Crypto World
Bitcoin Is Suddenly a Hedge Again, VanEck Says: What Changed?
Bitcoin (BTC) is rallying again, and VanEck’s Matthew Sigel says it is finally acting like the hedge it was built to be.
Sigel, head of digital asset research at VanEck, ties the move to fears over US fiscal policy rather than pending crypto legislation.
All Eyes on the US Treasury
The US Treasury doubled its long-dated bond buyback ceiling, from $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation. The move compressed yields and fed a broader risk-on rally tied to the Treasury’s bond buyback expansion.
Roughly $3 billion in forced short liquidations amplified the move. bitcoin climbed to $72,757, part of what one report called Bitcoin’s short squeeze cascade.
Sigel downplays the CLARITY Act, the crypto market structure bill working through Congress, as the driver. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has voiced optimism the bill clears 60 Senate votes, though prediction markets price a slim chance it becomes law this year, a gap Sigel says explains why the rally isn’t about CLARITY Act’s Senate odds.
“Bitcoin is one of the best hedges you can find on that dynamic.”
— Matthew Sigel, Head of Digital Asset Research, VanEck, via CNBC
That hedge framing carries a mixed record
Bitcoin’s correlation with US equities spiked, not fell, during the 2020 COVID crash and the 2022 rate-hiking cycle. Academic research shows that pattern, not decoupling, is what typically happens under market stress.
That tension traces back to Bitcoin’s origin. Satoshi Nakamoto’s 2008 whitepaper proposed Bitcoin as a fixed-supply alternative to a financial system reliant on central bank money printing.
Sigel’s dollar-debasement argument revives that same case, just aimed at Treasury debt management instead of the printing press directly.
Whether Bitcoin keeps behaving like that hedge, or snaps back into a risk-on trade if equities wobble, will show which version of the story markets are actually pricing.
The post Bitcoin Is Suddenly a Hedge Again, VanEck Says: What Changed? appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Crypto World
How holders can seize the opportunity to earn $10,000
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
XRP liquidity on Binance is declining as prices face resistance, while UE Crypto promotes cloud mining and yield aggregation as alternative return strategies.
Summary
- XRP’s Binance balance slips to 2.62 billion as the token struggles to reclaim $1.07, keeping near-term price gains under pressure.
- With XRP facing volatile trading conditions, investors are exploring cloud mining as an alternative way to seek passive returns.
- UE Crypto highlights cloud mining, multi-asset support, and automated yield services as XRP holders seek diversified income options.
XRP is trading above $1 and continues to decline below key exponential moving averages (EMAs), with the short-term bearish trend remaining in place. The 50-day EMA is at $1.07, the 100-day EMA is at $1.15, and the 200-day EMA is at $1.34. All remain above the current price, indicating that the overall trend remains constrained despite the previous breakout above the descending resistance trendline, with the current breakout price near $1.06.
Momentum remains weak, with the Relative Strength Index (RSI) hovering around 38 and the Moving Average Convergence/Divergence (MACD) remaining below zero, suggesting that downward pressure continues rather than an immediate bullish reversal.

XRP balances on Binance have narrowed slightly to 2.62 billion, indicating declining liquidity. Unless XRP can decisively reclaim the 50-day moving average support level at $1.07, its short-term rally may continue to face selling pressure.
Despite some potentially favorable factors, such as the passage of the CLARITY Act, the market reflects limited expectations for the project’s growth potential amid increased exchange-rate volatility. As a result, more and more XRP investors are turning their attention to UE Crypto’s cloud mining digital asset platform.
Facing selling pressure, UE Crypto’s cloud mining platform is attracting increasing attention from investors who hope to use cloud mining and yield aggregation mechanisms to mitigate market volatility and improve returns.
Recent events and risks
Institutional spot ETF inflows have stalled:
Capital inflows into spot XRP exchange-traded products have stalled, with multiple instances of zero inflows and net asset outflows, leaving the spot market vulnerable to volatility in the absence of sustained institutional buying.
Derivatives leverage unwinding and forced liquidations:
As price action tests and briefly breaks through the key psychological support level of $1.00, forced long liquidations in the perpetual futures market have intensified alongside the expansion of short open interest, further accelerating the intraday downward momentum.
Regulatory friction and stalled legislative catalysts:
Following the U.S. Senate recess, key cryptocurrency framework legislation such as the CLARITY Act failed to pass. Continued uncertainty surrounding the regulatory framework proposed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has also stalled legislative progress, continuing to suppress broader market risk appetite.
Contraction in on-chain network activity:
During recent trading cycles, transaction throughput and active wallet usage on the XRP Ledger have contracted sharply, indicating declining demand driven by immediate utility, while large deposits of tokens into centralized venues have increased supply pressure.
Meanwhile, an increasing number of digital asset investors are turning their attention to the UE Crypto cloud mining platform, seeking to explore diversified income models through cloud mining and yield aggregation. Although they remain optimistic about XRP’s long-term prospects, the question is whether the impact of short-term price volatility can be effectively reduced while continuing to generate additional returns from their XRP holdings.
Why is UE Crypto increasingly attracting attention?
1. Security and stability
UE Crypto adopts a multi-layer security architecture, integrating technologies from McAfee and Cloudflare and implementing measures such as offline cold wallets to provide comprehensive protection for platform operations and user assets.
2. Environmentally friendly and efficient
The platform’s mining operations utilize renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydropower, aiming to minimize the environmental impact of energy consumption while maximizing computing efficiency.
3. Compliance and transparency
The platform continuously improves its operational standards, data transparency, and user protection mechanisms to provide a clearer and more reliable environment for cryptocurrency services.
4. Smart custody
UE Crypto handles daily operations, computing power management, and yield settlement through professional teams and automated systems, enabling users to easily generate passive income.
5. Multi-currency support
The platform supports a variety of mainstream digital assets, including BTC, ETH, DOGE, SOL, XRP, USDC, LTC, and USDT, providing greater flexibility for different users.
6. Affiliate rewards
The platform offers an affiliate program through which users can earn 3% + 2% referral commissions by inviting friends, with rewards of up to $50,000. Users can increase their passive income even without making any investment.
About UE Crypto’s cloud mining digital asset platform
UE Crypto is headquartered in the United Kingdom and operates within European regulatory frameworks such as MiCA and MiFID II, continuously improving its transparency, operational standards, and user protection mechanisms.
The platform adopts a multi-layer security architecture, including:
- Annual financial and security compliance audits conducted by PwC.
- Digital asset custody insurance provided by Lloyd’s of London.
- Enterprise-grade network protection from Cloudflare and McAfee® security systems.
- Bank-grade data encryption and professional security infrastructure to provide multiple layers of protection for users’ assets and accounts.
How to use UE Crypto?
1. Register an Account
2. Choose a mining package
Choose a suitable cloud mining contract according to a personal budget and needs, and start mining with one click.
3. Start earning
Once the contract is activated, the system will automatically allocate computing power, and returns will be settled automatically every 24 hours. Users can withdraw their earnings at any time or continue participating according to their own needs, thereby achieving long-term compound growth of their assets.
Popular UE Crypto contracts
BTC (Beginner Experience Contract)Investment amount: $100, Contract duration: 2 days,Daily return: $4,Total return at contract expiration: $100 + $8
Dogecoin (DOGE, Digital Intelligent System Contract)Investment amount: $500,Contract duration: 5 days, Daily return: $6.25 ,Total return at contract expiration: $500 + $31.25
BTC (Super Computing System Contract)Investment amount: $1,000,Contract duration: 10 days, Daily return: $13.10 ,Total return at contract expiration: $1,000 + $131
LTC (Algorithm-Driven System Contract) Investment amount: $5,000,Contract duration: 25 days, Daily return: $72,Total return at contract expiration: $5,000 + $1,800
BTC (Quantitative Intelligent System Contract)Investment amount: $10,000,Contract duration: 35 days, Daily return: $158, Total return at contract expiration: $10,000 + $5,530
For more details about the contract plans, please visit the official UE Crypto website.
Overview
XRP’s price surge is facing selling pressure. Despite some potentially favorable factors, such as the passage of the CLARITY Act, the increased exchange-rate volatility reflects the market’s limited expectations for the project’s growth potential.
For long-term XRP investors, in addition to focusing on price trends and market cycles, it is equally important to consider how to reduce the risks associated with relying on a single storage method and explore more diversified digital asset management approaches. UE Crypto aims to create more resilient and sustainable passive income for users through cloud mining, computing power management, renewable energy, and other methods.
Disclosure: This content is provided by a third party. Neither crypto.news nor the author of this article endorses any product mentioned on this page. Users should conduct their own research before taking any action related to the company.
Crypto World
CME Group CEO Terry Duffy Clashes With CFTC Chair Over Prediction Markets
CME Group CEO Terry Duffy told the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) it clears contracts that traders can rig. Chairman Michael Selig cut him off and called the claim fake news.
The exchange happened Thursday in Washington, at the first meeting of the CFTC’s Innovation Advisory Committee. Duffy runs the largest futures exchange in the world. Selig regulates it.
2,500 Filings and Zero Objections
Selig built the 35-member committee in February. Its roster includes the chief executives of Kalshi, Polymarket and DraftKings. Thursday’s agenda covered crypto, artificial intelligence and event contracts.
Duffy used his turn to attack the last one.
Roughly 2,500 self-certifications have landed at the agency since January 2025, he said. None were opposed.
Self-certification is the fast lane. An exchange files a contract, attests that it follows the law, and lists it. Nobody has to approve it.
Duffy said some of those filings break core principle 3. That rule bars any contract that traders can readily manipulate.
There is a structural reason few filings get challenged. Selig is the only sitting commissioner at the CFTC. Four of the agency’s five seats are empty.
“We’re not a bunch of carnival barkers at a circus. We are running the most envious markets in the world in the United States of America.”
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Selig Calls It Fake News, But The Record Is Messier
Duffy raised two cases.
In the first, a Fort Bragg soldier named Gannon Van Dyke turned $33,034 into $409,881 on Polymarket. He bet on whether US forces would enter Venezuela. He also held classified details of the raid that captured Nicolás Maduro. Prosecutors charged him in April.
In the second, Trump’s teleprompter operator Gabriel Perez cleared more than $100,000 on Kalshi. He traded on what the president would say. Investigators found bets on more than a dozen speeches.
Selig cut in before Duffy finished.
“…those products are not listed in the United States. They never were. This occurred offshore, and that’s fake news.”
Duffy called that a cute comment. He granted that the Maduro market was Polymarket’s, which trades offshore.
The teleprompter case is different. Those trades ran on Kalshi, an exchange the CFTC itself designates and oversees. Kalshi’s own surveillance team flagged the activity and reported it to the agency.
So one example landed offshore. The other did not.
Kalshi Trades Compute Today. CME Waits for October.
Duffy then moved to timing, and the complaint got sharper.
Kalshi already runs markets on the cost of renting Nvidia chips. It launched them in July.
CME wants in on the same trade. On August 11 it said it would list rental futures for Nvidia H100 and B200 chips. Its partner is Silicon Data, a firm backed by trading house DRW. Target date, October 5, pending review.
Then the agency opened a consultation. On August 19 it asked the public to comment on compute derivatives for 60 days.
Count the days. A 60-day window starting from Federal Register publication closes after October 5.
DRW founder Don Wilson, also on the committee, asked why compute needed 60 days at all.
Duffy added a second detail. Cantor Fitzgerald had opened institutional trading in Kalshi contracts hours earlier. “Let’s call that a coincidence,” he said.
Cantor’s announcement covered event contracts broadly and never mentioned compute.
The Man Attacking Self-Certification Once Used It
Duffy’s frustration is not abstract. His own filings keep stalling.
In July the agency froze CME’s 24-hour crude oil contract while a rulemaking ran. Selig called the timing wholly inappropriate. That comment period closes on August 26.
CME has already gone to court. On June 18 it sued the CFTC over Kalshi’s Bitcoin perpetual contract, arguing the agency rubberstamped Kalshi’s reasoning. Those perps cleared $1 billion in volume in their first week.
Duffy also pressed on offshore venues. Traders in the US cannot legally touch them, he said, yet they get there anyway. He asked what the commission is doing to “police everybody’s VPN.”
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
He named Hyperliquid. President Donald Trump had floated bringing Hyperliquid onshore at a White House crypto summit the previous day.
One point cuts against Duffy. CME self-certified its own Bitcoin futures in December 2017, using the same fast lane he now calls dangerous. Duffy signed the announcement.
He closed on 2008. Bad behavior in finance does not cost the industry one step, he said. It costs 20, and the rebuild takes years.
Duffy hands the CEO job to Lynne Fitzpatrick in March 2027. The committee he was addressing cannot write rules. Selig can, alone, and two of his clocks run out within weeks.
The post CME Group CEO Terry Duffy Clashes With CFTC Chair Over Prediction Markets appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Crypto World
Ex-FBI Officer is Watching Every Polymarket Trader, Says CEO Coplan
Polymarket pays a former FBI staffer to watch its traders full time. Chief executive Shayne Coplan revealed the role to US regulators on Thursday.
He spoke at the first meeting of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Innovation Advisory Committee. His message was blunt. Polymarket users have almost no privacy.
Polymarket Surveillance Goes Further Than the Company Says
Coplan described the hire while defending his platform in Washington.
“We have someone here right now who… is ex-FBI who works full-time at Polymarket.”
That staffer built custom surveillance software in-house, he said. Outside firms were impressed it was not outsourced.
The detail is new. Polymarket’s public integrity page names Chainalysis and Palantir as partners. It never mentions building tools of its own.
Coplan knew the news would sting. He said some users would be upset to hear it.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The Numbers Behind the Monitoring
Polymarket reports handing 315 or more wallet records to authorities. It also claims 90 or more account referrals and two arrests. The company gives no date for those totals.
Two traders learned what that means this year. In April, the CFTC charged Army Master Sgt. Gannon Ken Van Dyke over the Nicolas Maduro market.
He bought more than 436,000 “Yes” shares in four days. He made roughly $404,000. His handle, Burdensome-Mix, sat in public view the whole time.
In May, regulators charged Google engineer Michele Spagnuolo over 23 contracts on the firm’s Year in Search list. He allegedly cleared about $1.2 million as AlphaRaccoon.
Why Anonymity Was Never Real
Coplan argues the openness is the point.
“It’s all public. It’s all on chain. It’s the least anonymous financial market of all time.”
Anyone can open a market and read a trader’s full history. Therefore the tool that catches cheats also exposes everyone else.
The walls are rising elsewhere too. Polymarket bars 39 countries and bans VPNs outright under its terms. It began blocking VPN access and demanding documents from big accounts this year. South Korea cut access entirely in August.
Not everyone thinks self-policing works. CME Group chief Terry Duffy told the same meeting that regulators wave through manipulable contracts. Chairman Michael Selig rejected that.
For traders, the lesson is simpler. A Polymarket wallet is not a disguise. It is a permanent record, and a former FBI staffer is reading it.
The post Ex-FBI Officer is Watching Every Polymarket Trader, Says CEO Coplan appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Crypto World
Chinese humanoid robots face challenge of their own capabilities
Chinese consumer electronics company Xiaomi showed off its humanoid robot in Beijing at the World Humanoid Conference in August 2026.
Evelyn Cheng | CNBC
BEIJING — The big challenge for humanoid robots is still getting the technology to work well, according to industry leaders speaking alongside the World Robot Conference in Beijing this week.
Robots are not yet as efficient as humans, and take time to learn new skills, creating a bottleneck for the industry, Unitree’s founder Wang Xingxing said, addressing the conference one day after his company’s 460% IPO-day surge. His remarks underscored the challenges for humanoid robots entering the human workforce. Shares of Unitree fell 18.7% on Thursday.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission last month added foreign-made advanced robotic devices, including humanoids, to a list restricting imports to the U.S. The statement did not specify a country, and said retailers could still import models the FCC has previously approved.
But the impact of that limitation isn’t that great right now because there aren’t that many humanoids being used in the U.S., Jeff Burnstein, president of the Association for Advancing Automation, told CNBC.
“Where the impact might be in the U.S. is on autonomous mobile robots, which are used in factories that much more than humanoids are,” he said.
The state of technology means companies deploying robots to increase efficiency aren’t even focused on humanoids right now.
“What I hear from customers in the U.S. [is that] ‘we want solutions. We have a problem. We need a solution. We don’t care if it’s a humanoid. We don’t care if it’s a traditional robot, a collaborative robot. We don’t even care if it’s a robot. We need a solution,” Burnstein said.
“So the onus is on the humanoid players to show we have a solution,” he said, noting the robots need to be affordable, safe and ready to use.
Keenon, a startup, develops humanoids to use in conjunction with simpler delivery robots to handle laundry services in hotels, for example, according to COO Wan Bin. Keenon’s business partners include Buffalo Wild Wings and Hilton.
Completing 50% of a task well is relatively easy, even 80%, he said. But to reach a 99.9% completion rate really tests engineering and training capabilities, Wan said.
He said the company has shipped more than 100,000 robots, and expects that to exceed 150,000 units by the end of next year.
Crypto World
Muscle Isn't Vanity. Gabrielle Lyon Says It's Preventive Medicine

Crypto World
GnosisDAO Endorses Gnosis Chain as Part of Ethereum Economic Zone
GnosisDAO has approved a major change for Gnosis Chain, clearing the way for the network to transition from a standalone layer-1 into a ZK-proven Ethereum Economic Zone (EEZ) rollup. The vote centered on GIP-153, which would effectively retire the existing validator set and move transaction settlement to Ethereum.
According to Gnosis Chain, the proposal passed with 123,158 GNO in support, 115 against, and 151 abstaining across 54 voters. Turnout totaled 123,425 GNO, surpassing the 75,000 GNO quorum threshold.
Key takeaways
- GIP-153 clears governance approval to transition Gnosis Chain into an EEZ rollup settled on Ethereum.
- Existing validator infrastructure would be retired, shifting settlement responsibilities to Ethereum validators.
- Target timing is late 2026 or early 2027, contingent on EEZ technology readiness.
- The EEZ concept aims to reduce fragmentation by enabling cross-rollup smart contract execution without bridges.
- Standard Chartered expects fewer bridge dependencies and improved on-chain usability, which could increase Ethereum activity.
What GIP-153 approved and what it changes for users
In the proposal, Gnosis Chain outlined a pathway to make Gnosis Chain “Ethereum-aligned” by converting it into a rollup instance under the EEZ framework. The core mechanics are straightforward: the current validator set would be retired, and transactions would settle on Ethereum. In that structure, Gnosis Chain becomes a layer-2 that relies on Ethereum for settlement, while still supporting “Gnosis Chain-native smart contracts.”
The proposal also points to functionality changes intended to matter for developers and dApps: Gnosis Chain contracts would be able to call Ethereum and use the result within the same transaction. If implemented as described, that design is meant to provide tighter integration with Ethereum mainnet assets and liquidity than what the proposal claims is currently available on existing L2 deployments.
Gnosis Chain further states it would preserve key user-facing continuity, including keeping its existing applications and balances, along with the xDAI gas token.
The EEZ framework: aligning rollups to address L2 fragmentation
The EEZ concept is not limited to one network. It is described as a framework for building Ethereum-aligned rollups developed by Gnosis and ZisK, with funding from the Ethereum Foundation. The intent is to unify parts of Ethereum’s currently fragmented scaling landscape.
Ethereum’s scaling reality today is defined by the proliferation of multiple rollups, each with its own liquidity pools, infrastructure choices, and user access patterns. That separation can reduce composability—especially when applications want to interact with state or assets across different rollups. The EEZ approach targets one of the most persistent scaling trade-offs: improved throughput at the cost of fragmentation.
Under the proposal’s vision, the first production EEZ instance would be deployed through Gnosis Chain while still keeping its existing ecosystem. The broader objective is to enable smart contracts across different participating rollups to execute synchronously without relying on bridges, which the proposal presents as a structural weakness in today’s cross-chain interactions.
This argument fits into an earlier critique of L2 designs. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin previously raised concerns about centralized sequencers and trusted bridging mechanisms as potential vulnerabilities, writing in a Feb. 3 X post that “the original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path.”
For context, L2Beat data cited by the Gnosis-related reporting indicates that 22 Ethereum rollups are currently “secure” with $27.82 billion in value secured. When expanded to include validiums, optimiums, and other scaling networks, the total tracked value secured rises to $34.88 billion.
Why reduced bridge reliance is a key selling point
Bridge risk is a frequent topic in Ethereum scaling discussions because bridges are often the point of failure in major cross-chain incidents. Standard Chartered’s Geoffrey Kendrick, global head of digital assets research, argued that EEZ could help reduce reliance on those vulnerable components.
In a May 28 report shared with Cointelegraph, Kendrick wrote that the EEZ “will have the benefit of reducing the need for bridges (where hacks tend to occur) and increasing the usability of assets in EVM chains.” He added that both factors are “likely to lead to greater activity in the Ethereum ecosystem.”
Kendrick’s view also emphasized composability. He suggested that EEZ could allow smart contracts on different participating networks to interact within the same transaction. For investors, traders, and users, that distinction matters because better composability can translate into smoother execution paths for complex DeFi operations—potentially reducing the friction that users face when assets must move across ecosystems before a transaction can complete.
Still, the practical timeline remains dependent on development readiness. Gnosis Chain says an initial launch is targeted for late 2026 or early 2027, subject to the required EEZ technology being ready. Until then, many questions—especially around performance, finality characteristics, and integration details—will likely remain in the realm of documentation and engineering milestones rather than lived production behavior.
What to watch as Gnosis Chain moves toward EEZ
The governance vote is a significant milestone, but it is not the final word on execution. Readers should watch for how Gnosis Chain and its partners operationalize the EEZ transition: whether settlement on Ethereum is implemented in the intended manner, how the ability for contracts to call Ethereum within a single transaction is achieved, and how users experience the migration while keeping existing apps, balances, and the xDAI gas token.
The next critical signals will likely come in the form of engineering updates leading up to the late-2026/early-2027 target—especially benchmarks or test deployments that clarify what “ZK-proven” and “Ethereum Economic Zone” mean in day-to-day performance and developer tooling. If the EEZ thesis holds, the broader impact could be a more cohesive Ethereum environment where interoperability is handled by design rather than bridged after the fact.
Crypto World
Bitdeer secures $400 million AI contract for Malaysia facility
Bitdeer AI has signed a five-year customer agreement expected to generate about $400 million from roughly half of its A102 data center capacity in Malaysia before the facility has been energized.
Summary
- Bitdeer AI signed a five-year deal expected to generate about $400 million.
- The contract covers roughly half of the capacity at its A102 Malaysia facility.
- Revenue from the agreement is expected to begin in the first quarter of 2027.
- Bitdeer is targeting 350 MW of AI cloud data center capacity by early 2028.
Bitdeer AI said in a Wednesday announcement that the agreement covers about 50% of the A102 site’s available capacity and was signed with an undisclosed customer it described as being of “high credit quality.”
Revenue from the contract, along with the costs associated with delivering the service, is expected to begin in the first quarter of 2027 when operations under the agreement start.
The deal gives the Bitcoin miner’s AI business a contracted customer for a large portion of the Malaysian facility before commercial operations begin, while Bitdeer AI continues building data center capacity across several markets.
Bitdeer AI has secured half of A102 capacity before launch
Under the five-year agreement, the unnamed customer will use about half of the available capacity at Bitdeer AI’s A102 facility in Malaysia.
Bitdeer did not disclose the customer’s identity or provide a detailed breakdown of the contract’s pricing structure. The company estimated total revenue from the agreement at approximately $400 million over its five-year term.
Service is scheduled to begin during the first quarter of 2027, meaning the contract is not expected to contribute revenue or related operating costs before then.
Securing a customer before energization reduces the amount of uncommitted capacity Bitdeer will need to commercialize once A102 enters operation. The company has not disclosed agreements covering the remaining capacity at the site.
Malaysia is already part of Bitdeer’s AI operations. As crypto.news reported in June on, the company had been expanding AI cloud services while reviewing infrastructure across several countries for AI and colocation use. Its AI cloud annual recurring revenue stood at about $69 million during that period, according to company disclosures cited in the report.
Bitdeer has set a target of reaching 350 megawatts of AI cloud data center capacity by the first quarter of 2028, placing the Malaysian agreement within a multi-year buildout that includes both cloud computing and dedicated infrastructure contracts.
AI contracts are becoming a larger part of Bitdeer’s business
Bitdeer began as a Bitcoin mining company but has increasingly committed capital and existing infrastructure to artificial intelligence and high-performance computing.
The company still operates a large mining business, including sites in the United States, Bhutan, Norway and Ethiopia, while developing its own SEALMINER machines. Its AI business has expanded alongside those operations through GPU cloud services, data center conversions and long-duration infrastructure agreements.
Earlier this month, Bitdeer signed a 16-year lease covering 121 megawatts of AI computing capacity at its Tydal campus in Norway. The agreement carries about $4.7 billion in contracted revenue over its initial term.
Bitdeer said the entire 121 MW of contracted IT capacity at Tydal will be configured to run Nvidia GPUs for a leading AI lab through Volta, an Nvidia Cloud Partner. The project is being developed in two phases, with the first scheduled to begin operations at the end of 2026 and the second targeted for the first quarter of 2027.
The Norwegian agreement also contains an eight-year renewal option that could increase its potential contract value to about $8 billion over 24 years, according to Bitdeer. Electricity costs are set to be reimbursed by the tenant under the lease structure.
At the same time, the company has continued investing in its mining hardware operations. A July expansion included a $36 million manufacturing facility in Nevada focused on Bitcoin mining equipment, while its AI cloud and data center businesses remained separate from the production site.
Bitcoin miners are locking in long AI leases
Bitdeer is one of several publicly traded Bitcoin miners using existing access to power and data center sites to build businesses serving AI customers.
Hut 8 and IREN announced large contracts in July, with new AI infrastructure deals adding billions of dollars in contracted revenue for both companies. Hut 8 signed its second 15-year, $9.8 billion agreement at the Beacon Point campus in Texas, while IREN announced $2.8 billion in new multi-year AI cloud contracts.
Hut 8’s second contract covered another 352 MW of IT capacity, taking the tenant’s total contracted footprint at Beacon Point to 704 MW. Combined base-term contract value at the Texas campus reached $19.6 billion following the agreement.
IREN, meanwhile, raised its 2026 annualized AI cloud revenue target to more than $4 billion after signing the additional contracts. The company has also been developing hundreds of megawatts of cloud capacity as it puts more of its power portfolio toward GPU-based computing.
MARA Holdings has taken a different route into the same market. In July, the miner expanded its Texas footprint through an agreement to acquire a 1,200-acre powered site with planned grid capacity of up to 2 gigawatts for AI, high-performance computing and Bitcoin mining infrastructure.
TeraWulf has already reached the point where its computing business produces more quarterly revenue than its Bitcoin mining operation. During the first quarter of 2026, the company generated $21 million from high-performance computing hosting compared with less than $13 million from digital asset mining, according to its first-quarter revenue results.
Bitdeer shares have risen after the Malaysia deal
Investors responded positively after Bitdeer disclosed the Malaysian customer agreement.
Bitdeer shares rose about 7% during Wednesday trading before adding nearly 6% in Thursday pre-market trading, according to Yahoo Finance data cited in the original report.
The stock was changing hands at about $10.20 as of 12:16 p.m. UTC on Thursday.
Bitdeer’s latest customer contract follows its second-quarter results earlier this month, when the company reported $228.8 million in total revenue compared with $155.6 million a year earlier. The company recorded a net loss of $92.3 million for the quarter and held $496.3 million in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash as of June 30.
Its data center portfolio continues to include both Bitcoin mining and AI facilities, with additional sites being assessed or converted for cloud and colocation workloads as capacity becomes available.
Crypto World
Upbit Listings Send 4 Tokens Higher as ETHGas Leads With 11% Gain
Upbit announced 4 new altcoin listings today. The exchange will open trading for Biconomy (BICO), Bubblemaps (BMT), Nillion (NIL), and ETHGas (GWEI).
South Korea’s largest exchange set trading to begin at 1 p.m. Korea Standard Time (KST). All four tokens moved higher after the notice.
Upbit Listing Confirmation Sends 4 Altcoins Sharply Higher
GWEI led the market reaction, rising 11.75% against the dollar on Kraken following the announcement. BMT gained 7.48%, while BICO climbed 7.35% on their respective Binance Tether (USDT) pairs over the same period.
NIL posted the smallest gain among the four tokens, up 5.11% at press time.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Trading activity climbed alongside the prices, and GWEI led again. According to CoinGecko, ETHGas’ trading volume jumped 197.70% to $11.1 million over 24 hours, the sharpest increase of the four.
BICO followed with $34.5 million, up 46.70%. BMT handled $12 million, a 25.70% gain, while NIL recorded $14.6 million, up 21.40%.
Meanwhile, the pattern here is familiar. Six new Upbit listings earlier this month lifted Cysic (CYS) by 32% and AIOZ Network (AIOZ) by 12.6%.
Upbit Applies Standard Opening Restrictions
The exchange will list all four tokens against Bitcoin (BTC) and USDT. Upbit did not announce Korean won (KRW) trading pairs.
Deposits and withdrawals will open within two hours of the notice being published.
“Deposits and withdrawals are supported only through the networks specified in this announcement. Always check the network before depositing,” the exchange said.
Upbit is also applying its standard launch restrictions. Buy orders will be restricted for approximately five minutes after trading begins.
Sell orders priced 10% or more below the previous day’s closing price will also be restricted during that period. For approximately two hours after launch, only limit orders will be available.
Whether the four hold these gains past 1 p.m. KST is the open question. Earlier Upbit debuts have often faded once the initial listing bid clears.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The post Upbit Listings Send 4 Tokens Higher as ETHGas Leads With 11% Gain appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Crypto World
SEC Regulation Crypto vs CLARITY Act: which framework wins
The Commission published 400 pages of token offering rules while Congress left town. If both frameworks survive, they will contradict each other on the questions that matter most.
Summary
- The SEC proposed Regulation Crypto Assets on Aug. 18, 2026, creating a $5 million startup exemption, a $75 million fundraising exemption, and an investment contract safe harbor that lets tokens exit securities status entirely.
- The CLARITY Act passed the House with 294 votes in July 2025 and cleared the Senate Banking Committee 15 to 9 in May 2026, but the Senate adjourned for August recess without a floor vote, and Polymarket odds for 2026 passage collapsed from 82% to roughly 16%.
- The two frameworks define decentralization differently: the CLARITY Act uses a statutory four part mature blockchain test with a hard 20% ownership cap, while the SEC safe harbor relies on issuer self certification that essential managerial efforts have ceased.
- Regulation Crypto Assets does not resolve the foundational jurisdictional question of whether a given token answers to the SEC or the CFTC, the exact problem the CLARITY Act was written to solve.
- Commissioner Hester Peirce, architect of the safe harbor concept, departs in November 2026, creating a narrow window in which the proposal must advance before the Commission loses the votes to finalize it.
The timing was not subtle. On Aug. 7, 2026, the United States Senate adjourned for its August recess without voting on the CLARITY Act, the most ambitious piece of crypto legislation to reach the chamber floor since the industry began lobbying for a federal framework. One week later, on Aug. 14, the Securities and Exchange Commission voted to publish Regulation Crypto Assets, a 400 page proposed rulemaking that would create the agency’s first bespoke offering regime for digital tokens. The full text landed on Aug. 18, the same week Polymarket odds for the CLARITY Act’s passage in 2026 dropped to roughly 16%.
The market read it as coordination. The SEC, under Chairman Paul Atkins, stepped into the vacuum that Congress left behind. But calling it a replacement misses the structural problem. The CLARITY Act is not dead. It sits on the Senate Legislative Calendar with a September 14 return window and three working weeks before the session runs out. If both frameworks proceed in parallel, the crypto industry will face two overlapping regimes that disagree on token classification, startup capital thresholds, the meaning of decentralization, and whether software developers owe regulatory obligations at all.
This is not a question of which framework is better. It is a question of which one survives.
What Regulation Crypto Assets actually proposes
The SEC’s proposal, filed as Release No. 33 11434 under docket S7 2026 27, runs roughly 400 pages and creates three distinct pathways for token projects that currently lack a workable compliance route.
The startup exemption, housed in Subpart B, allows teams to raise up to $5 million over four years with no accredited investor requirement and no per investor cap. The lane covers not just capital raises but also airdrops and network rewards, a deliberate expansion of scope that signals the Commission views token distribution itself as an offering event. Issuers must file a Form NOR (notice of reliance) before any distribution and post principles based disclosures on their website covering ten mandated topics, from token economics to governance mechanisms. There is no resale lockup, and general solicitation is permitted.
The fundraising exemption, in Subpart C, offers two tiers modeled loosely on Regulation A. Tier 1 allows $20 million per 12 month period with no audit requirement. Tier 2 raises the ceiling to $75 million annually but demands audited financial statements prepared under GAAS or PCAOB standards, plus ongoing reporting through annual (Form 1 KC), semiannual (Form 1 SC), and current (Form 1 UC) filings. Non accredited investors face a cap of 10% of the greater of their annual income or net worth. The offering circular, filed on Form 1 CRYPTO, requires disclosure across the same ten topic areas.
The investment contract safe harbor, in Subpart D, addresses the exit question. A token can shed its securities classification when the issuer has completed or permanently ceased all promised essential managerial efforts, made no new representations about such efforts, and filed a Form TR certifying compliance. The mechanism is issuer driven: the founding team decides when it has finished, self certifies, and the SEC retains the right to challenge.
Antifraud and antimanipulation provisions apply across all three lanes. Bad actor disqualification mirrors Regulation A. The comment period runs 60 days from Federal Register publication.
What the CLARITY Act would do instead
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, which the House passed with 294 votes in July 2025, takes a fundamentally different approach. Where Regulation Crypto Assets builds exemptions within the SEC’s existing authority, the CLARITY Act rewrites the jurisdictional map from scratch.
The bill classifies every digital asset into one of three categories: investment contract assets regulated by the SEC, digital commodities regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and stablecoins subject to joint oversight under the separate GENIUS Act framework. The classification turns on an asset’s characteristics, issuance method, sale context, and whether it meets the mature blockchain test.
That test is the bill’s structural centerpiece. A token transitions from SEC to CFTC oversight when its underlying network satisfies four statutory conditions: the system must operate for actual transactions, services, validation, or governance; the code must be publicly accessible without permission requirements; operation must follow preset, transparent rules applied consistently; and no person or commonly controlled group may hold 20% or more of tokens or voting power.
The 20% threshold is the bill’s working definition of sufficient decentralization. Meeting it creates a rebuttable presumption that the asset qualifies as a digital commodity. The issuer can self certify, and the SEC has 60 days to contest the classification, with appeals heard in federal court.
On capital formation, the CLARITY Act allows new issuers to raise up to $75 million over 12 months without full securities registration, conditional on filing an offering statement covering blockchain details, source code, consensus mechanism, and insider holdings. The bill also includes DeFi developer protections, carving out software that never touches customer funds from both SEC and CFTC registration requirements. A separate provision exempts non controlling blockchain developers from money transmitter classification.
Three fights stalled the bill in the Senate: who enforces the ethics rules barring government officials from sponsoring digital assets, whether stablecoin yield arrangements survive a provision prohibiting interest on idle balances, and how far developer protections extend into the DeFi stack.
The collision map: clause by clause
The two frameworks agree on the broadest principle, that crypto assets need a regulatory home, and diverge on nearly everything else. The following comparison isolates the points of direct contradiction.
Token classification. The CLARITY Act creates a statutory three category system (security, digital commodity, stablecoin) and assigns each to a specific regulator. Regulation Crypto Assets does not classify tokens at all. It builds offering exemptions for assets already deemed securities and provides an exit ramp from that status, but it does not address what happens after the exit. A token that sheds its investment contract classification under the SEC safe harbor enters a jurisdictional void: it is no longer a security, but no rule designates it a commodity or routes it to the CFTC. The CLARITY Act fills that gap. Regulation Crypto Assets leaves it open.
Decentralization test. The CLARITY Act defines decentralization through four objective, statutory criteria anchored by the hard 20% ownership cap. The SEC safe harbor uses a subjective standard: the issuer must have ceased all essential managerial efforts and self certify that fact. There is no ownership threshold, no code transparency requirement, and no governance test. A project with a single entity holding 40% of tokens could theoretically qualify for the safe harbor if that entity convincingly argues it has stopped managing the network. Under the CLARITY Act, the same project would fail the mature blockchain test and remain a security.
Startup exemptions. Regulation Crypto Assets caps the startup lane at $5 million over four years. The CLARITY Act does not include a comparable small raise exemption; its $75 million offering pathway is the floor, not the ceiling. For a team seeking to raise $3 million through a token sale, the SEC framework offers a lighter compliance path. For a team raising $50 million, the CLARITY Act’s single tier structure may prove simpler than Regulation Crypto’s Tier 2, which demands PCAOB audited financials and ongoing semiannual reporting.
DeFi treatment. The CLARITY Act explicitly carves out DeFi developers who build non custodial software from registration requirements on both the SEC and CFTC sides. Regulation Crypto Assets contains no DeFi provisions. The March 2026 joint SEC CFTC interpretation placed staking, mining, and airdrops outside securities law as a temporary classification, but the proposed rule does not codify those carve outs. A DeFi protocol builder operating under the SEC framework today relies on guidance that a future commission could withdraw.
Staking. The joint interpretation treats staking as a non securities activity. Regulation Crypto Assets includes airdrops and network rewards as covered transactions under the startup exemption, which means distributing staking rewards could count against the $5 million cap. The CLARITY Act does not subject staking to offering limits; its mature blockchain test treats validation activity as evidence of decentralization, not as an offering event.
State preemption. Regulation Crypto Assets preempts state registration requirements for qualified purchasers in primary offerings and conditionally preempts state rules for secondary trading if the issuer maintains ongoing disclosure. The CLARITY Act goes further, preempting state property laws that would classify self custodied digital assets as abandoned due to inactivity and asserting federal primacy over token classification. Both frameworks preserve state antifraud authority, but the CLARITY Act’s preemption is broader and statutory, while the SEC’s is narrower and regulatory.
Resale and secondary markets. Regulation Crypto Assets imposes no resale lockup on tokens sold under either exemption, but the proposal explicitly does not address Exchange Act registration for secondary market participants such as exchanges, brokers, and dealers. The CLARITY Act requires digital commodity exchanges, brokers, and dealers to register with the CFTC and meet standards for custody, customer asset segregation, qualified custodian requirements, and market surveillance.
What this means for teams building today
The collision is not theoretical. Projects at different stages of development face materially different outcomes depending on which framework prevails, and many cannot afford to wait for resolution.
A pre launch token project seeking to raise $4 million has a clear path under Regulation Crypto Assets: file Form NOR, post the ten topic disclosures, distribute tokens under the startup exemption, and skip the accredited investor gatekeeping entirely. Under the CLARITY Act, the same team would need to file a full offering statement covering blockchain details, source code, and insider holdings, then navigate the $75 million pathway designed for much larger raises. The SEC framework is objectively lighter for small teams. But if the CLARITY Act passes six months later, every disclosure filed under Form NOR becomes legally uncertain, and the team may need to reclassify its token under the statutory three category system.
A mid stage protocol that has already distributed tokens and wants to exit securities status faces the opposite problem. Under Regulation Crypto Assets, the founding team self certifies through Form TR that it has ceased essential managerial efforts. Under the CLARITY Act, the protocol must pass the mature blockchain test, including the 20% ownership cap and the open source code requirement. A protocol where the founding entity still holds 25% of governance tokens qualifies for the SEC safe harbor (assuming it has stopped active management) but fails the CLARITY Act’s statutory test. If both frameworks apply simultaneously, that protocol sits in regulatory limbo.
DeFi builders face the starkest divide. A developer who writes and deploys a non custodial automated market maker has explicit statutory protection under the CLARITY Act’s carve out for software that never touches customer funds. Under Regulation Crypto Assets, that same developer has no explicit protection at all. The March 2026 joint interpretation offers informal comfort, but informal comfort is not a compliance program. Teams building DeFi infrastructure today must decide whether to invest in compliance architecture for a rule that may be superseded or to wait for a statute that may never arrive.
Staking service providers confront a subtler trap. The SEC framework treats network rewards as covered transactions under the startup exemption, which means a validator distributing staking yields to delegators could be conducting an unregistered offering if the aggregate value exceeds $5 million. The CLARITY Act treats validation as evidence of decentralization. Under one framework, staking is an offering. Under the other, it is proof that a token should no longer be treated as a security. The contradiction is not a matter of interpretation. It is a matter of text.
Why one framework could kill the other
The legal hierarchy is straightforward. Federal statute trumps agency rulemaking. If the CLARITY Act passes, its provisions override any SEC rule that conflicts with the statutory text. The token classification system, the mature blockchain test, the CFTC jurisdiction over digital commodities, and the DeFi developer protections would all supersede Regulation Crypto Assets to the extent they contradict.
But the reverse is also true in practice, if not in law. If the CLARITY Act dies in the Senate, Regulation Crypto Assets becomes the only structured framework available. Projects will build compliance programs around the SEC’s three lanes. Exchanges will develop listing standards based on the safe harbor criteria. Lawyers will advise clients using the Form NOR and Form 1 CRYPTO templates. Within 12 to 18 months, the industry’s operational infrastructure will have calcified around the SEC’s architecture, making any subsequent legislation politically and practically harder to implement.
This is the pattern that played out with the SEC CFTC joint framework announced in March 2026. That interpretation classified 16 major tokens as digital commodities, effectively pre deciding a classification question that Congress intended to resolve through legislation. By the time the CLARITY Act reached the Senate Banking Committee, those 16 classifications had already shaped exchange operations, custody arrangements, and compliance budgets across the industry.
Regulation Crypto Assets extends the same dynamic. TD Cowen managing director Jaret Seiberg described the proposal as creating a distinct compliance regime that eliminates the binary choice between registration and litigation risk. That is precisely the value proposition the CLARITY Act was supposed to deliver. If the SEC delivers it first through rulemaking, the legislative urgency evaporates.
The vulnerability the market is not pricing
The structural weakness of Regulation Crypto Assets is not its provisions. It is its durability. An SEC rule adopted under one commission can be amended, suspended, or repealed by the next. Commissioner Hester Peirce, whose safe harbor concept anchors Subpart D, departs the Commission in November 2026. If the proposal is not finalized before her exit, the Commission could lose the three vote majority needed to advance it. Even if finalized, a future commission hostile to crypto asset innovation could reopen the rulemaking, narrow the exemptions, or redefine essential managerial efforts so broadly that no project qualifies for the safe harbor.
The CLARITY Act, by contrast, would require an act of Congress to amend. Its classification system, once enacted, would bind every future SEC and CFTC chair until lawmakers chose to change it. The ethics provision, which bars the president, vice president, members of Congress, and federal judges from sponsoring digital assets for compensation while in office, carries civil penalties reported at up to $250,000 daily. That provision is one reason the bill stalled, but it is also one reason the bill, if passed, would be extraordinarily difficult to reverse.
The market is pricing Regulation Crypto Assets as a win and the CLARITY Act’s stall as a manageable delay. That framing ignores the possibility that the SEC framework, precisely because it is easier to enact, is also easier to dismantle. A regulatory framework that depends on the composition of a five member commission is not a framework. It is a truce.
Industry reaction reflected this tension. Groups broadly welcomed the proposal as a constructive step away from regulation by enforcement. But a16z, one of crypto’s most influential venture firms, supported the goal while urging the Commission to defer to Congress. That position captures the split: the SEC’s rules are better than no rules, but they are not better than statute.
The September window
The Senate returns on Sept. 14, 2026, with three working weeks before the session effectively ends. Senator Cynthia Lummis has circulated a consolidated draft merging Senate committee versions of the CLARITY Act, but Majority Leader John Thune publicly cast doubt on passage before the August recess, and the Senate prioritized other legislation.
The comment period for Regulation Crypto Assets runs 60 days from Federal Register publication, placing the deadline in mid to late October. If the CLARITY Act passes during the September window, the SEC would need to reconcile its proposal with the new statutory framework, potentially withdrawing or substantially revising the rule. If the CLARITY Act fails, the SEC proceeds to finalize Regulation Crypto Assets with no competing legislative constraint.
Both outcomes carry costs. Passage of the CLARITY Act after Regulation Crypto Assets has already shaped industry compliance would create a disruptive transition. Failure of the CLARITY Act would consolidate regulatory authority in an agency that, by design, can change its mind every time the White House changes hands.
The crypto industry spent three years asking for regulatory clarity. It may get two incompatible versions of it in the same quarter.
What to watch
Polymarket odds for CLARITY Act passage crossing 30% before Sept. 14. A sustained move above that threshold would signal that Senate leadership has committed floor time, changing the calculus for every project building compliance around Regulation Crypto Assets.
SEC comment letter volume during the first 30 days. If major exchanges and venture firms submit letters urging the Commission to defer to Congress, it signals the industry views the rule as a backstop, not a destination.
Whether the SEC schedules a second open meeting on Regulation Crypto Assets before Peirce’s November departure. Acceleration of the finalization timeline would indicate the Commission is racing the clock on its own composition.
Any amendment to the CLARITY Act’s ethics provision. The provision barring government officials from sponsoring tokens is the single largest obstacle to a floor vote. A narrowing or sunset clause would materially increase passage odds.
CFTC public statements on the safe harbor exit ramp. If the CFTC signals it will not automatically accept tokens that exit SEC jurisdiction under Subpart D, the safe harbor’s practical value collapses.
What is Regulation Crypto Assets?
Regulation Crypto Assets is a proposed SEC rulemaking published on Aug. 18, 2026, that creates three pathways for token offerings: a $5 million startup exemption, a $75 million fundraising exemption, and a safe harbor that allows tokens to exit securities classification when their founding teams cease essential managerial efforts.
What is the CLARITY Act?
The CLARITY Act, formally the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, is federal legislation that classifies every digital asset as a security, digital commodity, or stablecoin and assigns regulatory authority to the SEC, CFTC, or joint oversight accordingly. The House passed it with 294 votes in July 2025.
How do the two frameworks define decentralization differently?
The CLARITY Act uses a four part mature blockchain test with a hard 20% ownership cap: no single entity or commonly controlled group may hold 20% or more of tokens or voting power. The SEC safe harbor relies on issuer self certification that essential managerial efforts have ceased, with no ownership threshold.
Can both frameworks exist at the same time?
If the CLARITY Act becomes law, its statutory provisions override any conflicting SEC rule. If it does not pass, Regulation Crypto Assets proceeds as the sole structured framework, but it lacks the jurisdictional clarity and CFTC integration that the CLARITY Act provides.
What happens to DeFi developers under each framework?
The CLARITY Act explicitly exempts non custodial software builders from SEC and CFTC registration. Regulation Crypto Assets contains no DeFi provisions. DeFi developers currently rely on the March 2026 joint interpretation, which a future commission could withdraw.
Does the SEC safe harbor send tokens to the CFTC?
No. The safe harbor ends a token’s securities classification but does not route it to any other regulator. A token that exits through Subpart D enters a jurisdictional gap unless the CLARITY Act or separate legislation assigns it to the CFTC.
Why did the CLARITY Act stall in the Senate?
Three unresolved disputes blocked a floor vote: enforcement of the ethics provision barring officials from sponsoring tokens, whether platforms may pay yield on stablecoin balances, and how far DeFi developer protections extend. The Senate adjourned for August recess without resolving any of them.
What is the deadline for the Regulation Crypto Assets comment period?
Public comments are due 60 days after the proposal is published in the Federal Register. Based on the Aug. 18 publication date, the deadline falls in mid to late October 2026. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or legal advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk. Always conduct your own research before making investment decisions. Published Aug. 20, 2026.
Crypto World
A $2 million bet on XRP volatility crosses the tape as prices surge

An options trader opened a large straddle on XRP, betting on wild price swings by Aug. 28.
-
Fashion6 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Ann Taylor
-
Tech7 days ago11 Ways to Rank Your Videos
-
Sports6 days agoBirmingham 2026: Day 6 Timetable for Irish Athletes
-
NewsBeat6 days agoMyanmar says over 300,000 Rohingya refugees verified for repatriation as exodus enters ninth year
-
Politics6 days agoSEQ Code: The Three Letter Boarding Pass Code That Could Give You The Worst Seat
-
Tech3 days agoQwen3.8-27B runs frontier-class coding agents and reasoning locally, no cloud API required
-
Business3 days agoSMA Solar Technology AG (SMTGY) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript
-
Crypto World6 days agoPi Network Protocol 27 endgame: last upgrade before what?
-
Crypto World3 days agoOCC Greenlights Trump Family Crypto Firm for Trust Charter
-
Tech6 days agoEvery fusion startup that has raised over $100M
-
Entertainment6 days agoMarvel Studios Reveals New X-Men Cast Including Adam Driver and Sadie Sink
-
Business7 days ago15 Ways to Make Money From Your Phone (2026 Guide)
-
Crypto World7 days agoRobinhood Chain Approaches $1B TVL as Uniswap Integration Boosts Liquidity
-
Entertainment7 days ago10 Netflix Shows That Quietly Became Modern Classics
-
Fashion6 days agoWeekly News Update, 8.14.26 – Corporette.com
-
News Videos23 hours agoDon’t Leave Your Financial Future To Chance | August 19, 2026
-
Fashion7 days agoSilver bangles for women – Newbridge Silverware
-
Business6 days agoFacebook Down Now? Users Report Login And Loading Problems As Outage Trackers Monitor Ongoing Issues
-
Business6 days agoMonarch Mutual Fund set to enter MF space with maiden overnight fund; files draft with Sebi
-
Fashion6 days agoCart Confidential Vol. 44 – Julia Berolzheimer

You must be logged in to post a comment Login