Senator Wicker's stance may heighten regional tensions, reducing diplomatic prospects and increasing the risk of military escalation in the Middle East.

The post Senator Wicker urges Trump to reject Iran deal, renew military strikes appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

HIVE's ambitious AI pivot could redefine crypto miners' roles, pushing them towards AI infrastructure, impacting market valuations and strategies.

The post HIVE Digital Technologies plans CAD $3.5 billion AI gigafactory in Ontario appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The exploit highlights the critical need for robust security practices in crypto platforms, as trust hinges on operational integrity.

The post Polymarket hit by $700K exploit of internal top-up wallet appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The relaxation of listing rules to attract IPOs may compromise market stability, posing risks to investors and challenging regulatory oversight.

The post NYSE Group president Lynn Martin questions integrity of rule changes to attract listings appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

SpaceX's potential IPO could significantly influence market dynamics, investor strategies, and regulatory landscapes, shaping future tech valuations.

The post SpaceX nears $1.8T IPO as market confidence grows appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

A Freshman Congressman from Nashville Wants to Make the National Bitcoin Reserve Permanent

When Rep. Matt Van Epps helped lead the American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026 this week, he framed the bill not as an abstract national security measure — but as a direct extension of what he sees happening in his own backyard.

“Nashville is one of the nation’s leading Bitcoin hubs,” Van Epps said in a statement to Bitcoin Magazine, pointing to Bitcoin Park, the city’s growing digital asset community, and the annual Bitcoin conference, set to return to Nashville in 2027. 

“Nashville is quickly emerging as one of the nation’s leading Bitcoin hubs, with a growing digital asset community, institutions like Bitcoin Park, and the annual Bitcoin conference, which is scheduled to come back to Nashville in 2027,” Van Epps said. “Supporting this bill means supporting the financial innovation taking place in my district.” 

For the freshman congressman from Tennessee’s 7th District — a West Point graduate and combat helicopter pilot who won his seat in a December 2025 special election — this is personal. The bill is, in his telling, a statement about what his district already represents.

Van Epps co-led the legislation alongside Rep. Nick Begich (R-AK), who introduced the American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026, known as ARMA. The bill would codify President Trump’s March 2025 executive order establishing a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve — giving it the force of statute rather than leaving it to the discretion of future administrations. 

The reserve would sit inside the U.S. Department of the Treasury and hold BTC seized through federal law enforcement forfeitures and civil penalties.

Van Epps’ central argument for the legislation is fiscal. “With a national debt of $39 trillion, this is an essential piece of legislation,” he said. Under ARMA, any future sale of Bitcoin from the reserve would be permitted for only one purpose: reducing the national debt. No transfers to other government programs, no discretionary spending — just debt reduction. The reserve, he stressed, “would be established without cost to American taxpayers”.

The bill also draws a firm line on property rights. Van Epps and Begich included language affirming that the federal government cannot interfere with an individual’s right to own, transfer, or self-custody digital assets — a provision that reflects the libertarian undertow running through much of the pro-Bitcoin caucus in Congress.

Van Epps: Bitcoin can fix some problems in the U.S. 

For Van Epps, the argument goes beyond portfolio management. He described the reserve as something with the potential to “solve major problems” for the country, with the national debt chief among them. Bitcoin’s fixed supply and its appreciation over time, in his view, give the United States a tool that gold certificates and traditional reserves cannot match.

The bill requires BTC in the reserve to be held for a minimum of 20 years — a provision designed to take the asset out of short-term political calculations and treat it as a generational balance sheet decision. 

Quarterly public Proof of Reserve reports and independent third-party audits would accompany the reserve, adding a layer of statutory transparency that the existing executive order lacks.

Eighteen original co-sponsors signed on, stretching across nine states. The Senate remains the harder terrain — competing crypto legislation is moving through committee there, and the path to 60 votes is unclear. 

This post A Freshman Congressman from Nashville Wants to Make the National Bitcoin Reserve Permanent first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Trump Media (DJT) Moves to Sell Bitcoin as Losses Reach $455 Million

Trump Media & Technology Group (Nasdaq: DJT), the parent company of the Truth Social platform, has transferred another 2,650 Bitcoin worth approximately $205 million to the exchange Crypto.com, a move widely interpreted as preparation for a potential sale of the company’s digital asset holdings.

The transfer, confirmed by on-chain data tracked by blockchain analytics firm Lookonchain, occurred in two transactions between roughly 1:22 a.m. and 2:22 a.m. GMT on May 22, originating from wallets labeled as Trump Media accounts by Arkham Intelligence.

The company has yet to issue any official statement confirming or denying the intent behind the move.

Trump Media originally purchased 11,542 BTC for approximately $1.37 billion at an average acquisition price of $118,522 per coin. 

With Bitcoin trading around $77,000 to $77,300 at the time of the transfer — well below that cost basis — the company is now estimated to be sitting on roughly $455 million in unrealized losses on its cryptocurrency holdings. Following the transaction, Trump Media’s visible on-chain holdings stand at an estimated 6,889 to 6,892 BTC, valued at approximately $533 million at current prices.

This is not the first time the company has moved Bitcoin off its books. 

Four months ago, Trump Media shifted 2,000 BTC valued at roughly $175 million — at the time, with Bitcoin trading near $87,378 — in what the company later characterized as a collateral movement.

Trump bitcoin ETF withdrawal

The latest crypto transfer comes just days after Trump Media withdrew its applications for a spot Bitcoin ETF and a combined Bitcoin-Ethereum ETF from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20. 

The company’s fund sponsor, Yorkville America, filed for withdrawal, citing a decision not to pursue the public offering “at this time.” 

ETF analysts noted that the decision appeared driven less by regulatory headwinds and more by competition from established players like BlackRock and Morgan Stanley, which now dominate what has become a $57 billion Bitcoin ETF market.

The Bitcoin strategy has coincided with a dramatic deterioration in Trump Media’s financials. In its first-quarter 2026 earnings report, the company posted a net loss of $405.9 million on just $871,200 in revenue — a staggering widening from a $31.7 million loss during the same period a year earlier. The bulk of those losses, approximately $368.7 million, stemmed from non-cash unrealized losses on digital assets and equity securities.

DJT shares have fallen roughly 60% over the past 12 months and were trading around $7.95 to $8.15 on Thursday and Friday. 

The company, which was founded in 2021 and is headquartered in Sarasota, Florida, has struggled to build meaningful advertising revenue even as it has aggressively bet on crypto as a core pillar of its financial strategy.

This post Trump Media (DJT) Moves to Sell Bitcoin as Losses Reach $455 Million first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Happy Bitcoin Pizza Day, The 16th Anniversary of Laszlo Hanyecz Paying 10,000 BTC For Two Papa John’s Pies

Sixteen years ago today, a Florida programmer named Laszlo Hanyecz paid 10,000 Bitcoin for two large Papa John’s pizzas. At the time, those coins were worth roughly $41. On this Pizza Day, they are worth $777.87 million — down $328 million from last year’s anniversary price. 

Bitcoin Pizza Day, observed each May 22, marks the first commercial transaction using Bitcoin — the moment a digital currency stopped being a theoretical experiment and became a medium of exchange for real goods.

On May 18, 2010, Hanyecz posted on the BitcoinTalk forum with a straightforward offer: 10,000 BTC to anyone willing to order him two pizzas. Some forum users were skeptical — one pointed out he could sell the coins for $41 in cash. 

Hanyecz’s reply was simple: “I just think it would be interesting if I could say that I paid for a pizza in Bitcoins”. Four days later, a then-19-year-old forum user named Jeremy Sturdivant accepted, ordered the pies from Papa John’s, and collected 10,000 BTC via manual transfer. Bitcoin had its first exchange rate against a consumer good.

The $328 million bitcoin haircut

Every May 22, that fixed 10,000 BTC gets revalued at the day’s spot price — the cleanest annual benchmark crypto has. In 2024, the stack was worth $674 million. In 2025, it hit a record $1.106 billion, with Bitcoin trading at $110,568 on that day’s all-time high. Today, with Bitcoin near $77,300, the stack sits at $777.87 million — down 29.7% from last year.

The decline began on October 6, 2025, when Bitcoin reached a fresh all-time high of $126,000. Four days later, President Donald Trump announced 100% tariffs on Chinese imports and export controls on critical U.S. software. 

Within hours, total crypto market capitalization fell nearly $200 billion in a single session, Bitcoin dropped from $122,000 to $107,000, and approximately $19 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated — the largest single-day liquidation event in crypto history.

The worst start since 2018

Q1 2026 became Bitcoin’s third-worst opening quarter on record, closing down 23.2%, with spot Bitcoin ETFs bleeding $4.5 billion in outflows across the first eight weeks of the year. Iran tensions compounded the pressure, as U.S.-Israeli airstrikes on February 28 triggered a sharp risk-off rotation, trapping Bitcoin between $60,000 and $75,000 for much of March. 

Q2 has brought partial recovery — Bitcoin has climbed roughly 14% over the quarter — but the broader crypto market cap sits at $2.65 trillion today, down from $2.9 trillion just one week ago.

This post Happy Bitcoin Pizza Day, The 16th Anniversary of Laszlo Hanyecz Paying 10,000 BTC For Two Papa John’s Pies first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Mark Cuban Sells Most of His Bitcoin, Calls It a Failed Hedge

Billionaire investor Mark Cuban has parted with most of his Bitcoin holdings, saying the asset failed to deliver on its core promise as a hedge against fiat currency weakness and geopolitical turmoil.

Cuban made the remarks during an interview with Front Office Sports, where he said Bitcoin “has lost the plot.” The Shark Tank personality and former Dallas Mavericks owner had long positioned Bitcoin as a superior alternative to gold, citing its fixed supply and decentralized structure. That conviction has eroded.

“I always thought it was a better version of gold than gold,” Cuban said. “But gold just blew up and went to $5,000. Bitcoin dropped.”

The billionaire pointed to price behavior during the U.S.-Iran conflict as the moment his confidence broke. Gold surged through the period of heightened tensions, setting a record above $5,500 per ounce earlier this year. 

Bitcoin, meanwhile, struggled to hold momentum. Cuban said he expected Bitcoin to rise each time the dollar fell. It did not.

“Every time the dollar dropped, Bitcoin should’ve gone up,” he said. “It’s not the hedge I expected it to be.”

Bitcoin traded near $77,500 on Thursday, down roughly 30% over the past year and 38% below its all-time high of $126,080 set in October. Gold, despite its own pullback from recent peaks, remains up more than 37% over the same 12-month stretch and commands a market cap above $31 trillion — the largest of any asset in the world.

Bitcoin has outperformed gold since the Iran conflict

The data does offer a counterpoint to Cuban’s critique. Since the first signs of U.S.-Iran conflict emerged in late February, Bitcoin has risen more than 16% while gold has fallen over 15%. Bitcoin’s defenders argue that framing matters — the asset’s performance depends on the window of analysis chosen.

Cuban acknowledged a distinction within the crypto space. He expressed less disappointment in Ethereum, which he sees as underpinned by real utility through decentralized finance and blockchain applications. He was categorical about meme coins and speculative tokens, calling them “garbage.”

His earlier crypto profile was broader. In 2021, he held a portfolio split roughly 60% Bitcoin, 30% Ethereum, and 10% in other assets. He was a vocal NFT enthusiast, displayed his wallets publicly, and even accepted Dogecoin as payment for Mavericks merchandise. He once predicted Dogecoin would reach $1 and function as a stablecoin.

Cuban said the crypto sector as a whole has disappointed him by failing to find mainstream utility. “It hasn’t found an application for grandma,” he said.

This post Mark Cuban Sells Most of His Bitcoin, Calls It a Failed Hedge first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

U.S. Lawmaker Unveils Bill to Codify Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, Draws Bipartisan Support 

Rep. Nick Begich, R-Alaska, introduced legislation Thursday to permanently establish a U.S. strategic bitcoin reserve, unveiling the American Reserve Modernization Act (ARMA) — a bill designed to codify President Donald Trump’s March 2025 executive order and give the reserve a durable legal foundation in statute.

The measure, which has garnered bipartisan support and more than a dozen co-sponsors in Congress, would task the Treasury Department with overseeing the reserve while creating a separate digital asset stockpile for federally held cryptocurrencies other than bitcoin. Begich drew a direct comparison between bitcoin and gold, arguing the market has already determined both assets as the dominant stores of value in their respective classes.

“When you look at gold, it is the dominant precious metal reserve,” Begich told Fox Business. “When you look at bitcoin, it represents about 60% of all market cap for the entire crypto space. So the market has decided, in the case of gold and in the case of bitcoin, that this will be the predominant store of value within that asset class.”

ARMA builds on the earlier BITCOIN Act, which Begich originally introduced in March 2025 alongside Sen. Cynthia Lummis. The updated legislation would authorize the Treasury to acquire up to 200,000 BTC per year for five years — targeting a total of 1 million bitcoin, or roughly 5% of global supply — with all holdings locked for a minimum of 20 years. 

The U.S. government currently holds an estimated 328,372 BTC accumulated through law enforcement seizures, including proceeds from the Silk Road takedown and the 2022 Bitfinex hack recovery.

The U.S. bitcoin handling needs to change

Co-sponsor Rep. Pat Harrigan, R-N.C., underscored the urgency of giving that existing stockpile a strategic home. “The United States government already holds billions in seized bitcoin with no coherent strategy for managing it, and that needs to change,” Harrigan said.

The bill’s introduction comes amid a broader wave of crypto-friendly legislative momentum in Washington. The Senate Banking Committee passed the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act in a 15-9 bipartisan vote on May 13, advancing a sweeping regulatory framework for the crypto industry to the full Senate floor. 

Two Democrats — Senators Ruben Gallego of Arizona and Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland — crossed the aisle to support the measure. Sen. Lummis signaled the bill could reach a Senate floor vote by mid-June, though she cautioned that timeline may be optimistic.

The legislative push also arrives as the Treasury Department intensifies pressure on crypto-linked illicit finance. 

Under Operation Economic Fury, the U.S. seized nearly $500 million in Iranian cryptocurrency assets as of late April, reinforcing calls for a comprehensive government strategy to manage seized digital assets. 

The White House has separately signaled a formal announcement on the operational status of the strategic bitcoin reserve is imminent, with a senior administration official saying a key legal hurdle has been cleared.

This post U.S. Lawmaker Unveils Bill to Codify Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, Draws Bipartisan Support  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Mark Cuban sold most of his Bitcoin because it failed to provide a hedge when fiat confidence weakened and geopolitical risk rose.

Cuban called it “not the hedge I expected it to be,” and the price record supports his frustration. Bitcoin traded around $77,663 in mid-May 2026, roughly 38% below the record high of $126,000 set in early October 2025.

Spot gold hit a record $5,594.82 on Jan. 29, while silver touched $121.64 the same day, driven by the same macro variables Cuban cited: inflation fears, dollar weakness, and geopolitical pressure.

World Gold Council data shows that gold demand in the first quarter reached 1,231 tonnes, including OTC, and the dollar value of quarterly demand jumped 74% year over year to a record $193 billion.

Central banks bought 244 tonnes net in the same period, and bar-and-coin demand hit 474 tonnes, up 42% year over year. Cuban also told Portfolio Players he is moving more money into Ethereum than Bitcoin, but the hedge critique is specific to Bitcoin.

The ‘digital gold' pitch always had a problem

Bitcoin.org describes the asset as peer-to-peer money with no central authority or banks and specifies that issuance halves over time, eventually stopping at 21 million Bitcoin. Nothing in that description commits Bitcoin to rising when geopolitical stress rises.

Cuban built a thesis on the “digital gold” narrative that the market constructed and the Bitcoin whitepaper never endorsed.

Bitcoin has traded as a liquidity-sensitive, high-beta asset that correlates with the Nasdaq during risk-off episodes and surges when risk appetite returns.

Last year, crypto moved with broader equities through the April tariff shock before Bitcoin hit its October record, then suffered a major leverage wipeout. More recently, Glassnode's May 20 report describes Bitcoin as structurally resilient but notes that spot demand has weakened, ETF accumulation has slowed, and options positioning has turned defensive.

Cuban applied a gold benchmark to an asset that has never consistently moved like gold, and the resulting distance between what he expected and what the price did is what drove him to sell.

Bitcoin long-term holder supply rose by over 2 million BTC during the current drawdown, reaching 16.3 million BTC, with roughly 200,000 BTC added in the past month alone. Cuban is judging Bitcoin by whether it acts like gold in a crisis, while long-term holders are judging it by whether the network still functions and the supply cap holds ten years from now.

A hedge reduces portfolio risk during stress events with some consistency, but Bitcoin's realized volatility runs far above gold's, its price responds to ETF flows, regulatory headlines, and leverage cycles, and it has repeatedly correlated with equity drawdowns during acute stress.

Those are the mechanics of an early-stage monetary network still pricing in adoption uncertainty, with an asset that may be powerful over a long horizon precisely because it is too volatile and too liquidity-sensitive to function as a short-term panic hedge.

Investors reach for Bitcoin, if the adoption thesis holds, when they expect the monetary system itself to look different in the next decade. The fixed supply, permissionless transferability, and absence of a central issuer are the properties that make Bitcoin worth considering as long-duration monetary optionality.

The distance between $58,000 and $165,000

Citi's March 2026 forecast is a 12-month base target of $112,000, a recessionary downside of $58,000, and a bull case of $165,000, which captures how wide the resulting uncertainty runs.

Glassnode places the Realized Price near $54,900 as a lower structural boundary, while the $70,000 level carries weight as the pre-election anchor.

In the bear case, higher yields, continued ETF outflows, and weak spot demand keep Bitcoin pinned near structural support.

Bitcoin trades like a de-risking asset, fails to distinguish itself from the broader risk-off environment, and gold continues to absorb the crisis-hedge flows that Bitcoin's marketing promised to capture.

In the bull case, ETF demand recovers, regulatory progress in the US provides institutions with cleaner on-ramps, and risk appetite returns enough to push Bitcoin back through the $112,000 Citi target and toward $165,000.

Bitcoin survives the critique by operating as a scarce, borderless, permissionless monetary network that gains value as more institutions and sovereigns want an asset outside traditional finance.

The 21 million supply cap and the absence of a central issuer are the properties that make Bitcoin worth holding as a long-duration bet on monetary distrust becoming infrastructure, and those properties held through the same drawdown Cuban is citing as proof of failure.

Bitcoin's actual case rests on offering exposure to a world where more people want money outside the traditional system, which holds regardless of how Bitcoin performs against gold in any given crisis.

Bitcoin as a call option on monetary distrust

Cuban wanted Bitcoin to act like a predictable and consistent protection against the specific risks he saw coming.

Yet, Bitcoin may be closer to a call option on monetary distrust: valuable if the thesis plays out over a decade, volatile in the meantime, and a poor substitute for gold during acute stress.

Gold is still the cleaner crisis asset by every recent measure, shown through record prices, record quarterly demand value, sustained central bank buying, and consistent performance against the macro variables that define genuine panic.

The asset Cuban sold most of his stake still has a 21 million supply cap, still operates without a central issuer, and still accumulated 200,000 BTC of long-term holder supply in the past month.

Whether that is enough to justify the price range of $58,000 to $165,000 over the next year depends on whether the adoption thesis can replenish what the hedge thesis has lost.

The post Mark Cuban’s Bitcoin sale tests the gap between a failed hedge and a surviving monetary bet appeared first on CryptoSlate.

XRPL's known amendments page lists fixCleanup3_1__3 for activation on May 27, and by design the event is a maintenance upgrade.

Version 3.1.3 of rippled bundles fixes for NFTs, Permissioned Domains, Vaults, and the Lending Protocol, and the XRPL blog set the default vote to Yes because of the importance of those fixes.

The amendment process requires more than 80% support from trusted validators sustained for two weeks before the new rules become permanent.

What makes the episode worth examining beyond the deadline is what XRPL co-creator David Schwartz said about what a real fork would actually require, because his answer reveals how protocol legitimacy works on any blockchain.

Schwartz's central point is that raw node count is a poor proxy for consensus power. A system where nodes vote in proportion to their number creates an attack surface where anyone can spin up thousands of machines at low cost.

In the XRPL model, each server operator maintains a curated set of validators the server trusts not to collude, the Unique Node List, and the UNL determines which validation votes the server counts during consensus.

A server receives validation messages from many nodes across the network, and the validators on its UNL determine which of those messages shape the server's view of the ledger.

Schwartz explained that consensus legitimacy on XRPL flows through trust lists and validator coordination, producing a system in which UNL alignment and economic adoption determine which ledger survives a split.

Why a real fork requires a full coordination campaign

For the XRPL vote on May 27, servers that become amendment-blocked lose the ability to determine ledger validity, submit or process transactions, participate in consensus, or vote on future amendments.

That makes the deadline operationally important for any exchange, wallet, explorer, or infrastructure operator still running pre-3.1.3 software, as those servers become non-participants in the canonical ledger until the operator updates.

Amendment-blocked infrastructure loses access to the upgraded chain and lacks the coordination infrastructure to anchor a functional rival.

To produce a credible fork, a dissenting group would need validators willing to keep producing ledgers under the old rules, and without validators, there is no ledger stream to follow.

They would then need a competing Unique Node List that servers can configure or software can default to, because without a trusted validator list, nodes have no mechanism for coordinating around the old rules.

On top of that, they would need a code distribution that preserves the old rules and ships with defaults pointing to the rival UNL, and they would need infrastructure support from wallets, exchanges, explorers, and apps sufficient to make the old-rule ledger accessible and tradable.

XRPL documentation cites research showing that competing UNLs may need 90% overlap in the worst case to prevent a fork, meaning any rival UNL would need to share nearly the entire trusted validator set with the canonical one to maintain internal coherence.

A fork forming around a radically different validator set risks producing a ledger that cannot sustain its own consensus, let alone attract market adoption.

What the amendment process actually tracks is validator support, and the 80%-for-two-weeks threshold ensures that the entities the network trusts have reached a durable agreement before new rules become permanent.

A large share of unupgraded non-validator nodes can reflect infrastructure lag without implying anything about the canonical ledger's trajectory.

The distance between infrastructure lag and a rival chain

In the bear case, exchanges, wallets, or infrastructure operators that lag behind the May 27 activation become amendment-blocked and stop functioning as ledger participants.

Users routing through those providers encounter service disruptions, such as transactions that cannot be submitted, explorers that cannot confirm ledger validity, and apps that cannot process payments.

That operational cost falls on operators who deprioritized the upgrade, and it is worth tracking, particularly for any major exchange or custodian still running pre-3.1.3 nodes at activation.

Sustained infrastructure lag across enough providers would create real user-facing friction even as the canonical ledger continues under the new rules.

In the bull case, fixCleanup3_1_3 activates on schedule with the validator supermajority intact, infrastructure operators update without major incident, and the episode becomes a routine amendment activation.

The fixes to NFTs, Permissioned Domains, Vaults, and the Lending Protocol take effect, and the network moves on. The governance debate the upgrade surfaces survives either outcome, because Schwartz's explanation of what a real split would require applies to any future amendment.

Sustaining old rules requires a dissenting group running old software, recruiting validators around a competing UNL, and convincing wallets, exchanges, and market makers to recognize their ledger as the canonical XRP Ledger, against a default configuration pointing everyone else to the upgraded chain.

Every blockchain has a governance layer

Schwartz drew a comparison to Stellar, whose Protocol 24 upgrade is itself a stability fix for a state-archival bug in Stellar Core, which was a maintenance event requiring the same kind of coordinated validator adoption.

Bitcoin's equivalent legitimacy layer runs through miners, economic nodes, client implementations, and exchange listings. Ethereum's runs through validators, staking infrastructure, client diversity, core developers, and app-layer adoption.

What XRPL makes explicit through UNLs, other networks embed in mining power distribution, staking economics, or the social consensus around which client software developers trust.

The mechanisms differ across Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRPL, while the dependence on coordinated human decisions to make rule changes permanent runs through all three.

The May 27 activation illustrates how XRPL's governance layer converts validator agreement into ledger permanence, with UNL configuration determining which agreements count.

An operator who disagrees with fixCleanup3_1_3 has the technical freedom to run old software and configure a rival UNL.

Whether any exchange lists the resulting token, any wallet supports it, or any market maker provides liquidity is a question the protocol cannot answer for them.

That coordination disconnect is why protocol upgrades on well-adopted networks rarely produce durable forks: the economics of following the canonical chain almost always outweigh the economics of building a parallel chain from scratch, and the canonical chain is whichever the market decides is real.

The post XRPL’s May 27 upgrade shows how validators and markets decide a blockchain split appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Polymarket faced what many users interpreted as a possible hack on May 22 after public alerts described a rapid POL drain on the prediction market platform. Polymarket-linked accounts later said the incident was not a smart-contract exploit and did not affect user funds or market resolution.

The first wave of concern came from on-chain investigator ZachXBT and blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps. ZachXBT said a Polymarket admin address appeared to have been compromised on Polygon, with more than $520,000 drained at the time of his Telegram alert.

Bubblemaps then warned that attackers were removing 5,000 POL roughly every 30 seconds and that about $600,000 had been stolen so far, while advising users to pause Polymarket activity.

Polymarket's later explanation shifted the issue away from core-market failure and toward an internal operational security breach. Findings pointed to a private-key compromise of a wallet used for “internal top-up operations,” according to Polymarket Developers, rather than “contracts or core infrastructure.”

Polymarket software engineer Shantikiran Chanal similarly said, “User funds and market resolution are safe,” adding that the issue was linked to rewards payout reports.

That implies different risks. A contract or resolution failure would raise questions about whether markets could settle correctly or whether user positions were exposed. An internal funding-wallet compromise, while still serious, points instead to key management, refiller services, and operational controls around wallets that support the platform.

Related Reading

Crypto finds $64B product market fit in 2025 but reliance on centralized logins has created a critical security flaw

Mainstream adoption of prediction markets raises systemic trust challenges and highlights ambiguities in resolution mechanisms for crypto platforms.

Feb 11, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The public alert moved faster than the private key compromise explanation

The timeline moved quickly. ZachXBT's Telegram post at 08:22 UTC described a Polymarket admin address as apparently compromised on Polygon and identified the attacker address as 0x8F98075db5d6C620e8D420A8c516E2F2059d9B91.

The same post listed related and drained addresses, giving on-chain analysts a trail to follow.

Bubblemaps amplified the warning at 08:51 UTC, describing the situation as a Polymarket contract exploit, the kind of Polymarket exploit alert that would raise immediate concern about core infrastructure, and saying the attacker was removing 5,000 POL every 30 seconds.

On-chain data show why the warning drew attention. A PolygonScan transaction at 09:01:19 UTC shows 5,000 POL moving into a Polymarket-labeled UMA CTF Adapter Admin address.

Seven seconds later, another PolygonScan transaction shows 4,999.994 POL moving from that labeled admin address to the labeled attacker address. The attacker address page is tagged by PolygonScan as “Polymarket Adapter Exploiter 1” and shows repeated transfers around the alert window.

That transaction pair supports the visible drain pattern that triggered the public alarm and gives a concrete example of the kind of transfer flow that Polymarket team members later described as involving an internal refiller, while leaving root cause to the team's statements.

Related Reading

Polymarket’s stablecoin launch looks bearish for USDC, but the real shift runs deeper

Polymarket’s new token may not cut USDC demand, but it could make that demand harder to see and easier to misread.

Apr 7, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

Team statements pointed to a Polymarket private key compromise

The clearest official wording came from the Polymarket Developers account, which framed the incident as a Polymarket private key compromise involving a wallet used for internal top-up operations.

That phrasing moves the incident out of the category of a direct smart-contract vulnerability and into a more operational question: who controlled the key, how it was exposed, and why the affected process kept sending POL into an address that could be drained.

Chanal's statement used similar language, saying the reports were linked to rewards payout and that findings pointed to a private-key compromise of a wallet used for internal operations. In replies to users, Chanal said wallets were “completely safe” and said the team was investigating backend systems and secrets while rotating keys.

Mustafa, another Polymarket-linked source, gave the most direct explanation of the contract distinction. He said “The CTF contract is not exploited,” adding that the issue involved an internal ops address used by a service that checks and refills balances every few seconds.

He also said all user funds were safe and that the address was being rotated.

Polymarket's own documentation helps explain the stakes behind that distinction. The platform says markets use UMA for resolution and that winning positions are redeemed after resolution through CTF-related mechanics.

Related Reading

Polymarket faces major credibility crisis after whales forced a “YES” UFO vote without evidence

Late-night traders bought odds at 99 cents just before a token-weighted vote overruled the public consensus, exposing a massive flaw in "truth" markets.

Dec 10, 2025 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Its CTF documentation describes outcome tokens for prediction markets and notes that Yes/No pairs are fully collateralized. Against that background, a direct failure in CTF or resolution infrastructure would raise different questions from a compromised wallet used for rewards or internal top-ups.

The known team statements place the issue outside the core market-resolution infrastructure. They leave the operational-security question open.

Private keys are the authority layer for blockchain wallets, and a compromised internal key can still move funds, trigger public panic, and expose weaknesses in monitoring or automated funding flows even when users' trading balances and market settlement are not the target.

The next update needs to settle the loss and remediation details

For users right now, Polymarket's team says the incident was limited to internal operations, meaning Polymarket user funds, core contracts, and market-resolution processes were outside the affected path.

The remaining question is how much was ultimately lost and what changed after the team discovered the compromised key.

ZachXBT's first available figure was more than $520,000 drained. Bubblemaps later said about $600,000 had been stolen at the time of its alert.

On-chain pages show a representative transfer trail, but the current public record leaves the final audited loss amount, full set of affected addresses, and recovery status unsettled.

The operational follow-up is just as important. Polymarket-linked statements said the affected address was being rotated and that the team was investigating backend systems and secrets.

That leaves several live questions: whether rotation has been completed, whether any connected refiller-service credentials were exposed, whether the compromised wallet had permissions beyond the observed transfers, and whether the platform will publish an incident report explaining the failure.

For traders, the practical takeaway is that the initial public wording appears to have overstated the contract-exploit angle based on the later Polymarket team statements. A live drain of internal funds remains a security incident, especially for a platform whose users rely on clear separation between operational wallets, rewards systems, and market infrastructure.

Until Polymarket issues a final update, the team has told users their funds and market resolution are safe, while the public chain record shows a rapid POL drain from Polymarket-labeled infrastructure.

The next disclosure needs to state the final loss, confirm the address rotation, and explain what changed after a Polymarket private key compromise turned an internal wallet into the center of a live-drain alarm.

The post Polymarket suffers live POL drain as team rules out feared contract exploit appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The AFL-CIO is trying to recast the Senate CLARITY Act from a fight over banks, stablecoin rewards, and crypto market structure into a fight over workers' retirement money.

The AFL-CIO is the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, the largest federation of labor unions in the United States, representing millions of workers across dozens of unions.

In a May 11 letter to senators, the labor federation urged lawmakers to oppose the Senate version of the House's Digital Asset Market Clarity Act.

The group warned that the bill could push digital assets into pension plans, retirement accounts, and the broader financial system under weak oversight.

The warning landed just days before the Senate Banking Committee advanced H.R. 3633 in a 15-9 vote, sending the crypto market-structure bill toward a harder floor fight.

That vote gave the industry a major procedural win, but it did not settle the political problem underneath the bill.

For months, CLARITY has been framed as a fight between banks and crypto firms over stablecoin rewards, Democrats and Republicans over ethics, and law-enforcement voices over DeFi carve-outs.

Related Reading

CLARITY Act faces 100+ amendments as bankers send 8,000 demand letters against stablecoin rewards

Crypto advocates mobilized 300,000 emails to counter a banking campaign aimed at stripping stablecoin yield provisions from the CLARITY Act.

May 13, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The AFL-CIO's intervention adds a different constituency and a more human risk: whether regulatory certainty for digital assets becomes a bridge into retirement savings before safeguards are strong enough.

The caveat is crucial. CLARITY is market-structure legislation rather than retirement law, and it does not order pensions to buy crypto.

The labor argument is about what the bill could unlock once digital assets receive clearer federal labels and market rules.

The retirement path is indirect

CLARITY is designed to draw lines between digital commodities, digital asset securities, intermediaries, custody, trading activity, DeFi services, and stablecoin-related conduct.

Its supporters argue that this brings crypto into a more transparent rulebook after years of regulatory uncertainty. That framing is exactly why the AFL-CIO sees a retirement problem.

Pension trustees, 401(k) plan fiduciaries, asset managers, custodians, and compliance teams generally do not need Congress to tell them to buy crypto. They need enough legal certainty to decide whether a product can be offered, diligenced, benchmarked, valued, custodied, and defended under fiduciary standards.

The Department of Labor has already moved in that direction outside CLARITY.

In 2025, DOL rescinded its 2022 crypto-specific warning to 401(k) fiduciaries, returning to a more neutral ERISA process standard.

In March 2026, the agency proposed a rule to create process-based safe harbors for selecting alternative assets in 401(k) plan menus, including investment vehicles with digital-asset exposure, according to the agency's release and the Federal Register notice.

That makes the retirement pathway a stack, not a switch.

CLARITY would not force plan sponsors to add crypto funds. But it could make digital assets easier to classify and wrap inside products that retirement-plan gatekeepers can evaluate under a more permissive DOL posture.

Related Reading

Wall Street sees a $10 trillion opening as Washington rewrites 401(k) rules

The Labor Department’s proposal does not open the floodgates yet, but it starts a fight over who can tap retirement capital.

Apr 6, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

That distinction also limits the strongest version of the AFL-CIO's claim.

The bill remains a market-structure measure. The risk is that it becomes one part of a larger policy environment that makes retirement exposure more likely.

Labor adds a retirement front to the floor fight

The AFL-CIO letter is blunt because retirement money is politically different from stablecoin rewards.

A bank-deposit fight presents like a turf battle between regulated lenders and crypto exchanges. A DeFi liability fight is more technical. A pension fight aims to put workers, retirees, and plan sponsors at the center of the news cycle.

CLARITY's committee vote was only the first Senate test.

CryptoSlate's markup coverage showed how the bill survived objections over national security, stablecoin yields, ethics, and President Donald Trump's crypto interests.

A follow-up analysis noted that Galaxy Research raised its 2026 passage odds to 75% after the vote but still pointed to ethics demands, DeFi language, and the compressed calendar as live constraints before a possible summer signing window.

Related Reading

CLARITY Act could be signed into law by President Donald Trump in early August — Galaxy Digital

Galaxy says the CLARITY Act could become law this year if lawmakers resolve ethics demands and move quickly before the recess.

May 18, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Labor's critique adds another reason Democrats may demand changes before floor support.

It sits alongside concerns over illicit finance and conflicts of interest, while giving those disputes a more tangible endpoint: if the rules are too loose, the next pool of capital may not be traders chasing yield. It may be workers whose retirement menus are selected by fiduciaries and product providers.

The Government Accountability Office has already warned that crypto in 401(k)s raises hard oversight questions.

A 2024 GAO report highlighted volatility, valuation, and projection uncertainty, limited data, and oversight gaps around crypto assets in defined-contribution plans.

GAO also found current use was low, which makes the AFL-CIO's argument a warning about access expanding rather than a claim that retirement portfolios are already stuffed with crypto.

Market scale makes the warning more consequential. CryptoSlate's market pages showed a total crypto market cap of around $2.58 trillion, Bitcoin around $1.55 trillion, Tether around $189 billion, and USDC around $76 billion.

Even small retirement allocations could change flows in a market where liquidity, product design, and regulatory labeling shape investor behavior.

The labor critique is also more difficult for CLARITY supporters to dismiss than a broad anti-crypto argument.

Supporters can say the bill brings digital assets into the sunlight, creates disclosure obligations, and gives regulators a framework. The AFL-CIO's counter is that weak rules can still be useful to industry if they provide enough legitimacy to move risk into mainstream portfolios.

The next test is the Senate text

The bill's supporters still have a straightforward answer: regulatory certainty is safer than the current patchwork.

They can argue that without a federal framework, digital assets remain in a harder-to-police market, while retirement-plan fiduciaries remain bound by ERISA duties regardless of what CLARITY says.

That answer is only partly responsive to the labor warning. ERISA duties do not eliminate product pressure, political pressure, or the practical effect of legal labels.

If CLARITY makes digital assets easier to classify and DOL makes alternative-asset access easier to defend, retirement-plan exposure can grow without Congress ever writing a line that says pensions should buy crypto.

That is why the floor debate now has a clearer test.

If senators add stronger safeguards around tokenization, enforcement, conflicts of interest, or retirement-plan exposure, the AFL-CIO can claim the bill had a real vulnerability.

If the bill moves quickly without those changes, labor's argument becomes a pressure point aimed at Democrats whose committee votes did not guarantee floor support.

AFL-CIO has identified a credible political and regulatory pathway, rather than a direct pension mandate in CLARITY.

The fight is no longer only about who pays rewards on stablecoins or which agency gets jurisdiction over digital assets. It is about whether a bill sold as crypto clarity also creates the legal comfort needed to put volatile assets closer to workers' retirement savings.

That makes the next Senate text more important than the committee vote.

The retirement-access test is whether lawmakers close the gaps before CLARITY gives crypto a clearer route to that door.

The post US labor federation warns CLARITY Act could push crypto closer to workers’ retirement money appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The latest Canaan earnings revealed a new split among Bitcoin mining's best-known hardware suppliers: the company selling mining machines reported a much weaker quarter just as its own crypto holdings became harder to ignore.

The ASIC maker said Q1 2026 revenue fell to $62.7 million, down from $196.3 million in the previous quarter and $82.8 million a year earlier.

Its net loss widened to $88.7 million from $85.0 million in Q4, while non-GAAP adjusted EBITDA loss almost doubled to $76.3 million from $40.5 million.

At the same time, Canaan ended March with a record crypto treasury of 1,807.60 BTC and 3,951.53 ETH.

At CryptoSlate's May 22 price levels of roughly $77,200 per BTC and $2,100 per ETH, that stack was worth about $148 million on a spot-market basis before accounting treatment, receivables, or liquidity constraints.

That is the tension inside the quarter. Canaan still sells the machines that power Bitcoin mining, but the reported numbers increasingly make it appear to be a company with a weaker hardware cycle on one side and a growing BTC-linked balance sheet on the other. The decline also reflected weaker demand for Bitcoin mining following tighter miner economics.

The hardware cycle is the pressure point

Canaan's product segment shows why hardware revenue, miner economics, and treasury exposure all have to be read together. ASIC miner sales fell to $42.9 million from $164.9 million in Q4 2025.

The company said the decline reflected lower computing power sold and a lower average selling price, which it tied to tighter market demand after Bitcoin's price decline.

Related Reading

Bitmain just slashed mining rig prices, proving the market’s oldest “Bitcoin rule” is officially dead

Hardware costs usually skyrocket when BTC climbs, but a collapse in daily revenue has forced a historic decoupling.

Dec 29, 2025 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

ASIC makers sit upstream from miner economics. When miners are confident that new machines can earn back their cost, hardware orders can pull revenue forward.

When power costs, difficulty, financing, or hashprice pressure compress margins, new hardware demand can weaken quickly.

Canaan's Q1 comparison also had company-specific noise. Q4 benefited from a large U.S. customer order, which made the sequential decline look sharper. But the demand language in the Q1 release still points to a broader problem: the hardware line reflected both weaker unit demand and lower average pricing.

Outside Canaan, miner economics were still recovering from a difficult stretch. Hashrate Index's April 2026 lookback said average USD hashprice rose 8.5% to $33.92 per PH per day after two all-time-low monthly averages.

Even with hashprice back near $40 in early May, the firm said marginal hashrate had not returned to the network.

CryptoSlate's own mining coverage has tracked the same pressure from another angle. Earlier this year, miners did not rush machines back online after a price rebound, underscoring that spot BTC alone does not decide whether a rig is profitable.

Related Reading

Bitcoin difficulty just retreated, but a more critical “survival metric” signals the mining sector is bleeding out

Data centers are outbidding crypto operators for electricity, turning the "cheap power" moat into a desperate liability for anyone without long-term contracts.

Jan 17, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

Power price, difficulty, machine efficiency, and balance-sheet liquidity all matter.

For Canaan, that turns the product revenue line into the main signal. The company has two linked exposures: Bitcoin price moves and miners' willingness to justify fresh capital spending on machines.

Q1 suggested that demand was not yet strong enough to absorb the hardware seller's operating base.

The treasury is the counterweight

The other side of the story is that Canaan's Bitcoin treasury and ETH holdings continued to rise.

The company's January mining update said it had converted stablecoin proceeds from miner sales into Bitcoin, helping its reserve reach 1,778 BTC and 3,951 ETH at the end of that month.

By March 31, the Q1 results showed 1,807.60 BTC and 3,951.53 ETH. After the quarter closed, Canaan said its April operations added 90 BTC from self-mining and 3 BTC from customer payments, taking the balance to 1,826 BTC and 3,952 ETH by April 30.

That mechanism changes how the quarter reads. Canaan's crypto balance now reflects ongoing operating decisions alongside its legacy holdings. Some miner sale proceeds have moved into Bitcoin, and self-mining continues to add BTC even as mining revenue has fallen since Q4.

The distinction is important. A pure ASIC supplier depends on customer demand for machines. A miner depends on operating efficiency, power costs, hashprice, and Bitcoin production. A treasury holder depends on the market value of the assets it holds.

Canaan now has elements of all three, which makes its reported weakness harder to interpret through a single lens.

Still, the operating loss remains a counterpoint. The company reported an $88.7 million net loss in Q1 and guided Q2 revenue to only $35 million to $45 million, below the already weaker Q1 result.

That guidance means the balance sheet may become a larger part of the narrative precisely because the income statement is not yet showing recovery.

The roughly $148 million spot estimate for Canaan's BTC and ETH also needs restraint. It is useful for scale, while market value differs from Canaan's accounting value and investor motive remains unproven.

Without market-cap and share-price evidence, the more precise claim is that the treasury is now material enough to belong near the top of the story.

Infrastructure gives Canaan a third lane

Canaan's Q1 release also pushed a broader infrastructure message. The company highlighted its Nordic hash-to-heat deployment and a stake in West Texas ABC Projects, which sits closer to energy and compute infrastructure than traditional machine sales.

Those details belong behind the core numbers, but they help explain why Canaan is looking beyond the next ASIC order cycle.

Public miners have already been pulled toward energy, hosting, and AI or high-performance compute strategies as mining margins tighten. CryptoSlate has covered how public miners are using treasuries and infrastructure pivots to navigate the post-halving market.

Related Reading

Latest Bitcoin data proves BTC miners need price to retake $80k to stop lure of $4B in AI revenue

Yet top 10 public miners could earn $4.7B–$9.3B from BTC vs up to $4.1B in long-term AI contracts, reshaping Bitcoin’s security base.

Apr 18, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Canaan's version is different because it is upstream. It sells into miners, operates its own mining exposure, holds a growing crypto stack, and is testing energy-linked infrastructure projects.

That mix can help the company if hardware demand remains weak, but it also makes the investment story more complicated. A buyer of Canaan's stock is reading ASIC sales, Bitcoin price exposure, self-mining output, and management's ability to turn infrastructure projects into durable revenue.

That complexity is in why the quarter stops being a basic miss-versus-expectations story. Canaan's customers are under stress, its product revenue fell sharply, and its own crypto balance became more prominent at the same time.

The seller of mining machines is becoming more exposed to the asset that those machines are built to produce.

The next test is straightforward: whether Q2 revenue and product pricing stabilize enough to make Q1 look like a weak transition quarter, or whether Canaan's guided decline pushes the story further toward treasury, self-mining, and infrastructure exposure.

If customer demand improves, Canaan can still be read primarily as a cyclical ASIC supplier with a growing BTC and ETH balance. If revenue follows guidance lower and the crypto stack keeps rising, the market will have more reason to treat the company as a hybrid: part hardware seller, part miner, part Bitcoin treasury, and part energy-compute operator.

For now, the sourced record supports the tension rather than a clean verdict. Q1 showed a weaker hardware business, a wider loss, lower mining revenue, and a larger crypto treasury.

That combination makes Canaan one of the clearer examples of how the Bitcoin mining trade is changing: even the company selling the picks and shovels is increasingly carrying the asset risk its customers face every day.

The company remains heavily exposed to Bitcoin mining hardware demand even as its treasury exposure grows. The broader question after these Canaan earnings is whether treasury growth can offset weaker hardware demand.

The post Canaan earnings show Q1 revenue collapse as record BTC and ETH treasury nears $148M appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Harvard University's endowment fund has aggressively scaled back its exposure to cryptocurrencies. According to recent regulatory filings, the world's largest academic endowment fund reversed its bullish stance on crypto assets during the first quarter of the year.

The move highlights an emerging divergence among Wall Street's elite regarding the long-term viability of spot crypto products. While some multi-billion-dollar entities continue to accumulate digital assets, others are rapidly taking profits or mitigating risk amid a choppy macroeconomic landscape.

What Did Harvard Sell?

The latest Form 13F filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reveals that the Harvard Management Company (HMC) completely eliminated its $86.8 million position in BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust (ETHA).

Compounding this full exit, Harvard also downsized its position in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) by roughly 43%. The endowment offloaded approximately 2.3 million shares of the spot Bitcoin ETF, leaving it with 3,044,612 shares valued at approximately $117 million at the end of the quarter.

Understanding Institutional Rebalancing and 13F Filings

To contextualize Harvard's recent trades, it is essential to define what these regulatory disclosures mean. A Form 13F is a quarterly report required by the SEC from institutional investment managers holding at least $100 million in equity assets. It offers the public a snapshot of long positions in U.S. listed equities, options, and exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

While these filings provide transparency, they feature an inherent time lag. The data disclosed in mid-May reflects the portfolio architecture exactly as it stood on March 31. Therefore, any tactical adjustments made by Harvard during the second quarter remain unknown to the public until the next reporting cycle.

Why Did Harvard Dump Its Ethereum and Bitcoin?

Harvard's rapid exit from Ethereum after only one quarter of exposure points to several macroeconomic and internal crypto headwinds that occurred early in the year.

Underperformance and Volatility of Crypto Assets

The primary catalyst behind the sudden divestment appears to be the lackluster price action of major cryptocurrencies relative to standard equities. Ethereum experienced notable downward pressure during the first quarter, dropping significantly from its late-2025 local highs. Faced with an asset that underperformed projections, Harvard's risk management protocols likely triggered an automated stop-loss or a tactical rotation to preserve endowment capital.

Ecosystem Uncertainties at the Ethereum Foundation

Beyond price action, internal governance matters within the Ethereum ecosystem have raised eyebrows among institutional investors. A series of high-profile departures at the Ethereum Foundation—including key long-time researchers—created a narrative of organizational turbulence. Critics and analysts have argued that competing Layer-1 blockchains are aggressively capturing market share while the Ethereum Foundation remains heavily focused on ideological parameters rather than refining native tokenomics to appeal to Wall Street.

A Rotational Play Toward Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The capital freed up from selling crypto news-driven assets did not sit in cash. The 13F filing indicates that Harvard actively pivoted its portfolio toward booming tech and hardware manufacturing. HMC significantly increased its equity exposure to top-tier semiconductor and AI infrastructure firms, ramping up allocations in:

• Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC)
• NVIDIA (NVDA)
• Broadcom (AVGO)

The Broader Institutional Landscape: A Divided Frontier

Harvard's retreat does not necessarily point to a universal institutional rejection of crypto. Instead, the broader 13F data outlines a severe fragmentation in how major funds view the asset class.

For example, sovereign wealth funds took the exact opposite approach during the same period. Abu Dhabi's Mubadala Investment Company expanded its spot Bitcoin ETF allocations by 16%, pushing its net holding close to $566 million. Concurrently, banking giants like JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo reported increased stakes in both Bitcoin and Ethereum spot funds.

Conversely, hedge funds like Millennium Management and Capula Management mirrored Harvard's conservative approach by significantly paring down or entirely liquidating their respective spot crypto trust shares.

Mining and Masternodes: Private Hobby or Commercial Activity?

Crypto mining has long been the symbol of the digital gold rush. A computer, electricity, processing power – and with a bit of luck, new coins are created. What once sounded like an experiment to many tech enthusiasts is now taken much more seriously from a tax perspective. Those who earn income from mining, masternodes, or similar validation models quickly find themselves in a zone where the crucial question arises: Is this still a private hobby or already a commercial activity?

This distinction is more than just a formality. It determines how income must be reported, what costs can be deducted, whether a business registration is necessary, and whether additional tax obligations arise. Especially since many crypto users start their activities on the side, the risks are often underestimated.

Why Mining is Taxed Differently than Just Buying and Holding

Those who buy Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies and sell them later typically engage in private sales transactions. The situation is different with mining. Here, coins are not simply purchased on the market but earned through active effort. Miners provide processing power, secure networks, validate transactions, and receive rewards or fees in return.

Thus, mining is more akin to an active occupation than a passive investment from a tax perspective. This is precisely why the question arises as to whether the income is to be treated privately or if a commercial enterprise is already in place. The answer does not depend on a single characteristic but rather on the overall picture.

An occasional technical experiment with minimal income is assessed differently than a professionally set up mining operation with multiple devices, an optimized electricity contract, ongoing profitability calculations, and a clear profit-making intention.

Private Hobby: When Mining Can Still Have Hobby Characteristics

Not every mining activity is automatically a business. Those who test how a network works out of technical interest, experiment with small hardware, and do not pursue serious profit-making can remain in the private realm.

Typical for a private hobby are small amounts, lack of systematic approach, and no professional market presence. The user does not operate mining as an economically organized project but out of curiosity. The setup is modest, there is no elaborate infrastructure, no ongoing optimization, and no clear intention to generate sustainable profits.

However, this is where the difficulty lies: Even small activities can generate income. And income does not automatically become insignificant just because it arises from a hobby. Those who regularly receive rewards should not hastily assume that there is nothing to report for tax purposes.

When the Tax Office is More Likely to Consider it a Business

The more professional the mining operation, the closer it is to being classified as a commercial activity. Several factors are crucial: Is the activity carried out on a permanent basis? Is there a clear profit-making intention? Has specific hardware been acquired? Are electricity costs, cooling, location, and efficiency systematically optimized? Is there a recognizable organization?

A single laptop in the living room is different from a mining rig with multiple graphics cards or ASIC miners. Those who invest capital, calculate returns, and continuously adjust their activities to market conditions are no longer just playing around. Then, mining resembles a business activity.

Mining pools can also play a role. Joining a pool to receive rewards more regularly does not automatically mean acting commercially. However, it can be an indication of a systematic and sustainable activity, especially if further professional characteristics are present.

Masternodes: Sounding Passive, but Not Simple Tax-wise

Masternodes appear less active at first glance than classic mining. Users hold a certain amount of coins, operate a server, or provide network functions and receive rewards in return. Technically, it is not just about pure computing as in proof-of-work mining, but about network services, validation, governance, or transaction processing.

From a tax perspective, what actually happens is crucial. Those who operate a masternode typically provide a service to the network. In return, they receive compensation. This can be assessed differently for tax purposes than merely holding a coin.

With masternodes, the questions of scope, organization, and profit-making intention also arise. A single test run with low returns is viewed differently than operating multiple nodes with server costs, technical maintenance, and yield planning.

Income is Relevant Even Before Sale

A common misconception is that taxes only arise when mined coins or masternode rewards are sold. This perspective is too simplistic. The inflow of rewards can already be tax-relevant. The key factor is the value of the received coins at the time of inflow.

Later, a second tax event may occur. When the received coins are sold or exchanged, it must be re-evaluated whether a profit or loss has occurred. This leads to a two-stage consideration: First, the receipt of the coins, and later their utilization.

This complexity makes mining and masternodes more complicated than mere buying and holding. Those who only consider the later sale may overlook the original inflow value.

Costs: Electricity, Hardware, and Hosting

Mining and masternodes often incur significant costs. These include electricity, hardware, repairs, cooling, internet, servers, hosting, software, fees, or proportional space costs. Whether and how these costs can be considered for tax purposes largely depends on the classification of the activity.

In commercial mining, operating expenses can generally play an important role. Hardware may be depreciated under certain circumstances, and ongoing costs can reduce profits. However, obligations also increase: Income must be accurately recorded, expenses documented, and business transactions clearly substantiated.

In the private realm, tax treatment is less clear and often more limited. Those who wish to claim expenses must carefully examine whether they can be deducted for tax purposes and in what context they arise.

Hobby Activity: When No Profit is Generated Over Time

Another term is hobby activity. If an activity consistently produces losses and no realistic profit-making intention is evident, the tax office may question the tax recognition of losses.

This is particularly relevant for mining, as high electricity costs and fluctuating prices can quickly lead to losses. Those who spend more over the years than they earn cannot automatically expect to claim all losses for tax purposes.

Conversely, simply labeling something as a hobby does not automatically exempt one from tax obligations if income is regularly generated and the activity is economically organized. The classification depends on the overall picture.

Documentation Becomes the Crucial Evidence

Mining and masternodes can only be accurately classified for tax purposes if the data is complete. Important factors include the time of inflow, the amount of coins received, the euro value at the time of inflow, transaction IDs, wallet addresses, hardware used, electricity costs, server costs, pool settlements, and later sales or swaps.

Especially with masternodes, server data, node uptime, reward histories, and fees should be documented. Those who use multiple wallets or platforms should be able to clearly assign individual transactions.

Without documentation, a problem quickly arises: The blockchain shows movements, but it does not automatically explain why a coin was received, which transaction it must be assigned to, and whether costs are related.

Business Registration: Not Just a Tax Question

If mining or masternodes are operated commercially, a business registration may also become relevant. This is not solely a question of income tax but also involves organizational obligations. Depending on the scope, issues such as trade tax, value-added tax, bookkeeping, and profit determination may also arise.

Many investors start with a small setup and gradually grow into it. This transition is precisely where the risk lies. What initially begins as a private test can take on a different character due to increasing income, investments, and professionalization.

Therefore, the classification should not wait until the end of the year. Those who seriously engage in mining or use masternodes with a yield goal should check early on whether their activity already appears commercial.

Conclusion: The Line is Not Drawn by One Device, but by the Overall Picture

Mining and masternodes are not a trivial matter from a tax perspective. Whether an activity remains private or becomes commercial is not determined by a single factor. Neither the number of devices nor the amount of income alone provides the answer. The overall picture of scope, sustainability, organization, profit-making intention, and technical implementation is crucial.

For investors, this means: Even those who are just experimenting should document income and transactions. Those who want to systematically generate returns should treat their activity from the outset as an economic project.

The most important rule is: Mining and masternodes are not a tax-free playground. The more professional the activity becomes, the more it approaches a commercial activity. Recognizing this early can help fulfill obligations better, accurately record costs, and avoid future conflicts with the tax office.

Bitcoin is trading near the $78,000 level after a volatile week in the crypto market. The latest market data shows BTC holding a market cap of around $1.56 trillion, while daily momentum remains weak and technical ratings still lean cautious. However, a new macro signal is now getting attention: Fed liquidity may be turning supportive again.

For Bitcoin traders, this matters because liquidity has often played a major role in previous crypto cycles. When financial conditions tighten, risk assets usually struggle. When liquidity improves, Bitcoin and other crypto assets often become more attractive again, especially if investors start looking for higher-upside opportunities.

Now, with the Federal Reserve balance sheet showing signs of expansion after the end of quantitative tightening, the question is simple: could this be the liquidity shift Bitcoin needs for its next major move?

Bitcoin Price Holds Near $78K as Market Momentum Stays Mixed

Bitcoin is currently trading around $78,000, slightly lower over the past 24 hours. The move comes after BTC failed to hold stronger upside momentum above the $80,000 zone, keeping traders focused on whether the market is entering another correction phase or simply consolidating before the next attempt higher.

Despite the short-term weakness, Bitcoin remains the largest crypto asset by market cap, with a valuation of around $1.56 trillion. Trading volume also remains significant, showing that market activity has not disappeared even as price action becomes more uncertain.

The main issue now is direction. Bitcoin has not broken down aggressively, but it also has not confirmed a strong bullish continuation. This is why macro liquidity is becoming increasingly important. If liquidity conditions improve while BTC holds key support, the setup could shift from defensive to constructive.

Fed Liquidity Turns Bullish: Why This Matters for Bitcoin

The latest discussion across crypto markets is focused on the US central bank balance sheet. Some analysts are pointing to a bullish crossover in Fed liquidity indicators, comparing the current setup to 2019, before a major market expansion.

According to recent market commentary, the Fed has added around $193 billion in liquidity since quantitative tightening ended in December 2025, with another liquidity injection expected soon. While traders should be careful with viral chart signals, the broader idea is important: if liquidity is returning to the system, Bitcoin could benefit.

Historically, Bitcoin performs better when global liquidity improves. This does not mean BTC rises in a straight line, and it does not remove downside risk. However, it can create a stronger environment for risk assets, especially if investors believe the worst of the tightening cycle is over.

The Federal Reserve’s balance sheet remains a key macro indicator because it reflects how much liquidity is available in the financial system. When the balance sheet expands or reserve conditions improve, markets often become more comfortable taking risk. For Bitcoin, that can support demand from traders, institutions, and long-term holders looking for exposure before a larger market recovery.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: Can BTC Reclaim $80K?

The first major level to watch is still $80,000. Bitcoin needs to reclaim this zone with strong volume to confirm that buyers are regaining control. A clean move above $80,000 could open the door for another attempt toward the $82,000 to $85,000 range.

If BTC fails to recover $80,000, the market could remain under pressure. In that case, traders may watch the $76,000 to $75,000 range as the next important support zone. A breakdown below that area would weaken the current setup and could trigger another wave of selling.

For now, the most realistic Bitcoin price prediction is neutral to cautiously bullish. BTC is not showing a confirmed breakout yet, but the liquidity backdrop is becoming more supportive. If Fed liquidity continues to improve and Bitcoin holds above its key support levels, the probability of a move back above $80,000 increases.

Michael Saylor’s Bitcoin Signal Adds to Bullish Sentiment

Another factor supporting Bitcoin sentiment is Michael Saylor’s latest hint at more BTC buying. Saylor recently posted “Big Dot Energy,” which many traders interpreted as a sign that Strategy may be preparing for another Bitcoin purchase.

This matters because Strategy remains one of the most visible institutional Bitcoin buyers. Whenever Saylor hints at accumulation, it tends to attract attention from crypto traders and long-term BTC investors. Even if one company cannot control the entire Bitcoin market, the signal still reinforces the idea that institutional conviction remains strong.

In the current environment, this is important. Bitcoin is struggling below $80,000, but large buyers may still see the current range as an accumulation opportunity. If Strategy confirms another purchase, it could support short-term sentiment and add pressure on sellers.

Why This Bitcoin Setup Is Different from a Regular Bounce

This is not just a typical short-term bounce story. The important difference is the combination of price, liquidity, and institutional behavior.

Bitcoin is holding near a key psychological level. Fed liquidity signals appear to be improving. At the same time, Saylor’s latest post suggests that institutional Bitcoin accumulation may continue. Together, these factors create a stronger narrative than price action alone.

However, traders should not ignore risk. Bitcoin still needs confirmation on the chart. A bullish liquidity signal is not the same as a confirmed breakout. If macro conditions worsen again, or if BTC loses support, the market could quickly return to a defensive mood.

What Bitcoin Traders Should Watch Next

The first thing to watch is whether Bitcoin can reclaim $80,000. This remains the cleanest short-term signal for a possible recovery. A strong daily close above that level would make the bullish case stronger.

The second factor is Fed liquidity. If the balance sheet continues to expand and reserve conditions remain supportive, the macro environment could become more favorable for Bitcoin and the broader crypto market.

The third factor is institutional buying. Any confirmed Bitcoin purchase from Strategy could support sentiment, especially if it happens while BTC is holding key support.

Finally, traders should watch whether altcoins start reacting. If liquidity improves and Bitcoin stabilizes, capital may eventually rotate into Ethereum, Solana, and selected altcoins. But if BTC remains weak, the broader market may stay cautious.

Is Bitcoin Preparing for Its Next Move?

Bitcoin is still in a critical zone. The price has not confirmed a major breakout, but the market is also not showing full capitulation. With BTC holding near $78,000 and Fed liquidity signals turning more supportive, the setup is becoming more interesting for bulls.

The next move depends on confirmation. If Bitcoin reclaims $80,000 and liquidity continues to improve, BTC could attempt a stronger recovery toward the mid-$80,000 range. If it fails, the market may revisit lower support levels before any meaningful rebound.

For now, the Bitcoin price prediction remains cautiously bullish. Liquidity is improving, institutional interest remains visible, and BTC is still holding above major support. But until Bitcoin breaks back above $80,000 with strength, the market remains in a waiting phase.

Token Mentioned: $BTC, Bitcoin

While legacy digital assets have moved through standard cyclical trends, HYPE has decoupled from the broader market, establishing itself as a top-tier large-cap performer.

If you had invested $100,000 into HYPE at the beginning of January 2026, your portfolio value would sit at approximately $247,440 today (based on a move from $25 to the current trading price of $61.86). This explosive 147.4% year-to-date gain has completely rewritten the narrative around on-chain derivatives, leaving holders of major digital assets wondering how a decentralized exchange token stole the spotlight.

HYPE Destroys BTC and ETH Return Profiles

To put the strength of the HYPE price rally into perspective, a $100,000 allocation into Hyperliquid at the start of 2026 would have significantly outperformed investors who bought and held Bitcoin ($BTC) or Ethereum ($ETH) over a much longer four-year macro horizon.

Performance Comparison Matrix

The mathematical divergence is stark. A $100,000 investment in Bitcoin would have dropped to roughly $88,090, while the same capital placed in Ethereum would have depreciated to $70,930 due to localized market corrections. Meanwhile, HYPE more than doubled your capital.

What is Hyperliquid Crypto?

Hyperliquid is a high-performance Layer-1 blockchain explicitly optimized to operate a decentralized perpetual futures exchange. Unlike traditional decentralized applications that build on top of external networks like Ethereum or Arbitrum, Hyperliquid utilizes its own standalone infrastructure to offer centralized-exchange-like speed with full on-chain transparency.

The native HYPE token serves multiple vital utilities within this financial ecosystem:

• Staking and Security: Securing the underlying high-speed L1 consensus mechanism.
• Protocol Governance: Directing protocol upgrades and feature releases.
• Ecosystem Utility: Acting as a core collateral asset and driving the platform's highly anticipated programmatic fee-buyback architecture, where up to 97% of protocol revenue directly accrues value to the ecosystem.

Technical Analysis: Breaking Down the HYPE/USD Chart

A detailed analysis of the daily HYPE/USD chart shows a structurally flawless bullish trend characterized by climbing support floors and explosive breakout waves.

1. The January Baseline and February Accumulation

HYPE opened the year trading flat near the $25.00 psychological support line. Volatility initially remained compressed before a surge in platform trading volume triggered a sharp vertical impulse toward $35.00 in early February. This move established a definitive macro-bottom that was never retested.

2. The Mid-Spring Consolidation Channel

Throughout March and April, the token entered a broad, ascending re-accumulation channel. Every localized sell-off was met with intense spot buying pressure near the 50-day and 100-day Exponential Moving Averages (EMAs), which converged effectively around the $40.00 – $45.00 horizontal support zone.

3. The May Parabolic Expansion

The final leg of the structure showcases an almost vertical price expansion starting in mid-May. HYPE broke out of its multi-week consolidation at $45.00, accelerating through its previous historic resistance barriers to touch an all-time high of $61.86. The sheer steepness of the final candle indicates intense institutional accumulation and massive short-side market liquidations.

Why HYPE Outperformed the Market

While technical setups explain the path of price action, fundamental triggers explain the velocity of the move. Several major real-world developments converged in May 2026 to fuel the HYPE engine:

The Mother of All Short Squeezes

According to derivatives data from on-chain analytics firms like Santiment and CoinGlass, market participants aggressively attempted to short HYPE's rally between May 18 and May 20, pushing funding rates deeply into negative territory. This pessimistic bet backfired dramatically. As the price pressed upward, over $33.5 million in short positions were forcefully liquidated within a single 24-hour window, creating an aggressive, involuntary buying loop that catapulted HYPE past $59 and into the $61+ zone.

Wall Street Arrives: Spot HYPE ETFs Launch

Institutional validation reached a fever pitch on May 14, 2026, when top-tier asset manager Bitwise officially launched the Bitwise Hyperliquid ETF (ticker: BHYP) on the NYSE, offering native staking rewards natively within the fund structure. Concurrently, firms like Grayscale and 21Shares saw massive early capital inflows into their respective investment vehicles. Heavyweight venture capital firms like Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) were spotted by on-chain analysts accumulating tens of millions in spot HYPE tokens directly from major trading venues.

Synthetic Pre-IPO Markets (The SpaceX Effect)

Hyperliquid expanded its fundamental product suite beyond standard crypto assets via its HIP-3 protocol upgrade. The recent launch of synthetic pre-IPO perpetual contracts tracking SpaceX (SPCX-USDC) generated over $33 million in volume on its first day alone. By providing decentralized, 24/7 access to traditional mega-cap private equity valuations, Hyperliquid proved to mainstream finance that its layer-1 infrastructure is uniquely suited to handle global market demands.

Future Outlook: Can HYPE Maintain Its Momentum?

With HYPE currently sitting in price-discovery mode above its historic resistance levels, the technical path of least resistance remains upward. Financial analysts point out that with Hyperliquid maintaining an annualized revenue run rate nearing $900 million, the fundamental valuation models heavily favor continued token accumulation.

In a move that could fundamentally alter the plumbing of the United States financial ecosystem, President Donald J. Trump has officially signed an executive order titled "Integrating Financial Technology Innovation into Regulatory Frameworks." The directive aims to systematically dismantle the regulatory walls that separate financial technology (fintech) firms and digital asset companies from traditional banking infrastructure.

President Trump Orders Crypto Integration Into US Payment Systems

The executive order explicitly instructs federal financial regulators to update and streamline rules to merge digital assets and innovative technologies into traditional finance. For the digital asset markets, the immediate focus is on eliminating the "gatekeeper" status held by legacy tier-1 commercial banks, which have historically dictated which tech firms could access dollar liquidity and payment rails.

Streamlining Fintech Partnerships and Licensing

Under the first core mandate of the executive order, the heads of all federal financial regulatory agencies—including the SEC, CFTC, and OCC—have exactly 90 days to review existing guidelines, supervisory practices, orders, and no-action letters. The objective is to identify and modify rules that unduly impede fintech firms from entering into operational partnerships with insured depository institutions, broker-dealers, and investment advisers. Furthermore, the order demands a streamlined application process for alternative entities seeking national bank trust charters and federal insurance.

The Federal Reserve Master Account Mandate

The most critical aspect of the order is directed toward the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. The central bank has been requested to deliver a comprehensive evaluation within 120 days regarding the legal, regulatory, and policy frameworks that govern access to Reserve Bank payment accounts and payment services.

Crucially, this evaluation must explore how non-bank financial companies and uninsured depository institutions—specifically those managing digital assets—can directly access the Fedwire system and other central bank payment rails.

Why Fed Payment Access Matters for Crypto

For over a decade, the digital asset industry has suffered from localized "debanking" measures, often referred to by industry executives as Operation Chokepoint 2.0. Because digital asset firms could not gain direct access to Federal Reserve Master Accounts, they were forced to rely on intermediary partner banks under a Banking-as-a-Service (BaaS) model.

This infrastructure configuration introduced notable structural vulnerabilities:

• Counterparty Risk: Crypto companies remained exposed to the solvency and risk tolerances of third-party regional banks.
• Layered Transaction Fees: Multiple intermediaries increased the net cost of settlement for end-users transferring capital between fiat and digital assets.
• Single Points of Failure: Regulatory crackdowns on a handful of fintech-friendly partner banks routinely disrupted liquidity pipelines for the entire digital asset economy.

By evaluating direct access to Reserve Bank payment accounts, the administration is laying the groundwork for digital asset custodians and stablecoin issuers to settle transactions directly at the central bank level. This could effectively harmonize the legal standing of compliant digital asset institutions with that of traditional commercial banks.

The Broader Impact on Digital Assets and Markets

The regulatory restructuring comes at a time when institutional adoption of digital assets is already accelerating. Following the conditional approval of several crypto-related national trust bank charters by the OCC, this executive order provides a clear policy runway for top-tier digital asset service providers.

Institutions utilizing deep liquidity pools across major assets will benefit from more robust fiat on-ramps and off-ramps. Traders checking the Bitcoin price or assessing overall market shifts can expect reduced tracking errors and tighter spreads as institutional settlement bottlenecks disappear. For those seeking safe custody options amid these sweeping systemic upgrades, evaluating secure storage via the hardware wallets comparison remains a recommended baseline.

Furthermore, direct integration into payment channels gives clear utility advantages to compliant stablecoin issuers and settlement networks. This operational framework complements legislative progress in Washington, positioning the domestic digital dollar ecosystem to effectively scale commercial settlement speeds.

Gaming retailer GameStop wants to add 1.5 billion shares to its authorized share count as it seeks to maximize financial flexibility.

A House subcommittee hearing exposed a divide over how far to scale back the 1970-era anti-money laundering law as Trump expands its reach.

Muted volatility, political shifts, and Wall Street dominance are driving increasingly jaded retail traders out of crypto.

It's unknown whether Trump Media & Technology Group is selling its Bitcoin, though it has amassed sizable losses on its holdings.

OKX debuted perpetual oil futures tied to Intercontinental Exchange’s benchmarks, the latest sign of growing competition for Hyperliquid.

Bitcoin is bracing for a potentially explosive price movement as its monthly Bollinger Bands contract to their "tightest ever" levels.

The possibility of Bitcoin hitting $100,000 before the year runs out has moved from 40% to zero on Kalshi as its traders increasingly turn bearish.

Cardano has hit a major milestone of 121 million transactions and eight years of uninterrupted uptime, but the technical achievements are being overshadowed by a brewing governance crisis and a collapsing market cap.

Zcash deploys new NU7 testnet, slashing block times by 75% to triple network speeds.

XRP sees one of 2026’s biggest wallet surges with 4,300 new addresses added in a single day.

TLDR

• IREN co-founder Daniel Roberts said AI growth is now limited by infrastructure rather than chips.
• He identified power, land, cooling, and data centers as the main constraints facing AI expansion.
• IREN is building a three-layer platform covering infrastructure, compute systems, and software tools.
• The company has secured about 5 gigawatts of grid-connected capacity across multiple global regions.
• IREN has expanded from Bitcoin mining into AI infrastructure projects in several countries.

IREN co-founder Daniel Roberts said AI growth now faces limits from infrastructure rather than chips. He shared the view in a detailed post outlining the company’s long-term strategy. The IREN executive pointed to constraints in power, land, and data center capacity.

Roberts said AI demand is expanding faster than physical systems can support. He argued infrastructure shortages now pose the main challenge to scaling AI services.

IREN Outlines Infrastructure-first Strategy for AI Growth

Roberts described IREN’s model as a three-layer platform for AI infrastructure. The layers include physical assets, compute systems, and enterprise software tools.

He said the company currently generates most value from physical and compute infrastructure. He added that software capabilities will strengthen this advantage over time.

“AI demand grows exponentially. Infrastructure doesn’t,” Roberts wrote in the post. He pointed to power supply, cooling systems, and construction timelines as key limits.

IREN, formerly Iris Energy, has expanded beyond Bitcoin mining operations. The company now focuses on AI infrastructure projects across several global regions.

Roberts said IREN has secured about 5 gigawatts of grid-connected capacity worldwide. These assets span Texas, British Columbia, Oklahoma, Spain, and Australia.

He stated that owning infrastructure and compute systems creates a competitive moat. He also highlighted demand growth in Europe and Asia-Pacific regions.

NVIDIA Deals and Industry Shift Toward AI Infrastructure

IREN has strengthened ties with NVIDIA through a long-term compute agreement. The deal includes a five-year contract valued at $3.4 billion.

The agreement centers on deploying Blackwell GPUs in Texas-based facilities. Roberts said these deployments will support expanding AI cloud services.

The broader industry has also shifted from crypto mining toward AI workloads. Several companies now repurpose mining sites for high-performance computing.

WhiteFiber announced a separate AI compute agreement valued above $160 million. The contract involves an investment-grade technology customer in France.

The deployment will rely on NVIDIA GPUs and expand WhiteFiber’s European operations. Unlike IREN, WhiteFiber uses third-party data center infrastructure.

IREN focuses on owning and operating its physical assets directly. This approach differs from competitors relying on leased facilities.

Market reactions reflected the announcements from both companies. WhiteFiber shares rose 22% Thursday and gained another 5% in premarket trading Friday.

IREN shares also increased, rising 10% during Thursday trading. The latest updates follow Roberts’ comments on infrastructure limits shaping AI growth.

The post IREN Executive Flags Infrastructure as Key Barrier to AI Expansion appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Highlights

• Intercontinental Exchange and OKX introduce perpetual futures contracts for Brent and WTI crude oil with 24/7 availability.

• These contracts enable digital asset traders to gain oil market exposure without dealing with expiration dates.

• ICE supplies regulated pricing benchmarks while OKX handles crypto-based margin and platform distribution.

• Initial rollout targets markets outside the United States to comply with current regulatory frameworks.

• This collaboration represents a significant merger of conventional commodity markets with digital asset trading infrastructure.

Digital asset platform OKX has forged an alliance with Intercontinental Exchange to introduce perpetual futures contracts anchored to international oil pricing standards. These instruments will reference ICE Brent Crude and WTI Crude benchmarks, facilitating uninterrupted trading access for cryptocurrency market participants. Unlike traditional futures, perpetual contracts enable traders to hold positions without expiration constraints, while funding mechanisms maintain price correlation with underlying assets.

This strategic alliance merges ICE’s established regulated futures pricing infrastructure with OKX‘s cryptocurrency margin trading capabilities and global distribution network. The oil perpetual products will initially be available in jurisdictions where the exchange currently maintains regulatory authorization. This framework deliberately separates US-regulated pricing benchmarks from international crypto trading activities to satisfy compliance obligations.

Industry analysts highlight that this agreement reinforces ICE’s strategic relationship with OKX. Intercontinental Exchange maintains an equity position in OKX and obtained board representation through their comprehensive partnership arrangement. This development enables ICE to generate revenue from benchmark licensing while simultaneously extending its reach into crypto-native trading frameworks.

Contract Mechanics and Trading Access

These instruments function as non-expiring swap agreements that derive their value from ICE’s Brent and WTI benchmark prices. Funding rate mechanisms are incorporated to maintain pricing alignment between crypto markets and conventional futures exchanges. The product launch will initially exclude US markets to ensure adherence to applicable jurisdictional regulations.

Both retail and institutional market participants obtain perpetual exposure to globally recognized oil pricing standards. The perpetual contract structure facilitates around-the-clock market access, capitalizing on cryptocurrency market liquidity and existing user infrastructure. Through ICE pricing integration, OKX guarantees that contracts maintain fidelity to recognized market benchmarks.

The cryptocurrency exchange will oversee margin calculations, settlement processes, and user accessibility for these perpetual instruments. This arrangement grants traders commodity benchmark exposure without requiring physical asset custody or delivery. The approach corresponds with emerging patterns where digital asset venues provide derivatives linked to traditional commodities.

Market Impact and Future Development

Intercontinental Exchange and OKX are establishing a framework for incorporating tangible commodities into cryptocurrency markets. These perpetual instruments extend regulated benchmark utilization into digital asset trading environments. The continuous trading capability accommodates crypto leverage frameworks that users already understand and utilize.

This partnership creates pathways for accessing tokenized equity products and futures contracts pending regulatory clearance. ICE intends to introduce US-regulated cryptocurrency futures referenced to OKX spot market pricing. OKX platform users will gain access to ICE’s benchmark-linked instruments across international markets, significantly broadening market participation opportunities.

The perpetual futures offering has potential to capture high-frequency traders pursuing commodity market exposure. This initiative demonstrates the growing convergence between established commodity trading venues and cryptocurrency platforms. It establishes foundational infrastructure for deeper integration of regulated financial instruments within digital asset marketplaces.

The post Crypto Meets Commodities: OKX and ICE Launch Round-the-Clock Oil Perpetual Futures appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Trump Media transferred 2,650 bitcoin worth about $205 million to Crypto.com.
• The transaction took place during late U.S. evening hours based on blockchain data.
• Trump Media originally purchased 11,542 BTC for about $1.37 billion at a higher average price.
• Bitcoin currently trades well below the company’s acquisition cost, leading to large unrealized losses.
• The company now faces an estimated $455 million loss on its bitcoin holdings.

Trump Media has transferred 2,650 Bitcoin worth about $205 million to Crypto.com. The move adds pressure on its crypto strategy as losses deepen. Trump Media now faces an estimated $455 million unrealized loss on its bitcoin holdings.

The transaction occurred late in U.S. evening hours, according to blockchain data. Analytics firm Lookonchain reported the transfer publicly.

Trump Media Bitcoin Transfer Raises Pressure on Crypto Strategy

The latest transfer involved 2,650 BTC moved to Crypto.com. Bitcoin traded near $77,341 during the transaction window.

Trump Media previously moved 2,000 BTC four months earlier. That earlier transfer was valued at about $175 million.

The company originally bought 11,542 BTC for about $1.37 billion. Its average purchase price stood at $118,522 per bitcoin.

Bitcoin now trades well below that acquisition level. This gap has led to a large unrealized loss.

Based on current prices, losses total around $455 million. The figure reflects the difference between purchase and market value.

Blockchain records confirm the timing and destination of the transfer. Lookonchain shared the data through a public update.

Financial Strain and ETF Withdrawal Follow Crypto Moves

The transfer comes days after Trump Media withdrew its spot bitcoin ETF application. Analysts said economics, not regulation, likely drove the decision.

ETF analysts stated the sector has seen weaker returns recently. They suggested profitability concerns influenced the withdrawal.

Trump Media has not issued a detailed statement on the ETF move. The company has also not clarified the purpose of the Bitcoin transfers.

Financial results show mounting pressure on the business. The company reported a first-quarter net loss of $405.9 million.

Revenue for the same quarter totaled just $871,200. That compares with a $31.7 million loss in the prior year period.

The widening loss reflects increased costs and investment exposure. Crypto holdings appear to contribute to financial volatility.

The company continues to hold a large bitcoin position despite recent transfers. Remaining holdings still exceed several thousand BTC.

Bitcoin price have remained below the firm’s average purchase level. This has kept unrealized losses elevated.

The latest blockchain transaction marks the most recent update in Trump Media’s crypto activity. No further transfers have been confirmed since the reported move.

The post Trump Media Sends $205M in BTC as Crypto Losses Deepen appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Bloomberg reports Uber is considering a complete acquisition of Delivery Hero, a major European food delivery player
• Uber disclosed earlier this week it owns a 19.5% stake in Delivery Hero, with an additional 5.6% through options
• Investment bank Morgan Stanley assisted Uber in rapidly accumulating its position through derivative instruments
• Uber shares declined approximately 1.9% following the announcement; rival DoorDash climbed 1.9%
• Delivery Hero’s stock has surged almost 110% in Frankfurt during the last half-year, reaching a market capitalization of approximately €10.2 billion

According to a Friday Bloomberg report, Uber has entered preliminary discussions regarding a potential full acquisition of Delivery Hero, the Frankfurt-traded food delivery powerhouse.

The strategic initiative is designed to strengthen Uber’s competitive position against DoorDash in markets beyond American borders.

Following the report’s release, Uber’s stock price fell roughly 1.9%. Meanwhile, DoorDash—considered a primary competitor in global delivery markets—saw its shares rise 1.9% on the same information.

Uber Technologies, Inc., UBER

Just days ago, Uber revealed it had swiftly accumulated a 19.5% ownership position in Delivery Hero, complemented by options representing another 5.6%. The stake was built with assistance from Morgan Stanley, which leveraged derivative products to facilitate rapid execution.

Bloomberg’s sources indicate that Uber has been engaging in conversations with additional Delivery Hero shareholders regarding its potential acquisition interest.

Uber’s Official Position

In an official submission to German financial regulators, Uber declared it presently has no plans to increase its ownership to 30% or beyond—a key threshold that would normally require a mandatory takeover bid under European regulatory frameworks.

Nevertheless, the company acknowledged that it regularly evaluates its investment portfolio and remains open to acquiring additional shares should favorable circumstances emerge.

Uber further clarified it has no intentions to modify Delivery Hero’s capital framework or seek to influence board member selections beyond exercising standard shareholder voting privileges.

The company may still require regulatory clearance from antitrust authorities before exceeding specific ownership levels across European jurisdictions.

Delivery Hero’s Current Position

Delivery Hero’s stock has surged approximately 110% on the Frankfurt exchange during the previous six-month period, bringing its total market capitalization to around €10.2 billion.

The organization provides food and grocery delivery operations throughout numerous international markets excluding the United States, positioning it as a valuable strategic acquisition target for any platform seeking international expansion.

With support from financial advisory firms, Uber is carefully evaluating various approaches to expand its ownership stake, according to Bloomberg’s reporting.

Discussions remain in progress, though sources emphasized that no guarantee exists that negotiations will culminate in a completed transaction.

The post Uber (UBER) Stock Dips Amid Reports of Delivery Hero Acquisition Talks appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• OKX and ICE have partnered to launch perpetual oil futures based on Brent and WTI benchmarks.
• The new contracts will allow continuous trading without expiration or physical delivery of oil.
• OKX plans to offer the products to its 120 million users in licensed jurisdictions.
• ICE will supply pricing data to support accurate and trusted oil market benchmarks.
• The initiative builds on a broader partnership focused on blockchain and tokenized trading systems.

Intercontinental Exchange Inc. (ICE) and OKX announced a partnership to launch perpetual oil futures contracts. The products will use ICE’s Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate benchmarks. OKX said the offering will expand access to energy markets for its 120 million users.

The new contracts will not expire, allowing continuous trading without physical delivery. Both firms said the move connects traditional commodity markets with crypto-based trading systems. The rollout will target regions where OKX already offers regulated perpetual futures.

OKX to Expand Perpetual Futures With ICE Oil Benchmarks

ICE will provide pricing data for Brent crude and WTI to support the new contracts. These benchmarks are widely used in global oil markets.

Trabue Bland, senior vice president at ICE, said the products will broaden access to energy benchmarks. He stated the contracts will reach OKX’s large retail trading base.

OKX confirmed the contracts will be available only in licensed jurisdictions. The exchange said compliance remains a key requirement for the rollout.

Haider Rafique, global managing partner at OKX, said oil markets are critical to the global economy. He added that integrating ICE benchmarks meets demand from market participants.

Perpetual futures allow traders to speculate on price movements without expiry dates. Traders do not need to handle physical oil or renew contracts.

Crypto and Traditional Finance Converge in OKX Deal

ICE and OKX signed a prior agreement in March to develop blockchain-based trading systems. The partnership includes tokenized securities and crypto-linked futures products.

ICE also made a strategic investment in OKX, valuing the company at $25 billion. The firms aim to expand access between traditional finance and crypto platforms.

The move follows growing interest in perpetual futures tied to commodities. Hyperliquid recently reported $1.6 billion in daily trading volume for similar oil contracts.

Open interest in Hyperliquid’s oil products exceeded $1.3 billion, showing strong demand. These contracts also operate without expiration dates.

Regulators in the United States have started reviewing perpetual futures markets. Michael Selig, chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, said oversight will increase.

Most perpetual futures currently trade on offshore crypto exchanges. These platforms often operate under different rules than traditional exchanges like ICE and CME Group.

ICE and OKX said the new oil contracts will follow regulatory frameworks in approved markets. The companies confirmed availability will depend on local licensing conditions.

The announcement marks the latest collaboration between crypto and traditional finance firms. Both companies continue developing infrastructure linking blockchain and established markets.

The firms did not disclose a specific launch date for the contracts. They confirmed deployment will begin in regions where OKX already offers perpetual futures.

The post OKX Partners With ICE to Introduce Never-Expiring Oil Futures appeared first on Blockonomi.

The exploiter who drained the Verus-Ethereum bridge of over $11 million has returned $8.5 million to the project’s team, while keeping $2.8 million as a white-hat bounty.

This comes barely a day after the Verus community and its developers offered the reward in exchange for the hacker meeting a set of terms.

Hacker Accepts $2.8 Million Bounty

The incident took place on May 17, with the hacker taking advantage of a missing validation step on one of its cross-chain bridge contracts, which allowed them to drain approximately 103.6 tBTC, 1,625 ETH, and 147,000 USDC. Following the hack, the project’s team decided to stop its block-producing nodes to prevent further transfers and issued an emergency patch.

Verus later said on social media that it was offering the Ethereum bridge exploiter a 1,350 ETH bounty in exchange for returning 4,052 ETH within 24 hours, adding that it would stop any investigations and not pursue charges if the conditions were met.

“If you return a total of 4052.4 ETH to the address 0xF9AB…C1A74 within 24 hours specified above, we will understand that as your agreement to these terms, and we will uphold our stated agreement to cease further investigation of you,” wrote the team.

Blockchain security firm PeckShieldAlerts has since reported that the hacker transferred 4,052 ETH back to the team’s address, recovering 75% of the stolen funds while retaining a 25% bounty of 1.350 ETH. However, Verus has yet to issue a formal acknowledgment of the recovery on their platforms as stipulated in their initial statement.

Developer Flags Possible AI Use in Hack

The update comes as the crypto sector is dealing with a rise in the number of bridge exploits, with the Verus incident being the eighth of this kind this year. According to PeckShield, attackers have made off with a total of $328.6 million from several cross-chain protocols like THORchain, ZetaChain, KelpDAO, HyperBridge, CrossCurve, Squid Router, and IoTeX.io as of Mid-May.

But the Verus case is notable because the complexity of the exploit suggests hackers are using AI to help execute it. The protocol’s lead developer, Mike Toutonghi, explained in an article how the technology might have helped them understand the system’s rules closely enough to design transactions that bypassed checks and tricked the Ethereum contract into accepting the malicious cross-chain transfer.

Elsewhere, Vitalik Buterin shared insights on how AI can still be used to strengthen security instead of breaking it. Responding to community concerns about the technology creating non-stop exploitation opportunities, the Ethereum co-founder countered by saying that AI-assisted formal verification could be used as a strong defense against security failures in the crypto industry.

The post Verus Bridge Exploiter Returns $8.5M, Keeps $2.8M as Bounty Reward appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Perhaps the most anticipated financial and economic event is just hours away, as the US Federal Reserve will have a new Chairman after more than eight years under Jerome Powell.

But, before we explore the seventeenth chair of the financial institution, let’s rewind the clock for a week and review what happened in the last seven days through the eyes of bitcoin (and a few alts). The primary cryptocurrency jumped past $82,000 at the end of the previous business week after the CLARITY Act made progress in the US Senate, but it was quickly rejected and had lost the $80,000 support by Friday evening.

It dipped further on Saturday to under $78,000 before it calmed at around that level on Sunday. Another couple of leg downs followed at the beginning of the business week, driving the asset south to its lowest price level since early May at $76,000.

This meant that the cryptocurrency had lost over $6,000 in 4-5 days. After this substantial retracement, bitcoin rebounded slightly and tapped $78,000 on Thursday. However, the predominantly bearish market structure and sentiment were too strong, and BTC was halted there, currently struggling to remain above $77,000.

A major market shift is expected to unfold soon, as the financial industry has braced for a change in Fed leadership. As reported earlier, the Kevin Warsh era begins today, but analysts from XWIN Research Japan outlined certain risks and on-chain signals that could be more important to BTC’s short-term price moves than the new Fed chair stepping in.

Consequently, BTC ends the week in the red, similar to most larger-cap alts. However, HYPE has stolen the show as it painted a new all-time high above $62 following a mind-blowing 43% weekly surge. ZEC, NEAR, ONDO, and VVV complete the double-digit price gainers club.

Market Data

Market Cap: $2.666T | 24H Vol: $76B | BTC Dominance: 58%

BTC: $77,100 (-2%) | ETH: $2,125 (-3.8%) | XRP: $1.36 (-4.8%)

This Week’s Crypto Headlines You Can’t Miss

Bitcoin Pizza Day 2026: Commemorating Crypto’s First Real-World Transaction. It wouldn’t be May 22 without celebrating what became known as the International Bitcoin Pizza Day. On this date 16 years ago, Floridian programmer and early BTC adopter Laszlo Hanyecz ordered two pizzas from Papa John’s and paid with 10,000 BTC. This was one of the first (if not the very first) documented Bitcoin transactions, and the rest is history, as they say.

Bitcoin’s Biggest Holders Are Accumulating Again: What Are Whales Preparing For? Bitcoin wallets holding at least 100 units continue to accumulate, as new data from Santiment Intelligence explained that this cohort of investors has grown to 20,229. This is an 11.2% increase since the 18,191 wallets recorded this time last year.

XRP Futures on CME One Year Later: $63B in Trading Volume and Counting. This week marked the first anniversary of XRP futures going live on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME). The veteran platform celebrated the event by highlighting impressive figures, including trading volume and the number of contracts bought and sold.

Trump-Linked Truth Social Suddenly Pulls Crypto ETF, Analyst Doubts Reasoning Behind Exit. The media conglomerate linked to the First Family pulled out of the crypto ETF race, arguing that it had filed under the Securities Act of 1933 instead of the Investment Company Act of 1940. However, analysts were not convinced that was the real reason the entity exited the ETF space.

Saylor’s Strategy Reloads With a New Multi-Billion-Dollar Bitcoin Purchase. Following a couple of more modest BTC purchases, the Saylor-founded bitcoin accumulator announced its most significant buy in a long time. It splashed over $2 billion to acquire 24,869 BTC and increased its stash to a whopping 843,738 units.

Iran Reportedly Launches Bitcoin-Based Shipping Insurance for Hormuz Passage. Reports emerged earlier this week indicating that Iran had launched a Bitcoin-based shipping insurance for vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz. This was a different initiative than the one outlined last month, which asked passing ships to pay up to $2 million in BTC.

Charts

This week, we have a chart analysis of Ethereum, Ripple, Cardano, Binance Coin, and Hyperliquid – click here for the complete price analysis.

The post Bitcoin Loses Key Support Levels, HYPE Sets New ATH, Markets Brace for New Fed Chair: Weekly Recap appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin is trading at $77.3k to close out the week, locked in a consolidation that has now been running for nearly two weeks around the $75k–$80k range. The ascending channel from February is intact, the short-term support zone at $75k is holding, and the funding rates are positive again. This shows a market that is neither panicking nor rushing. What is building beneath the surface may matter more than what the price chart is showing.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, the ascending channel continues to provide the macro framework, with the lower boundary rising toward $72k and the 100-day moving average also rising just above the same zone.

These two dynamic support elements are located closely and create a strengthening combined floor that closes in on the price every week. The asset has held above the $75k demand zone after getting tested in the past week, and the RSI has stabilized around 50, neither building momentum nor losing it.

The path forward requires a daily close above $80k and the declining 200-day moving average nearby, to build a bullish case again. Below, the support zone at $75k is the immediate support that could still get broken to the downside, which would then open the path toward the 100-day moving average and the lower boundary of the channel.

Ultimately, a daily close below $72k would be a significant structural damage that could put the entire recovery case in jeopardy, and would put the $60 demand zone back in scope.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

On the 4-hour chart, the price has bounced from the $75k–$76k order block and is now consolidating directly below the recent structural lower high at $78.2k. The RSI on this timeframe has also recovered from near oversold levels that were reached during the recent sell-off to the mid-50s. This suggests that the bounce has legs without yet generating the momentum needed to clear the resistance above.

The ascending daily channel’s structure is clean, with the floor located at $70k and the upper boundary is now around $83k, where the next critical resistance zone also sits.

A 4-hour close above $78k would be the first confirmation that the price is rebounding, with the bearish Fair Value Gap zone around $80k as the next area to fill before targeting the channel’s ceiling. Yet, failure to clear $78k and a drop below $75k could lead to a further decline toward the key $72k area in the coming weeks.

Sentiment Analysis

The funding rates have returned to a modest +0.004 after oscillating between slightly negative and slightly positive for the past two weeks. The important development is not the current reading in isolation but what it represents in context.

The deeply negative funding that powered the $60k to $80k recovery by providing constant short-squeeze fuel for every upward leg has been largely exhausted. The most recent negative bars have also been shallow, compared to the extremes of February and April.

What this means practically is that the $75k support is holding without the assistance of forced short liquidations, driving the bounce. That is a more credible test of support than anything seen during the short-squeeze-dominated rally. The level is being defended by buyers who are choosing to buy, not by shorts being forced to cover.

If funding oscillates near zero or remains modestly positive as price attempts to reclaim $80k, it would signal that organic long demand is beginning to replace short-squeeze mechanics as the driver, and historically, that transition has marked the point where recoveries become sustainable.

The post Bitcoin Price Prediction: Will BTC Stay Stuck in Consolidation Through the Weekend? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Kevin Warsh is set to be sworn in as the seventeenth Federal Reserve Chair at the White House on Friday, May 22, with President Trump administering the oath.

Analysis published by XWIN Research Japan identifies the specific on-chain signals most likely to move first as markets begin pricing in what a Warsh-led Fed actually means for Bitcoin.

Coinbase Premium and Exchange Netflows Are the Ones to Watch

XWIN’s analysis, published on May 22, centers on a specific risk that most crypto commentary has missed. The concern is not whether Warsh cuts rates or holds them, but rather what he intends to do with the Fed’s balance sheet.

During his Senate Banking Committee testimony, Warsh said the Fed’s balance sheet is too large, should shrink, and that the central bank has no business holding long-term Treasuries.

That is quantitative tightening, and XWIN argued that it works differently from rate policy. This is because rather than adjusting the price of money, it reduces the quantity of liquidity in the system directly.

The scenario XWIN flagged as uncomfortable is one where short-term rates fall while long-term yields rise at the same time. That combination has historically had a strong negative impact on risk assets.

And it matters for BTC because the asset is no longer behaving like a crypto-native instrument, considering that ETF adoption, institutional participation, and derivatives market growth have made it sensitive to global liquidity conditions in a way previous cycles were not.

For the flagship cryptocurrency, the first place that stress would likely show up is the Coinbase Premium, which tracks US institutional spot demand.

According to XWIN, if expectations for prolonged quantitative tightening build, institutional buying appetite may soften before anything registers in price, and a Coinbase Premium turning negative would be the earliest readable sign of that change.

The second indicator the analysts urged traders to monitor is Bitcoin exchange netflows. Rising inflows to exchanges tend to signal defensive repositioning, with holders moving assets onto platforms where they are easier to sell. A risk-off environment under the new Fed regime, XWIN argues, could trigger exactly that pattern among short-term holders.

What If BTC Draws Capital Under Tight Conditions?

According to XWIN, BTC’s recent structure has been driven mostly by leveraged positions rather than by any real buying. That is something investors should watch out for, too, considering that when such happens, it means that rallies only reflect short-covering rather than new capital coming in.

However, the research firm also allowed for a different outcome. According to them, if ETF inflows recover, exchange reserves keep falling, and Coinbase Premium turns positive again, it would suggest that Bitcoin is drawing capital even under structurally tighter conditions. This would be because the cryptocurrency sits outside the fiat system, being reined in.

At the time of writing, the asset was trading just above $77,000, having earlier dumped to a three-week low near $76,000, with attempts at recovery stopped at $78,000.

The post Warsh Era Begins at Fed: Two On-Chain Signals Bitcoin Traders Must Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Although it continues to have its fair share of non-believers, doubters, and critics, many of whom are within the broader Pi Network ecosystem, the team behind the project insists that it does certain aspects better than (almost) all other digital asset protocols.

In the latest post on X on the matter, the Core Team highlighted one of the key components of their infrastructure that is a better version of their counterparts.

Pi Says it Again

The problem itself was also targeted by Pi Network’s co-founder, Dr. Chengdiao Fan, at the 2026 Consensus conference in Miami. During her speech, she doubled down:

“Tokens issued advanced financial mechanisms running, but there is a lack of underlying utility and substance. There are tokens used mostly to raise capital without actually [providing] product innovation. People have too easy and immediate access to capital without actually doing the hard work to finish the building. There’s too much value extraction without equivalent value creation in the crypto space.”

Instead, she and the team claim that Pi Network has undertaken a contrasting approach as its own token can be “treated as tools that can support user acquisition, product engagement, and long-term utility.”

She added that Pi uses crypto tools, including payment ability to issue tokens and smart contracts, and aligns them to address and fix the ‘quick exits’ problems.

As mentioned above, the team made a similar claim last month, highlighting the issue while simultaneously indicating that 1 million verified users on Pi is not the same as 1 million users on other networks, since they have a more thorough verification process.

Enter Pi Launchpad

All of the above led to one of Pi’s solutions to this problem: the Pi Launchpad. The team described it as their design for “ecosystem tokens and launch mechanisms that aim to help products acquire real users who engage, provide feedback, and use those tokens within actual product experiences.”

As with a few other of the broader Pi Network products in recent months, Pi Launchpad will have a touch of artificial intelligence in it, as “AI makes it easier to build applications,” and the limiting factor “is no longer creation.”

However, it added that it operates as a combination of AI, blockchain infrastructure, innovative token and launch mechanisms, identity verification, and a large, engaged network of “real users” to directly address the gap in distribution and usage.

The post Pi Network Says It Has Solved One of Crypto’s Biggest Problems appeared first on CryptoPotato.