I’m no stranger to scams. In fact, I probably need to up my OpSec because I’ve been seeing more of these lately, but let me tell you about this most recent one I encountered which was a bit different.
Anyone who’s been around Bitcoin for long enough learns to view unsolicited messages (especially ones involving trading, investments, or suspiciously enthusiastic strangers) with a healthy dose of skepticism. Yes, and even more so, especially skeptical when the profile has a picture of a pretty woman. Unfortunately.
Earlier today, such a message came through to me on the Orange Pill App (OPA) from a profile claiming to be an active crypto day trader, offering to “connect” (see Figure 1). What caught my attention was that this was the first time I’d seen this all-too-familiar type of conversation on Orange Pill App, which is supposed to be a fairly curated, Bitcoin only walled garden. I didn’t immediately dismiss it, but I did go into the conversation with my guard up.
Over the years, a few basic warning signs have proven reliable: when someone cold-messages you about Bitcoin or “crypto investments,” when they mention “AI trading algorithms,” or when they promise “consistent returns” with minimal risk, it’s almost always a scam, or a really bad idea at best.
The conversation started with the usual “Are you into trading any other cryptos?” and “No, I’m Bitcoin only.” type of banter, but what made this case different, and worth reporting on, was what happened next.
The Setup
The profile I interacted with claimed to own several businesses and to run an “AI-powered Bitcoin trading algorithm,” promising “a minimum 5% ROI daily depending on market volatility” (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Pivot to the Scam Pitch
The conversation shifts to a classic scam pitch: an “AI-powered Bitcoin trading algorithm” promising unrealistic daily returns. My bait of 2.5 million (sats) seemed enticing.
It was textbook in its approach: friendly greetings, casual small talk about “how your day is going,” a vague but impressive-sounding personal description, and then a swift pivot to investment opportunities.
I decided to play along a little longer — not because I believed them, but because I was curious.
And what I found was more interesting, and more troubling, than I expected.
Instead of the broken English, obvious copy-paste scripts, or high-pressure tactics typical of scam bots, the entity on the other end convincingly mimicked the language and technical knowledge of a real Bitcoiner.
They talked, or at least responded, about Lightning Network concepts like channel factories and anchor outputs when I asked.
They could define UTXOs, after a few minutes…
They claimed to understand the importance of self-custody.
At this point, I wasn’t quite sure if I was dealing with an AI, or a real Bitcoiner trying to scam me, or a scammer using a knowledgeable ChatGPT (the likely case).
The Conversation
When I mentioned that I ran a Bitcoin Lightning routing node, and that I actually was, and am, still looking for channel partners, and offered to open a channel with them, the replies didn’t make sense.
Rather than engaging with the opportunity, or even asking about node pubkeys, they simply repeated their trading pitch.
When I pressed further, asking questions that most real, seasoned Bitcoiners would answer naturally, like the meaning of “Not Your Keys, Not Your Coins” on a personal level, the answers turned oddly mechanical and concise.
Technically correct, but definitely hollow, and on a delay.
They could define concepts well enough to fool a newcomer.
But they couldn’t demonstrate understanding.
Eventually, I decided to escalate the test (see Figure 3). I issued a challenge:
Explain the differences between channel factories, dual-funded channels, and anchor outputs — and do it without sounding like an FAQ page.
Figure 3. The Lightning Turing Test
The scammer is challenged to explain complex Lightning Network concepts. Their answer, while technically accurate, lacks real conversational depth.
The response was impressive… but wrong.
It sounded lifted directly from reference material.
At one point, after giving them increasingly technical Turing test questions to prove they were a real person into Bitcoin and not a scammer, I sent a fake Bitcoin “reward,” a string designed to look like a Bitcoin address but containing a hidden message: “HFSPAI” (Have Fun Staying Poor, AI).
Before sending it, though, I gave one more philosophical check:
I asked about UTXOs, and about the concept of low time preference, not just technical knowledge, but a test of Bitcoin values (see Figure 4).
Figure 4. Philosophical Collapse
The scammer struggles when asked about Bitcoin’s deeper cultural and philosophical principles, revealing the limits of their AI-driven script.
Again, the scammer delivered technically correct definitions.
But there was no soul. No understanding.
No proof of independent thought.
Finally, after I delivered the “Bitcoin key” and they failed to even recognize the joke (see Figure 5), the conversation collapsed.
Figure 5. Final Message and Defeat
After failing the cultural test, the scammer responds with confusion and ultimately concedes, unable to maintain the illusion.
The Aftermath
Victory, I guess.
I put out a quick Nostr warning and contacted Orange Pill App to let them know about the account.
To their credit — big kudos to the OPA team — they responded within a few minutes, saying,
“Thanks for reporting, he’s been banned.”
The Implications
This wasn’t just a lazy scam attempt.
This was a glimpse of the future: scam operations powered by AI, capable of mimicking technical knowledge, cultural references, and conversational nuance well enough to fool someone who isn’t paying close attention.
The lines between bots and humans are blurring.
If this had been a nefarious, sophisticated scammer with actual knowledge about Bitcoin, it could have been worse.
Thankfully, the vast majority of Bitcoiners I’ve met are awesome, wholesome people who denounce scamming — and as NGU, our incentives align.
Today, it’s a scammer trying to bait you into a fake trading scheme.
Tomorrow, it could be a more elaborate con, soliciting multisig signatures, phishing node credentials, or exploiting genuine Bitcoiners who let their guard down.
The scammer I encountered could parrot Bitcoin concepts to people in a presumably Bitcoin only space, but they couldn’t believably converse about them.
That’s still the gap — for now.
A Word of Caution
If someone cold-messages you promising trading returns, if they talk about “AI-enhanced strategies” or “minimal-risk opportunities,” or if they even mention the words “crypto” or “trading,” remain skeptical, no matter how technically fluent they sound.
Technical vocabulary about Bitcoin can now be faked.
Only conviction, patience, and a deep understanding of Bitcoin’s principles can’t be faked.
Stay skeptical. Stay alert. And remember: the real work in Bitcoin can’t be outsourced to bots or trusted to strangers in your DMs, regardless of what platform you are on.
Andrew Lonero is a geochemist, lab manager, and Bitcoin advocate with a deep interest in complex systems, both natural and digital. He runs a geochemical research lab focused on environmental systems and climate change, where he works with high-precision scientific instruments such as mass spectrometers to analyze the elemental and isotopic composition of materials. His passion for technology extends beyond the lab, with a long-standing interest in computer hardware, from GPUs to Bitcoin nodes and ASICs.
Andrew first became involved with Bitcoin in 2014, drawn to its open, decentralized nature and its intersection with energy, computing, and financial inclusion. Much like his work in geochemistry, where he deciphers intricate natural systems, he sees Bitcoin as a technological system that requires careful analysis, optimization, and innovation. Through the Progressive Bitcoiner Organization, Andrew is excited to support research that explores Bitcoin’s role in sustainability, economic justice, and social impact.
