
              emit LaunchForceSwept(token);
          }
    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L104
      Show source
      uint256 public constant GRADUATION_RESCUE_DELAY = 7 days;

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • LowProtocol owner can redirect the creator fee after a 3-day noticefeesAI

    The factory owner can propose a new creator-fee recipient for any launch. After a 3-day timelock, anyone can execute it within a 3-day window. The change also redirects vested buyback tokens through the buyback vault. This affects where the 1.5% creator tax goes, not holders' balances or their ability to sell.

    Evidence

    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L946-L957
      Show source
      function setCreatorFeeRecipient(address token, address newRecipient) external onlyOwner {
              LaunchedToken storage launch = _launchedTokens[token];
              if (!launch.exists) revert TokenNotFound();
              if (newRecipient == address(0)) revert ZeroAddress();
      
              uint256 effectiveAt = block.timestamp + CREATOR_FEE_RECIPIENT_TIMELOCK;
              uint256 expiresAt = effectiveAt + CREATOR_FEE_RECIPIENT_EXECUTION_WINDOW;
              pendingCreatorFeeRecipient[token] =
                  PendingCreatorFeeRecipient({newRecipient: newRecipient, effectiveAt: effectiveAt, expiresAt: expiresAt});
      
              emit CreatorFeeRecipientChangeProposed(token, launch.creatorFeeRecipient, newRecipient, effectiveAt, expiresAt);
          }
    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L988-L1006
      Show source
      function _setCreatorFeeRecipient(address token, LaunchedToken storage launch, address newRecipient) private {
              if (newRecipient == address(0)) revert ZeroAddress();
      
              address previousRecipient = launch.creatorFeeRecipient;
              launch.creatorFeeRecipient = newRecipient;
      
              if (launch.phase == GraduationPhase.PoolCreated) {
                  memeHook.setCreatorFeeRecipient(_poolIdFor(token, launch), newRecipient);
              } else {
                  PonsV2BondingCurve(launch.curve).setCreatorFeeRecipient(newRecipient);
              }
      
              // Keep the buyback vest's beneficiary aligned with the live creator
              // recipient so recovery and self-service transfers redirect vested
              // buyback tokens as well, not only immediate fee payouts.

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • LowLocker and buyback vault owner can switch their authorised factoryproxy-upgradeAI

    The LP locker and buyback vault are both owned by 0x263e…19Dd and expose setFactory(address). The factory address is what is allowed to lock positions, lock token supply and change buyback creator recipients. The locker and vault sources were omitted, so it is unverified whether a replacement factory could do more, such as unlocking graduated LP. MINDS has not graduated yet, so no LP is locked today.

    Evidence

    • on-chainLP-locker fn setFactory(address) [owner] @PonsV2LaunchLocker.sol:L60-L66
    • on-chainbuyback-vault fn setFactory(address) [owner] @PonsV2BuybackVault.sol:L98-L104

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7 · Disputed by: gpt-5.6-sol

  • LowTwo same-funder wallets hold 5.7% of supplyholdersAI

    Wallets 0x3d31…0bb8 and 0x30d8…a98e were funded by 0x5118…6f72. Together they hold 5.7005% of supply, likely one entity that could sell together. The token has only 23 holders, and the top 10 (excluding the curve) hold 24.03%.

    Evidence

    • on-chainclusters: funder 0x511808449be470efaf4131838b2d4998500a6f72, pctSupplyHeldNow 5.7005
    • on-chainholdersCount = 23; top10Pct = 24.0326

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • LowLinked website is an AI agency page that never mentions the tokenwebsiteAI

    The on-chain website, deployedminds.tech, is an enterprise AI software agency site with no wallet connection or mention of the token. The dApp tests failed only because there is no crypto functionality, which is not evidence of theft. The domain was created 2026-07-08, but the first Wayback snapshot is from the token's launch day, 2026-11-06. Whether the agency is actually behind the token is unverified.

    Evidence

    • forkdappTests: buy (open a position) — driver: fail
      Show source
      The site deployedminds.tech is an enterprise AI software development agency landing page, not a crypto dApp.
    • on-chainsite.domainCreatedAt = 2026-07-08T14:02:31.620Z; waybackFirstSeen = 2026-11-06T09:55:54Z
    • Show source
      Deployed Minds builds custom enterprise AI software — agentic workflows, private local LLMs, and legacy integrations.
    • Show source
      DEX PAID https://t.co/1a6k0Xw35L
    • Show source
      Burn Supply https://t.co/xjS1ccZjLI
    • on-chaindeployedAt=2026-11-06T09:52:21.000Z symbol=MINDS verified=false ownerRenounced=false
      Show source
      target 0xe9056598e2f1e9bbc2432100f12fcdfc9ab78a0a deployed 2026-11-06T09:52:21.000Z, contract unverified, owner not renounced

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • LowWebsite shows placeholder client logos and zeroed statswebsiteAI

    The site sells Deployed Minds as an established AI studio (40+ products shipped, 83% return clients, named testimonials and industry case studies). On the same page the trusted-by strip uses ACME CO and NORTHWIND — classic fictional placeholder companies — and the shipped-missions counters render as zeros (0×, ~0%, 0 week, 0+, 0 days, 0.0/5). Buyers cannot treat the track record as real. Named co-founders are first names only (Swayam, Janmejay), so the team is not actually identified.

    Evidence

    Confirmed by: grok-4.7 · Disputed by: gpt-5.6-sol

  • LowX account is two days old with six followerssocialAI

    @deployedminds was created 2026-11-04, is unverified, and has 6 followers and 6 following. Its posts are near-copy website slogans with 0–4 likes. The only notable mention is an unsolicited "next 100x" call, plus follow-back and "bring more eyes" DMs. No third-party post found that ties this contract to a prior rug. Wayback first saw the site at 2026-11-06T09:55:54Z, the same minute as launch, even though the domain was registered 2026-07-08.

    Evidence

    Confirmed by: grok-4.7 · Disputed by: gpt-5.6-sol

Positive signals (2)

  • PositiveBuys and sells both work on the curve at about 2.5% feehoneypotAI

    The fork simulation bought and sold MINDS on the Pons bonding curve. Buy tax was 2.49% and sell tax 2.5%, made up of the 1% protocol fee and the 1.5% creator tax. A second wallet that received tokens by transfer could also sell, and selling after +1h worked. Transfer tax is 0%. The snipe tax has already decayed to 0. No honeypot behaviour was seen.

    Evidence

    • forkcanBuy=true, buyTaxPct=2.49, canSell=true, sellTaxPct=2.5, transferTaxPct=0
    • forksecond wallet (received via transfer) could sell; sell after +1h: ok
    • on-chaincurve: graduated=false, feeBps=100, creatorTaxBps=150, snipeTaxNow=0bps over 3s

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • PositiveTrade fees are capped and fixed at launch for this tokenfeesAI

    The factory caps the base curve fee at 10% and the creator tax at 10%, with a 20% combined ceiling. Per the factory's comments, an existing launch keeps the creator tax it launched with even if the owner later changes the ceiling. MINDS launched at 1% + 1.5%. Nothing in the material shows a way to raise fees on this curve after launch.

    Evidence

    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L59-L61
      Show source
      uint256 private constant MAX_CURVE_FEE_BPS = 1_000; // 10%
          uint256 private constant MAX_CREATOR_TAX_CEILING_BPS = 1_000; // 10%
          uint256 private constant MAX_TOTAL_TRADE_FEE_BPS = 2_000; // 20%
    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L545-L554
      Show source
      /**
           * @notice Adjusts the ceiling a creator's chosen trade tax is validated
           * against at launch time. Already-launched tokens keep the immutable
           * tax rate they launched with regardless of later ceiling changes.
           */
          function setMaxCreatorTaxBps(uint256 bps) external onlyOwner {
              if (bps > MAX_CREATOR_TAX_CEILING_BPS) revert InvalidBasisPoints();
              maxCreatorTaxBps = bps;
              emit MaxCreatorTaxUpdated(bps);
          }
    • codePonsV2LaunchFactory.sol:L801-L806
      Show source
      if (config.curveFeeBps + params.creatorTaxBps > MAX_TOTAL_TRADE_FEE_BPS) {
                  revert CombinedFeeTooHigh();
              }
              if (policy.hookFeeBps + params.creatorTaxBps > MAX_TOTAL_TRADE_FEE_BPS) {
                  revert CombinedFeeTooHigh();
              }

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7 · Disputed by: gpt-5.6-sol

Notes (4)

  • InfoOne-time burn: 0.98% of supply sent to a burn addressburnDeterministic

    0.98% of the supply ever minted is burned, in 1 burn transfer(s), last 2026-11-06. Burned by: the deployer 0x383c…2c52 (0.98%, 1 burn). This happened once, around launch; there is no sign of a continuing burn mechanism.

    Evidence

    • on-chainTransfer events to 0x0 / 0x…dEaD and balanceOf(burn addresses) of 0xe9056598e2f1e9bbc2432100f12fcdfc9ab78a0a

    Confirmed by: facts

  • InfoSnipers and launch bundle bought little and have sold outsnipersAI

    Six sniper wallets bought 3.5852% in the first 100 blocks and now hold 0%. A 3-wallet bundle in block 107487201, funded by 0x5309…f32f, bought 0.5488% and the cluster now holds 0%. There is no remaining sniper overhang.

    Evidence

    • on-chainsnipers.pctSupplyBought = 3.5852, pctSupplyHeldNow = 0
    • on-chainbundles block 107487201 commonFunder 0x53091256ebd2d8aa37b45536a5fd864ca764f32f pctSupply 0.5488

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • InfoDeployer holds nothing, never sold, and burned about 1%insidersAI

    The creator 0x383c…2c52 was the only declared snipe-tax-exempt wallet and now holds 0%. It sent 0.9769% of supply to the dead address in one burn. The facts show deployerSoldPct = 0, so it does not appear to have dumped.

    Evidence

    • on-chainDeployer 0x383c88bd3e4161693bb8e59b65d4f0e2987d2c52 holds 0% now
    • on-chainburns.by deployer pct 0.9769, count 1
    • on-chaindeployerSoldPct = 0

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

  • InfoStill on the bonding curve with only about $1.5k liquidityliquidityAI

    MINDS has not graduated and has no Uniswap pool yet. All trading happens on curve 0x299E…8351, which holds 71.01% of supply and about $1,536 of liquidity. Large sells will move the price a lot.

    Evidence

    • on-chainliquidity pons-v2-bonding-curve pool 0x299E73022F2c0555641f638d5089f30148aF8351 liquidityUsd 1536
    • on-chainNo Uniswap pool yet — trading on bonding curve 0x299E73022F2c0555641f638d5089f30148aF8351 (not graduated)

    Confirmed by: claude-opus-5.5, grok-4.7, gpt-5.6-sol

Score breakdown

Higher is safer. The overall is the weighted average of the assessed parts, then capped by hard facts.

  • Contract

    weight 45%
    55
    Capped · max 60

    source code not verified → max 60

    Buys and sells work at a fixed ~2.5% launchpad fee and the token shows no owner-only powers, but neither the token nor its curve has verified source, and the Pons protocol owner keeps rescue and fee-routing powers.

    Why this score

    Raised the score

    • Buy and sell simulation passes, including a second wallet and a sell after 1 hour
    • About 2.5% fee (1% protocol + 1.5% creator), with a 0% transfer tax
    • Function list shows no mint, fee, blacklist or pause setters
    • Created by the verified Pons factory, with fee caps in its code

    Lowered the score

    • Token and bonding curve source not verified
    • Pons factory owner cannot renounce and can rescue stuck graduation reserves
    • Protocol owner can redirect the creator fee stream after a 3-day timelock
    • Locker and buyback vault factory address can be changed by the owner
  • Token

    weight 30%
    55

    The launch was not heavily captured: snipers took about 3.6% and have exited, and the deployer holds nothing and has not sold. But liquidity is tiny, there are only 23 holders, and one wallet pair holds 5.7%.

    Why this score

    Raised the score

    • Snipers bought only about 3.6% and the bundle about 0.55%; both now hold 0%
    • Deployer holds 0% and sold nothing
    • No deployer rug history in the facts

    Lowered the score

    • Only about $1.5k of liquidity, still on the bonding curve
    • Only 23 holders; top 10 hold about 24%
    • Two wallets funded by the same source hold 5.7%
    • Burn was a one-time 0.98% at launch, with no ongoing burn
  • Social / X

    weight 15%
    30

    The X account is two days old with six followers and low-substance posts, and the team is not identified.

    Why this score

    Raised the score

    • No third-party rug or honeypot reports found for this contract

    Lowered the score

    • X account created two days before launch, with 6 followers
    • Engagement is mostly follow-back replies and an unsolicited '100x' call
    • Co-founders named by first name only, unverifiable
  • Website

    weight 10%
    35

    The linked site is an AI agency page that never mentions the token, uses placeholder client logos, and first appeared in archives on launch day.

    Why this score

    Raised the score

    • Site loads with substantial content and blog pages
    • Domain registered in July 2026, before launch

    Lowered the score

    • No mention of MINDS, its supply or token terms
    • Client strip uses placeholder names like ACME CO and NORTHWIND
    • First archived on the token's launch morning
    • Link between the agency and the token is unverified