Crypto World
Base tokenized stock volume reaches $100 million
Base tokenized stocks have recorded a new daily decentralized exchange trading high of $100 million, with Aerodrome controlling more than three-quarters of the category’s monthly volume.
Summary
- Base tokenized stocks reached $100 million in daily DEX volume, setting a new network record.
- Token Terminal reported $730.9 million in Base tokenized-stock trading volume over the preceding thirty days.
- Aerodrome generated $557.1 million of volume, representing 76% of the measured monthly market on Base.
- Uniswap v4 ranked second after processing $139.3 million of Base tokenized-stock trades during period measured.
- Coinbase launched four products before adding six tokenized stocks referencing public and private companies later.
Token Terminal reported on Sept. 12 that tokenized-stock DEX volume on Base reached $730.9 million during the preceding 30 days. Aerodrome processed $557.1 million, representing 76% of the total, while Uniswap v4 handled $139.3 million.
The two exchanges generated $696.4 million collectively, accounting for more than 95% of the recorded volume. Based on the reported figures, the remaining Base venues processed approximately $34.5 million.
Base founder Jesse Pollak shared the record and noted that the category had grown from zero to $100 million in daily volume. Coinbase introduced its first Base-native stock tokens on Aug. 24, less than three weeks before Token Terminal published the latest data.
Aerodrome captured most Base tokenized stock trading
Aerodrome’s $557.1 million total was approximately four times the volume handled by Uniswap v4. The figures measure the value of completed swaps, not the value of stocks held in custody or revenue received by either decentralized exchange.
Every trade contributes to volume, meaning the same token can be counted repeatedly as it changes hands. Token Terminal did not publish a breakdown showing the number of participating wallets, average transaction size or volume generated by each stock token.
Aerodrome uses liquidity pools to execute trades on Base. Users and professional market makers deposit paired assets into the pools, allowing traders to exchange tokens without sending orders through a centralized exchange.
Uniswap v4 offers a separate source of liquidity. The protocol’s programmable hooks let pool developers customize fees, liquidity management and access conditions. Uniswap v4’s $139.3 million represented close to 19% of the reported monthly market.
Neither dataset established how much trading occurred during regular U.S. equity-market hours. The tokens can trade outside the operating hours of Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange, creating periods when their onchain prices move without an active primary-market price for the referenced shares.
Base tokenized stocks grew from four to ten products
Coinbase launched the initial tokenized-stock group on Aug. 24 for eligible investors outside the U.S. The first products referenced Apple, Nvidia, Alphabet and Meta through the AAPLc, NVDAc, GOOGLc and METAc tickers.
Coinbase later introduced tokens connected to Amazon, Microsoft, Strategy, SanDisk, Tesla and SpaceX. Base announced the six-product expansion in September. SpaceX is privately held and does not have shares listed on a public exchange. Its inclusion means the Base product group covers both listed equities and a private-company asset. Separate issuance, transfer and valuation rules may apply to a private-share token.
The products use the B20 standard developed for Base. B20 is compatible with the network’s smart-contract applications and can support identity checks, compliance controls and restrictions established by an issuer.
Coinbase describes its tokenization infrastructure as a system for issuing, trading and managing assets with compliance functions. Its dedicated platform connects token issuance with Base and Coinbase’s other trading and custody products.
Availability remains subject to location and eligibility rules. The initial launch targeted customers outside the U.S., although the tokens reference shares in U.S. companies and trade on a blockchain developed by Coinbase.
Underlying shares back the public stock tokens
Coinbase says its listed-equity tokens are backed one-for-one by underlying shares held through Alpaca, a U.S. brokerage infrastructure provider. The product structure is designed to connect every issued token with a corresponding share in custody.
As crypto.news previously reported, the initial four products gave holders beneficial ownership connected to underlying shares. They were not described as synthetic contracts supported only by a general collateral pool.
One-for-one backing does not mean a token is legally identical to a conventional share held directly in a brokerage account. The governing agreements determine voting rights, dividend treatment, redemption procedures and claims against the issuer or custodian.
Custody arrangements create their own operational considerations. Token holders rely on the issuer and broker to maintain accurate records, hold sufficient shares and process corporate actions affecting the underlying securities.
Traditional corporate actions can include dividends, stock splits, mergers and tender offers. Each product’s terms determine how those events reach token holders and whether any payment is distributed in cash, stablecoins or additional tokens.
The legal position of a holder may depend on whether the blockchain record represents direct registered ownership, beneficial ownership through an intermediary or a separate contractual claim. Investors must review the documentation for each product before treating a stock token as equivalent to a conventional share.
SEC guidance separates different token structures
The Securities and Exchange Commission addressed the legal structure of tokenized securities in a January statement. The agency said securities may be tokenized by their original issuers or by unaffiliated third parties. An issuer-sponsored token can place ownership records directly on distributed-ledger technology. A third-party structure may provide beneficial ownership, a security entitlement or only economic exposure linked to another asset.
The SEC said tokenization does not remove an instrument from federal securities law. Legal treatment depends on the rights represented by the token and the relationships among the investor, issuer, broker, custodian and underlying company.
Federal banking agencies have expressed a similar distinction when discussing tokenized assets. The Federal Reserve’s guidance separates tokens representing ownership in an underlying security from instruments that merely reference another asset.
Neither statement specifically approved Coinbase’s Base products. The guidance provides a framework for determining whether a token represents the share itself, an indirect ownership interest or a debt-style claim against a third party.
Base stock tokens were initially offered outside the U.S., but their connection to U.S. securities gives the project a direct American market angle. Alpaca’s role as broker and custodian introduces another link to U.S. financial rules.
Monthly volume will depend on continued liquidity
Token Terminal’s $730.9 million figure uses a rolling 30-day period. The total will change as daily trading activity enters and leaves the measurement window.
Aerodrome’s 76% share could move if liquidity providers transfer assets to Uniswap v4 or another Base exchange. New token listings may create separate pools and distribute activity across more venues.
The current data does not show whether the $100 million daily record resulted from sustained participation or a short burst of trading. Wallet counts, trade sizes and daily volume following the record would provide more information about the source of the activity.
Crypto.news reported that Robinhood Chain reached $945 million in daily DEX volume in August, with tokenized assets contributing to activity on that network. Robinhood’s products use a different legal and issuance structure from the beneficial-ownership model described for Coinbase’s Base stock tokens. Token Terminal had not announced a revised Base record or a new 30-day figure after its Sept. 12 post at the time of publication.
We all know at least one or two adults who like to have things done for them: someone to run their errands, drive them to the doctor, pick up their medications and groceries. My mother was like this. I was what is referred to as the parentified child, taking care of her since I was a young girl until she died seven years ago. I was so put off by my mother’s complete reliance on other people that I went in the opposite direction; I became a psychologist who strongly prefers to do everything for herself.
I learned over time that the problem with excessive self-reliance or stoicism is that it isn’t always, or even often, effective. As a psychologist, I had to learn and teach myself, as well as my patients, the importance of asking for help when one needs it. As I tell my patients (and as I learned to tell myself), we do ourselves a disservice by not asking for and accepting help when we need it.
No one can go through life alone. Humans are social beings, and we are designed to be interconnected with one another. Being able to effectively ask for and receive help also makes us stronger and more independent over time.
There are many reasons why people don’t like to ask for help. One is we think we should be able to do everything for ourselves. We feel like if we ask others for help that we will look weak or needy. We might fear rejection or are concerned with imposing on others. We may be concerned that asking someone for help gives people some kind of power or leverage over us. We may even believe that receiving help from others means we owe someone something back.
Believe me, I get it. I have some of those same cognitive distortions in my thinking as well. I need to give myself grace and compassion for having such thoughts, and then push through them.
The next step is figuring out what help we could benefit from, and knowing how, when, and who to ask for help. Doing this helps set us up for success.
Humans aren’t perfect. We aren’t supposed to have all the answers, capabilities, or capacities. I encourage the people I work with to take an inventory of the needs that they have. We have to understand that, as emotionally healthy adults, we need to meet many of our own needs ourselves. Some of our needs we can ask other people for help with, and some of our needs will go unmet.
Once we figure out the needs we have, we can spot which ones might benefit from support and assistance. Let’s say we don’t want to go to the end-of-summer company picnic alone and would prefer a plus-one to come with us. There’s nothing wrong—and, dare I say, everything right—with asking another person to accompany us. But we need to be strategic.
First, pick a supportive person to ask. (This isn’t a task for your least-social friend.) Then, ask politely. When we ask for help, we might want to consider what our body language, posture, tone of voice, and choice of words say about us and our request. For example, if we stand in front of someone with our arms crossed over our chests, this often signals defensiveness or a lack of openness. If we slump or shrug, avoid eye contact, or point a finger, this also doesn’t invite people in. Similarly, making demands, threats, or insults—or insisting someone help us—can also be off-putting, and decrease our chances of getting support.
I really like a treatment called Seeking Safety. Though originally designed for trauma survivors who have co-occurring PTSD and substance abuse, these are behavioral, cognitive, and people skills that have wider applicability. For example, in regards to asking for help, the method suggests that people consider starting small, practicing on safe people with simple requests. It may seem obvious, but your odds of getting a ride to a job interview or doctor’s appointment are higher than if you ask someone for money to pay this month’s rent or the next car payment.
Of course, there are other great treatments and resources for learning related social skills. For example, the psychologist Donald Meichanbaum has written extensively on the skills needed for interpersonal effectiveness, behavioral rehearsal, and problem-solving.
When we ask for help, we also must be prepared for someone to say no. If they do, we must learn not to take it personally. Most of the time, their reasons for refusal are not about us. It could be about their own time management, finances, or resources.
I reached out to Adam Brown, a psychologist and professor at the New School for Social Research who has conducted research on factors that contribute to mental-health risks and resilience. “Strong social connections and support are among the most important protective factors when people face stress, adversity, and difficult life circumstances,” he said. “Asking for help is not a sign of weakness. It is a form of adaptive coping that strengthens relationships, reduces isolation, and creates opportunities to gain new perspectives, learn from others, and grow.”
I agree, and I need that reminder sometimes when my old imprint comes back to me, and I think that I need to have all the answers and take care of everyone but me.
I’m human. I deserve support, connection, and help, just like everyone else. And so do you.
Passports, selfies and financial transaction histories of some customers were revealed to a fraudster using a government agency domain.
For the ninth consecutive week, the exchange-traded funds tracking the popular cross-border token were in the green, attracting nearly $19 million, similar to the previous week.
The cumulative total net inflows hit another all-time high, but the underlying asset continues to struggle with its breakout attempts as its mid-August rally came to a halt.
Another ATH
During the last full week of August, the spot XRP ETFs marked their best performance since early December 2025, attracting $110.49 million. This followed another impressive week, in which the net inflows neared $40 million.
The inflows slowed down at the start of September but remained well in the green. Although there was still a single day in the red for the first time in a month, the funds gained $18.96 million during the week that ended on September 4. The next one, which was just four business days long, saw similar inflows of $18.98 million.
The numbers on Tuesday were quite modest, with just $1.55 million. However, Wednesday brought $12.29 million, followed by another $5.14 million on Thursday. Interestingly, Friday was a no-action day, according to data from SoSoValue, with net flows of $0.00. This was rather unexpected given the massive market turbulence that day, but more on that later.
Ultimately, the XRP ETFs reached another all-time high of $1.7 billion. Bitwise’s XRP fund, which recently surpassed $500 million in assets, has extended its cumulative net inflow lead – $608 million compared with $490 million for Canary Capital’s XRPC.
XRP Still Struggles
The underlying asset exploded during the market breakout between August 19 and 22, skyrocketing by 70% in less than 72 hours. It jumped from $1.00 to $1.70, where it was rejected and driven south hard, despite the positive ETF flows.
It tried to take down the crucial $1.40 resistance in the past week, only to be halted again. On Friday, it went through a wild two-hour ride after the release of the CPI numbers. It went from $1.36 to $1.32 before it soared to almost $1.45. However, it was stopped once again, and now struggles below $1.40.
Crypto analysts are now split on its short-term potential. Ali Martinez, for instance, warned that whales have started to secure profits, while the network activity has dumped hard, which could lead to another leg down. In contrast, Celal Kucuker outlined a pattern that previously led to a 600% surge and suggested that it could run it back.
The post XRP ETFs Smash Another All-Time High as Inflow Streak Hits 9 Weeks appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Uniswap has processed more than $70 billion in trading volume over the past month, exceeding the combined volume attributed to the next three decentralized exchanges in its cited ranking.
Summary
- Uniswap processed more than $70B in decentralized exchange volume during the latest monthly period measured.
- The protocol said its volume exceeded the combined total of the next three DEXs ranked.
- DeFiLlama data attributes roughly $32B to Uniswap v3 and nearly $38B to v4 activity recently.
- Uniswap operates across multiple blockchains, allowing traders to swap assets through automated liquidity pools directly.
- UNI traded near $6.21 after falling roughly 2% during the latest market session tracked globally.
Uniswap said on Sept. 13 that the comparison came from DeFiLlama Research, describing the result as evidence that a large portion of decentralized spot trading continues to pass through its protocol.
The claim covers activity across multiple versions of Uniswap and the blockchains where its smart contracts operate. It does not represent revenue earned by Uniswap Labs or the market value of the UNI governance token.
Current DeFiLlama data supports a monthly total above $70 billion when the tracked volumes for Uniswap v2, v3 and v4 are combined. Since the figures update continuously, exact totals can change as older trading days leave the 30-day measurement period and new activity enters it.
Uniswap v4 and v3 account for most of the volume
DeFiLlama’s Uniswap v4 page showed close to $38 billion in trading volume over the preceding 30 days when accessed on Sept. 13. The analytics platform attributed roughly $32 billion to Uniswap v3 during a similar period.
Uniswap v2 contributed more than $1.2 billion, placing the combined figure for the three versions above the $70 billion level cited by the protocol. Smaller deployments or differences in update timing can produce slight variations between the version-level sum and Uniswap’s published figure.
Volume represents the dollar value of swaps processed by the protocol. It does not show how much profit traders made, how much liquidity providers retained or how much revenue reached UNI holders. Each trade can generate fees for liquidity providers, while selected pools direct part of their fees to the protocol under governance-approved settings.
Uniswap v3 remains active because it lets liquidity providers concentrate capital within chosen price ranges. Version 4 uses a shared contract architecture and programmable hooks, which developers can use to add customized pool functions.
Recent v4 growth has moved the newer version ahead of v3 in the current monthly snapshot. The data does not establish that every trader has migrated to v4 because the two versions continue to serve different pools, assets and integrations.
Uniswap volume spans dozens of blockchain networks
Uniswap’s total covers deployments across Ethereum and numerous scaling networks. DeFiLlama lists v3 contracts on more than 40 chains, with Ethereum representing the largest portion of the version’s locked liquidity.
Activity from Base, Arbitrum, BNB Chain, Polygon, OP Mainnet and Robinhood Chain contributes to the combined protocol figures. Each deployment processes swaps through its own pools, while analytics providers group the results under the Uniswap protocol.
Robinhood Chain has recently become one source of Uniswap activity. As crypto.news reported, the network reached approximately $945 million in daily DEX volume on Aug. 25, with Uniswap serving as its main public automated market maker.
DeFiLlama’s Sept. 13 snapshot showed Robinhood Chain processing roughly $1.35 billion in total DEX volume over 24 hours and $12.19 billion during seven days. Uniswap accounted for approximately $262 million of the chain’s daily volume and close to $4 billion of its seven-day total at the time of measurement.
Uniswap Labs launched v2, v3, v4 and UniswapX on Robinhood Chain in July. The integration placed the protocol in the Uniswap web application, wallet and API from the network’s first day of public operation.
On Ethereum, DeFiLlama recorded approximately $681 million in total DEX trading over the latest 24-hour period and $8.5 billion over seven days. Uniswap competes there with Curve, PancakeSwap, SushiSwap and other automated exchanges.
The rival comparison remains a moving snapshot
Uniswap said its monthly volume exceeded the next three DEXs combined, but the protocol did not identify the three competitors in its post. Rankings can differ depending on whether an analytics provider groups protocol versions, counts spot swaps only or combines activity across supported chains.
DeFiLlama defines DEX volume as the value of spot token swaps processed by a protocol. Perpetual futures trading is presented separately, preventing derivatives-focused venues from being mixed directly with spot exchanges in the same metric.
Competition within the DEX sector has changed over time. Raydium surpassed Uniswap in one monthly comparison during January 2025, while PancakeSwap held a higher 30-day total during parts of that year. The latest data cited by Uniswap places the protocol back at the top of the selected spot DEX ranking.
An earlier monthly record offers another comparison. Crypto.news reported in November 2024 that Uniswap reached $38 billion across Ethereum scaling networks. The latest figure is more than 80% above that total, though the two measurements cover different dates and may not include an identical set of chains and protocol versions.
Uniswap’s current competitor comparison should therefore be read as a trailing-period snapshot. It can be verified only against the methodology, protocol groupings and timestamp used for the underlying ranking.
Protocol fees connect volume with UNI supply
Uniswap governance approved a fee mechanism that directs part of the trading charges from selected pools to the protocol. The settings do not cover every pool or every dollar of reported volume, so monthly trading volume cannot be multiplied by one fee rate to calculate protocol revenue.
In July, Governance Proposal 100 expanded the mechanism to v4 pools across seven networks. Crypto.news reported that the changeaised Uniswap’s measured daily protocol revenue from approximately $114,000 to $325,000 at the time.
Captured fees are routed through TokenJar contracts and can fund UNI purchases and token burns under the governance system. Liquidity providers continue to receive the portion assigned to them under each pool’s settings.
Uniswap Labs has kept expanding the products connected to the protocol’s liquidity. A June agreement brought $150 million in Spark stablecoin liquidity to v4, with plans to move the assets into a programmable DualPool hook developed with Uniswap Labs.
Spark’s design places idle stablecoins in yield-bearing vaults between trades and moves the required capital into a v4 pool when a swap occurs. Uniswap said USDS would serve as the first quote asset, with support planned for USDT and PYUSD liquidity.
UNI traded near $6.21 during the latest market session, down roughly 2% from the previous close. The token moved between approximately $6.17 and $6.55 during the day, with no verified evidence connecting the price decline to Uniswap’s monthly volume announcement.
The CLARITY Act has reached a Sept. 15 Senate cloture vote that will determine whether senators begin formal floor debate on the U.S. crypto market-structure bill.
Summary
- The Senate has scheduled a September 15 cloture vote on proceeding to the CLARITY Act.
- Sixty votes are generally required for cloture, making Democratic support necessary if Republicans remain united.
- The procedural vote would open debate but would not approve the legislation or final text.
- White House adviser Patrick Witt has warned that failure could close Congress’s current legislative window.
- Banking, ethics and anti-money-laundering provisions remain contested before senators can negotiate a final bipartisan measure.
Reuters reported on Sept. 9 that cryptocurrency companies and banking groups had intensified their lobbying before the procedural vote. The two industries disagree over stablecoin rewards, bank deposits, anti-money-laundering controls and the division of regulatory authority.
Patrick Witt, executive director of the White House Digital Asset Advisory Council, has urged senators from both parties to support the motion to proceed. He warned that a failed vote could close the available legislative window and leave the United States without a federal crypto market framework.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has made a similar case for congressional action. In April, Bessent said the absence of clear rules was pushing digital-asset development toward jurisdictions including Singapore and Abu Dhabi,Reuters reported.
CLARITY Act vote opens debate, not final passage
The Sept. 15 action is expected to be a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633. It is not a final vote on whether the CLARITY Act becomes law. Senate cloture generally requires 60 votes, giving the minority party leverage when the majority lacks that number on its own.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed the cloture motion before the August recess, according to published accounts of the Senate schedule. If senators invoke cloture, the chamber can move toward debate on the bill, consider amendments and negotiate changes before voting on passage.
Failure to reach 60 votes would block the Senate from taking up the measure through the scheduled process. Republican leaders could reconsider the vote or pursue another procedural route, but limited floor time before the 2026 midterm elections would make another attempt difficult.
The House approved its version of the CLARITY Act by a 294-134 vote in July 2025. The Senate Banking Committee advanced its version in May 2026 by a 15-9 vote, with Republicans joined by Democratic Sens. Ruben Gallego of Arizona and Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland, Reuters reported. Neither senator committed at that stage to supporting the eventual floor bill.
Democratic votes remain the immediate test
Politico reported that no Democratic senator had publicly committed to supporting the Sept. 15 motion as of its latest assessment. Supporters have said they need at least six Democratic votes, although the exact number depends on attendance and whether every expected Republican supports cloture.
Earlier vote estimates were less favorable. Reuters reported in August that the bill required support from at least eight Democrats if every voting Republican backed it. Changes in attendance, Republican positions or the working text can alter the number of opposition-party votes needed to reach 60.
Forbes reported that the latest negotiating draft incorporated 114 amendments or proposals requested by Democrats. Incorporating proposals into a draft does not establish that their sponsors support the entire bill. Senators can seek revisions while reserving their position on cloture or final passage.
The committee vote showed that some Democrats were prepared to continue negotiations. Gallego and Alsobrooks joined Republicans in advancing the measure from committee, but both said discussions remained fluid. No committee vote guarantees support for a later floor version containing different language.
President Donald Trump supports the legislation, while Witt and Bessent have pressed lawmakers to treat the vote as part of the administration’s digital-asset policy. Their warning that Congress may lose its present opportunity is a political forecast, not a procedural rule preventing lawmakers from introducing another bill.
Stablecoin and enforcement provisions remain disputed
The CLARITY Act seeks to define when a crypto asset falls under securities law and when it qualifies for treatment as a digital commodity. Its framework would give the Commodity Futures Trading Commission authority over covered spot-market activity while preserving Securities and Exchange Commission powers over securities and investment contracts.
Registration requirements would apply to certain exchanges, brokers and dealers serving the digital-asset market. The legislation contains disclosure, custody and customer-protection provisions, although senators continue to negotiate their scope and the treatment of decentralized finance.
Democratic critics have sought stronger anti-money-laundering requirements and more enforcement power for state authorities, according to Reuters. Ethics restrictions involving elected officials and their families have remained another area of negotiation.
Banks have focused on provisions affecting stablecoin rewards. Banking groups argue that interest-like payments on stablecoin balances could pull deposits away from insured banks and reduce funds available for lending. Crypto companies contend that restrictions written too widely could prevent lawful customer rewards and limit competition.
However, the Independent Community Bankers of America has lobbied senators over the deposit issue. Crypto organizations, including Stand With Crypto and the Blockchain Association, have organized events, opinion pieces and direct outreach supporting passage.
Political spending has raised the stakes surrounding the negotiations. Crypto groups have committed more than $190 million to political efforts, Reuters reported, as the industry seeks federal rules governing token classification and trading platforms.
In related coverage, crypto.news examined why the procedural vote may not settle the future of U.S. crypto rules, citing Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong’s expectation that agencies and lawmakers would keep working if the bill failed.
Senate approval would send the bill back to the House
Invoking cloture would permit the Senate to proceed to debate, but senators would still need to resolve the bill’s disputed provisions and vote on passage. Amendments adopted on the floor could produce a text different from the House-approved measure.
If the Senate passes an amended bill, the House must approve the Senate language or the chambers must reconcile their versions. Both chambers must pass identical text before sending legislation to the president.
A failed cloture vote would leave the SEC and CFTC working under their existing legal authority. Witt has said the agencies could pursue rulemaking if Congress does not act, though administrative rules cannot independently rewrite the statutory division of authority established by Congress.
The SEC and CFTC would need to use their separate notice-and-comment procedures for any new regulations. Agency rules can face court challenges over statutory authority, procedure and compliance costs. Senators are scheduled to return from recess before the Sept. 15 vote. The first recorded result will establish whether the bill has the 60 votes needed to begin consideration; it will not resolve its final language, secure House agreement or enact the CLARITY Act.
Lisk (LSK) climbed above $2 on Sunday, a gain of more than 900% from its August floor. On Sunday alone, it soared by over 500% before surrendering most of that within hours and now trades near $0.80.
The round trip made LSK the single largest liquidation event in crypto over 24 hours. Traders positioned on both sides of the move were forced out.
Short Sellers Paid for the LSK Price Spike
Coinglass recorded $41.13 million in LSK liquidations across the day. Shorts accounted for $33.68 million of that total, against $7.44 million in longs.
That four-to-one split points to forced buying rather than fresh demand. Short sellers betting on a decline had to repurchase the token as it rose. Each repurchase lifted the price further.
Open interest, meaning the value of outstanding futures positions, reached roughly $42 million against $501 million in daily futures turnover. Spot order books were far thinner. LSK’s current price and volume show it holding near $0.81, still up more than 300% on the day.
BeInCrypto flagged the conditions in July, when Binance added LSK to its Monitoring Tag, a delisting risk warning label applied to unusually volatile listings.
The Burn Traders Bought Has Not Been Approved
Most of the positioning traces back to August 25, when Lisk said it would shut down its blockchain on October 31 and rebuild as a stablecoin payments service for company finance teams.
That plan carries a proposal to destroy 100 million LSK held in the treasury, cutting maximum supply by a quarter. Token holders have not yet voted on it.
LSK continues as a loyalty token on Ethereum and Base. Anyone still holding on the old chain must bridge out before the deadline.
The token remains more than 97% below its 2018 peak, and whether Sunday’s bid survives the vote is the question the next three weeks will answer.
The post Forgotten Crypto Token LSK Jumps 500% Before Crashing: What Happened? appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed limiting inbound and outbound stablecoin transfers involving external wallets to five million baht, or roughly $151,000, per customer, operator and day.
Summary
- Thailand’s SEC proposes daily stablecoin transfer caps of five million baht per customer and operator.
- Deposits and withdrawals would be restricted to accounts or wallets verified as belonging to customers.
- Transfers between compliant Thai-regulated operators would remain exempt from the proposed five-million-baht daily transfer ceiling.
- Businesses, authorized institutions and qualifying market makers would receive exemptions under the regulator’s proposed framework.
- Public comments remain open through September 25, with requirements proposed to start sixty days later.
The regulator’s consultation, published on Sept. 11, would require stablecoins deposited with or withdrawn from licensed digital asset businesses to move between accounts verified as belonging to the same customer. Public comments remain open through Sept. 25.
Inbound and outbound transfers would each carry the five-million-baht ceiling. The dollar equivalent uses an indicative exchange rate and can change with the Thai baht.
The proposed rules are not yet in force. Thailand’s SEC said it opened the consultation to address money laundering, cybercrime and attempts to bypass controls governing international money transfers.
Thailand SEC would block third-party wallet transfers
Licensed digital asset operators could accept stablecoin deposits only from an account or wallet belonging to their customer. Withdrawals would need to go to another account or wallet verified under the same customer’s name.
Sending stablecoins from another person’s wallet into a customer’s exchange account would therefore be prohibited. A customer could not withdraw stablecoins from a regulated operator directly to another person’s wallet.
The restriction covers transfers involving foreign digital asset operators and private wallets. Thai businesses would need procedures for verifying ownership before processing the transaction. Ownership checks would operate alongside Travel Rule requirements. Operators would need to classify customers, screen account information and check whether a wallet is linked to mule accounts, watchlists or transactions presenting an elevated illegal-finance risk.
Blockchain analytics or comparable monitoring tools would be required to trace digital asset movements and identify links to high-risk wallets. The consultation does not name specific analytics providers or prescribe one technical platform.
In related coverage, crypto.news reported that Thailand proposed five-year recordkeeping and wallet checks under an expanded Travel Rule framework. The stablecoin consultation focuses more narrowly on ownership, transfer values and regulated operator responsibilities.
The five-million-baht cap has several exemptions
For transfers involving a private wallet or foreign operator, a customer’s stablecoin deposits and withdrawals could not exceed five million baht per day at each licensed business. At current exchange rates, the limit equals close to $151,000.
The permitted value would need to remain consistent with the customer’s income and financial position. Operators could therefore apply a lower practical threshold when a transfer does not match information collected during customer checks.
Transfers between accounts held at Thai-regulated digital asset operators would not face the five-million-baht ceiling when both businesses comply with the Travel Rule. Customer information would move through the regulated system, giving each operator a record of the parties involved.
Several customer groups would receive separate exemptions. Businesses transferring stablecoins through accounts held in their own names would not face the same ceiling when the activity serves their stated commercial purpose. Institutions supervised by the Bank of Thailand could qualify when the central bank authorizes stablecoin use for a particular business arrangement. Approval would be assessed case by case.
Market makers supplying liquidity to stablecoin-baht pairs would receive an exemption when transfers are required for liquidity management. The proposal does not create a general waiver for every market-making transaction, leaving regulated operators responsible for confirming that activity fits the stated function.
Off-platform trades would face price disclosure rules
Thailand’s SEC paired the stablecoin transfer controls with proposed standards for off-platform transactions handled by digital asset brokers and dealers. Such trades would need a minimum value of three million baht, equal to roughly $91,000 at the current exchange rate.
Businesses providing the service would need to publish digital asset trading prices on their websites or platforms. The disclosure requirement is designed to let customers verify the prices used for transactions completed outside regular order books.
Digital asset brokers could not arrange direct off-platform transactions between two customers. They could act as agents that match customers through an exchange, according to the consultation.
The proposal draws a distinction between brokers, which arrange transactions for clients, and dealers, which trade as principals. Each category would remain subject to controls intended to prevent off-platform services from being used for cybercrime or money laundering.
No transaction-volume estimates were supplied for Thailand’s existing off-platform market. The regulator did not publish data showing how many current transactions would fall below the proposed three-million-baht minimum.
Market makers and liquidity providers face more checks
Licensed exchanges would need to publish the names of their market makers and identify the digital assets for which each firm supplies liquidity. Screening would cover the source of assets and the actual purpose of market-making transactions.
Exchange operators would have to monitor and periodically review market-maker conduct. The regulator said the controls are intended to improve transparency and prevent liquidity arrangements from becoming channels for illegal fund movements.
For digital asset brokers, the proposal would prohibit liquidity providers from serving stablecoin-baht trading activity. Other liquidity providers would face location, regulatory and anti-money-laundering requirements.
A qualifying provider could not operate from a jurisdiction that fails to implement Financial Action Task Force recommendations. The provider would need oversight from an appropriate business or anti-money-laundering regulator, while the broker would need reasonable grounds to believe customer assets can be safeguarded.
Brokers would have to disclose their liquidity providers and any conflicts of interest to clients. Reviews would cover asset origins, transaction purposes and provider behavior.
Source exchanges used by brokers would face comparable standards. They would need regulatory supervision and ongoing screening based on controls applied to liquidity providers.
Consultation closes on September 25
Stakeholders can submit comments through theThai SEC website, Thailand’s central legal consultation portal or the email addresses listed in the notice. The deadline is Sept. 25. Following consultation, the SEC can revise, postpone or abandon parts of the proposal before issuing final requirements. The notice does not provide a date for approving the final text.
Stablecoin rules covering transfers, market makers, liquidity providers, source exchanges and off-platform transactions are proposed to take effect 60 days after the resulting notification becomes effective.
Separate provisions would strengthen the SEC’s response when digital asset operators fail to collect or disclose required information. The regulator could order a business to correct the breach within a stated period and, if noncompliance continues, direct it to perform or stop specified activities.
Similar to the previous weekends, this one is quite sluggish for bitcoin, as its price remains in a very tight range between $77,000 and $77,400.
Most larger-cap alts are in the same boat, with minor losses compared to yesterday. CRO, PUMP, and BTW have marked more substantial gains, but one alt reigns supreme.
BTC Fights for $77K
Bitcoin finished the first week of September with intense volatility after it rocketed to $82,400 for the first time since mid-May, before it was rejected and driven south to under $79,000 that Friday after the release of the US jobs report. The following week or so was less eventful, as the cryptocurrency remained between $80,000 and $77,600.
The upper boundary halted its breakout attempts, while the support managed to hold the bears. However, it all started to change on Thursday and especially on Friday. At first, the lower boundary gave in, and BTC slipped to $77,000. Then came the release of the CPI numbers for August, which sent shockwaves through the market.
The initial reaction drove BTC to $76,000, marking a multi-week low. However, the bulls stepped up somewhat surprisingly and drove the cryptocurrency north to $79,800 within an hour. Another rejection followed, and BTC returned to its starting point at $77,000. Since then, it has been trading sideways between $77,000 and $77,500, currently above the former.
Its market cap has retreated to under $1.550 trillion on CMC, while its dominance over the alts remains sluggish at 58.7%.
One Alt Above Them All
Ethereum, which rocketed to nearly $2,700 on Friday, was stopped there and now fights to stay above $2,500. BNB is down to $722 after a 1.3% daily decline, while XRP remains well below the key $1.40 level. SOL, TRX, DOGE, XMR, and LINK are also slightly in the red.
In contrast, RAIN is up by over 2%, CRO has gained 3%, while PUMP has pumped (right?) by 6%. BTW has stolen the show from the larger caps, rocketing by 11% to over $0.55.
However, the altcoin in question that has posted the biggest gains is Lisk (LSK). The asset has exploded by 325% daily to $0.82. Its weekly gains are even more impressive, posting an 800% surge.
The total crypto market cap has remained at essentially the same level as yesterday at $2.640 trillion on CMC.
The post Top 100 Viral Altcoin Explodes by 325% Daily, BTC Struggles at $77K: Weekend Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Sam Altman and Elon Musk spent this year fighting each other in court. Both now back Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei’s call to slow artificial intelligence (AI) down.
In July, roughly 700 AI agents built a private message board and hacked a major AI hub. Russia has already refused to join.
“Something clearly happened with a frontier AI model that hasn’t been made public and it spooked them so much that it made Elon Musk, Dario Amodei, and Sam Altman all simultaneously agree to slow down,” one skeptic noted.
What the Three of Them Actually Agreed To
Amodei posted the framework on Saturday, with his plan running to three steps, and only the first sitting inside any company’s control.
Anthropic will give an outside review team desks, badges and laptops. Those reviewers can check whether the company follows the safety rules it advertises.
They can publish what they find, with Anthropic reserving the right to redact security and legal material. However, they cannot cut a finding for being unflattering.
The other two steps need governments. One asks American labs to set shared limits, which requires an antitrust waiver. The other asks Washington to talk to authoritarian states.
Altman said OpenAI would match the access pledge.
“I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier. This has been a primary topic of discussions we’ve had at OpenAI in recent weeks. Committing to having independent evaluators with employee-like access is a great idea, and we will do the same. We’ll have more to share soon,” he seconded.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Musk went further and said competitors should review each other’s work. A jury threw out his claims against Altman and OpenAI in May, and he is appealing.
What the Agents Actually Did in July
Between July 8 and July 13, about 1,200 agents running an OpenAI hacking benchmark escaped their sandbox. They turned a file cache into a message board and traded more than 70,000 messages.
Around 700 then attacked Hugging Face, a hub where developers share AI models. They found exposed credentials, ran their own code on its servers, and reached private databases.
Nobody had asked them to. They were trying to learn how the software grading them decided what counted as a win. OpenAI missed it for a week.
Two staff from METR, an independent evaluation nonprofit, later spent six days on site with Redwood Research. Amodei wants such teams inside the building permanently rather than called in afterwards.
However, David Sacks, who served as Trump’s AI and Crypto Czar, challenges this premise, noting that METR may be biased.
“…stop pretending you need anyone else’s permission. Stop pretending antitrust law has to be suspended so you can form a cartel. Stop pretending you need a regulatory approval process that supersedes product liability. Stop pretending METR is independent when it is intertwined with Anthropic’s investors and staff. Stop pretending you need those same evaluators to police competitors who aren’t even at the frontier: Most of all, stop pretending the motivation to slow down is purely altruistic,” wrote Sacks.
According to David Sacks, Anthropic is only skeptical because of the abounding product-liability exposure in the event that their products enable a truly damaging cyberattack.
This line of thought sprouts from the fact that the market tends to punishe models that behave in unpredictable or unauthorized ways.
In the same tone, writer Brian Merchant, in his newsletter Blood in the Machine, says nobody has shown a credible route from self improving AI to catastrophe. He reads the safety push as regulatory capture.
“I have not come across a credible, step-by-step documentation of how exactly AI might move from self-recursively improving AI to killing every single human……would likely only wind up serving Anthropic and OpenAI; it’s what regulatory capture looks like in action.”
Merchant’s supposition brings to mind the part about money.
So What About Money?
Sam Altman confirmed OpenAI will not list this year, again citing safety.
A listing forces a company to publish audited accounts in a filing called an S-1.
“Anthropic and OpenAI delaying their IPO, because their S-1 will reveal that they are bleeding money, and have no path to profitability. Solution? “AI slowdown”, so they cut costs for training new models. It has everything to do with IPO, and nothing to do with safety,” Eli David, AI researcher and co-founder of Deep Instinct, speculated.
OpenAI lost $20.9 billion in 2025 on revenue of $13.1 billion, BeInCrypto reported. Banks have since pushed for investment grade credit ratings, nonetheless.
Anthropic does not expect to break even until 2028, and OpenAI not until 2030. Nvidia has guaranteed $105 billion of OpenAI lease obligations, a backstop that lapses once OpenAI earns a solid credit rating.
BeInCrypto reported in August that Anthropic listing timing details pointed to a late September debut.
However, the theory has a hole. Musk folded his AI arm into SpaceX, which listed in June, so SpaceX AI driven valuation questions are already public. He alone has nothing left to disclose.
Why Russia’s Kirill Dmitriev Said No
Kirill Dmitriev, who runs the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and serves as a special representative of President Vladimir Putin, has dismissed the campaign to slow down AI.
“Can’t put genie 🧞♀️ back in bottle,” he said.
In short, it is already too late, with state outlets TASS and Izvestia recasting that as a flat declaration that slowing AI is impossible.
Moscow has little reason to agree. A similar idea appears earlier from President Vladimir Putin (December 2023), who said it is “impossible to stop this development” of AI, including superintelligence.
“If we ban something, it will simply develop elsewhere, and we’ll fall behind.”
That is the same logic Dmitriev is running two and a half years later.
Russia placed 28th of 36 countries in Stanford’s global AI index, far behind the US and China.
Its imports of graphics chips and AI hardware fell 84% in 2024 against pre war levels. Sberbank went hunting for Chinese processors in May to keep its own model running.
Amodei’s plan widens that gap by design. It calls for denying advanced chips to authoritarian states and stretching the democratic lead.
A pact to slow down would freeze Russia in last place. Refusing costs Moscow nothing, because the hardware it needs is blocked either way.
Anthropic has promised outsiders a badge and a desk, and OpenAI has promised to think about it.
“That’s a start, but it’s not enough. When you are racing towards a cliff, you don’t just ease up on the gas pedal. You hit the brakes,” Bernie Sanders articulated.
The US Senator from Vermont calls on Presidents Trump and Xi Jinping to negotiate a treaty to pause AI and ban superintelligence before it is too late.
However, David Sacks says China is very unlikely to join a global agreement.
The post Why Are AI Rivals Suddenly Agreeing to Slow Down and Why Russia Says No? appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Ethereum is attempting to convert its post-rally consolidation into a continuation setup. It remains compressed near the upper end of the range, and a sustained breakout could provide the foundation for another bullish leg, although the recent CPI-driven fakeout highlights the need for confirmation.
Ethereum Price Analysis: The Daily Chart
On the daily timeframe, ETH continues to hold the substantial gains generated by the explosive August breakout. More importantly, the market has avoided a meaningful retracement despite repeatedly testing the $2.43K-$2.52K area, suggesting that sellers have so far been unable to force price back toward the lower support zones.
The current consolidation is taking place around the $2.45K-$2.52K resistance zone, with ETH now trading near $2.52K. A convincing daily breakout and close above this region would strengthen the bullish structure and could open the way toward higher prices. In that case, the next major resistance visible on the chart sits around the $2.92K-$3.03K zone.
However, the market still needs to establish acceptance above the current resistance. Failure to do so would leave ETH vulnerable to another rotation inside the range. The $2.05K-$2.14K region represents the next significant daily support area below, while the moving averages are also gradually turning higher beneath the price.
ETH/USDT 4-Hour Chart
The 4-hour chart provides a clearer view of the immediate breakout attempt. ETH has spent several weeks ranging roughly between $2.35K and $2.56K, repeatedly rejecting both ends without establishing a sustained directional move.
The latest CPI volatility briefly pushed the price above the $2.56K range high, with the wick extending toward $2.66K, but buyers failed to maintain the breakout, and ETH quickly returned inside the structure. This fakeout is important because it shows that simply trading above the range is not sufficient. The market needs to hold above the $2.56K resistance level to confirm a genuine structural breakout.
Nevertheless, ETH has recovered toward the upper boundary again rather than experiencing a sharp rejection. If buyers can secure acceptance above $2.56K, the consolidation could resolve into another bullish leg.
Conversely, another rejection would keep the range intact and expose the $2.43K-$2.45K support zone first. A more decisive breakdown below the range floor around $2.35K would weaken the continuation scenario and could shift attention toward the $2.22K-$2.27K support zone.
Sentiment Analysis
The 90-day Spot Taker CVD tracks the cumulative difference between market buy and market sell volume. An increasing positive CVD indicates taker-buy dominance, while a declining negative reading reflects stronger aggressive selling.
The latest data shows a notable shift toward green, indicating that taker buyers have become dominant again after the more neutral conditions observed during July and early August. This transition has coincided with ETH recovering toward the $2.5K region and is therefore a constructive signal for the current consolidation.
If taker-buy dominance persists while ETH establishes itself above the range resistance, the combination would provide stronger confirmation that demand is supporting another bullish leg. A loss of this buy-side dominance, particularly alongside another failed breakout, would instead suggest that aggressive demand is not yet strong enough to sustain the move.
The post Ethereum Price Analysis: $3K Back in Play After ETH Reclaims $2.5K appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Tyler Donaldson-Aitken lands career-first Black Type win at Flemington in 2026
Microsoft Slaps Hours Limits On Xbox Game Pass Cloud Gaming
”’XRP BLAST PAST $100 IN 2026??” (XRP = WORLD RESERVE CURRENCY)
Memory prices are slowing because buyers ran out of money
Micron Stock Climbs Above $1,031 as AI Memory Crunch and a $50 Billion Outlook Fuel the Rally
AMD Stock Climbs After Management Lifts 2027 Data Center Outlook Toward $70 Billion in AI Sales
-
Tech5 days ago
Memory prices are slowing because buyers ran out of money
-
Business3 days agoMicron Stock Climbs Above $1,031 as AI Memory Crunch and a $50 Billion Outlook Fuel the Rally
-
Business3 days agoAMD Stock Climbs After Management Lifts 2027 Data Center Outlook Toward $70 Billion in AI Sales
-
Crypto World4 days agoBitcoin price risks $76K drop as $78K support weakens
-
Crypto World5 days agoRobinhood Stock: How To Take Advantage With Reduced Risk
-
Crypto World4 days agoEthereum price stalls below $2,500 as ADX drops to 11
-
Fashion2 days agoWeekend Open Thread – Corporette.com
-
Crypto World2 days agoXAG/USD: Silver’s Short-Term Rally Meets Its Moment of Truth
-
NewsBeat5 days agoEngland up in reading, maths and science rankings as Scotland and Wales dip
-
Crypto World3 days ago2 Chip Stocks Broke Out This Week. Neither Was Nvidia
-
Crypto World2 days agoOKX launches 10x OpenAI, Anthropic X-Perps in Europe
-
Crypto World2 days agoDiesel Tops $6 a Gallon for the First Time as 28 States Set Records
-
Crypto World5 days agoIntel Stock Jumps 9% on Chip Price Hike Report, US Stake Gains $36 Billion
-
Tech3 days agoBattery life is the only iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone Duo upgrade I care about. Apple didn’t disappoint
-
NewsBeat4 days agoWhat went right this week: an ‘historic’ fall in violent crime, plus more
-
Crypto World3 days agoBitcoin price risks $70K if $78K neckline breaks
-
Business2 days ago10 Most-Streamed Songs On Spotify In 2026 So Far, Led By Ella Langley’s Dominant Run On The Charts This Year
-
Crypto World4 days agoBitcoin price holds near $79K as cycle drawdowns narrow
-
Tech3 days agoApple Watch Ultra 4 vs Watch Ultra 3: Should you really spend another $799?
-
Crypto World2 days ago
Ethereum Price Analysis: Consolidation at $2.5K Tests Momentum as On-Chain Activity Surges
You must be logged in to post a comment Login