A Wild Ride on the Blockchain

Leonard Weise

When someone burns $1.65 million in Ethereum (ETH) and donates $5.35 million to WikiLeaks, using blockchain transactions to broadcast alarming claims about brain control technology, it blends tech and drama in a way that's impossible to ignore.

While this post shouldn’t be taken too seriously, it's a compelling example of Ethereum’s potential. Here's a concise breakdown of what Hu Lezhi did and the truth behind his sensational claims.

In February 2025, Hu Lezhi made several provocative Ethereum transactions. On February 10, he sent $92,537.40 to WikiLeaks, mentioning "digital enslavement." Five days later, on February 15, he donated an additional $91,901.92, referencing concerns about brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). On February 17, he transferred $1.55 million with warnings of "nano-brain-computer chips" for mind control, and burned another $1.65 million worth of ETH by sending it to an inaccessible "null" address. Altogether, he moved approximately 2,553 ETH, valued over $6.8 million, with all transactions publicly recorded on Etherscan.

Ethereum enables transactions that are public, irreversible, and uncensorable. Messages can be permanently embedded within transactions, making Ethereum a platform for powerful symbolic gestures. Burning ETH—sending cryptocurrency to a permanently inaccessible address—serves as a symbolic public statement. Lezhi specifically chose WikiLeaks as the recipient of his donations to amplify his message against perceived control and manipulation.

Lezhi’s claims revolve around BCIs and mind-reading technologies. Real-world BCIs currently exist mainly as medical devices, helping paralyzed users communicate or control prosthetics. Mind-reading technologies today are limited to interpreting basic visual stimuli or simple yes/no responses through brain scans. Advanced mind control technologies, as suggested by Lezhi, remain firmly within the realm of science fiction.

Lezhi, employed at Kuande Investment, expressed deep distress, stating he had lost his "human dignity" and felt psychologically tormented. His dramatic actions appeared as a highly publicized cry for help.

Hu Lezhi’s Ethereum saga highlights blockchain’s unique ability to amplify personal expression and desperation—even when the claims themselves stretch scientific credibility.