That is also why the [REDACTED] name fits better. Jester still matters, and we are not pretending that the last three years did not happen. Jester is where all of this came from, and the name will continue to exist, albeit closer to its original lineage, around strategies, algorithms and some of the intelligence that started the entire project. But Jester had become a name being stretched across a trading terminal, an API, a research system, an execution network, an agent framework and eventually an entire infrastructure layer. [REDACTED] gives us room to describe the machine around all of those things. It is something deliberately constructed through skill and intelligence, which is basically what this entire system has become: artificial operators using artificial intelligence to build, test, coordinate and execute strategies through infrastructure we built for them.
The closest comparison for what we are trying to become is also no longer a signal bot, a trading strategy, or even something like TradingView. It is something more like Cursor. Cursor did not replace programming languages, GitHub, cloud providers, databases or the rest of the software stack. It changed the environment through which intelligence interacts with all of those things. That is much closer to what [REDACTED] is supposed to do for finance. We do not need to replace exchanges, brokers, wallets or even the models people want to use. Those things can all continue existing. [REDACTED] sits between the intelligence and the financial infrastructure that intelligence needs to operate. It gives agents research, memory, backtesting, strategies, risk, coordination, execution and one consistent environment connecting the whole process. The interface matters, but the infrastructure underneath the interface is the actual company.
We are also not doing the full token relaunch tomorrow. This is important because there is no point in changing the name, migrating the token, doing a giant marketing push and then pointing everyone toward software that is still half-finished. Oroboros needs to reach v1 and be stable. The API and MCP system needs to be mostly bug free and stable. Execution needs to become boring. Risk needs to become boring. Agent permissions need to be clear. The infrastructure needs to survive people and agents doing things we did not anticipate. That matters much more than getting the new brand out quickly. Between now and then the branding will gradually change, products will continue consolidating onto the [REDACTED] infrastructure and we will keep shipping, but the full relaunch happens when we have something we are actually comfortable putting the [REDACTED] name on.
The part I keep coming back to is how absurd the progression looks when you lay it out. We started with one TradingView strategy. Then we needed a bot. Then execution. Then automation. Then backtesting. Then better risk. Then portfolio management. Then agents. Then research. Then agent coordination. Then APIs. Then MCP. Then multiple applications. Then somewhere along the way we realized the applications themselves were no longer the most important part, the infrastructure was. None of that was really the original plan. We just kept solving the next problem until the thing in front of us had become something completely different from where we started.
Three years later, I think the product, the technology, the business model and the brand are finally beginning to describe the same thing. There is still a ridiculous amount of work left, and I do not want to pretend otherwise, but the direction is much clearer now than it has ever been.
Forwarded fromScientio
August 17, 2026 61 2
