According to American entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and political activist Peter Thiel, he still holds bitcoin (BTC) but is uncertain about the future value of the cryptocurrency. Peter Thiel Talks Bitcoin: A Holder With Cautious Optimism Peter Thiel, the renowned billionaire and co-founder of Paypal, Palantir Technologies, and Founders Fund, shared his thoughts on bitcoin (BTC) […]
Bitcoin News
JPMorgan Questions Sustainability of $12 Billion Crypto Inflows
JPMorgan analysts have raised concerns about the sustainability of the billion year-to-date inflow into crypto assets, given the current high bitcoin prices relative to production costs and gold. The substantial inflows this year have been primarily driven by spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs). However, much of this inflow represents a shift from crypto wallets […]
Bitcoin News
Ethereum Co-Founder Vitalik Buterin on Tackling Deepfake AI Risks: ‘Ask Security Questions’
Vitalik Buterin, a co-founder of the cryptocurrency project Ethereum, has raised an alert on using deepfakes, videos created using artificial intelligence (AI) to try to impersonate human beings, to persuade others about making financial transactions. For Buterin, the issue is not only cryptographical and can be tackled using security questions with friends and colleagues. Ethereum […]
Bitcoin News
Legal Twist Keeps Terraform Labs’ Co-Founder Do Kwon in Montenegro, Appeals Court Questions Extradition Grounds
Following the Montenegro Appeals Court’s decision to reject the extradition requests for Terraform Labs co-founder Do Kwon, the panel from the Appeals Court has nullified the latest decision by Podgorica’s High Court to extradite Kwon to either South Korea or the United States. This ruling implies that Kwon will remain in Montenegro, as the matter […]
Bitcoin News
Maxine Waters Questions Meta’s Digital Asset Ambitions
Maxine Waters has sent a probing letter to Meta, querying the tech giant’s recent spate of trademark applications related to digital assets and blockchain technology.
Maxine Waters Suspects Meta’s Renewed Interest in Digital Assets Through Trademark Filings
Maxine Waters, the ranking Democrat of the House Financial Services Committee, has raised concerns over Meta’s recent trademark applications which suggest the tech giant’s potential re-entry into the digital asset space. Waters sent a detailed letter to Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Javier Olivan, questioning the company’s intentions regarding digital assets and blockchain technology.
In her letter, Waters pointed out five trademark applications filed by Meta over the past year. These applications cover a range of services, including an online social networking and dating service facilitating digital currency exchange, development of blockchain-related computer hardware and software, and cryptocurrency trading services. This move comes despite previous statements from Meta staff indicating no ongoing digital asset projects at the company.
Waters, a vocal critic of Meta’s crypto ventures, particularly the Libra (later Diem) stablecoin project, expressed her concerns about the company potentially delving back into digital asset plans. She highlighted the incongruity between Meta’s trademark filings and their public disavowal of current digital asset ventures.
In 2019, Meta faced significant regulatory and legislative scrutiny over its plans to launch the Libra cryptocurrency and the Calibra digital wallet. Waters, along with other lawmakers, had requested a moratorium on these projects due to privacy and national security concerns. Despite these challenges and the eventual shutdown of the Diem project, Waters’ letter suggests that Meta’s interest in digital assets persists.
The congresswoman’s letter also seeks clarity on whether Meta intends to launch a cryptocurrency payments platform and its plans for the recently filed trademark applications. She emphasized the need for transparency, especially given the company’s troubled past with digital currencies.
As of now, Meta has not publicly responded to the letter.
Is Meta pursuing several potential digital asset related business opportunities? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
Stablecoin Takeover? Record Tether 71% Dominance Raises Questions About Crypto Future
Tether, the issuer of the ubiquitous USDT stablecoin, cemented its dominance in 2023, ballooning its market share to a staggering 71%. This explosive growth, however, comes with a chilling undercurrent: a United Nations report linking USDT to a surge in cybercrime and money laundering in Southeast Asia.
Glassnode data paints a stark picture of Tether’s ascent. Its market capitalization reached a record billion in January 2024, fueled by a 40% increase in USDT supply over the past year. Meanwhile, competitors like Circle’s USDC saw their market share shrink, with USDT now commanding over 7 times the circulation of its nearest rival.
Tether Market Dominance Soars
Paolo Ardoino, Tether’s new CEO, has prioritized cooperation with U.S. law enforcement. The company boasts of freezing wallets linked to sanctions lists and recovering over 5 million in illicit funds.
However, the UN report casts a shadow on these efforts, detailing how USDT facilitates “sextortion,” “pig butchering” scams, and underground banking across Asia.
While Tether has proactively banned over 1,260 addresses linked to criminal activity, the sheer volume of illicit transactions raises concerns about the effectiveness of these measures.
Critics point to Tether’s opaque reserve backing as a breeding ground for misuse, calling for greater transparency to combat money laundering.
Tether’s Reign At Risk: Regulatory Challenges
The stablecoin market, once touted as a bridge between traditional finance and the crypto world, now faces a reckoning. Tether’s dominance is undeniable, but its association with criminal activity threatens to erode trust and trigger stricter regulations.
Meanwhile, Circle’s recent IPO filing hints at a potential shift in the landscape. With regulatory scrutiny intensifying, Tether’s future hinges on its ability to address concerns about transparency and combat illicit activity.
Can it clean up its act and maintain its crown, or will the tide turn towards its more transparent rivals? Only time will tell if Tether’s reign as the king of stablecoins will weather the storm of controversy.
With its historic 71% market share, Tether’s reign over the stablecoin realm is undeniable. Yet, the shadow of illicit activity threatens to eclipse its success.
As regulators sharpen their focus and competitors like Circle step into the ring, the question looms: will Tether clean house and retain its crown, or will this be the tipping point for a stablecoin revolution, reshaping the future of crypto itself?
Only time will tell if Tether’s dominance signals a bright new era for digital currencies or serves as a cautionary tale, paving the way for a more transparent and accountable crypto landscape. The gloves are off, and the fight for the future of stablecoins is just beginning.
Featured image from Shutterstock
DeFi Researcher Questions Injective Protocol’s Appeal: Is INJ Overvalued?
Thor Hartvigsen, a data-driven decentralized finance (DeFi) researcher, is questioning the appeal of Injective Protocol, a layer-1 platform whose creators say is designed to expressly power finance.
As of December 2023, INJ, the native currency of Injective Protocol, is one of the top-performing coins, surpassing Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH).
Is Injective Protocol Undervalued Based On On-Chain Metrics?
Taking to X on December 14, Hartvigsen highlighted the platform’s relatively low total value locked (TVL) of million and the limited number of protocols launched on the platform, currently standing at seven.
Based on the researcher’s analysis, the largest dapp on the layer-1, Helix Protocol, a decentralized exchange (DEX), only manages a daily trading volume of about .4 million.
Hartvigsen states this is significantly lower than other perpetual futures protocols, including the Perpetual Protocol. These competitors, the analyst notes, are valued at around 0 and 0 million based on fully diluted valuation (FDV).
So far, looking at data, there are only seven active protocols on Injective, with Helix managing over 60% of the ecosystem’s TVL, reinforcing its dominance.
If on-chain activity and the number of active protocol leads, Hartvigsen wants answers to irrefutably justify Injective Protocol’s .2 billion valuation.
The researcher compares Injective with other blockchains, including Ethereum and Solana. These platforms command relatively higher trading volume and on-chain activity.
To illustrate, Hartvigsen cites DefiLlama data, which shows that Injective’s volume ranges from to million daily from seven dapps.
On the other hand, Solana, a competing layer-1, presently processes between 0 and 0 million. Meanwhile, Injective Protocol cannot match Ethereum, which processes over billion in trading volume.
INJ Up 395%, Will Prices Continue Rising On Investor Optimism?
In response to Hartvigsen’s analysis, yiggit, a user claiming to be a legal counsel, defended Injective Protocol. The user emphasized that TVL, as the researcher cited, cannot be the sole determinant to gauge a project’s potential.
Related Reading: Bitcoin Deja Vu: Capital Inflows Mirror Pre-2021 Bull Run Momentum
Yiggit added that Injective Protocol’s potential is rooted in the expected number of upcoming apps. Notably, the legal counsel notes that optimism also stems from the Injective Protocol’s origins in Cosmos. In the Cosmos ecosystem, staking tends to catalyze participation as users seek to receive airdrops.
Still, whether or not the researcher’s assessment is valid depends on time. So far, looking at the INJ price action in the daily chart, the coin has been charting higher, registering new all-time highs.
To illustrate, INJ is up 395% from mid-October 2023, rallying as the broader crypto market recovers. At this valuation, CoinMarketCap data shows that the project has a market cap of over .7 billion.
US Lawmaker Blasts SEC for Deliberately Obfuscating Crypto Regulations — Questions Chair Gensler’s Personal Agenda
A U.S. lawmaker has slammed the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for having a deliberate policy preference to provide less clarity to the crypto market. “The SEC is not adhering to the law. That’s why it keeps losing in court,” said Congressman Tom Emmer as he questioned SEC Chair Gary Gensler’s personal agenda.
‘SEC Has a Deliberate Policy Preference to Provide Less Clarity to the Marketplace’
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) slammed the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)’s approach to the regulation of the crypto industry on Tuesday at a hearing of the House Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion titled “Fostering Financial Innovation: How Agencies Can Leverage Technology to Shape the Future of Financial Services.”
The lawmaker posted on social media platform X after the hearing:
If it wasn’t obvious before, it’s certainly obvious now: The SEC has a deliberate policy preference to provide LESS clarity to the marketplace instead of more clarity. Complete disservice to our great capital markets.
Among the witnesses who testified in the congressional hearing was Valerie A. Szczepanik, director of the SEC’s Strategic Hub for Innovation and Financial Technology (Finhub).
Referencing a speech titled “Digital Asset Transactions: When Howey Met Gary” given by William Hinman in June 2018 when he was the director of the Division of Corporation Finance at the SEC, Emmer explained that in this speech, Hinman discussed “how tokens can morph from securities to non-securities and he stated that ether is not a security.”
Citing Szczepanik’s review of Hinman’s draft speech, the congressman quoted her as saying at the time that providing “less detail in a speech is better because the concept of a token morphing from a security to a non-security was a new concept and would generate a lot of discussions.” Emmer emphasized:
You thought the SEC should give less clarity to the market rather than more … When the industry complains about a lack of clarity, I see this as a deliberate policy reference. Does the current SEC chair share that view?
Szczepanik declined to comment on the current chair’s view.
Congressman Emmer proceeded to ask Szczepanik whether Finhub has “issued any guidance since Chair Gensler took office to clarify how security laws apply to crypto.” After the Finhub director failed to provide an answer, Emmer said: “I take the answer is no, because it is no. It seems to be rulemaking through enforcement actions.”
Concerning Hinman’s speech stating that ether is not security, Emmer asked Szczepanik: “Is that your view today?” However, she declined to answer, stating that she couldn’t comment on a particular asset. The congressman concluded:
The SEC is not adhering to the law. That’s why it keeps losing in court. Does the chairman of the SEC tell you to adopt positions to further a specific goal, his own personal goal rather than allegiance to the law?
Szczepanik replied: “I can’t comment on any matters that are pending litigation.”
Emmer has repeatedly criticized the SEC and Chair Gensler for their enforcement-centric approach to regulating the crypto industry. In June, he joined Rep. Warren Davidson in supporting the SEC Stabilization Act that seeks to fire Gensler as the chair of the securities regulator. The House of Representatives recently adopted an amendment Emmer attached to the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act of 2024 that limits the authority of the SEC to carry out enforcement actions against the crypto industry. In November, the lawmaker from Minnesota urged Congress to spend resources to “bring more crypto activity and opportunities onshore to bolster U.S. national security.”
Do you agree with Congressman Tom Emmer about the SEC and do you think SEC Chair Gary Gensler has a personal agenda in regulating the crypto industry? Let us know in the comments section below.
Ex-FTX Chief’s Defense Team Challenges FBI Interviews, Raises Questions About Witness Credibility
On Wednesday, the defense team for the former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried issued a letter to the judge seeking to question two FBI agents who interviewed Gary Wang, former chief technology officer of FTX, and Nishad Singh, former director of engineering at FTX. Lawyers allege the witnesses provided “inconsistent statements” that don’t match their original interviews with the agents.
Former FTX Executives’ Testimonies Under Scrutiny in Ongoing Bankman-Fried Trial
Lawyers for Sam Bankman-Fried are interested in the “elicited testimony” gathered by two FBI agents who interviewed Gary Wang and Nishad Singh. The letter says Wang was questioned on October 6, and they asked him about specific statements he gave to the special agents on November 17, 2022, and December 7, 2022.
“Mr. Bankman-Fried’s counsel specifically asked Mr. Wang whether [a] reference to notes that the FBI Agents had prepared on Form 302 refreshed his recollection of his statements to the FBI Agents at those interviews,” the letter details. “On each of these occasions, Mr. Wang denied having made or claimed not to recall having made the statements recorded in the Form 302.”
The attorneys also delved into the reported special code privileges called “allow negative” that benefited Alameda, and Wang may have been “pressured or incentivized” to provide prosecutors with an “innocent explanation.” Bankman-Fried’s lawyers also noted similar instances when they cross-examined Nishad Singh on October 17, 2023. Singh was interviewed by the U.S. government on January 4, 2023, and January 19, 2023.
Again with Singh, the lawyers said they tried to refresh his recollection of the testimony, but he wasn’t able to remember everything he said during the interviews. The witnesses’ “inability to recall” these types of statements goes against the credibility of their testimony, the lawyers stressed. Bankman-Fried’s attorney, Mark Cohen, disclosed Wednesday that his client would testify in his trial. The testimony was set for Thursday, but the latest letter from the defense team could disrupt that plan.
Attorneys are calling for the testimony of FBI agents regarding their initial interviews with Singh and Wang. While pleading not guilty to all charges leveled against him, Bankman-Fried maintains his innocence.
What do you think about the defense team’s letter to the judge in the Bankman-Fried case? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.
Fed Governor Questions Need for US Central Bank Digital Currency
A top Federal Reserve official said Tuesday she has yet to be convinced there is a need for the U.S. central bank to develop a digital currency.
Fed Governor Remains Unconvinced on U.S. CBDC, Cites Existing Innovations and Risks
In a discourse at Harvard Law School, Fed Governor Michelle Bowman articulated that the case for a U.S. central bank digital currency, or CBDC, remains unconvincing, failing to distinctly showcase how it could address the identified issues more adeptly or efficiently than existing alternatives.
Proponents argue that CBDCs could address frictions in the payment system, promote financial inclusion, and provide the public with access to central bank money quickly. But Bowman questioned whether a CBDC would solve those issues better than private sector innovations like instant payments.
She cited the Fednow instant payment system as an example of existing infrastructure improvements. Bowman also warned that CBDCs pose “significant risks and tradeoffs” like disrupting the traditional banking system. She said if a digital currency is not properly designed, it could lead to “disintermediation” that harms consumers and businesses.
“I have yet to see a compelling argument that a U.S. CBDC could solve any of these problems more effectively or efficiently than alternatives, or with fewer downside risks for consumers and for the economy,” Bowman said.
Bowman noted that risks and tradeoffs include:
Potential unintended consequences for the U.S. banking system and considerable consumer privacy concerns. The U.S. banking system is a mature, well-functioning, and effective system that delivers important benefits to our economy.
The Fed governor called for more research on CBDCs and said the central bank should continue monitoring international developments. But she reiterated the high bar for adopting a digital currency in the U.S. given the risks.
“The potential benefits of a U.S. CBDC remain unclear,” Bowman said.
What do you think about Bowman’s speech about CBDCs? Share your thoughts and opinions about this subject in the comments section below.