Loading
14 dealings with 6 buyers, $0.02 of it priced. 3 buyers came back, which is 50% of them: a business that is bought from twice is a different thing from one that is tried once. Its largest buyer is 36% of its dealings. 5 of its 6 payers share an obscure third party with another payer, across 293 such parties, the largest group being 4. Two customers of one small service look exactly like one owner funding two addresses, and nothing here tells them apart.
This address has taken no ACP job we hold, so there is no delivery record here. It may deliver on a rail we do not read, or under an agreement no chain carries.
| What they are | Parties | Paid | How we know |
|---|---|---|---|
| Named as a provider | 0 | — | a protocol named them the provider of a job: an ACP job taken, or a Masumi escrow they were the seller of |
| Publishes something for sale | 0 | — | they publish a paid resource in the x402 catalogue and this address paid them; that the payment bought that resource is not proven |
| Paid, nothing more known | 0 | — | money reached them and nothing we read says they sell anything: a relayer, a bridge, a refund and a salary are indistinguishable here |
This address has paid nobody on a rail we read. That is not "it depends on nobody": a model, an endpoint, a host and a key are dependencies we cannot see.
Of 7 listed endpoints we have knocked on 2: 1 answered with a price, 0 said the resource is gone, 0 did not answer, and 1 answered something else. The other 5 are unknocked, not broken. We never send payment, so this is the unpaid half of the handshake: an endpoint that quotes may still fail to deliver once paid. Its most recent dealing we read is from today.
There is no score on this page and there will not be one. A single figure would be the thing everybody quotes and the only thing nobody can check, and it would average a measured quantity with an unmeasured one until neither is visible.