Crypto World
Echo Protocol Hack Autopsy: The $76 Million Exploit That Wasn’t Really a Hack
2026 DeFi losses crossed $1 billion in four months, with April alone draining $634 million across 28+ incidents, the worst month on record.
Drift ($285M) and KelpDAO ($292M) alone accounted for $577 million of April’s losses, and neither was a code exploit.
DefiLlama’s 2026 hack breakdown tells the same thing.
The biggest slices are LayerZero bridge exploits (18%), compromised admin keys (16%), spoof tokens (14%), and private key compromises (11%).
Combined, operational and key-management failures account for the majority of all stolen value this year. Smart contract bugs like re-entrancy and oracle manipulation barely register.
Echo Protocol just became the latest data point.
On May 18, an attacker broke into the Echo Protocol on Monad and printed 1,000 fake eBTC for themselves. That’s $76.7M on paper.
The problem is, fake tokens don’t buy you anything unless you can trade them for something real. So they took a small chunk, dropped it into Curvance’s lending app as collateral, and borrowed real Bitcoin against it.
Then bridged that Bitcoin to Ethereum, swapped it for ETH, and ran it through Tornado Cash. Final take: around $816,000.
Everyone’s calling it $76.7 million but the real number is $816,000, and why those two numbers are so far apart is the main story here.
This breakdown covers what happened, how, and what it says about DeFi security right now.
The bottom line: The contract was fine. A stolen admin key and lazy controls did everything else, and that’s how most of 2026’s DeFi losses are happening.
Post Mortem (The Summary)
- Echo Protocol was not hacked through bad smart contract code. The attacker stole or accessed an admin key.
- That admin key controlled minting rights for Echo’s eBTC token on Monad. One private key was enough to create fake Bitcoin-backed tokens.
- The attacker minted 1,000 fake eBTC, worth about $76.7 million on paper. But those tokens had no real BTC backing.
- They could not cash out the full amount because Monad liquidity was thin. So they used 45 fake eBTC as collateral on Curvance.
- Curvance accepted the fake eBTC as normal collateral and let the attacker borrow real WBTC.
- The attacker escaped with about $816,000 in real value, not $76.7 million.
- Echo later burned the remaining 955 fake eBTC and paused affected functions.
- Monad itself was not hacked. Curvance’s main protocol was not directly hacked either. The failure came from Echo’s admin setup and Curvance trusting newly minted collateral.
- The core lesson: DeFi attackers are now targeting keys, admins, bridges, infrastructure, and team operations more than smart contract bugs.
- Basic protections could have reduced or stopped this: multisig admin control, timelocks, mint caps, rate limits, and collateral checks.
- Echo got lucky. The attacker only failed to drain more because there was not enough liquidity to cash out the fake tokens.
The Players
Here’s the full breakdown of what happened, and how.
- Echo Protocol
A BTCFi (Bitcoin DeFi) project. Their pitch: take your BTC, get a yield-bearing wrapped version of it that works in DeFi.
Their home base is Aptos, where the token is called aBTC. They hit a peak TVL of $878 million on Aptos in May 2025, currently sitting around $254 million.
Echo expanded to Monad as part of Monad’s mainnet ecosystem push. On Monad, their wrapped BTC token is called eBTC.
This is critical: aBTC and eBTC are completely separate, non-bridgeable assets. They’re parallel deployments, not connected. The hack hit eBTC on Monad only.
- Monad
A new high-performance parallelized EVM L1. One of the hyped chains of 2025-26. Just out of the mainnet, with lots of protocols deploying fresh.
Echo is one of them. Monad itself was NOT compromised in any way. Co-founder @keoneHD confirmed the network ran normally throughout. It was a protocol-level failure on top of Monad.
- Curvance
A lending protocol deployed on Monad. Functions like Aave but with isolated markets, where each collateral asset lives in its own siloed pool so a compromised asset can’t infect the rest of the lending protocol.
They had listed eBTC as a collateral asset.
- Tornado Cash
Sanctioned ETH mixer. You send ETH in, you get ETH out from a different wallet, and break the on-chain trail. Standard exit tool for hackers.
What Got Exploited
Echo’s eBTC token on Monad is a standard ERC-20 contract that uses OpenZeppelin’s role-based access control system. This is industry standard, used by basically every serious DeFi project.
Two roles matter in its setup:
- DEFAULT_ADMIN_ROLE: the master role. Can grant or revoke any other role on the contract.
- MINTER_ROLE: can call mint() and create new eBTC tokens.
Normally, only Echo’s team holds these. Minting only happens when real BTC gets locked somewhere, and the team mints the matching eBTC. That’s the entire trust model behind a wrapped token.
Here’s where Echo messed up.
The DEFAULT_ADMIN_ROLE sat on a single EOA, basically just a normal wallet with one private key behind it. And the wallet had no safety nets. Whoever held that key could mint as much as they wanted, whenever they wanted, with nothing to slow them down.
So the entire $254M+ Echo ecosystem on Monad was, in security terms, sitting behind one private key. That key got stolen. Nobody’s said how yet. Could be phishing, malware on a team laptop, an infra breach, an insider, secrets leaked in a repo, supply chain attack through a dev tool. Echo hasn’t disclosed.
The Attack Step by Step
Date: May 18, 2026, around 5:55 PM ET
- Step 1: Attackers use the stolen admin key to grant themselves DEFAULT_ADMIN_ROLE on a fresh wallet. They’re now admin too.
- Step 2: From that new admin role, they grant themselves MINTER_ROLE. They can now mint.
- Step 3: They call mint(attacker_wallet, 1000e8). 1,000 eBTC shows up in their wallet. Notional value $76.7M. Real BTC backing: zero. These tokens are completely fake, phantom claims on Bitcoin that don’t exist anywhere.
- Step 4: They revoke the original Echo admin and their own admin role too. Cleanup move so it looks less suspicious on-chain. From the outside, it just looks like a random wallet holding 1,000 eBTC.
At this point, the peg is mathematically broken. There are 1,000 more eBTC tokens than there is BTC backing them.
But the attacker hasn’t actually taken anything yet. Fake tokens are worthless unless you can convert them into real money.
The Cashout Flow
You can’t just dump 1,000 fake eBTC on a DEX. Monad’s DEXs don’t have anywhere close to that liquidity. You’d crash the price to zero before extracting anything, and arbitrageurs would catch it instantly. So the attacker went to a lending market instead.
- Step 5. Deposit 45 eBTC ($3.45M paper value) into Curvance as collateral. Curvance accepts it because, from the contract’s view, eBTC is eBTC. No oracle or check that separates “freshly minted fake eBTC” from “legit BTC-backed eBTC.” That’s the second failure of this hack. Lending markets just accept new collateral at face value without checking where it came from.
- Step 6. Borrow 11.29 WBTC against it, about $868K of real wrapped Bitcoin. WBTC is the major BTC-on-Ethereum token, deep liquidity, fully backed. They now have $868K of real value, secured by $3.45M of fake collateral they’re never coming back for.
- Step 7. Bridge the WBTC to Ethereum. That’s where liquidity lives and where Tornado works.
- Step 8. Swap WBTC to ~384 ETH on Ethereum (~$822K).
- Step 9. Run the 384 ETH through Tornado Cash. Trail breaks. Funds land in fresh wallets that can’t be traced back.
Total real money out: approximately $816,000.
How Echo Responded
Within hours of the hack going public, Echo reclaimed the admin key, burned the 955 eBTC still sitting in the attacker’s wallet (which no longer exists), and paused all cross-chain functionality on Monad.
They also paused the Aptos bridge and Aptos lending even though Aptos was clean, just to be safe. Pushed a contract upgrade on Monad to restrict the affected operations and said they’d patch their other EVM bridge deployments too.
Curvance paused the eBTC market, confirmed that their own contracts were fine, and noted that their isolated market design prevented the damage from spreading to other lending pools.
Keone from Monad clarified the chain was untouched and pegged the actual loss at around $816K.
The Breakdown
The gap between $76.7 million and $816,000 is the whole story. Curvance was the only viable exit, and its depth capped the borrow at approximately $868,000.
eBTC minted
1,000 (notional $76.7M)
Deposited to Curvance
45 eBTC
WBTC borrowed
11.29 (~$868K)
Sent through Tornado
~384 ETH (~$822K)
Actually stolen
~$816K
eBTC burned by Echo
955
Aptos exposure
~$71K
ECHO drawdown
~11-12%
The other 955 eBTC had nowhere to go until Echo burned it. Monad’s thin liquidity saved Echo from a much bigger loss. On Ethereum, this would’ve been close to $76M out the door.
Why this was an operational hack, not a smart contract hack
The code wasn’t the issue. It worked the way it was supposed to. The real problem was how Echo set things up around the contract:
- The admin role was held by a single wallet instead of a multisig. Stealing a single private key was enough to take over the entire protocol.
- There was no time lock. When the attacker granted themselves admin and then minter rights, those changes went live immediately. No delay, no window for the team to notice and respond.
- The contract had no maximum supply. Minting 1,000 eBTC with zero BTC backing was technically allowed by the rules of the contract itself.
- No rate limit either. The attacker minted the entire 1,000 in a single transaction, rather than being forced to spread it out.
- Curvance accepted the freshly minted eBTC as collateral without checking whether it was legitimately backed. The lending market just saw eBTC tokens in a wallet and treated them the same as real ones.
None of these are obscure or experimental fixes. Multisigs, timelocks, mint caps, and supply checks are stuff serious DeFi protocols have been shipping for years. Echo just didn’t bother with any of them.
May 2026 looks like this
Echo is the 14th hack this month. The year so far:
| Protocol | Loss | Vector |
| KelpDAO (Apr) | $292M | RPC poisoning + DDoS (Lazarus) |
| Drift | $285M | Social engineering (Lazarus, UNC4736) |
| THORChain (May 15) | $10M+ | Vault breach |
| Verus bridge (May 17) | $11.6M | Cross-chain verification |
| Echo (May 18) | $816K | Admin key |
| Transit Finance | $1.88M | Deprecated contract |
Approximately $328.6 million lost to bridge hacks in 2026 across 8 incidents. None of these were Solidity bugs. Keys, signers, RPC endpoints, off-chain verifiers, that’s where the money is leaving now. The attackers moved up the stack. A few from this year worth paying attention to:
- Drift (April): Not a technical exploit. UNC4736 (North Korea) spent six months social engineering Drift employees, then drained $285M in 12 minutes. Six months of prep, 12 minutes of execution. That’s a military op, not a hack.
- KelpDAO (17 days later): Same group, completely different vector. They poisoned LayerZero’s RPC infrastructure and forged cross-chain messages for $292M. State-sponsored teams running multiple playbooks in parallel.
- AI is showing up too: Google confirmed the first AI-powered mass exploit on May 11 (AI found a zero-day and wrote bypass code for 2FA). GoPlus reported a 231% MoM jump in Web3 losses partly tied to AI. CrowdStrike puts the average eCrime breakout time at 29 minutes, with the fastest at 27 seconds. The attack side is automating, defense mostly isn’t.
- Resolv Labs (March): Admin key compromise on a stablecoin issuer. Attacker minted 80M unbacked USR, drained $25M, and USR depegged by 80%. Same root cause as Echo, completely different protocol type. The pattern doesn’t care what you’re building.
Ondo Finance put it bluntly in their post-incident analysis: “there is no single class of vulnerability to defend against.” That’s the part most protocols still haven’t internalized.
So when Echo got drained through a stolen admin key, it didn’t happen in a vacuum. It happened during the most hostile threat environment DeFi has ever seen, and the protocol was set up as if it were still 2022.
So what?
DeFi spent the last five years getting good at smart contract security. Audits, bug bounties, formal verification, all of it.
So the attackers stopped targeting the code and started targeting everything else. Keys, infrastructure, employees, signers. None of that gets audited.
For any wrapped BTC protocol, the only security question that actually matters is who can mint, and how hard is it for someone to take that power from them.
If the answer is “a multisig with a timelock, a mint cap, and a lending market that checks where new collateral came from,” you have a real protocol. If the answer is “one wallet with one key,” you have $254M sitting there waiting to be taken. Echo was the second kind.
The damage doesn’t stay in one place either. Aave wasn’t hacked in April, but it lost $5.4B in TVL within 48 hours of the KelpDAO exploit anyway. People just panicked and pulled their money out of everything. That’s what happens now. One protocol gets hit and the whole sector gets repriced.
The fixes are not new. They’ve been around for years. Multisig the admin, timelock the changes, cap the supply, check the collateral. It’s just that none of it makes a protocol more competitive on the front end, so nobody ships it until they’re the next headline.
Echo got off easy because Monad’s liquidity was too thin for the attacker to fully cash out. The next protocol probably won’t have that excuse.
The post Echo Protocol Hack Autopsy: The $76 Million Exploit That Wasn’t Really a Hack appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Pi Coin price is drifting toward a fresh all-time low as a bearish chart structure tightens its grip on the token, leaving the floor sitting just inches below the current price.
Three independent signals across capital flow, social activity, and smart money positioning have lined up against the token as it tests its most important support since February.
Head and Shoulders Forms as CMF Flags Capital Flight
The PI/USDT daily chart shows a Head and Shoulders pattern, a classic bearish reversal structure. The setup features a higher peak (the head) flanked by two lower peaks (the shoulders), with a horizontal neckline tying the swing lows together.
The left shoulder formed in mid-February. The head printed in mid-March near the cycle peak. The right shoulder completed in mid-May and is now rolling over.
Want more token insights like this? Sign up for Editor Harsh Notariya’s Daily Crypto Newsletter here.
Chaikin Money Flow (CMF), a volume-weighted indicator that proxies big money buying and selling pressure, has slipped to -0.04 on the daily chart. That marks the lowest reading since early April.
The indicator broke below its zero line and is now retesting its most stressed zone in roughly two months. A push under -0.05 would confirm a heavier outflow phase aligned with the pattern’s downside thesis.
Capital flight, however, does not measure how much attention Pi Network is drawing as the breakdown approaches.
Pi Network Social Volume Falls From 31 to 1
Pi Network’s daily Social Volume, a Santiment metric that counts unique social documents discussing the token across more than a thousand crypto channels, has collapsed to 1. That reading sits at the floor of the visible chart range. By comparison, the score peaked at 31 on May 8 post a brief retail rally attempt.
The roughly 97% drop in social chatter shows that retail attention has faded sharply as the price has drifted lower. Quiet markets tend to extend bearish moves because no fresh demand arrives to absorb sell pressure.
For a community-driven asset like Pi, where engagement has historically powered demand, a silent social tape is a structural warning. The token is sliding without any narrative catalyst pulling new buyers in.
The crowd has stepped back, but the question is whether informed money is doing the same.
Smart Money Index Diverges Below Signal
The Smart Money Index, an indicator that measures informed-trader positioning, sits at 0.9063 against its signal line at 0.9157.
The Smart Money line is now diverging below its signal line, a configuration that has historically preceded weaker prices when it persists. The metric slipped under its baseline relative to the signal line in early May and the gap has continued to widen.
The only feature still propping up the indicator is an ascending trendline anchored from the early-February low. That trendline is currently being tested.
A clean break under that ascending support would push the Smart Money reading to its lowest level since February 11, the same period when PI printed its all-time low of $0.130. A repeat of that backdrop would close the loop between informed money exit and a fresh price low.
With three independent signals aligned, the price chart now becomes the decider.
Pi Coin Price Levels to Watch as All-Time Low Looms
The Pi Coin price is currently fighting to defend the $0.145 neckline of the Head and Shoulders pattern. A daily close below $0.145 opens the door directly to the $0.130 all-time low, which sits roughly 13% below current spot.
The first cushion below the neckline arrives at $0.143, the 0.236 Fibonacci level of the structure. Below the all-time low, $0.129 (0.5 Fibonacci) and $0.122 (0.618) become the next stress zones.
Deeper bearish extensions stack at $0.113 (0.786) and $0.102 (1.0 Fibonacci). The pattern’s full measured-move target near $0.074 aligns with the 1.618 extension at $0.069, marking the deepest projected zone.
Every level below $0.130 would print a fresh all-time low and pull the token into uncharted territory with each breach.
A bullish reset, however, only begins on a daily close back above $0.156, the right shoulder peak. Real strength returns above $0.200, the left shoulder zone, while the full pattern invalidates only on a move above the $0.300 head.
A daily close above $0.156 separates a possible right shoulder recovery from a confirmed slide into all-time low territory.
The post Pi Coin Loses Social Pulse With New All-Time Low Just 13% Away appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Texas voters are headed back to the polls this week for runoff elections in two high-stakes contests that could shape the political calculus around cryptocurrency policy ahead of 2027. In the U.S. Senate Republican primary, incumbent John Cornyn faces challenger Ken Paxton, while in Texas’ 18th congressional district, incumbent Al Green competes with challenger Christian Menefee for the November general election. Both races feature outsized spending from interest groups aligned with the crypto industry, signaling an ongoing effort to tilt policy conversations at the federal and state levels toward a crypto-friendly agenda.
Campaign finance filings illuminate a concerted effort by crypto-aligned PACs to influence outcomes. Protect Progress, affiliated with Fairshake PAC and connected to Ripple and Coinbase networks, reported substantial expenditures in support of Menefee and in opposition to Green. Specifically, filings show about $5 million spent to back Menefee and roughly $2.8 million directed at ads opposing Green. Menefee also holds the endorsement of the Blockchain Leadership Fund, a coalition backed by Anchorage Digital and Chainlink Labs, though the committee’s recent expenditures had not been reported as of the latest disclosures.
The Fellowship PAC, funded by Cantor Fitzgerald and Anchorage, disclosed about $500,000 spent to favor Paxton in the Senate race. The timing of that investment followed public remarks from former President Donald Trump endorsing Paxton, a move widely interpreted as a signal to conservative voters and to the donor community about Paxton’s alignment on a broad set of policy priorities, including those related to crypto regulation.
The primaries’ outcome could determine the electoral dynamics of Texas’ 18th district and one of the state’s two Senate seats in the November election, with potential downstream effects on the balance of power in Congress in 2027. Pro-crypto policy supporters have highlighted the GENIUS Act, a stablecoin-related measure that has drawn industry backing and legislative attention in recent years, as an example of the kind of framework that crypto firms argue is necessary for clear, compliant operations.
Key takeaways
- Crypto-aligned political action committees have deployed significant sums in Texas’ runoff races, with Protect Progress spending about $5 million to back Menefee and $2.8 million opposing Green, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
- Menefee’s campaign context includes an endorsement from the Blockchain Leadership Fund, a coalition backed by Anchorage Digital and Chainlink Labs, though the fund’s recent spending activity had not been reported at the time of reporting.
- The Fellowship PAC’s $500,000 expenditure to support Paxton emerged shortly after Trump publicly endorsed Paxton, illustrating how national-level endorsements can intersect with state campaigns where crypto policy is a focal point.
- Prediction markets show strong, though not unanimous, expectations for Paxton and Menefee, with Kalshi placing high odds on both races. Statewide, Paxton’s odds surged following Trump’s endorsement, illustrating how market signals can reflect, and potentially amplify, political messaging around crypto issues.
- Beyond electoral dynamics, the contests underscore ongoing regulatory and compliance considerations for crypto firms, including licensing, stablecoins, AML/KYC frameworks, and cross-border policy alignment under frameworks like MiCA and U.S. oversight by the SEC, CFTC, and DOJ.
Crypto-funded campaigns and the regulatory backdrop
The Texas races highlight how political spending tied to crypto interests can influence not only candidate support but the regulatory conversation itself. The crypto industry has long advocated for clearer, rules-based frameworks that reduce uncertainty for exchanges, lenders, and other market participants. In Congress, this translates into ongoing attention to bills and regulatory proposals that touch stablecoins, token classifications, and the treatment of crypto firms under banking and financial services laws. The GENIUS Act, cited by industry observers as an illustrative example of policy language sought by the sector, remains a touchstone for debates about how stablecoins should be integrated into the traditional financial system and how consumer protections should be implemented without stifling innovation.
Analysts and compliance professionals monitor these races for indications of potential shifts in oversight philosophy. A Republican-led congressional slate that remains supportive of crypto-friendly measures could advance a legislative agenda leaning toward clearer categorization of digital assets and a more navigable licensing regime for exchanges and custodians. Conversely, a broader regulatory coalition in the next Congress could seek to broaden enforcement authority or tighten consumer protections in ways that affect liquidity, access to banking services, and the feasibility of institutional crypto programs. The immediate Texas backdrop thus has implications for how firms think about state-level political risk and the likelihood of alignment with national policy trajectories.
Markets, messaging and political risk signals
In parallel with campaign spending, prediction markets have been active in pricing in anticipated outcomes. Kalshi’s contracts for the Texas races assigned substantial probabilities to Menefee and Paxton, with event contracts indicating a strong likelihood of Democratic and Republican nominees prevailing in the respective runoffs. The platform’s latest data showed Menefee and Paxton favored by roughly 90% or higher in one or both contracts, with total reported volume surpassing $16 million across related markets. Polymarket, a rival platform, has produced similar parity in its assessments, reflecting a broad market view that crypto-aligned candidates continue to attract support from speculative and policy-focused participants alike. These market signals, while probabilistic, can influence stakeholder expectations, donor decisions, and lender and exchange strategies as regulatory discussions evolve.
Industry observers note that not all crypto-advertising explicitly brands itself as industry-friendly messaging. Some ads emphasize broader political themes, including opposition or support for figures based on a wider set of policy positions. The volume and direction of spending suggest a disciplined approach by industry-aligned groups to shape the political landscape in a way that could facilitate more predictable regulatory outcomes for crypto firms operating in Texas and, by extension, the wider United States.
From a compliance perspective, the Texas runoff outcome matters for institutions that navigate state-level political risk. If policymakers in Texas and in the federal arena move toward more crypto-friendly regimes, banks and fintechs operating in or through Texas could experience greater regulatory clarity and potential access to partner programs with crypto-native firms. However, if regulatory risk intensifies, firms may reassess exposure, capital deployment, and geographic diversification of crypto activities to maintain robust risk controls and adherence to AML/KYC standards. This dynamic is particularly relevant for entities seeking to balance customer due diligence with the need to maintain competitive, compliant services in a rapidly evolving policy environment.
What comes next for regulators and market participants
As officials consolidate results from the runoff elections, the broader policy implications will hinge on how legislators approach crypto risk, consumer protection, and financial stability. The ongoing interplay among state campaigns, national regulatory priorities, and cross-border policy alignment will shape the enforcement and licensing landscape for crypto firms, exchanges, and banks interfacing with digital assets. Institutions should watch for forthcoming committee hearings, rulemaking initiatives, and potential updates to AML/KYC guidance that could alter licensing thresholds, reporting obligations, and supervisory expectations across jurisdictions.
Related: Texas Lt. Gov. calls for study of crypto, prediction markets — A broader policy frame around state leadership and crypto policy continues to unfold as markets assess regulatory risk and potential structural reforms in 2027.
According to the U.S. Federal Election Commission filings, Protect Progress has spent approximately $5 million to support Menefee and $2.8 million on advertising opposing Green. The same filings confirm the level of outside influence present in these races, underscoring the growing role of crypto-aligned political spending in shaping electoral outcomes. The endorsement from the Blockchain Leadership Fund, as reported by Cointelegraph, adds another layer to the strategic alignment between policy advocacy and industry fundraising activity, illustrating how industry-backed groups seek to influence candidate positioning on digital asset policy. The timing of Paxton’s support from the Fellowship PAC and Trump’s public endorsement further demonstrates the convergence of national political momentum with state-level electoral contests that affect crypto policy trajectories.
In sum, the Texas runoff outcomes will be observed not only as a function of district politics but also as a barometer for the sector’s influence on legislative processes, enforcement priorities, and the architecture of digital-asset regulation in the United States. For institutions, the period ahead warrants close monitoring of policy developments, licensing approaches, and cross-border alignment efforts that could redefine how crypto activities are conducted, supervised, and integrated with the broader financial system.
Closing perspective: The upcoming runoffs will crystallize where the crypto-policy discourse lands in the near term, with implications for compliance programs, licensing strategies, and risk management for firms operating in a landscape of evolving rules and evolving market structures.
XRP has spent the better part of three months going nowhere while Bitcoin (BTC) climbed from around $60,000 to $80,000, and one chart analyst is done pretending otherwise.
According to them, the gap between community expectation and actual market performance has rarely looked wider.
XRP Has Been Losing Ground to Bitcoin Since 2017
UK-based technical analyst ChartNerd laid it out plainly in a post on Monday:
“I’m sorry to break this to my $XRP community. I’m just tired of the constant hopium: we have been underperforming Bitcoin since 2017, with NO signs of any major rotation. In fact, over the last 3 months, BTC has climbed 60K-80K while $XRP/BTC has lost its 20 MEMA.”
That 20-period exponential moving average on the XRP/BTC pair is a metric traders use to track medium-term momentum in one asset relative to another. Losing it, as ChartNerd’s chart shows, puts the pair back toward the bottom of its long-term range.
Historically, that lower zone is where XRP has delivered its most explosive outperformance against Bitcoin, including the one in November 2024. But the analyst is careful not to spin that as a near-term buy signal. The pattern has to confirm first, and right now, the breakdown is what has confirmed.
“While BTC has climbed 60-80K, $XRP has done nothing but trend sideways, all while the XRP/BTC pair is breaking down,” ChartNerd added in a follow-up post.
In a separate May 21 update, the analyst noted the XRP/BTC pair had been declining for 15 consecutive weeks, directly explaining why XRP’s USD price had gone essentially flat over the same period.
“I expect $XRP will likely underperform against Bitcoin for the majority of the year,” he wrote.
Subdued Short-Term Outlook
The short-term picture is similarly subdued, with XRP trading around $1.36 at the time of writing, within a tight 24-hour range of $1.34 to $1.37.
ChartNerd has identified $1.30 as a key support level, and he expects resistance in the $1.40 territory on any recovery attempt, describing that zone as a potential support/resistance flip.
His longer-range bear case points toward the $0.90-$0.70 area if broader conditions deteriorate, while he has noted that XRP’s 2-week regression band lower boundary is currently sitting near $1.00.
Bitcoin, meanwhile, is trading around $77,000 after a rough stretch that saw it drop to just above $74,000 last week. However, it has recovered on news of progress in US-Iran peace talks, and its dominance over the rest of crypto has remained above 58%.
That high dominance figure is itself part of what is weighing on XRP and most altcoins: when Bitcoin is absorbing the majority of capital flow, altcoins tend to lag.
The post XRP Community Gets a Harsh Warning as Bitcoin Dominance Tightens appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Key Takeaways
-
Legal action in New York targets nearly 40,000 inactive Bitcoin addresses
-
Court case applies traditional abandoned property statutes to cryptocurrency holdings
-
Legal proceedings challenge fundamental principles of Bitcoin self-custody
-
Plaintiff claims discovery of wallets through proprietary algorithmic methods
-
Case establishes precedent for how courts handle long-dormant digital assets
A groundbreaking legal proceeding in New York has thrust the issue of inactive Bitcoin wallets into the spotlight, creating a potential landmark case for cryptocurrency property rights. A plaintiff identified as Noah Doe has initiated court proceedings seeking legal ownership of 39,069 Bitcoin addresses that have shown no activity for extended periods. This unprecedented case forces courts to grapple with how traditional property abandonment statutes apply to decentralized digital currencies.
Legal Framework Behind the Bitcoin Wallet Claim
On May 1, 2026, Doe submitted his legal petition to the Supreme Court of New York, invoking New York Personal Property Law Article 7-B as the statutory foundation. The legal strategy characterizes these digital holdings as discovered property rather than misappropriated or exchange-managed funds.
The petition lists Doe alongside two Wyoming-incorporated entities as co-plaintiffs. Their objective is securing a declaratory judgment that would establish legal ownership rights over the contested wallets and any cryptocurrency they contain. The core argument maintains that ownership should transfer due to the absence of legitimate claimants stepping forward.
According to the filing, Doe identified 42,001 potentially abandoned wallets using a proprietary algorithmic system he developed. Following protocol for found property, he notified the New York Police Department. Through subsequent verification efforts, 2,932 wallets were removed from consideration, leaving 39,069 addresses at the center of the legal dispute.
Technical and Legal Challenges in the Bitcoin Ownership Case
This legal challenge centers on fundamental issues of notification, possession, and statutory abandonment. Bitcoin wallets operate through cryptographic private keys, meaning courts cannot simply reassign cryptocurrency through conventional judicial orders. Any favorable ruling would carry symbolic and legal significance without enabling direct technical transfer.
Documentation shows Doe attempted blockchain-based notification by embedding messages via OP_RETURN transactions in June 2025. These on-chain communications pointed wallet controllers toward abandonment documentation and a formal claims procedure. A mandatory public notification window then extended through October 10, 2025.
Technical scrutiny has identified potential weaknesses in the notification approach. Blockchain analysts have observed that certain notices targeted P2PKH address formats, while the actual cryptocurrency resides in P2PK outputs. This technical discrepancy could undermine arguments that legitimate owners received adequate notification.
Broader Implications for Cryptocurrency Self-Custody
The targeted addresses include wallets associated with early-stage miners and other historically significant holders. Investigation has connected some listed addresses to cryptocurrency from the Satoshi Nakamoto era and potentially to assets linked to the Mt. Gox security breach. The complete inventory of contested addresses spans 901 pages of court documentation.
This litigation presents fundamental challenges to cryptocurrency self-custody principles. Extended periods of wallet inactivity could indicate lost cryptographic keys, deceased owners, or deliberate long-term storage strategies—not necessarily legal abandonment. Doe’s position maintains that proper notification combined with owner silence creates grounds for ownership transfer.
Traditional property law faces unprecedented challenges when applied to Bitcoin, which operates without centralized control or administration. While courts might bind regulated entities like exchanges if contested funds eventually move through their platforms, the [[LINK_START_2]]Bitcoin[[LINK_END_2]] protocol itself cannot reallocate cryptocurrency without the corresponding private keys.
Dubai, UAE | May 2026 – The agent economy is reshaping financial markets. Open-source agent frameworks are accelerating autonomous financial activity, with AI agents increasingly executing trades, managing portfolios, and interacting directly with exchanges. Yet the financial infrastructure supporting this shift has not evolved at the same pace.
CoinQuant, the AI-powered no-code trading platform that has attracted over 15,000 users since launch, today announces its expansion into a unified trading intelligence architecture built for both human traders and autonomous AI agents.
“Autonomous trading is no longer theoretical. It is already happening. The next phase requires structured validation, disciplined risk management, and intelligence infrastructure. That is what CoinQuant delivers,” said Maan Ftouni, Founder and CEO of CoinQuant.
The trust layer for autonomous AI agents
As AI agents increasingly connect directly to exchanges and wallets, many rely on raw APIs without structured backtesting, risk analysis, or validated data pipelines. CoinQuant introduces a structured intelligence layer between trading intent and live capital deployment.
No strategy goes live unvalidated, whether built by a human or generated autonomously. Backtesting, risk metrics, and parameter optimization are embedded directly into the workflow, ensuring capital is deployed only after systematic evaluation.
From no-code platform to trading intelligence architecture
CoinQuant’s expansion reflects the evolution of its core engine. At the center of the platform is a unified intelligence system combining institutional-grade backtesting, structured market data from providers including Kaiko and Financial Modeling Prep, AI-powered optimization, and CoinQuant’s proprietary Domain Expert system.
Human traders interact through a natural language interface that allows them to describe, test, optimize, and deploy strategies without writing code. AI agents connect programmatically through API and MCP integrations to validate strategies and access structured data at scale.
The interface is only the surface. The intelligence engine beneath it is the product.
One engine, two growth vectors
This expansion represents a natural extension of CoinQuant’s business model. The platform’s growing base of over 15,000 traders validates product-market fit and generates structured strategy intelligence. The agent interface multiplies that value through high-volume programmatic validation and automation workflows.
Every strategy built, tested, and deployed contributes to an anonymized aggregated intelligence layer, creating a proprietary dataset mapping trading intent to logic, validation metrics, and performance outcomes across market conditions.
“The same engine that powers a trader’s first backtest can validate hundreds of strategies for autonomous systems in parallel. We are building one intelligence foundation for both humans and AI agents,” Ftouni added.
Automation layer launching next
CoinQuant is preparing to launch its automated strategy execution layer on HyperLiquid as its second major revenue stream.
The automation layer will enable validated strategies to transition seamlessly from backtest to live deployment within the same intelligence framework.
Raising $3 million to scale
CoinQuant is currently raising a $3 million Seed round to support product development, infrastructure scaling, and global expansion. The company is also developing HYDRA, a hierarchical multi-agent architecture designed for advanced research, risk modeling, and strategy optimization.
With over 15,000 users validating demand for structured trading intelligence, CoinQuant aims to become the intelligence backbone of algorithmic trading in the agent-driven financial era.
About CoinQuant
CoinQuant is an AI trading platform that enables traders and AI agents to build, validate, optimize, and automate trading strategies using natural language. Headquartered in Dubai, CoinQuant integrates with major exchanges and institutional data providers to deliver professional-grade trading infrastructure to a global community.
Media contact:
The S&P 500 blasted to a record 7,534 on Memorial Day as oil price plummeted on potential Middle East de-escalation. A tentative framework agreement between the Trump administration and Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz sent Brent crude tumbling back below $100 per barrel, gutting the geopolitical risk premium that had kept institutional allocators defensive for weeks.
Spot BTC ETF flows have yet to turn positive after a bloody week. Can Bitcoin take advantage of this situation? Or is the downtrend yet to bottom?
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
Bitcoin S&P 500 Correlation Could be Back
The Bitcoin correlation with the S&P 500 is not just a background statistic. During prior risk-on equity waves, Bitcoin’s 90-day correlation with the S&P has repeatedly climbed into the 0.3–0.5 range, compared with near-zero or negative readings during risk-off periods.
UBS had projected the S&P 500 reaching 7,500 by year-end 2026 on the back of roughly 14% earnings growth, with approximately half of that expansion driven by AI and tech. The index hitting that target ahead of schedule compresses the forward timeline for every correlated risk asset.
Bitcoin’s price structure shows a clean reclaim of the 200-day EMA, with horizontal resistance clustered near its prior all-time high. The technical setup is not ambiguous after it reaches what looks to be a local bottom. But the question now is whether macro momentum holds long enough to push through it.
The primary variable to watch is institutional infrastructure demand, specifically whether the Nasdaq options market and spot ETF complex continue to absorb supply at current levels or begin showing outflow pressure ahead of the next macro data print.
Oil Price Collapse Is the Disinflationary Shock Crypto Has Been Waiting For
Brent crude tumbling back below $100 per barrel is not just an equity catalyst; it is a direct input into the inflation trajectory that has kept the Federal Reserve hawkish and crypto markets range-bound.
The Iran deal oil price dynamic runs a clean causal chain: lower crude means lower CPI expectations, which would likely be followed by the Fed less compelled to hold rates restrictively, dollar softens, liquidity conditions loosen, so risk assets, including Bitcoin, can reprice higher.
BREAKING:
BRENT CRUDE HAS FALLEN BELOW $100 AS OPTIMISM GROWS AROUND A POSSIBLE U.S.-IRAN AGREEMENT
THE DEAL MAY INCLUDE A CEASEFIRE AND THE REOPENING OF THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ
NEARLY 20% OF GLOBAL OIL SUPPLY MOVES THROUGH THE STRAIT
MARKETS ARE STARTING TO PRICE IN A… https://t.co/bQGMGo4V1t pic.twitter.com/aLNOVzUwFM— The Bitcoin Times (@TheBitcoinTime) May 25, 2026
Brent had spent weeks above $100 following Iran’s disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint carrying roughly 20% of global oil supply. AAA data showed national gasoline prices at four-year highs heading into Memorial Day.
This inflation overhang had futures markets pricing in the possibility that the Fed might raise rates rather than cut, a scenario that would have been structurally brutal for crypto. The framework agreement, even unfinalized, changes that pricing.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
The post Oil Price Butchered as US Stocks Breach ATH: Can Bitcoin Mirror the S&P 500? appeared first on Cryptonews.
XRP (XRP) traded within a key “value zone” where whales recently accumulated $170 million, signaling a tightening liquidity supply.
Key takeaways:
- XRP whales withdrew 122 million XRP, worth $170.8 million, from Binance, while price is near the key $1.35-$1.40 support.
- Exchange outflows and steady spot XRP ETF inflows point to a tightening supply and growing demand for XRP.
- XRP price could target $2.33 if bulls break above $1.50 resistance, with Bollinger Bands hinting at a big move ahead.
122 million XRP withdrawn from Binance exchange
XRP whale withdrawals, large exits above 1 million coins per transaction, hit 122 million on Binance on May 22, worth about $170.8 million at current rates, according to data from CryptoQuant.
This marked their first daily withdrawal above 1oo million XRP since the 278 million XRP seen in early February.
“What makes the latest move more important is the price context,” CryptoQuant analyst Amr Taha said in a Monday QuickTake post.
Note that the Feb. 9 withdrawal spike happened while XRP was trading near $1.43, while the May 22 spike came with XRP around $1.35.
“This makes the $1.35–$1.40 range an important zone to watch for XRP,” the analyst said in another QuickTake post, adding:
“Repeated withdrawals near the same price range may indicate that some larger players view this area as a value zone.”
XRP: Whale outflows from exchanges. Source: CryptoQuant
Such outflows typically indicate accumulation by large holders, who move tokens to self-custody or increase exposure to XRP investment products, thereby reducing immediate sell-side pressure.
Meanwhile, inflows for US-based spot XRP ETFs continue with these investment products recording positive flows for 16 consecutive days, totalling $116.75 million.
Spot ETH ETFs flows chart. Source: SoSoValue
XRP price must hold $1.30 as support
The XRP/USD pair has been trading in a tight range between $1.30 and $1.50 since early February.
XRP’s bullishness now hinges on holding $1.30 as support if it “stands another chance at retesting $1.50 resistance,” analyst ChartNerd said in a recent post on X.
“$1.30 is a current guardrail,” the analyst said, adding:
“If lost, a deeper drop to the lower $1 territory is likely in the coming weeks.”
XRP/USD daily chart. Source: X/ChartNerd
XRP trades within a multi-year range from May 2022 to November 2024. Eventually, a break above the upper limit of this range at $0.68 preceded a 400% rally to $3.40 in January 2025.
If the XRP/USD pair holds within its current range, a similar upward move could be seen once a decisive move supported by strong volume above the upper limit at $1.50 is achieved.
XRP/USD three-day chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView
Meanwhile, the Bollinger Bands are still at their tightest level since mid-2024. Similar occurrences have previously led to gains of 58%-82% in XRP price, as shown in the chart above.
As such, XRP could rise as high as $2.33 if a similar breakout scenario plays out.
Analyst Crypto Patel referred to the current range as the “best accumulation zone,” adding that the muted price action resembles the calm before its major breakout in late 2024.
The analyst’s upside target is $10, implying a roughly 7x potential from the lower end of the accumulation range if XRP repeats its 2022–2024 cycle-style expansion.
XRP/USD two-week chart. Source: X/Crypto Patel
As Cointelegraph reported, overhead resistance at $1.40-$1.50 is likely to keep the price in check unless the bulls muster the strength to overcome it over the next few weeks.
Hyperliquid has launched its first US macro event market using HIP 4 outcome contracts, letting traders bet USDC on the May 2026 CPI year over year print in a fully collateralized, no liquidation format that settles on June 10 off official Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
Summary
- New CPI market uses HIP 4 outcome contracts settled on BLS May 2026 CPI YoY release
- Contracts trade as bounded probabilities in USDC, with early volume around $3,000 and open interest near $5,000
- Outcome markets sit alongside perpetuals under a unified margin system, blending crypto speed with tradfi macro events
HIP 4 is Hyperliquid’s protocol upgrade that adds “outcome contracts” to its L1, a native primitive for prediction style markets and options like products that are fully collateralized, dated, and free of leverage and liquidation risk.
On May 2, the protocol activated HIP 4 on mainnet, and MEXC reports that the initial roll out featured recurring daily Bitcoin price binaries that recorded over 6.05 million contracts and roughly 4,000 unique traders on day one, capturing about 0.7 percent of global prediction market volume.
How does Hyperliquid’s CPI outcome market work?
The new CPI market extends that template from crypto native prices to US macro data.
According to coverage of HIP 4 and outcome trading, each contract represents a discrete event that ultimately settles to 0 or 1 based on whether a predefined condition is met, with prices between 0 and 1 before resolution reflecting the market implied probability of a “yes” outcome.
For the May CPI year over year market, traders are effectively buying or selling slices of the distribution for the twelve month change in the Consumer Price Index as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on June 10, 2026, with tick values and brackets defined in the market spec and all settlement keyed to the official BLS release.
Unlike perpetuals, HIP 4 outcome contracts are fully collateralized at entry: Hyperliquid’s documentation stresses that there is “no leverage, no liquidations,” and that a buyer’s maximum loss is the principal posted, while payouts at expiry are fixed based on the event result, much like a binary option.
Crucially, outcome contracts run directly on HyperCore and share the same unified margin account as perpetuals, so traders can post USDH or bridged USDC once and deploy that collateral across perps, spot and event markets without siloed balances.
In early CPI trading, probabilities have clustered in a balanced range, with order books showing roughly 34 percent to 43 percent odds across the key brackets and total traded volume just over $3,000, with open interest near $5,000 – tiny in absolute terms, but consistent with a fresh listing in a brand new product line.
Why CPI markets matter for Hyperliquid and crypto prediction rails
The CPI listing is not an isolated experiment; it is part of a broader push to turn Hyperliquid from a pure perp DEX into a full stack derivatives venue that can natively host prediction markets across crypto, macro and sports.
Binance’s explainer on HIP 4 notes that the upgrade “brings native prediction markets to Hyperliquid,” with outcome contracts designed to trade election results, sports events, Bitcoin price thresholds and “whether specific conditions are met before a certain point in time,” all with fixed expiry and no liquidation risk.
Unchained and MEXC both highlight the competitive angle: by running outcome markets in the same core engine as perps, with a unified margin account and low fees, Hyperliquid is explicitly challenging off chain prediction venues like Polymarket on UX, capital efficiency and product breadth.
Macro inflation is a natural first target.
Market outlook pieces for May and June emphasize that CPI remains the single most important US datapoint for risk assets, with recent consensus pointing to year over year readings in the 3.3 percent to 3.7 percent range and traders watching closely for signs that energy driven price pressures are becoming entrenched.
By listing a CPI YoY outcome market, Hyperliquid is essentially letting its existing perp traders express that macro view directly in the same interface where they already trade BTC, ETH and basis trades, instead of routing through an external prediction protocol or centralized broker.
In practice, that means a single USDH or USDC margin pool can now back a book of positions like long BTC perps, short ETH perps, and a “CPI above 3.7 percent” outcome contract, all risk managed by one engine – bringing a more tradfi style cross product book to a crypto native chain.
If volumes and participation grow from the current few thousand dollars in CPI bets to millions, the launch could mark the beginning of a more serious migration of macro prediction flow onto L1 derivatives platforms, blurring the line between perps DEXs and on chain prediction markets and pulling future event risk – from inflation prints to elections – directly into crypto collateral stacks.
Hyperliquid (HYPE) reached a new all-time high of over $64 on Sunday as on-chain trackers documented sharply contrasting whale behavior across the rally. Some wallets added millions in fresh exposure while others cashed out.
The token climbed more than 40% over the past week. According to the latest data from BeInCrypto Markets, the altcoin traded at $63.7, up over 0.53% over the past day.
Whales Pour Millions Into Hyperliquid While Others Cash Out at Highs
Wallet 0x9137 spent $15.1 million in USDC (USDC) to acquire 238,811 HYPE at $63.25, according to Lookonchain data. A newly created wallet separately withdrew 63,780 HYPE worth $4.06 million from Bybit.
BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes appears to have reversed his earlier position. Lookonchain reported that a wallet linked to Hayes deposited 115,453 HYPE worth $6.33 million into Bybit at $54.81. The same address later withdrew 85,714 HYPE worth $5.37 million from the exchange at $62.69.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
Moreover, Garrett Jin has accumulated 145,050 HYPE tokens, worth $9.05 million, over the past four days. He also placed a time-weighted average price order to buy another 39,940 tokens worth $2.44 million.
“He still holds a 504.4 BTC ($38.9M) long and a 57,460 ZEC ($38M) short, currently down $2.11M,” Lookonchain added.
However, not every whale chased the rally higher. Wallet 0x632B sold 151,574 HYPE worth $9.25 million. The same address queued limit sell orders for another 170,000 tokens between $63.45 and $70.55.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Whether continued buying offsets profit-taking near the current price levels will shape the next move.
The post Hyperliquid Whales Show Conflicting Moves as HYPE Hits Fresh Peak appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Polymarket traders price 39% odds that the United States announces a new Iran agreement by May 31, even as Memorial Day market closures mute Wall Street reaction to a sweeping diplomatic push from President Donald Trump.
Trump on Monday issued a public mandate for Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey, and Jordan to sign the Abraham Accords as a condition tied to any final Iran settlement, broadening the diplomatic scope of the talks.
Polymarket Odds Frame the Diplomatic Window
The 39% probability on the Polymarket US-Iran agreement contract reflects measured caution among prediction-market traders.
The 11% probability that Iran agrees to hand over its highly enriched uranium signals far steeper doubts on the deal’s most technical demand.
Traditional finance markets, closed for Memorial Day, have not yet priced the diplomatic signals.
Crypto markets, which trade through the holiday, have absorbed the weekend reporting without sharp moves, leaving the Bitcoin and oil flip dynamic intact.
“Trump keeps signaling two things at once… Middle East normalization expansion… And potential progress with Iran. Markets are increasingly trying to price whether this becomes a real geopolitical reset… or just another temporary negotiation cycle,” analyst Kyle Doops noted, highlighting that traders are weighing whether the current talks mark a structural reset or another short cycle.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Draft Framework Stages Uranium Disposal Against Sanctions Relief
Reports indicate that Iran’s supreme leader has approved the broad template of a draft deal.
Tehran has agreed in principle to dispose of highly enriched uranium in exchange for the lifting of the US blockade, with the Vice President, Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner involved in the talks.
Reportedly, a senior US official said that sanctions relief will be staged, with no fixed timeline and no dollar figure yet requested by Iran.
The official described the approach as “no dust, no dollars,” tying any oil shock liquidity selloff risk to verified Iranian delivery of nuclear concessions.
US officials also want the Strait of Hormuz operating with no tolls and free passage for ships, coordinated with Gulf partners.
That target directly addresses the Iran Bitcoin Hormuz toll regime that Tehran rolled out earlier in the conflict.
Abraham Accords Expansion Pushed as Diplomatic Lever
In a Truth Social post on Monday, Trump wrote that it “should be mandatory” for Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and Bahrain to simultaneously sign the Abraham Accords, with the United Arab Emirates already a member.
He floated the possibility that Iran itself could later join.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed coordination with Trump on a memorandum of understanding covering the Strait of Hormuz and the broader Iran framework.
Netanyahu reiterated that any deal must remove Iran’s enriched material from its territory.
Saudi Arabia has so far shown no public willingness to formalize ties with Israel, and an Iranian source has separately denied that Tehran has committed to handing over its uranium stockpile.
Those gaps suggest the framework remains contingent rather than settled, even as the Bitcoin Strait of Hormuz trade thesis loses some of its acute risk premium.
The post Memorial Day Lull Masks Iran Deal Signals as Trump Mandates Abraham Accords Push appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Rays OF Jonny DeLuca (hamstring) out 6-8 weeks
Late Late Show odds slashed for top Irish presenter to be next host
Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds Face $2.1 Million Contractor Liens on Expansive New York Estate
-
Crypto World4 days agoBlockchain.com files with SEC for U.S. IPO
-
Fashion3 days agoHoliday Weekend Open Thread – Corporette.com
-
Business3 days agoDell Technologies DELL Stock Surges 15% on AI Server Momentum and Analyst Upgrades in 2026
-
Crypto World3 days agoBitcoin Accumulation Weakens as BTC Realized Losses Hit $600M
-
Crypto World3 days agoSpace X IPO Is ‘Bad News’ for Tech Stocks: But What About Bitcoin?
-
Politics3 days agoMakerfield: a tale of two social-media histories
-
Crypto World2 days agoRobinhood crypto COO Tanya Denisova exits
-
Crypto World4 days agoMicroStrategy’s Saylor Says Miners No Longer Set Bitcoin Price, Another Force Has Taken Over
-
Business23 hours agoNYT Strands Answers May 24 2026 Revealed for Puzzle No. 812 Theme Summer Essentials
-
Crypto World3 days agoAI infrastructure race heats up as IREN pitches full-stack strategy, WhiteFiber lands $160M deal
-
Tech3 days agoA 0.12% parameter add-on gives AI agents the working memory RAG can’t
-
Tech4 days agoWhatsApp ads could make Irish debut after discussions with DPC
-
Crypto World7 days ago
Revolut Launches Dogecoin Debit Card Across UK and EU
-
Tech4 days agoYou Can Now Add ChatGPT To PowerPoint
-
Business3 days agoTrump Invests $1M-$5M in Kura Sushi USA Chain With 27 California Locations
-
Sports4 days ago2026 CJ Cup Byron Nelson leaderboard: Brooks Koepka finds putting stroke in Round 1
-
NewsBeat4 days agoCharity run by Reform leader Malcolm Offord accused of ‘law breaking’ over Scottish registration
-
Crypto World3 days agoTrump Media’s Bitcoin Stash Shrinks Again as 2,650 BTC Lands on Crypto.com
-
Business3 days ago
Goldman Sachs reinstates Ageas stock coverage with neutral rating
-
Crypto World5 days agoExa Labs raises $250 million in funding led by a16z
You must be logged in to post a comment Login