Crypto World
Everyone calls SpaceX a Bitcoin proxy. The math says 0.08%
SpaceX’s broken IPO has crypto media narrating every tick against its 18,712 BTC. One division destroys the story: the coins are eight basis points of the company.
Summary
- SPCX has collapsed 48% from its June peak of $225.64 to about $117, below its $135 IPO price, and a persistent narrative frames the stock as a leveraged Bitcoin proxy because of the 18,712 BTC on its balance sheet.
- The decomposition kills the frame: at a roughly $1.56 trillion market value, SpaceX’s $1.18 billion in Bitcoin is approximately 0.076% of the company, eight basis points. A normal 3% daily move in SPCX shifts more value than the entire coin position.
- The honest comparisons make the point: Strategy’s Bitcoin exceeds its enterprise value, Tesla’s 11,509 BTC is about 11 basis points of its valuation, and neither the stock’s 48% collapse nor Bitcoin’s drawdown explains the other.
- The proxy myth survives because it serves everyone: crypto media gets a $1.5 trillion protagonist, wallet-watchers get content from $88 test transactions, and the industry gets to claim the world’s most valuable startup as a holder.
- SpaceX’s real crypto footprint is elsewhere: a shadow market of perpetuals and mirror tokens that traded the IPO before and after it existed, scrapped tokenized-share products that refunded buyers, and the disclosure precedent of the S-1 that revealed 10,400 BTC on-chain analysts never saw.
Here is the decomposition, why the proxy myth survives arithmetic, and where SpaceX actually touches crypto, which is stranger than the myth.
There is a genre of crypto headline that has attached itself to SpaceX like a barnacle since June 12, when the company completed the largest IPO in history and promptly broke: every move in the stock, now 48% below its peak and under its own offer price, gets narrated against the 18,712 Bitcoin on the company’s balance sheet. The stock falls, and the coins are in danger. A dormant wallet moves $88 of test dust, and a selloff looms. The framing has a name, the Bitcoin proxy, a listed stock that functions partly as leveraged BTC exposure from day one, and it has migrated from trading desks to research notes to the passive-flow analysis around the company’s Nasdaq-100 inclusion. It survives on one number, 18,712, and dies on one division. SpaceX is worth roughly $1.56 trillion at Thursday’s price. Its Bitcoin is worth roughly $1.18 billion. The coins are 0.076% of the company, eight basis points, a rounding error inside a rounding error, and every trader positioning in SPCX for Bitcoin exposure is buying a rocket company with a satellite business and receiving, as a bonus, less BTC sensitivity than the cash drag in a money-market fund. This piece does the decomposition the narrative skips, explains why the myth is immortal anyway, and maps where SpaceX actually matters to crypto, which turns out to be a better story than the one being told.
The decomposition
Start with the arithmetic, because it takes one paragraph and settles the headline question permanently.
SpaceX disclosed 18,712 BTC in its S-1, acquired at a cost basis around $661 million, roughly $35,300 per coin, and worth approximately $1.29 billion at the March 31 balance-sheet date. At Bitcoin’s current price near $63,000, the position marks at about $1.18 billion. The company’s fully diluted valuation at its $135 IPO price was approximately $1.8 trillion; at Thursday’s $116.72, call it roughly $1.56 trillion. Divide: $1.18 billion into $1.56 trillion is 0.0757%, between seven and eight basis points of the company. For scale, SPCX’s average daily move since listing has exceeded 3%, which at current valuation is roughly $47 billion of market value, about forty times the entire Bitcoin position, swinging on ordinary days for reasons that have nothing to do with crypto: a Starship abort, an AI-sector rotation, a lockup headline, an analyst initiation. If Bitcoin doubled tomorrow, all else equal, it would add about eight basis points of net asset value to SpaceX, an amount the stock gains or sheds in the first minute of a routine session. If Bitcoin went to zero, the damage would be less than the market-cap impact of one scrubbed launch.
Now place the honest comparisons beside it. Strategy, the archetype the proxy language borrows, holds Bitcoin worth more than its own enterprise value, with an mNAV below 1; its stock is not Bitcoin-correlated, it is Bitcoin-constituted, and this publication’s coverage of its flywheel reversal is coverage of what an actual Bitcoin proxy looks like. Tesla holds 11,509 BTC against a roughly trillion-dollar valuation, about eleven basis points, and a decade of trading history shows TSLA moving on cars, margins, and Musk, with its Bitcoin line a quarterly footnote. SpaceX sits below Tesla on the exposure scale. The category error is treating membership in the largest-corporate-holders list, where SpaceX truly ranks high in absolute coins, as equivalent to balance-sheet materiality, where it ranks nowhere. A big number inside a vastly bigger number is a small number, and eight basis points is where the proxy thesis goes to die.
The same division embarrasses the causation stories running in both directions. SPCX’s 48% collapse has named, boring, equity-native causes, profit-taking from a euphoric debut, a failed Starship V3 test flight, an unpopular AI acquisition, a 911.5 million share lockup looming, and a valuation that reached 109 times trailing revenue in a market suddenly repricing AI-adjacent growth. Bitcoin’s simultaneous weakness has its own macro causes. The two declines share a risk regime, not a mechanism, and the wallet-move theater of early July, in which $88 of on-chain dust generated a week of selloff speculation, including coverage in these pages, measured the narrative’s appetite, not the balance sheet’s importance.
Why the myth is immortal
If one division kills the frame, why does the frame keep walking? Because the proxy myth is load-bearing for everyone who repeats it, and none of the load is analytical.
For the crypto industry, SpaceX-as-holder is a legitimacy asset of the highest grade: the world’s most valuable startup, run by its most famous entrepreneur, keeps a tenth of its liquid reserves, and that is the honest framing buried in the S-1, the coins are material relative to SpaceX’s cash, not its capitalization, in Bitcoin. The largest-holders leaderboard needs SpaceX on it, and the leaderboard does not publish a basis-points column. For content economics, the equation is even simpler: SPCX is among the most-watched tickers on earth, Bitcoin is crypto’s protagonist, and any sentence containing both outperforms any sentence containing either, which is why an $88 wallet transaction, a sum that would not cover the gas to discuss it, commanded a news cycle. For the wallet-tracking industry, SpaceX is the franchise client: Arkham’s tagged addresses made the company’s coins the most-watched corporate stack on-chain, and the S-1’s revelation that on-chain analysis had missed 10,427 BTC sitting invisible in custodial accounts, more than half the true position, was quietly the most important methodological event of the year for that discipline, a subject this publication has treated separately. And for traders, the proxy frame licenses a story trade: SPCX options and perps are liquid, Bitcoin conviction is abundant, and a narrative connecting them creates flow, which creates the correlation the narrative claims, briefly, reflexively, on exactly the days everyone is watching.
None of this is conspiracy; it is incentive gravity. But it has a cost, which is that the actual SpaceX-crypto story, the one the proxy myth crowds out, goes underreported, and it is novel.
Where SpaceX actually touches crypto
Strip away the treasury myth and three real interfaces remain, each stranger and more consequential than eight basis points.
The first is the shadow market, the crypto-native venues that traded SpaceX before SpaceX was tradable. Hyperliquid’s SPCX perpetual, launched pre-IPO against an implied valuation, ran to an all-time high of $228.74, tracked the listed stock’s collapse tick for tick, and hosted the kind of position the equity market cannot: a whale running a combined 40x-leveraged $60 million Bitcoin short against a 10x $14 million SpaceX short, a pure risk-regime trade executed entirely on crypto rails. The xStocks tokenized version, SPCXx, trades on offshore exchanges at a $28.7 million market cap, down 46% from its peak. These venues made SpaceX crypto’s most-traded equity story of the year, not because the company holds coins, but because crypto built the only infrastructure through which global retail could touch the IPO of the decade, before, during, and after. That is a market-structure fact with regulatory consequences, and it needs no treasury myth to matter.
The second is the tokenized-equity reckoning the IPO forced, the subject of this publication’s continuing settlement audit. Multiple platforms sold pre-IPO SpaceX exposure, mirror tokens, contingent notes, SPV claims, at implied valuations up to $1.6 trillion, and the listing was the stress test: some products converted, some paid out against reference prices that the broken IPO has since undercut, and some were scrapped entirely, with platforms unable to secure share allocations refunding buyers, a quiet admission that the products’ connection to the underlying was aspirational. A $117 stock against vintages sold at $1.35 to $1.6 trillion implied valuations means the late buyers of tokenized SpaceX lost money on the most successful IPO in history, which is the single best case study yet in what these instruments actually are, and the industry has mostly declined to run the numbers.
The third is the disclosure precedent. The S-1 converted the world’s most speculated-about private Bitcoin position into an SEC-filed fact, revealed that the true stack was double the on-chain estimate, and placed the position inside quarterly reporting forever: the September 2 earnings report will mark the coins to market in public, every quarter, applying fair-value accounting to a treasury the company has never once explained the purpose of. Combined with Tesla, Musk-controlled entities now disclose 30,221 BTC, about $1.9 billion, across two public balance sheets, and the honest version of the treasury story is forward-looking: not that the coins move the stock, but that a company this large filing Bitcoin on its balance sheet normalizes the line item for every CFO who reads S-1s for a living, at eight basis points of risk, which may be precisely the allocation size that makes imitation thinkable. The proxy myth claims SpaceX matters to Bitcoin’s price. The truth is smaller and larger: it matters to Bitcoin’s paperwork.
The index backdoor, sized honestly
One thread of the proxy narrative deserves separate treatment, because unlike the rest it contains a real mechanism, just at a scale its retellers never compute: the claim that SpaceX’s Nasdaq-100 inclusion put Bitcoin into every index fund in America.
The mechanism is genuine. SpaceX qualified for accelerated Nasdaq-100 entry under the revised eligibility rules for large new listings, and JPMorgan’s estimate put the resulting passive demand around $4.3 billion as index-tracking funds bought their required weight. Every dollar of that flow purchased a claim on all of SpaceX’s assets, coins included, which means QQQ holders, target-date funds, and every 401(k) with Nasdaq-100 exposure now do, in the strictest sense, own Bitcoin through SPCX. The backdoor exists. Now size it.
Eight basis points of the position bought means the $4.3 billion of passive inflows acquired roughly $3.3 million of look-through Bitcoin exposure, in aggregate, across every fund tracking the index. A single QQQ investor with a $100,000 position holds, through SpaceX, on the order of a few dollars of Bitcoin, less than the round-up feature on a coffee app. Add Tesla’s basis points and the grand look-through Bitcoin content of the American index complex via Musk vehicles remains a sum that would not fund a mid-tier ETF’s marketing budget.
The honest version of the index story is therefore not about exposure; it is about normalization, and there it has real content. Index membership means the Bitcoin line survives every quarterly rebalance without any active manager’s decision, appears in the look-through disclosures of fiduciary products, and gets audited, footnoted, and carried by administrators who a decade ago would have escalated its existence to a risk committee. The precedent stack matters more than the dollars: Strategy entered major indices as a de facto Bitcoin fund and forced the classification conversation; Tesla normalized the treasury line for operating companies; SpaceX now normalizes it at IPO scale, inside the index complex, at a size, eight basis points, small enough that no fiduciary objects. That last clause is the strategic insight the proxy myth obscures. The meaningful corporate-Bitcoin question was never whether giant companies would bet themselves on the asset, Strategy exists for that, but whether the line item could become boring, a standard minor allocation that passes every committee precisely because it is immaterial. SpaceX’s eight basis points, held wordlessly, filed routinely, and now owned fractionally by every indexed retirement account in the country, is what boring looks like at the moment of its creation. The coins do not move the stock, and that, not the proxy fantasy, is exactly why they matter.
What to watch
September 2. The first earnings report puts the Bitcoin line under fair-value accounting in public, with whatever explanation management finally offers, the first ever, for why the coins exist. Any addition, disposal, or stated policy would be real news, as opposed to the wallet-dust genre.
The December lockup. 911.5 million shares unlock around the 180-day mark, the genuine overhang the proxy narrative keeps misattributing to crypto. Watch whether the coverage narrates lockup-driven weakness as Bitcoin contagion; it will, and it will be wrong for the reason this piece exists.
The shadow-market basis. The spread between SPCX equity, the Hyperliquid perp, and the tokenized versions is a live measure of what crypto rails price that Nasdaq does not, and the first venue to break correlation in a stress event will teach everyone which market leads.
Any actual treasury motion. The July test transactions preceded nothing, but a company below its IPO price with $1.18 billion in non-core coins and a history of one prior custody consolidation is a company whose CFO knows the position is sellable. A disposal would be the one event that converts eight basis points into a story, not for SpaceX’s stock, but for the corporate-treasury imitators watching what the biggest name on the holders list does under pressure.
The Bitcoin proxy is the rare market myth that a single division refutes and no division will kill, because it is not a claim, it is a content format. SpaceX’s coins are eight basis points of a rocket company; its actual gravity in crypto runs through the shadow markets that traded it, the tokenized products it stress-tested, and the disclosure regime it just joined. The stock will keep falling or recover on launches, lockups, and Starlink, the coins will keep being 18,712, and the headlines will keep connecting them, because the headline economy, unlike the balance sheet, genuinely does run on Bitcoin.
One final decomposition completes the audit: the time dimension. The proxy narrative is not only too large by a factor of a thousand; it is also aimed at the wrong date. SpaceX’s Bitcoin position, at eight basis points, cannot matter to SPCX holders now, but the ratio is not a constant, it is a quotient with two moving parts, and both are volatile. If the AI-era valuation reset that has taken the stock 48% off its peak continued severely, and Bitcoin simultaneously ran a strong cycle, the arithmetic compresses: a hypothetical SpaceX at a quarter of its current valuation against Bitcoin at a prior-peak $126,000 would put the coins near seven-tenths of a percent of the company, still small, but an order of magnitude toward mattering, and the reflexive coverage would finally have a number worth quoting. The scenario is not a prediction; it is a boundary condition that clarifies what the proxy claim would require to become true: a catastrophic equity repricing paired with a Bitcoin supercycle, which is to say, the exact configuration in which SPCX holders would have far larger problems than their look-through coin exposure. The more realistic time-path runs the other way. SpaceX’s revenue is compounding through Starlink, its valuation, whatever its multiple, is a claim on growth, while the Bitcoin position is static at 18,712 coins absent new purchases, meaning the default trajectory of the ratio is toward zero, the coins mattering less every quarter the company grows. The proxy myth, examined closely, is therefore a bet against SpaceX dressed as a bet on Bitcoin, which is perhaps the most concise demonstration available of how little arithmetic its retellers have run. The position’s real future is the boring one this piece has argued throughout: a footnote that compounds nothing, disturbs nothing, and normalizes everything, marked to market every quarter in the world’s most-read filings.
Frequently asked questions
How much Bitcoin does SpaceX hold, and what is it worth?
18,712 BTC, disclosed in the company’s S-1 ahead of its June 12 IPO, acquired at a cost basis of roughly $661 million, about $35,300 per coin, and valued near $1.29 billion at the March 31 balance-sheet date. At current Bitcoin prices near $63,000 the position marks at approximately $1.18 billion, ranking SpaceX among the largest corporate Bitcoin holders in absolute terms.
Why is the Bitcoin-proxy framing wrong?
Proportion. Against SpaceX’s roughly $1.56 trillion market value, the Bitcoin position is about 0.076% of the company, eight basis points. An ordinary 3% daily move in SPCX shifts roughly $47 billion of value, about forty times the entire coin stack, so Bitcoin’s price cannot meaningfully drive the stock. By contrast, Strategy’s Bitcoin exceeds its enterprise value, which is what an actual proxy looks like; even Tesla’s exposure, about 11 basis points, is marginally higher than SpaceX’s.
Then why did SPCX fall 48% while Bitcoin also fell?
Shared risk regime, separate mechanisms. The stock’s decline has named equity causes: profit-taking from a $225.64 peak, a failed Starship V3 test, the unpopular Cursor AI acquisition, a 911.5 million share lockup approaching, and a valuation that reached triple-digit multiples of revenue amid a broad AI repricing. Bitcoin’s weakness has macro causes. Correlated drawdowns across risk assets do not make one asset a proxy for another.
What was the significance of the July wallet movement?
Almost none, which is the point. A tagged SpaceX address moved about $88 of Bitcoin on July 8, its first activity in six months, and the transaction generated days of selloff speculation despite being test-transaction dust. The episode measured the proxy narrative’s appetite rather than any balance-sheet event, and no disposal followed.
What did the S-1 reveal that on-chain analysts missed?
More than half the position. Blockchain trackers had tagged roughly 8,285 BTC to SpaceX, while the filing disclosed 18,712, meaning about 10,427 BTC sat invisible in custodial arrangements that on-chain analysis cannot see. The gap is a landmark case study in the limits of wallet-tracking as a source of corporate treasury intelligence. Crypto.news has also explained reading corporate positions honestly when market narratives rely on incomplete institutional disclosures.
Where does SpaceX actually matter to crypto markets?
Three places. The shadow market: Hyperliquid’s SPCX perpetual and tokenized versions like SPCXx made SpaceX tradable on crypto rails before and after the IPO, hosting institutional-scale positions the equity market cannot. The tokenized pre-IPO products the listing stress-tested, some of which were scrapped with refunds while late vintages went underwater. And the disclosure precedent: quarterly fair-value reporting of a major Bitcoin treasury, normalizing the line item for other corporates.
Combined, how much Bitcoin do Musk’s companies hold?
Approximately 30,221 BTC across the two public companies, SpaceX’s 18,712 and Tesla’s 11,509, worth roughly $1.9 billion at current prices. Both positions are small relative to the companies’ valuations, and neither firm has articulated a treasury strategy for the holdings, which is part of what the September 2 SpaceX earnings report may finally address.
What would make SpaceX’s Bitcoin genuinely newsworthy?
Action or explanation. A disclosed purchase, disposal, or stated treasury policy at the September 2 earnings report would be the first substantive information about the position’s purpose since it was accumulated. A sale in particular would matter less for SPCX, where the sums are marginal, than as a signal to the corporate-treasury sector about what the largest name on the holders list does under a broken-IPO share price. This is not investment advice.
Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Market values, prices, and percentages reflect data available at the time of writing and change continuously. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security or asset. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 24, 2026.
Bitcoin mining’s annualized electricity demand rose to about 190 terawatt-hours in December 2025, up 38% from 138 the in June 2024, according to preliminary research reported by theEnergyMag.
Summary
- Bitcoin mining electricity use rose 38% to 190 TWh between June 2024 and December 2025.
- Hydropower became mining’s largest energy source as low-carbon power reached 59.4% of the reported mix.
- Only 10% of surveyed miners had already allocated power to AI or accelerated computing services.
Alexander Neumueller of the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance presented the figures at the Energy Investors Forum in Dallas. Cambridge expects to publish the second edition of its Digital Mining Industry Report later in 2026.
The research also found that hydropower had overtaken natural gas as Bitcoin mining’s largest single energy source. Low-carbon power supplied 59.4% of the reported mining mix, up from 52.4% in the previous study. However, total estimated greenhouse-gas emissions still increased by 20%, from about 40 million to 48 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalent.
Hydropower takes the largest share of mining power
The 2025 Cambridge Digital Mining Industry Report found that natural gas supplied 38.2% of surveyed miners’ electricity, making it the largest single source at the time. Renewables provided 42.6% in total, while nuclear power added 9.8%. Coal’s share had fallen to 8.9%, down from 36.6% in the earlier 2022 estimate.
The preliminary update changes that order. Hydropower now ranks ahead of natural gas, although Cambridge has not released the full breakdown for each source. Neumueller linked part of the change to stronger survey coverage in hydro-rich markets such as Ethiopia.Ethiopia expanded Bitcoin mining around low-cost electricity from the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam.
Electricity demand rises faster than emissions
The network’s annualized power use increased by about 52 TWh between the two reference points. Annualized demand measures the electricity Bitcoin mining would use over a year if the December 2025 rate continued. It does not mean miners consumed exactly 190 TWh during the 2025 calendar year.
Emissions rose more slowly than electricity demand because miners reported using a lower-carbon power mix. Even so, Cambridge’s estimate still increased from roughly 40 million to 48 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. The cleaner mix slowed the rate of emissions growth, but it did not offset higher overall electricity consumption.
More mining machines joined the network during the measured period, raising total computing power. Newer hardware can perform more calculations for each unit of electricity, but efficiency gains did not fully counter the increase in hashrate. Cambridge’s Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index tracks how prices, transaction fees, mining equipment and network difficulty can change estimated electricity demand over time.
Preliminary figures carry survey limits
Cambridge based the new estimates mainly on responses from mining companies representing slightly more than half of global Bitcoin hashrate. The wider coverage gives researchers a larger sample than the first report. However, the final publication may revise some figures after Cambridge completes further checks.
The 2025 report also warned that survey participation can distort geographic estimates. U.S. companies supplied a large share of responses, which likely overstated the country’s portion of global mining activity. The latest rise in reported hydropower may partly reflect better coverage of miners in Ethiopia and other markets that rely more heavily on hydroelectric generation.
Cambridge’s earlier study estimated 39.8 million tonnes of emissions using its survey-based method. A separate location-based model produced a much higher estimate of 69.6 million tonnes. The gap shows that results depend on assumptions about mining locations, electricity contracts, grid mixes and the use of stranded or flared energy.
Miners explore AI, but deployments remain limited
The new survey also examined whether Bitcoin miners are shifting power capacity into artificial intelligence and high-performance computing. About 10% of respondents said they had already allocated some power to AI or accelerated computing. More than 40% of the remaining miners said they were actively exploring the option.
Neumueller cautioned that “intent to look into it is not commitment to deploy.” AI data centers need costly networking, cooling and reliability systems that basic Bitcoin mining sites may not have. Miners can quickly reduce Bitcoin loads when electricity prices rise, while AI customers usually require steady power and stronger service guarantees.
Still, almost nine in ten respondents expected AI and HPC diversification to gain ground over the next several years. As crypto.news reported, listed miners have already announced more than $70 billion in AI and HPC contracts as they seek steadier revenue outside Bitcoin production.
The change is already visible in some company results. TeraWulf generated more revenue from HPC hosting than Bitcoin mining during the first quarter of 2026. It reported $21 million from HPC services, compared with less than $13 million from digital asset mining.
The Cambridge findings show two changes taking place together. Bitcoin mining uses more electricity, while hydropower and other low-carbon sources account for a larger share. At the same time, mining companies are assessing whether their power connections and sites can support AI services. Cambridge’s full report will provide a detailed energy breakdown and final methodology later in 2026.
The XRP Ledger added about $2.6 billion in tokenized real-world asset value during the past six months, excluding stablecoins, according to data from RWA.xyz.
Summary
- XRP Ledger added $2.6 billion in RWA value, ranking second among blockchains over six months.
- JMWH alone represents $2.23 billion, making tokenized energy XRPL’s largest real-world asset category by value.
- Most XRPL RWA value is represented, while distributed assets total only about $323 million currently.
That placed XRPL second among tracked blockchain networks for net RWA inflows during the period. BNB Chain ranked first with about $3 billion, while Stellar followed XRPL with roughly $2.1 billion.
The increase lifted XRPL’s combined distributed and represented RWA value to about $4.38 billion on July 26. The RWA.xyz dashboard listed $323.21 million in distributed assets and $4.06 billion in represented assets. The network also held $995.12 million in stablecoins, taking its broader total above $5.37 billion when those tokens are included.
XRP Ledger moves higher in RWA rankings
The six-month figures placed XRPL ahead of several larger smart-contract networks for new tokenized asset value. Solana added about $1.6 billion, while Avalanche attracted roughly $972 million. Ethereum remained the largest home for distributed tokenized assets, but its net addition during the measured period was lower at about $424 million.
The latest rise continues a trend visible earlier in 2026.XRPL moved into sixth place in the tokenized RWA rankings in February after adding $354 million in one month. A crypto.news report in July found that tokenized assets on the ledger had passed $3 billion as developers added compliance tools, permissioned trading and proposed lending features.
Tokenized energy drives most of XRPL’s total
Justoken’s JMWH product accounts for the largest share of XRPL’s RWA value. RWA.xyz valued the represented commodity asset at $2.229 billion on July 26. Each JMWH token represents one megawatt-hour of contracted energy output. The issuer mints tokens against energy agreements and burns them after the electricity is delivered and consumed.
The asset also shows why represented value and active onchain liquidity are not the same measure. RWA.xyz recorded only 19 JMWH holders, one active address over 30 days, no monthly transfers and no monthly transfer volume. The token therefore works mainly as a blockchain record for energy contracts rather than a widely traded asset. JMWH alone accounts for about 51% of XRPL’s total RWA value.
Justoken said it had tokenized more than $2.84 billion in total value across its products. In March, the company announced an energy tokenization project with Argentina-based power producer YPF Luz using the XRP Ledger. The wider product links blockchain records with contracts for electricity generation and consumption.
Distributed assets and stablecoins expand
XRPL’s distributed asset segment remains much smaller than its represented segment, but several financial products now operate on the network. RWA.xyz listed about $323 million in distributed assets. Ondo Finance, Braza Crypto, OpenEden Digital, Société Générale-FORGE and other issuers contribute to this category through tokenized Treasuries, credit products and regulated digital money.
Ripple’s RLUSD remains the largest stablecoin platform on XRPL. RWA.xyz showed about $894.7 million in RLUSD on the network, while all XRPL stablecoins totalled about $995.12 million. Braza Crypto ranked behind RLUSD with products worth about $83.4 million. Stablecoin transfer volume reached $4 billion over 30 days.
A May pilot also tested how tokenized funds can connect XRPL with bank payment rails. As crypto.news reported, Ripple redeemed part of its holdings in Ondo Finance’s OUSG Treasury product on XRPL. Mastercard sent settlement instructions to Kinexys by J.P. Morgan, which moved U.S. dollars to Ripple’s Singapore bank account.
Ondo said the asset leg settled in under five seconds. Ondo Finance President Ian De Bode called it the “first time tokenized U.S. Treasuries have settled across borders and banks in near real time.” The transaction combined a public blockchain asset transfer with traditional bank settlement.
RWA growth does not equal direct XRP demand
RWA growth measures asset value recorded or issued on the ledger. It does not show how much XRP investors purchased or how often they used the native token. Most institutional products can use XRPL for issuance and settlement while paying only small network fees in XRP. Stablecoins such as RLUSD can also handle the cash side of transactions without using XRP as a bridge asset.
The asset mix also matters when comparing networks. Represented assets refer to offchain holdings or contracts recorded on a blockchain, while distributed assets are issued and held more directly onchain. XRPL’s represented value accounts for more than 92% of its non-stablecoin RWA total. JMWH alone drives more than half of that figure.
Even so, XRPL has added more issuers and asset types during 2026. Its RWA count reached 373, while the number of tracked holders rose 14.29% over 30 days to 176. The ledger’s stablecoin holders reached about 60,080. These figures show a broader tokenization base, although ownership remains concentrated in several products.
Ripple and XRPL developers are also building infrastructure for regulated markets. Crypto.news reported that permissioned domains, credentials and a permissioned exchange layer now support identity-based access rules on the public ledger. Proposed lending standards could add fixed-term credit products if validators approve them. The next stage will depend on whether issuers turn the growing asset base into regular transfers, trading and settlement activity.
Shiba Inu rose 36% to about $0.0000057 on Sunday, adding roughly a billion dollars to its market value in a day, with no announcement or development to account for it.
The token now carries a market cap near $3.4 billion on almost $380 million of daily volume, its highest turnover ranking in months.
Nothing has emerged from Shibarium, the network’s layer-2, and the wider dog-token complex has lagged. Dogecoin gained 6% over the same stretch, and smaller-cap tokens moved as much as 10%, which pointed to something specific to SHIB rather than a rotation into memecoins.
South Korean buying stands out. Upbit’s SHIB/KRW pair is the single largest market at about $62 million, over a tenth of global volume, and it prints a slight premium to Binance and the other dollar venues.
The country’s traders are known to drive exuberant rallies in high-volatility tokens, and the token’s climb fits that pattern, with a first push late Saturday, nine flat hours, then a second move through the Asian morning.
Bitcoin’s price climbed slightly on Saturday evening after US President Donald Trump halted the planned attacks on Iran, and jumped to $64,500 before it retreated slightly.
Shiba Inu has stolen the show from the larger-cap alts, rocketing by over 35%. Most larger-cap alts are also in the green but in a more modest manner.
BTC Defends $64K
Last Monday began with a somewhat expected leg down that drove bitcoin south from $65,000 to $63,750. However, the asset reacted well, defended that support level, and jumped by two grand by the end of the day. Tuesday was even better in terms of gains, as the cryptocurrency jumped to roughly $67,000 on some exchanges to mark a monthly high.
After gaining over $3,000 in just over 24 hours, BTC was primed for a correction given the overall market landscape. It started to lose value gradually and dropped below $65,000 on Thursday. It initiated another breakout attempt on Friday, but it was stopped at $65,750. The subsequent rejection drove it south by $2,000.
The bulls finally intervened and didn’t allow another leg down. Instead, BTC showed some resilience around that level and remained at around $64,000 on Saturday and climbed to $64,500 later that day after Trump ordered the US military to stand down while waiting for the resumed talks between Iran and Oman.
For now, BTC stands above $64,000, with its market cap returning to $1.290 trillion on CG. Its dominance over the alts has risen to almost 57%.
SHIB Pumps Hard
In a rare reminder of the meme coin mania from a few years ago, Shiba Inu’s largest native token has rocketed by over 35% today to mark a two-month peak. PEPE is the other big gainer from the meme coin niche, surging by 9.6% daily and 26% in the past month. Dogecoin has risen by 5.8% to $0.073. VVV sits among the meme coin gainers, surging by 12% to $14.5. AVAX has pumped by 9% as well.
The rest of the larger-cap alts have posted significantly more modest increases. ETH is close to $1,900 after a 1.5% jump, XRP is back at $1.10, while HYPE is up by 2.5%, but it still trades below $60. ZEC and CC are also in the green.
The total crypto market cap has increased slightly since yesterday, but it’s still below $2.3 trillion on CG.
The post These Meme Coins Steal the Show as Bitcoin Defends $64K Support: Weekend Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.
BitMart will wind down its cryptocurrency exchange, ending all trading services on Aug. 26 before ceasing operations entirely on Jan. 31, 2027.
“After a careful evaluation of the Company’s operating conditions, market environment, and future strategic direction, BitMart has made the difficult decision to commence an orderly wind-down of its trading platform operations,” it said in a Sunday notice.
Under the shutdown plan, BitMart has stopped accepting new user registrations and deposits, while futures trading has entered reduce-only mode and spot markets no longer accept new orders.
BitMart joins a growing list of crypto trading platforms that have announced plans to close shop in recent months. Among them are BitMEX and Dango, which both said this week they would shut down their respective trading platforms.
Related: As BitMEX exits, analysts warn crypto consolidation is accelerating
BMX sinks amid withdrawal complaints
BitMart’s native token, BMX, lost nearly 70% of its value while users reported delayed withdrawals from the exchange.
BMX traded at about $0.09464 at the time of writing, down nearly 70% from about $0.31 late Friday. The token fell as low as $0.1058 early Saturday before extending its losses.
BMX resumes losses after Saturday’s brief recovery, falling below $0.10. Source: CoinGecko
Several users on X reported that withdrawals were taking longer than usual, with some claiming that Tether USDt (USDT) withdrawal requests remained pending for hours.
Arkham data showed wallets attributed to BitMart held about $71 million in crypto assets on Sunday, down from roughly $102 million on July 6. About $41.5 million was in stablecoin banking platform WeFi’s WFI tokens, while the tracked wallets held about $91,000 in USDT.
BitMart’s USDT balance over the past month. Source: Arkham
In its wind-down announcement, BitMart said some withdrawal requests could be subject to additional compliance and security reviews, potentially extending processing times.
BitMart did not respond to Cointelegraph’s request for comment before publication.
Related: BitMEX hit with 623 BTC lawsuit on day it announces shutdown
BMX? BMEX? BitMEX?
Some users on X also appeared to confuse BitMart and its BMX token with BitMEX.
On Saturday, an X user in the Mandarin-speaking crypto community who goes by “Brother Lu” drew attention to BMX’s price drop while speculating about its cause.
“The whole internet was posting yesterday that it was shutting down on Sept. 30. Did you just wake up?” another X user replied, according to a machine translation.
The reference to Sept. 30 did not match BitMEX’s Sept. 23 shutdown date announced Thursday. BitMEX’s own token, BMEX, fell 90% shortly after the notice.
Several other users in the Mandarin-speaking community also mixed up BMX with BitMEX.
It was not immediately clear whether the confusion had any impact on BMX trading.
Magazine: Here’s why the CLARITY Act’s ethics deal may be so hard to reach
The Bitcoin Policy Institute has joined the U.S. State Department’s Freedom Tech Excellence Program as a founding partner.
Summary
- Bitcoin Policy Institute staff will support temporary State Department assignments focused on digital freedom worldwide.
- Palantir, Anduril, and a human-rights foundation joined BPI as founding partners in the new programme.
- FTEP covers online expression, privacy tools, digital surveillance, scams, and responsible artificial intelligence governance standards.
The programme will place private-sector specialists inside the department for limited assignments tied to digital freedom and freedom of expression. Palantir Technologies, Anduril Industries and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation are the other founding partners.
BPI announced its role in a July 24 post on X. It said participating employees would work with State Department experts on online speech, privacy tools, digital surveillance and responsible artificial intelligence governance. The announcement did not state how many BPI employees will take part, when placements will begin or which offices will receive them.
State Department opens roles to outside specialists
The State Department describes FTEP as a talent partnership that brings private-sector workers into government for fixed periods. Participants remain linked to their organisations while supporting diplomatic projects in areas where the department wants more technical knowledge. They will also gain direct experience in foreign policy and international development.
The department lists several possible work areas. They include protecting online freedom of expression, countering unlawful surveillance and scams, expanding access to encryption and virtual private networks, supporting responsible AI governance and improving online safety for children. The programme is not a Bitcoin reserve, payment system or crypto licensing project.
BPI said the programme would allow its employees to “work alongside State Department experts and defend digital freedoms around the world.” However, neither party has released individual assignments. The scope may vary according to each participant’s skills and the needs of diplomatic teams.
BPI brings Bitcoin and privacy research into diplomacy
Founded in 2021, the Bitcoin Policy Institute describes itself as a non-partisan, non-profit research organisation. Its work covers Bitcoin policy, national security, financial inclusion, energy and human rights. The group has argued that encryption and open monetary networks can help journalists, dissidents and users in countries where governments restrict speech or financial access.
BPI’s inclusion does not mean the State Department will promote Bitcoin in every FTEP project. The official description focuses on broad digital-policy questions. BPI staff may advise on privacy technology, censorship-resistant systems or financial access, but the government has not named a Bitcoin deployment linked to the programme.
The group will continue its wider policy work outside FTEP. Its Freedom Tech DC summit is scheduled for September 22 and 23 in Washington. The event will bring together policymakers, researchers, investors and technology builders to discuss money, speech and computing systems. The summit is separate from the State Department partnership.
Palantir, Anduril and rights group join as partners
Palantir and Anduril bring experience in data software, defence technology and government contracts. The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation works on human rights, political repression and authoritarian governments. Together, the four organisations provide policy, engineering, national-security and civil-society backgrounds.
The department has not explained how it will divide projects among the partners. It has also not listed the countries, embassies or bureaus involved. Those details will determine whether placements focus on policy research, technical tools, staff training or overseas programmes.
FTEP uses limited-term assignments rather than permanent appointments. That structure can bring specialised staff into government without creating full-time roles. Partner employees may later return to their organisations with direct knowledge of diplomatic processes and government needs.
Bitcoin reserve advocacy remains a separate policy track
BPI has supported efforts to turn President Donald Trump’s Strategic Bitcoin Reserve order into federal law. Trump signed the executive order establishing the reserve on March 6, 2025. It created a reserve based on Bitcoin forfeited through criminal or civil proceedings and directed officials to study budget-neutral ways to acquire more BTC.
Senator Cynthia Lummis reintroduced the Bitcoin Act in March 2025 at a BPI-organised event. The bill proposed that the U.S. government acquire one million BTC, but it had not completed passage when FTEP was announced. The State Department programme does not advance that bill or give BPI authority over federal Bitcoin.
The reserve also remains under development. As crypto.news reported in July 2026, federal officials were still reviewing which agency could legally control the assets and how custody should work. The White House order named the Treasury, while later discussions also involved the Commerce and Justice departments.
FTEP therefore gives BPI a role in a foreign-policy talent programme, not control over U.S. crypto policy. Its work will centre on assigned digital-freedom projects. Further updates should show how many experts take part, where they serve and which technologies the programme uses.
BMX, the platform’s token, fell to about 8 cents, down 58% over 24 hours, cutting its market value to roughly $27 million. The token was already down about 70% over the past year, so Sunday’s drop extended a long decline rather than starting one.
The exchange’s trading figures are significant, despite the closure. BitMart reported about $1.6 billion in 24-hour volume, up 51% from the previous period, with bitcoin accounting for nearly half of it. That jump more plausibly reflects users unwinding positions and moving funds out than any fresh demand, but it leaves open why a platform still clearing that kind of flow is closing.
Meanwhile, the withdrawal terms carry more friction than a routine exit. BitMart said requests may face additional review covering identity verification, device and IP checks, withdrawal-address screening, source-of-funds questions and sanctions checks, and warned that processing could stretch if request volumes spike.
BitMart lost about $196 million to a hot-wallet breach in December 2021, one of the larger exchange hacks of that cycle, and covered customer losses at the time.
In another relatively boring and uneventful trading day during the weekend, in which most cryptocurrencies have remained sideways, the second-largest meme coin by market cap exploded in a rare reminder of what the niche used to do a few years ago.
Some of the potential reasons behind this massive surge seem to be related to a returning whale and other on-chain factors.
SHIB’s Big Pump
The popular meme coin, once touted as the Dogecoin killer, actually began its ascent yesterday evening. It stood below $0.0000042 before it shot up to $0.0000052 and to $0.0000058 earlier today, posting a massive double-digit surge. The latter became its highest price tag in just over two months.
Recall that the token was rejected at $0.0000067 in May, and the subsequent painful correction drove it south toward $0.000004, which translated into a multi-year low. As such, SHIB has now returned to the top 30 alts by market cap as its own has jumped to over $3.3 billion on CoinGecko.
Moreover, it has solidified its spot as the second-largest meme coin by that metric, even though a few others have posted impressive gains as well. PEPE is up by 9%, M has added 4%, while DOGE has jumped by 5.5%.
Why Is That?
Surging by double digits on a random Sunday used to be the norm in the meme coin space years ago. However, the niche has fallen out of investors’ grace lately, with interest dwindling over time. As such, it’s intriguing to see what the latest developments in the Shiba Inu ecosystem are that might have propelled this rally.
The one thing that stands out on X is the behavior of a certain SHIB whale who has resumed accumulating after over half a year of inactivity. According to reports, the unknown market participant has splashed $125,000 to accumulate over 30 billion tokens. Although one standalone purchase cannot guarantee a 35% jump, it can be regarded as the market signal other investors are waiting for to join.
The SHIB token burn mechanism also shows a massive surge in the past day of over 3,200% (and 500% weekly). This means that the actual number of coins in circulation has declined violently, which is typically a bullish signal.
SHIB coins stored on crypto exchanges have also fallen in the past few weeks, according to data from CryptoQuant. Lastly, some analysts argued that the asset has broken out of key resistance levels and trendlines, while the community rejoices in the move, indicating that it’s finally paying off after “years of accumulation.”
The post Shiba Inu Price Soars 35% on a Dull Day as Whale Returns With Massive SHIB Purchase appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Robinhood is reportedly holding talks with Crypto.com about adding the exchange’s event contracts to its prediction markets hub.
Summary
- Robinhood reportedly wants Crypto.com contracts to broaden its prediction market exchange network and product range.
- Any agreement could deepen Robinhood’s competition with Kalshi while reducing reliance on a single provider.
- Federal and state regulators remain divided over who controls sports-linked event contracts across the U.S.
The proposed arrangement would let Robinhood users trade yes-or-no contracts supplied by Crypto.com, according to people familiar with the discussions cited by The Wall Street Journal. Neither company has announced an agreement, and the report said the talks may not result in a completed deal.
https://x.com/WSJmarkets/status/2080785057954902434?s=20
The discussions come as Robinhood builds a wider network of exchanges rather than relying on one source of event contracts. A company spokesperson said Robinhood “will continue to partner with multiple exchanges” to give customers a broad and reliable market. The strategy could add Crypto.com alongside Kalshi, ForecastEx and Rothera, the exchange created through Robinhood’s venture with Susquehanna International Group.
Robinhood seeks more prediction market suppliers
Robinhood launched its prediction markets hub in March 2025 with contracts routed through Kalshi, a Commodity Futures Trading Commission-regulated exchange. Its products cover outcomes tied to sports, politics, economics and other public events. Robinhood later added ForecastEx and began routing contracts through Rothera in June 2026.
Rothera gives Robinhood a closer link to the exchange layer because Robinhood owns the venture with Susquehanna. The company said in June that the new route lowered customer trading costs. Adding Crypto.com would create another source of contracts and could help Robinhood maintain product availability when one exchange lacks a market or faces a service issue.
Crypto.com expands event contract distribution
Crypto.com already offers prediction trading through Crypto.com Derivatives North America, a CFTC-regulated exchange and clearinghouse. Its contracts use a simple yes-or-no format based on future events. The company also launched OG Prediction Markets as a separate platform in February 2026 and has expanded distribution through partners.
In June, FanDuel Predicts expanded its offering with sports, entertainment and combination contracts supplied through Crypto.com and OG Prediction Markets. Crypto.com has also announced a planned prediction-market integration with Truth Social, although The Wall Street Journal reported that the product had not launched by July 24. A Robinhood deal would place its contracts before another large retail trading audience.
Kalshi rivalry grows as revenue forecasts rise
Robinhood and Kalshi started as distribution partners, but their businesses now overlap more directly. Kalshi has expanded beyond standard event contracts, while Robinhood has built Rothera and added more exchange partners. Kalshi chief executive Tarek Mansour described Robinhood as both a partner and a competitor, adding, “We’ll see who ends up with a better product.”
The reported Crypto.com talks arrived after Bernstein raised its Robinhood share-price target to $160 from $130. The firm estimated that Robinhood’s prediction-market revenue could reach about $1.7 billion by 2028. As crypto.news previously reported, Bernstein also forecast $586 million in Robinhood prediction-market revenue for 2026, supported by higher World Cup activity and Rothera volumes.
Bernstein expects total prediction-market trading volume to grow from about $51 billion in 2025 to $1 trillion by 2030. The projection assumes wider distribution, more institutional use and clearer rules. Sports contracts currently generate much of the activity, but analysts expect economic, political and business contracts to form a larger share over time.
State and federal regulators remain divided
Robinhood’s possible expansion comes during a legal fight over who can regulate event contracts. The CFTC says federal law gives it exclusive authority over commodity derivatives traded on registered exchanges. In 2026, the agency sued several states after officials moved against prediction-market operators.
States argue that some sports-related contracts function like gambling and should follow local licensing, age and consumer-protection rules. Wisconsin’s actions included complaints against Crypto.com and Robinhood, along with Kalshi, Polymarket and Coinbase.the CFTC responded by seeking to block the state’s enforcement and preserve federal oversight.
The conflict has produced different rulings and restrictions across the country. New York sued Coinbase and Gemini over claims that their event-contract products violated state gambling rules. The CFTC later filed its own case against New York and maintained that federal law takes priority.
Any Robinhood-Crypto.com arrangement would still depend on contract availability, regulatory status and the final terms between the companies. Robinhood has not confirmed that Crypto.com contracts will appear in its app. For now, the talks show that the company is considering another supplier as competition grows among exchanges, brokers and crypto platforms seeking a larger share of event trading.
Binance runs simulated phishing attacks against its employees every month to reduce social engineering risks.
Summary
- Binance runs monthly phishing simulations to measure employee awareness and identify weak security habits early.
- Workers who fail receive training, while repeated severe failures can lower ratings and risk dismissal.
- Recruiter lures and fake conference invitations mirror scams already causing large losses across cryptocurrency firms.
Chief security officer Jimmy Su said the exchange’s red team creates fake attacks to test whether staff recognise suspicious messages, links and requests. Employees who fail must complete follow-up training. Repeated failures can also affect performance ratings and may lead to dismissal.
The programme targets human errors that attackers use to enter crypto companies. Binance has operated the drills for three to four years, according to Su. He said the company’s security habits had improved during that period. Binance reports 323 million registered users, while DefiLlama tracks about $137.5 billion in assets linked to the exchange.
Binance ties phishing tests to staff reviews
The red team uses methods that resemble real attacks. One test may present a fake recruiter offering a job. Another may promise free access to a conference and request personal details. The team records whether employees open the message, follow a link or share information that could expose company systems.
Su said workers who fail receive remedial training. Repeated failure “will negatively impact their rating,” he said. Severe cases may push a worker’s rating to the lowest level and result in dismissal. The policy gives employees a direct work-related reason to verify unexpected messages before responding.
Binance has described its red team as an internal group of ethical hackers that tests systems from an attacker’s point of view. The exchange also works with external researchers through bug bounty programmes. Its security model covers technical weaknesses and employee behaviour because attackers may enter through trusted accounts or devices.
Social engineering drives crypto security cases
The drills come as social engineering causes a large share of reported crypto losses. AMLBot reviewed more than 2,500 investigations and found that 65% of the cases it handled in 2025 began with social engineering rather than direct software exploits. Phishing represented 18% of its cases, while device compromise accounted for 13%.
Attackers often spend days or months building trust before asking a target to open a file, approve a wallet request or run a command. This method can defeat technical controls when a worker has access to private keys, administrator accounts or internal systems. Stolen credentials can lead directly to liquid assets that move across blockchains within minutes.
As crypto.news reported, the April 2026 attack on Drift Protocol drained about $285 million after attackers compromised an administrator key. Researchers linked the breach to social engineering and operational security failures rather than faulty smart contracts. The attacker changed market settings and withdrawal limits before removing assets across dozens of transactions.
Fake meetings and job offers remain common lures
Su identified fake job interviews as one scenario used in Binance’s tests. Real attackers use the same approach against developers, executives and investment teams. They may move a conversation from LinkedIn, Telegram or email into a video meeting, then claim that the victim’s camera or microphone needs an update.
North Korea-linked hackers have used compromised Telegram accounts and deepfake Zoom calls to contact crypto professionals. The attackers impersonated known contacts and asked victims to install files that claimed to fix audio problems. Those files instead delivered malware capable of accessing devices, browser data and crypto wallets.
A Venus Protocol user lost about $13.5 million in September 2025 after approving a malicious transaction. Venus paused its lending platform and recovered the assets through an emergency governance process. The case showed how a user-level compromise can place assets at risk even when a protocol’s contracts remain intact.
Frequent drills aim to reduce predictable errors
Monthly simulations let Binance compare failure rates and update training when attackers change their methods. A single annual course may not prepare staff for new lures built around current events, trusted contacts or job offers. Frequent tests also show whether workers report suspicious messages instead of only deleting them.
However, simulations cannot remove every risk. Attackers can hijack genuine accounts, copy earlier conversations and use artificial intelligence to create convincing audio, video and written messages. Firms still need access controls, transaction limits, device monitoring and fast incident response alongside employee training.
Su said Binance’s early security habits “left a lot to be desired,” but repeated testing brought improvement. The exchange treats staff awareness as part of its wider defence system rather than a one-time compliance task. Employees still need to verify unusual requests through a separate channel before opening files, sharing information or approving transactions.
The House | Continuity has been just as important as change in Burnham’s first week
Lucas Herbert Has 4-Shot Lead On Bryson DeChambeau After Round 2 Of LIV Golf UK
How Film Industry Data Website The-Numbers.com Got Mauled By Bots
-
Fashion2 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Politics7 days agoDemocrats look to World Cup watch parties to register thousands of voters
-
News Videos7 days agoBig Money Is Entering XRP
-
Tech5 days agoSail Virtually Aboard The “Itanic” With IA-64 Emulator
-
Tech5 days agoTurtle Beach Command Series KB7 review: a nifty screen-equipped gaming keyboard
-
Crypto World5 days agoGrayscale Files For Worldcoin ETF, WLD Registers Sharp Rise
-
NewsBeat6 days agoUnregistered fitter used Gas Safe logo on business flyers
-
Business4 days agoNew Jersey voter registration controversy explained: How 6,600 noncitizens got on the rolls, and what happens next
-
Entertainment5 days agoJohnny Depp’s R-Rated Gothic Cult Classic Gets New Release Ahead of Sydney Sweeney Remake
-
Crypto World3 days agoEthics, other provisions in crypto Clarity Act to be further discussed
-
Tech6 days agoWatch Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley discuss the future of surveillance at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026
-
NewsBeat5 days agoShanghai science forum photos show China’s AI and robotics advances in rivalry with US
-
Crypto World6 days agoCircle’s President Sold Over 360,000 Shares, The Filings Explain Why
-
Tech6 days agoSubway Sandwich Computers Get a Second Life as Gaming Machines
-
Sports2 days ago2026 3M Open leaderboard: Scottie Scheffler finds putter in Round 1, sits three back
-
News Videos3 days agoThe Peugeot Family: How 200 Years of an “Old Money” Dynasty Died in A Boardroom
-
Fashion2 days ago16 Dresses for the High Summer Event
-
Tech7 days agoHow To Use Claude’s Reflect Dashboard And Learn When It’s Time To Touch Grass
-
Tech6 days agoThe 35 Best Board Games for Family Game Night
-
Entertainment6 days agoStephen Colbert Returns to Social Media After Late Show End
You must be logged in to post a comment Login