Crypto World
New York sues Kalshi over prediction market gambling
The state is seeking at least $36 billion in damages from the prediction market platform it calls an unlicensed gambling operation, and has filed for a temporary restraining order to halt its contracts immediately.
Summary
- New York Attorney General Letitia James and Governor Kathy Hochul sued KalshiEX on July 31, 2026, in New York Supreme Court, Manhattan, seeking at least $36 billion in compensatory damages, triple-gains penalties, and $100,000 per unauthorized sports wagering offer.
- The state simultaneously filed a motion for a temporary restraining order to halt Kalshi’s event contracts in New York immediately, citing ongoing harm to consumers including users under the legal gambling age of 21.
- Kalshi users bet over $1 billion monthly on the platform in 2025, with 90% of that volume on sports, according to figures cited in the AG’s own release, a concentration that makes the bipartisan Senate proposal to ban sports event contracts existential for the business.
- Kalshi, valued at roughly $22 billion with annualized volume of approximately $178 billion, calls the suit “political theater” and argues its CFTC registration as a designated contract market means exclusive federal oversight.
- A bipartisan coalition of 38 state attorneys general has already filed an amicus brief supporting Massachusetts in a parallel case, signaling that the enforcement wave extends far beyond the 13 states with active litigation.
The lawsuit that prediction markets knew was coming
Two days after the Second Circuit denied Kalshi emergency relief on July 29, New York filed the most aggressive state action yet against the prediction market industry. The suit arrived with a coordinated announcement from AG James and Governor Hochul, counts spanning multiple bodies of state law, a $36 billion damages demand, and a motion for an immediate restraining order.
The $36 billion figure, reported by The Block based on the court filings, is roughly 1.6 times Kalshi’s reported valuation. It is the number every major outlet is leading with, and it signals that New York is treating this as a revenue-extraction case, not merely a cease-and-desist.
This piece examines the filing, the legal arguments on both sides, the federal regulator caught between them, and what the case means for an industry now fighting a war on two fronts: in courtrooms and in Congress.
What the complaint actually alleges
The core claim is straightforward: Kalshi is running an unlicensed gambling business in New York.
The AG’s office says the platform lets users place wagers on uncertain future events, from Super Bowl outcomes to reality TV winners to election results, without a Gaming Commission license and without paying state gaming taxes. New York treats these as bets, not derivatives, regardless of Kalshi’s CFTC registration.
The complaint goes further. It alleges Kalshi allows users aged 18 to 20 to place bets, violating New York’s 21-and-older minimum for mobile sports betting. It alleges the platform offered wagers on games involving New York college teams, a separate violation under state law.
The AG’s investigators placed test wagers from New York accounts as evidence: four “Yes” contracts on a UConn-Michigan basketball game at $1.14 in April 2026, and ten contracts on the winner of “Big Brother” in July 2026. Both transactions completed without obstruction.
The filing also introduces a count under the federal Interstate Wire Act, alleging Kalshi used wire communications to transmit bets across state lines. This is significant because it widens the legal exposure beyond state gambling statutes into federal criminal law, giving the state an argument that operates independently of the preemption question. Even if Kalshi’s CFTC registration were found to preempt state gambling law, the Wire Act is a federal statute, and the state is arguing that Kalshi violates it.
The complaint details the investigative methods in unusual specificity. Rather than relying on industry reports or third-party data, the OAG built its case from the inside. Investigators created accounts, placed real wagers, and documented each step. This matters for the TRO motion: the state can present firsthand evidence that illegal gambling is actively occurring in New York, not merely that it could occur.
“Prediction markets like Kalshi are gambling platforms, plain and simple,” James said in a statement accompanying the filing.
Governor Hochul framed the action around consumer protection, saying Kalshi “has chosen to ignore New York’s gaming laws, which exist to protect consumers, prevent problematic gambling, deliver funding for critical public services, and ensure that every company plays by the same rules.” The coordinated announcement from both the AG and the Governor signals that this is not a routine regulatory action. It is a political priority.
The $36 billion in damages and the TRO
New York is not seeking a slap on the wrist. The headline number is at least $36 billion in compensatory damages, pending a full accounting of Kalshi’s operations. The remedies demand:
- A permanent injunction barring Kalshi from operating unlicensed gambling in the state
- A temporary restraining order halting Kalshi’s event contracts in New York immediately
- A full accounting of every customer bet and loss processed through the platform
- Forfeiture and disgorgement of all gains the state deems illegal
- Restitution to affected consumers
- Penalties of three times Kalshi’s gains under Penal Law Section 80.10
- A fine of $100,000 per unauthorized sports wagering offer under the Racing Law
The TRO is the near-term threat. If granted, Kalshi would need to suspend operations in New York while the case proceeds, potentially for years. The triple-damages provision is the long-term one. At $36 billion, New York is claiming a figure that exceeds the platform’s reported valuation of $22 billion by more than 60%.
The per-offer fine structure adds another layer. The AG’s release notes that Kalshi users bet over $1 billion monthly in 2025, with 90% of that volume on sports. Each unauthorized sports offering carries a $100,000 fine under the Racing Law. At that volume, the per-offer penalties alone could produce a figure in the hundreds of millions.
The damages calculation itself reveals the state’s theory of the case. New York is not treating Kalshi as a minor regulatory violator that failed to file paperwork. It is treating Kalshi as a gambling operation that processed billions in unlicensed wagers over multiple years, and it wants the full economic benefit of that activity returned. The $36 billion figure presumably reflects the total volume of wagers placed by New York users, or a substantial fraction of it, multiplied by the treble-damages provision. The final number will depend on the full accounting the state is requesting, but the opening demand is meant to establish the scale of the alleged violation.
The TRO motion deserves separate attention because it operates on a different timeline from the main case. A TRO hearing can happen within days or weeks, while the underlying lawsuit could take years. If New York secures the restraining order, Kalshi faces an immediate operational decision: comply and lose the New York market, or challenge the order and risk contempt proceedings. Either outcome sets a precedent that other states can follow. Michigan and Nevada secured their own TROs through similar procedural mechanisms, and each one reduced Kalshi’s geographic footprint.
The $1 billion monthly number and why it matters
The AG’s release includes a figure that has received less attention than the $36 billion headline: Kalshi users bet over $1 billion every month on the platform in 2025, and 90% of that money went to sports betting.
This is the number that makes the bipartisan Senate proposal to ban CFTC-licensed platforms from offering sports event contracts existential. Sports are not a side product for Kalshi. They are the product. If sports contracts are removed, whether by state enforcement or federal legislation, the platform loses nine-tenths of its recorded consumer activity.
The figure also undercuts Kalshi’s framing of its offerings as sophisticated financial derivatives. A billion dollars a month on the Super Bowl, the NBA, and college basketball looks like a sportsbook by any name. New York is making exactly that argument, and the AG’s investigators have the receipts.
The concentration matters for investors and market participants as well. Kalshi’s $22 billion valuation implies a diversified event-contract platform serving a range of use cases: elections, weather, economics, entertainment. The AG’s data shows something closer to a sports gambling platform with a derivatives label. If the valuation was underwritten on the assumption of product diversity, the 90% sports concentration represents a disclosure risk independent of the legal outcome.
Kalshi’s federal preemption defense
Kalshi’s position rests on a single legal premise: that its 2020 registration with the CFTC as a designated contract market means its event contracts are regulated derivatives under the Commodity Exchange Act, subject to exclusive federal oversight.
The company calls the suit “political theater” and argues states cannot simply shut down a federally licensed exchange. The framing is deliberate. Kalshi wants this treated as a jurisdictional question, not a gambling question.
It is the strongest version of their argument, and it carries legal weight. The CFTC itself has backed the position, filing lawsuits against multiple states and claiming exclusive regulatory authority over prediction markets. On the same day New York filed its suit, the CFTC filed an emergency counter-motion in Manhattan federal court less than one hour before the state complaint dropped, attempting to reassert federal jurisdiction preemptively.
The federal regulator has now challenged state enforcement in at least nine states, including filing suit against Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois in April 2026. The CFTC is not a passive bystander in this dispute. It is an active combatant on Kalshi’s side.
Why the federal shield is cracking
On July 7, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres denied Kalshi’s preliminary injunction against New York’s Gaming Commission enforcement. Her reasoning cut directly at the preemption argument.
Torres cited Section 2 of the Commodity Exchange Act, which states the law “shall not supersede or limit the jurisdiction conferred on other regulatory authorities under the laws of the United States or of any state.” She wrote that “Congress did not intend to regulate so broadly as to exclude all state gambling laws from regulating transactions involving swaps.”
Her conclusion was blunt: “There is nothing preventing Kalshi from obtaining a license pursuant to New York law.”
The Second Circuit denied Kalshi emergency relief on July 29. With the appellate safety net gone, the state had a clear path to file.
The Torres ruling matters beyond New York because it provides a template. Other states facing Kalshi’s preemption argument can cite it directly. The decision rejects the premise that CFTC registration creates a blanket exemption from state gambling law, and it does so by citing the Commodity Exchange Act’s own text. Before Torres, Kalshi could argue that no court had squarely addressed the question. That argument is gone.
The legal logic is worth following in detail. Kalshi’s preemption claim rests on the idea that CFTC registration means its products are regulated derivatives, full stop. Torres responded that the Commodity Exchange Act explicitly preserves state jurisdiction, that the products in question resemble gambling under New York law, and that nothing in federal statute prevents Kalshi from obtaining a state gaming license if it wants to operate in New York. The decision does not say Kalshi cannot exist. It says Kalshi cannot avoid state gambling law by pointing to a federal license that, by its own statute’s terms, was never meant to override it.
The Second Circuit’s refusal to grant emergency relief on July 29 reinforced this reasoning. It did not issue a full opinion, but the denial means Kalshi failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits, which is the standard for emergency relief. Two levels of federal courts have now declined to protect the company from state enforcement.
The result is a genuine constitutional question about the boundary between federal commodity regulation and state gambling law. Kalshi needs either a circuit court reversal or Congressional action to restore the shield it thought it had.
The 38-state coalition
The count that matters is not 13 states with active litigation. It is 38.
In April 2026, James joined a bipartisan coalition of 38 state attorneys general filing an amicus brief supporting Massachusetts in its parallel case against Kalshi. The coalition spans from Alabama to Wisconsin, including red states, blue states, and the District of Columbia. The full list: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin, and DC.
On the same day the AGs filed, the CFTC filed its own amicus brief at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court asserting exclusive federal jurisdiction, creating a direct confrontation between the federal regulator and a supermajority of state enforcement agencies.
New York is not operating in isolation. The suit fits into a pattern of escalating state enforcement that has accelerated through 2026:
Massachusetts has a court order restricting Kalshi. Polymarket has countersued the state, opening a second front.
Michigan secured a temporary restraining order against the platform under AG Dana Nessel, making it the third state to obtain a court order.
Nevada issued a TRO covering sports, election, and entertainment contracts. Kalshi responded by removing those categories for Nevada users, effectively conceding the state’s authority in practice while contesting it in court.
Washington holds its own court order restricting the platform. The state’s Gambling Commission issued a cease-and-desist, and Kalshi did not challenge it in court.
Wisconsin handed down an adverse ruling the week of July 28, adding another state to the enforcement column in a decision that received less coverage than the New York and Massachusetts actions but follows the same legal reasoning.
New York itself previously sued Coinbase and Gemini in April 2026 on similar prediction-market allegations. That suit broadened the target set beyond pure-play prediction platforms, signaling that New York views any company offering prediction-style products to state residents as subject to gaming law, regardless of whether the company’s primary business is elsewhere.
In Congress, a bipartisan Senate proposal has emerged that would ban CFTC-licensed prediction market platforms from offering sports event contracts, which would remove the category that accounts for 90% of Kalshi’s recorded volume.
The arithmetic that matters
Kalshi’s reported valuation of $22 billion rests on the assumption that its CFTC registration provides a durable regulatory moat. The annualized transaction volume of $178 billion flows through that assumption. If the federal preemption argument fails at the circuit level, the business model does not downgrade gracefully.
The platform cannot operate as a state-licensed gambling business without fundamental changes to its product, its economics, and its user base. State gaming licenses come with specific requirements: age floors (21 in New York for mobile betting), tax obligations, product restrictions, and compliance infrastructure that a CFTC-registered exchange was never built to support.
Nevada’s example is instructive. When the state issued its TRO, Kalshi did not fight to keep sports, election, and entertainment contracts available to Nevada users. It removed them. If that pattern repeats across additional states, the platform’s addressable market contracts with each new enforcement action.
The numbers tell the story in three layers. First, $36 billion in damages sought in New York alone, exceeding the company’s valuation by 60%. Second, 38 state attorneys general aligned against the federal preemption argument, representing a supermajority of American enforcement capacity. Third, 90% of Kalshi’s monthly volume concentrated in sports, the single category most vulnerable to both state enforcement and the pending Senate ban.
The counter-argument deserves its strongest form. Kalshi’s $178 billion in annualized volume proves genuine consumer demand for event contracts. The CFTC registration is not a legal fiction, and federal regulators are actively fighting to preserve federal jurisdiction. The Commodity Exchange Act does grant the CFTC authority over designated contract markets, and a reasonable reading of federal preemption could conclude that state gambling law should not apply to products traded on a federally licensed exchange. If the CFTC prevails at the appellate level, or if Congress acts to clarify federal preemption, the state cases collapse. Kalshi’s appeal of the Torres ruling remains live, and the Second Circuit has not yet ruled on the merits.
There is also a policy argument that Kalshi rarely makes explicitly but that supports its position. Prediction markets have informational value. Research from academic institutions and the CFTC’s own prior statements have recognized that event contracts can produce useful price signals about future events. A state-by-state licensing regime could effectively kill a market structure that regulators, academics, and the public have found valuable for forecasting elections, economic indicators, and policy outcomes.
But the burden has shifted. Two federal courts have declined to protect Kalshi from state enforcement. Thirty-eight attorneys general have aligned against the federal preemption argument. And 90% of Kalshi’s volume is concentrated in sports, the single category most politically vulnerable. The question is no longer whether states can regulate prediction markets. The question is whether Kalshi can find a court that says they cannot.
What to watch
- The TRO hearing in New York Supreme Court. If granted, Kalshi must suspend operations in the state while the case proceeds. The timeline and conditions of this hearing will set the pace for the entire case.
- The Second Circuit appeal of Judge Torres’s July 7 ruling. If the court reverses on federal preemption, the state enforcement wave stalls. If it affirms, expect additional state filings within weeks.
- The CFTC’s emergency motion filed hours before New York’s suit. The federal court’s handling of this motion will signal whether the judiciary treats CFTC registration as a meaningful shield or a regulatory label.
- Congressional action on the bipartisan Senate proposal to ban sports event contracts. At 90% of Kalshi’s volume, this would be a structural blow regardless of court outcomes.
- Kalshi’s operational response in states with active enforcement. Nevada’s pattern, removal of categories rather than legal confrontation, is the leading indicator of how the business adapts under pressure.
What did New York sue Kalshi for?
New York filed a lawsuit alleging Kalshi operates an unlicensed gambling business by offering wagers on sports, entertainment, and election outcomes without a Gaming Commission license and without paying state gaming taxes. The suit includes counts under the state constitution, Penal Law gambling provisions, the Racing Law, and the federal Interstate Wire Act.
How much is New York seeking in damages?
The state is seeking at least $36 billion in compensatory damages, pending a full accounting of Kalshi’s operations. Additional penalties include three times the company’s gains under Penal Law and $100,000 per unauthorized sports wagering offer under the Racing Law.
What is the temporary restraining order?
Alongside the lawsuit, New York filed a motion for a TRO to halt Kalshi’s event contracts in the state immediately while the case proceeds. If granted, Kalshi would need to suspend operations in New York, potentially for years.
What is Kalshi’s defense?
Kalshi argues that its registration with the CFTC as a designated contract market since 2020 means its event contracts fall under exclusive federal oversight and that states cannot regulate them as gambling. The company calls the suit “political theater.”
How did the court rule on federal preemption?
U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres denied Kalshi’s preliminary injunction on July 7, ruling that the Commodity Exchange Act does not prevent states from applying their gambling laws to event contracts. The Second Circuit denied emergency relief on July 29.
How many states are aligned against Kalshi?
A bipartisan coalition of 38 state attorneys general filed an amicus brief supporting Massachusetts in a parallel case. At least five states, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Washington, and Wisconsin, have active court orders or adverse rulings restricting Kalshi’s operations.
What role is the CFTC playing?
The CFTC has positioned itself as the exclusive federal regulator of prediction markets, filing lawsuits against multiple states and an emergency motion less than one hour before New York’s suit. The agency has challenged state enforcement in at least nine states and filed an amicus brief directly opposing the 38-state attorney general coalition.
Could this lawsuit shut down prediction markets entirely?
The New York case alone would not end the industry, but it tests whether CFTC registration shields platforms from state gambling laws. With 38 attorneys general aligned against the federal preemption argument and 90% of Kalshi’s volume concentrated in sports betting, the combination of state enforcement and the pending Senate ban on sports event contracts could force a fundamental restructuring of the business model. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or investment advice. The information presented reflects the state of events as of July 31, 2026, and may change as legal proceedings develop. Readers should consult qualified professionals before making decisions based on this material.
Crypto World
Crypto News, July 31: July Round Up, Kospi Coming Back, Bitcoin Price Ignores Political Noise as Market Splits
The Kospi ended July with a powerful rebound, while the Bitcoin price stayed remarkably steady despite several major headlines. We watched the Kospi recover sharply as the Bitcoin hovered near $64,300, showing little interest in politics, stock market swings, or a major crypto security breach.
July closed with markets moving in different directions. South Korean equities staged an impressive comeback, while crypto traders chased memecoins and tokenized assets instead of pushing Bitcoin higher. Even so, Bitcoin continued trading within a familiar range, reflecting patience.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
Bitcoin Price Stays Calm After Hardware Wallet Exploit
A major security incident became one of Friday’s biggest crypto stories. An attacker exploited a flaw affecting older Coldcard Mk3 hardware wallets, draining 594 BTC from around 500 single-signature wallets in less than 30 minutes.
The vulnerability reportedly traced back to firmware version 4.0.1, where a weakness in random number generation made some wallet seeds predictable. Many affected wallets had remained untouched for years before the coordinated theft unfolded across three blockchain blocks.
Wallet maker Coinkite confirmed the issue and said its early investigation indicates newer Mk4, Q, and Mk5 devices are not affected. Users who protected their wallets with a BIP 39 passphrase also appear to face significantly lower risk. Despite the scale of the exploit, the Bitcoin price barely reacted as it remained close to $64,300 after briefly testing $65,300 during Asian trading before retreating.
Meanwhile, Ethereum hovers around $1,900 while BNB is held near $590, outperforming many large-cap cryptocurrencies. Activity remained concentrated in smaller speculative assets instead of flowing into Bitcoin.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
Kospi Recovery Highlights Growing Market Divergence
The Kospi delivered one of Asia’s strongest performances after recovering sharply from its recent correction. Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix helped drive the rally as semiconductor stocks attracted renewed buying following weeks of heavy selling pressure.
Taiwan Semiconductor also posted strong gains, reinforcing optimism across regional technology stocks. However, the Bitcoin price has yet to mirror the equity rebound as closely as it had earlier this month, highlighting a growing disconnect between traditional markets and digital assets.
Instead, speculative capital flowed into selected crypto sectors. Uniswap extended its rally after expanding its fee switch across additional blockchain networks, while several low float tokens recorded triple-digit percentage gains following fresh exchange listings.
South Korean regulators also remained active despite legislative delays. Officials continued discussing interim stablecoin regulations, reflecting the country’s ongoing effort to strengthen oversight while digital asset adoption continues expanding.
The contrast between equities and crypto defined the final trading session of July. While the Kospi recovered with remarkable speed, Bitcoin stayed disciplined and largely ignored both political headlines and market excitement.
That resilience may prove more important than short-term volatility. Security breaches, regulatory developments, and speculative rallies continue to dominate daily headlines, yet Bitcoin has repeatedly shown an ability to absorb negative news without breaking below key support levels.
As August begins, investors will watch whether the Kospi can sustain its recovery and whether the Bitcoin Price finally breaks out of its prolonged trading range. For now, patience remains the dominant theme across both markets.
Trade Crypto on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop
The post Crypto News, July 31: July Round Up, Kospi Coming Back, Bitcoin Price Ignores Political Noise as Market Splits appeared first on Cryptonews.
XRP price prediction is getting bullish as Ripple backed Evernorth amended its SEC registration statement again. The real question is whether the market has already priced it in.
Evernorth’s latest amended Form S-4 formalizes employment agreements for three senior executives. They include chief legal officer Jessica Jonas, chief business officer Sagar Shah, and chief operating officer Meg Nakamura. Jonas would receive an initial equity award worth about $4.5 million. Shah and Nakamura would each receive roughly $2.8 million, pending shareholder approval.
BREAKING: — Xora Finance (@xora_finance) July 30, 2026
Evernorth updates SEC filing for $1B XRP treasury
Custody move, OTC settlement, or exchange sale? pic.twitter.com/oCFzI6RoBP
The filing also follows previously disclosed compensation for CEO Asheesh Birla and CFO Matt Frymier. Birla’s equity award remains valued at about $44 million. Together, these incentive packages fall under Evernorth’s 2026 Omnibus Incentive Plan. Locking in the executive team with equity suggests the transaction continues moving forward.
At the center of Evernorth’s strategy is its planned Nasdaq listing under the XRPN ticker. The company also aims to build a $1 billion XRP treasury, targeting roughly 473 million XRP, or about 0.8% of the token’s circulating supply. If completed, that allocation would remove a meaningful amount of XRP from the open market, strengthening the long-term supply reduction narrative.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
XRP Price Prediction: Recover Toward $1.65 as Evernorth Filing Advances?
XRP is trading around $1.06, still well below Evernorth’s implied cost basis of about $2.44. That gap cuts both ways. It leaves institutional exposure underwater while supporting the case for continued accumulation. Meanwhile, XRP has traded in a relatively tight range as market sentiment remains cautious.
Technically, the original support levels are no longer relevant after XRP’s recent decline. Immediate support now sits near $1.00, while a break below that could expose the $0.85 to $0.90 area. On the upside, reclaiming $1.10 would improve momentum, with $1.14 to $1.15 acting as the next resistance zone.
The bull case remains unchanged. If XRPN lists on Nasdaq, the SEC clears the S-4 filing, and Evernorth completes its XRP treasury strategy, supply could tighten over time. That would support long term price targets around $2.80, while more aggressive forecasts extend much higher.
The base case assumes filing progress continues but the timeline slips. In that scenario, XRP may consolidate between $1.00 and $1.15 before a stronger catalyst appears. On the bearish side, SEC delays, weaker macro conditions, or a decisive break below $1.00 could open the door to prices under $0.90.
Institutional XRP price targets have been building for months, but the Evernorth catalyst stands apart. It would operate through a regulated U.S. securities vehicle, potentially making it easier for compliant institutional capital to gain exposure if the plan moves ahead.
Trade XRP on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop
LiquidChain Targets Early Mover Upside as XRP Tests Key Levels
XRP’s institutional thesis is compelling, but at current prices, the upside to even the conservative $2.80 target requires patience and tolerance for a -$0.98 invalidation sitting only 9% below spot.
For traders already holding XRP, that’s a known risk. For capital looking to size into a higher-beta opportunity with a structurally different value proposition, the early-stage infrastructure layer is where asymmetry tends to live.
Consider this your invitation.
The age of isolated chains is ending.pic.twitter.com/Iaeuk01uPI
— LiquidChain (@getliquidchain) July 29, 2026
LiquidChain ($LIQUID) is a Layer 3 infrastructure project built around a single thesis: Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana liquidity should not require bridging, wrapping, or fragmented execution environments. Its Unified Liquidity Layer fuses all three ecosystems into a single execution environment. So developers deploy once and access all.
The presale is currently priced at $0.01485, with $926K raised to date. Core architecture features include Single-Step Execution, Verifiable Settlement, and a Deploy-Once build model that eliminates multi-chain deployment overhead. The cross-chain fragmentation problem it targets is real and structurally persistent.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
The post XRP Price Set for Institutional Boost? Evernorth Files $1B SEC Amendment appeared first on Cryptonews.
Crypto forensics and compliance company AMLBot has launched its AI Tracer, described as a self-service blockchain analysis tool that maps visible fund movements from a transaction hash across blockchain networks.
AMLBot said the tool aims to address the current need for specialist software and knowledge to trace transactions. The company said the tool also traces through bridges that move assets cross-chain or when the assets are split among multiple wallets.
“The process is automatic: the AI traverses the transaction graph, follows the movement of funds from the starting address through intermediate wallets toward whatever endpoint the money reached, and matches known entity labels — exchanges, services, flagged addresses — against every wallet it encounters,” the company said in a press release shared with Cointelegraph.
According to the announcement, AI Tracer cannot see transfers between internal exchange accounts, determine why a payment was made, freeze assets or guarantee recovery. Its reports are intended as a starting point for investigations and do not replace an audit or legal process.
The tool offers a free check and offers paid plans with higher limits on the number of automated checks. Currently supported networks include Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Litecoin, TRON, Ethereum, BNB Chain, Ethereum Classic, Polygon, Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, Solana, Cardano and Ripple.
AMLBot said the tool is suitable for journalists, researchers, traders, and crypto user who want to read transaction paths, as well as law enforcement agents investigating crypto crime and independent investigators or compliance teams.
Related: AMLBot says social engineering drove 65% of crypto cases it probed in 2025
At the time the platform’s website showed only a landing page, and CoinDesk could not verify whether it was operational or whether any cargo owners had used it. Fars claimed at the time the model could generate more than $10 billion without explaining how it arrived at that figure.
The policies were approved by the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, an IRGC-backed body Treasury designated in May. Both firms were sanctioned under an executive order covering Iran’s petroleum and petrochemical sectors.
Designation means U.S. persons are barred from dealing with the two companies, and foreign firms that transact with them risk sanctions themselves. Payments in bitcoin carry the same exposure as payments through banks.
“With its economy in freefall and inflation in the triple digits, the regime is desperate for cash,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in the statement.
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints, and traffic through it has thinned during weeks of U.S. strikes on Iran that have kept oil prices elevated.
AMLBot, a crypto compliance and forensics company, has introduced AI Tracer—an automated, self-service blockchain analysis tool that follows the trail of funds from a given transaction hash across multiple networks.
The company positions AI Tracer as a way to reduce the reliance on specialist tracing software and deep internal expertise, enabling users to map visible movement on-chain from a starting transaction through intermediate wallets to the eventual endpoint.
Key takeaways
- AI Tracer is built to trace fund movements from a transaction hash across supported blockchains.
- It can follow cross-chain transfers through bridges and handle flows where assets are split across multiple wallets.
- Reports rely on matching known entity labels (such as exchanges and flagged addresses) but are not a substitute for legal or audit processes.
- The tool offers free checks and paid plans with higher limits on the number of automated analyses.
- Initial support covers major networks including Bitcoin, Ethereum (and several L2s), Solana, TRON, and Ripple.
How AI Tracer maps transaction paths
In a press release provided to Cointelegraph, AMLBot described AI Tracer as “self-service” analysis that automatically traverses a transaction graph. The stated workflow follows funds from the starting address, through intermediate wallets, and toward whatever endpoint the assets reached.
A key part of the system is entity labeling: AMLBot says the tool matches known labels—such as exchanges, services, and flagged addresses—against wallets encountered during tracing.
This matters for investigators and compliance teams because manual graph reconstruction across complex transaction histories can be time-consuming, especially when transfers involve many hops, multiple wallets, or routing patterns typical of illicit movement attempts.
What the tool can’t do
AMLBot also emphasized limits that users should understand before relying on outputs. According to the announcement, AI Tracer cannot:
- See transfers occurring between internal exchange accounts.
- Determine the reason a payment was made.
- Freeze assets.
- Guarantee recovery of funds.
The company further noted that AI Tracer reports are intended as a starting point for investigations and do not replace audit procedures or legal processes. That framing is important in practice: blockchain tracing can reveal address-to-address movement, but it cannot by itself establish intent, contract context, or operational control over funds.
Cross-chain tracing and split flows
AMLBot said AI Tracer is designed to trace through bridges used to move assets cross-chain, as well as situations where assets are split among multiple wallets. These are two areas where transaction tracing often becomes harder than a simple “send and receive” pattern.
Cross-chain movement can obscure the path of value when assets are wrapped, bridged, or reconstituted on a different network. Meanwhile, split flows can require tracking multiple branches of a transaction graph to understand where value ultimately consolidated. By explicitly calling out these scenarios, AMLBot suggests AI Tracer is meant to handle more realistic transaction structures rather than only single-line transfers.
Coverage, access model, and who it’s for
AMLBot’s announcement says AI Tracer currently supports these networks: Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Litecoin, TRON, Ethereum, BNB Chain, Ethereum Classic, Polygon, Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, Solana, Cardano, and Ripple.
The tool includes a free check, while paid plans provide higher limits on the number of automated analyses users can run. AMLBot described the product as suitable for a range of users, including journalists, researchers, traders, and crypto users who want to read transaction paths, as well as law enforcement and independent investigators or compliance teams.
That target audience reflects a broader trend in the industry: as regulators, exchanges, and institutional participants increase expectations around transaction monitoring and provenance checks, more tools are being built to make on-chain analysis accessible beyond specialized forensics teams.
Why the launch is timely for on-chain investigations
AI Tracer’s “from transaction hash to endpoints” approach addresses a practical bottleneck in crypto investigations—turning raw blockchain data into a readable path that can be acted on. While it still cannot explain intent or replace legal review, AMLBot’s positioning suggests it is designed to speed up early-stage work: triage, mapping routes, and narrowing down where further diligence should focus.
As cross-chain activity and multi-hop transaction structures become more common, users are likely to judge tools less on whether they can follow basic transfers and more on how well they handle routing complexity—particularly bridge interactions and wallet splits, both of which AI Tracer is explicitly meant to cover.
Going forward, the main questions for users will be how consistently AI Tracer’s entity labeling reduces ambiguity across different networks, and how the product’s limits and supported chains expand over time—especially as investigations increasingly span L2s, bridges, and liquidity-driven flows.
Crypto World
Bitcoin Price Tumbles to 2-Week Low as Fed and BoJ Keep Rates Unchanged: Weekly Crypto Recap
It was a very eventful week in terms of economic activity, with most of the focus turned to the Wednesday conclusion of the second FOMC meeting under new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh.
But before we head into the details of the central bank’s decision, let’s explore what transpired prior to that. Last week, the US CPI numbers came out, and inflation data was actually a lot better than many expected. BTC went on a rally after that, peaking at $67,000, where it was rejected but still managed to close the week at around $64,000.
It regained some traction on Monday after the de-escalation news on the Middle East front. The cryptocurrency jumped past $65,000 and touched $65,600 on a couple of occasions. However, the predominantly bearish sentiment was too strong, and the asset dumped below $63,000 a day later.
The bulls managed to intervene and didn’t allow another immediate leg down. Instead, BTC started to regain traction after the United States Federal Reserve kept the rates unchanged. The asset challenged $65,500 once again on Friday morning. However, a familiar end-of-the-week scenario repeated, and the cryptocurrency was rejected even after the Bank of Japan followed the Fed’s example and maintained the rates.
The subsequent leg down has been quite painful, with BTC sliding below $62,500 minutes ago for the first time in over two weeks. Some altcoins have it even worse, with RAIN plummeting by double digits, while ZEC, XLM, and HYPE are down by up to 8%.
Market Data
Market Cap: $2.275T | 24H Vol: $60B | BTC Dominance: 55.3%
BTC: $62,700 (-0.5%) | ETH: $1,858 (+1.7%) | XRP: $1.06 (-1.7%)
This Week’s Crypto Headlines You Can’t Miss
New York Sues Kalshi as Legal Pressure on Prediction Markets Intensifies. In a major development from earlier today, New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Leticia James filed a lawsuit against Kalshi, arguing that it operates illegal gambling products without the proper license in the state.
A Rocky Year: Ethereum Turns 11 Years as ETH Trades 61% Below the High Set Last August. Ethereum celebrated its 11th birthday on July 30. In this article, we explore the good and bad over the past few years, including some controversial developments around the blockchain and the foundation behind it.
Bitcoin’s Next Bull Run Could Follow US Midterms: Analyst. US Midterm election years are not favorable for bitcoin historically. One analyst claimed that once they are over, BTC’s major rally could finally commence. Another analyst outlined a major price prediction, indicating that the cryptocurrency can peak at somewhere around $400,000 per unit within less than two years.
‘OC’ Actor Ben McKenzie Urges Congress to Block CLARITY Act Over Trump Ties. The CLARITY Act remains one of the most discussed topics within the cryptocurrency community and in Washington. In a surprising development from the past week, OC actor Ben McKenzie argued that the bill should be blocked over its potential aid to Trump and his family.
Circle’s IBM Patent Deal Brings Nearly 1,000 Blockchain Patents. The company behind the second-largest stablecoin said it had expanded its blockchain patent portfolio by purchasing nearly 1,000 such patents from IBM. This includes more than 680 patent families and nearly 1,000 issued worldwide, covering core blockchain tech, banking, financial services, and insurance.
Saylor’s Strategy Keeps Rebuilding Its Cash Pile, Putting Bitcoin Buys on Hold. The world’s largest corporate holder of BTC has continued its BTC purchase pause for a fifth consecutive week. Instead, Strategy keeps growing its USD reserve. Another $525 million injection brought the total USD stash to $3.75 billion, enough to cover 2.1 years of dividend payments.
Charts
This week, we have a chart analysis of Ethereum, Ripple, Cardano, Binance Coin, and Hyperliquid – click here for the complete price analysis.
The post Bitcoin Price Tumbles to 2-Week Low as Fed and BoJ Keep Rates Unchanged: Weekly Crypto Recap appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Circle Internet Group, Inc. (CRCL), the issuer of USDC, the world’s second-largest stablecoin, announced Friday that it secured a limited purpose trust charter from the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).
The trust charter is an official state banking authorization that allows the holder to legally provide fiduciary, custody and asset-management services under the New York Banking Law.
“Earning a New York trust charter has been a longstanding objective for Circle given the regulatory clarity that comes with it,” said Jeremy Allaire, Co-Founder, Chairman, and CEO of Circle.
Circle’s stock price remains flat Friday morning at $64.24 and its stablecoin USDC has a market capitalization exceeding $71.8 billion.
Earlier this month, Circle received approval from the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to establish a national trust bank.
National trust banks are authorized to provide users with custody and fiduciary services but do not accept consumer deposits or make loans like traditional commercial banks.
The stablecoin issuer said the national bank would “enhance the safety and regulatory oversight of the USDC Reserve, while enabling Circle to offer fiduciary digital asset custody and related services to institutional customers.”
Crypto World
What Jean Grey's Debut in Spider-Man: Brand New Day Means for the Future of the X-Men in the MCU
Warning: Spoilers ahead for Spider-Man: Brand New Day
The Dark Phoenix will rise again. Probably. Eventually.
A new version of Jean Grey made her debut in Spider-Man: Brand New Day. Stranger Things’ Sadie Sink follows in the footsteps of Famke Janssen and Sophie Turner as the redheaded telepath who is arguably the most powerful mutant in the Marvel comics. But the Jean that Peter Parker (Tom Holland) meets is just a lonely teenager who can’t fully control her powers. She presumably won’t learn how until she meets Professor Charles Xavier and the other mutants at his school. Those X-Men are coming to the Marvel Cinematic Universe with a new cast in the iconic roles. It’s just going to take a few more years.
Disney acquired 21st Century Fox way back in 2019, and Marvel fans have been waiting ever since for Magneto, Storm, and Cyclops fighting alongside the Avengers. There have been hints of what is to come: Ms. Marvel carries the X-gene, the fabled marker of a mutant. And the Deadpool & Wolverine movie was the first X-Men movie set inside the MCU. But Marvel Studios head Kevin Feige has long promised something more deliberate, a dedicated series of X-Men movies and a “reset” of the stories that came before.
Jean appears to be the first character in that reset, which is confusing because the old versions of various X-Men characters are still here. Ian McKellen’s Magneto, Patrick Stewart’s Professor X, and James Marsden’s Cyclops all turn up in Avengers: Doomsday later this year. Whether they survive it is another question, and the odds don’t look good. Here’s what Jean’s introduction tells us about how Marvel plans to get from one set of X-Men to the other.
How is Jean Grey introduced in Spider-Man: Brand New Day?
Jean is the misunderstood villain of the latest Spider-Man movie. She uses mind control to break into the Department of Damage Control, the government body originally created to clear the rubble after the fight in the first Avengers movie and since expanded into something closer to SHIELD, charged with safeguarding the public. Its head, Bill Metzger (Tramell Tillman), has a private agenda: he wants to contain superpowered beings and take their abilities. He kidnaps Jean’s sister Sarah, also a telepath, and performs experiments on her. Jean tries to save her, but arrives too late.
The movie draws a parallel between Jean Grey and Peter Parker. Both are isolated. Both see their powers evolve. (We even get hints of the destructive emotions in Jean that could eventually manifest in her alter-ego Dark Phoenix.) Peter talks Jean out of killing Metzger and encourages her to find friends who can embrace her for who she is rather than shame her for being different. At the end of the movie, she boards a bus out of New York. Somewhere ahead of her is the found family at Professor X’s school.
For now, Jean is the only future X-Man we know of in Peter’s timeline. That distinction matters, because the MCU has spent years establishing that variants of the same hero exist across parallel timelines. Bruce Banner and the Ancient One lay out the branching rules in Avengers: Endgame. Loki built an entire series around the TVA, the bureaucracy tasked with policing different timeline branches. And in Deadpool & Wolverine, Deadpool shops across timelines for a Wolverine variant willing to help him save his universe. The Jean Grey played by Janssen, along with Cyclops (Marsden), Magneto (McKellen), and Storm (Halle Berry), live in one of those other timelines.
How do the events of Spider-Man: Brand New Day set up an X-Men film?
In Brand New Day, Peter’s actions may set in motion a major conflict between mutants and the government. Peter begins to develop new abilities thanks to a spike in arachnid hormones. At first, he can’t control his new powers; they make him stronger but also more angry. In an effort to return to “normal,” Peter visits Bruce Banner, a.k.a. The Hulk, who has invented a gamma radiation inhibitor to prevent himself from turning into “the big green guy.” Peter suggests that he could adapt the technology to target specific genes, preserving his “good” powers while suppressing the “bad” ones. Banner warns that judging which evolutionary traits are good or bad is an ethical slippery slope.
Nonetheless, Peter builds both an inhibitor calibrated to target his own evolved powers and a universal one, which he uses to defeat Jean Grey. By the end of the film, the Department of Damage Control has its hands on the universal inhibitor. It’s probably not the last we see of it.
A device that can suppress superhuman abilities will likely play a major role in future X-Men films. Mutants, and Magneto in particular, are frequently in conflict with the government over the attempt to eliminate or “normalize” them. While Professor X advocates for finding a way to live harmoniously beside humans, Magneto frequently takes the stance that humans will inevitably target mutants because of their differences. With the inhibitor, Peter may have accidentally seeded a future conflict between whoever this universe’s Magneto turns out to be and Bill Metzger, should Metzger attempt to use this technology to continue to capture, control, experiment on, and eliminate mutants as he does to Sarah.
Already some early fans are comparing Peter’s invention of this universal inhibitor to J. Robert Oppenheimer in Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer: The physicist built the atomic bomb and then came to regret it, spending years advocating against nuclear proliferation. By the end of Brand New Day, Peter has accepted his own evolution and come to realize the government had specifically designed weapons to contain him. Once Peter understands how the universal inhibitor could be weaponized against people with special abilities, he surely will side with the mutants against its use.
How are the Fox X-Men in Avengers: Doomsday if they are from a different timeline?
Trailers and casting announcements have confirmed a substantial Fox contingent in Doomsday: Stewart as Professor X, McKellen as Magneto, Marsden as Cyclops, Rebecca Romijn as Mystique, Alan Cumming as Nightcrawler, Kelsey Grammer as Beast, and Channing Tatum as Gambit, who never appeared in the Fox movies but did make his debut in Deadpool & Wolverine.
It’s unclear which timelines these X-Men hail from. Stewart’s Professor X has already died three different times: vaporized by Jean Grey in X-Men: The Last Stand, stabbed through the chest by X-24 in Logan, and neck-snapped by Wanda Maximoff in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. Whatever version shows up in Doomsday, it’s presumably a variant we haven’t met.
The Doomsday trailers suggest that Marvel is employing a specific mechanism that gets all the superheroes in the same room: an incursion, a catastrophic event where the two separate universes collide and destroy one another. In a recent trailer, Professor X seems to witness an incursion. Fans are speculating that various superheroes travel across timelines to join forces and stop both the incursions. In fact, the Fantastic Four have already made that journey: At the end of Thunderbolts*, Yelena (Florence Pugh) spots the Fantastic Four’s ship entering her universe. If the Fantastic Four can reach the Avengers’ timeline, the Avengers can presumably reach the X-Men timeline.
What role will the X-Men play in Avengers: Doomsday and Avengers: Secret Wars?
Feige said at a fan event that Secret Wars will launch “a new age of mutants” in the MCU. That tracks with the comics storyline from which the movie takes its name. In the comics, every parallel timeline is destroyed. A great many heroes and villains die. Many survivors forget their past lives and live on the single remaining planet, Battleworld, ruled by Doctor Doom. That story let Marvel writers clear the board, cut the characters who weren’t working, keep the ones who were, and introduce new ones.
On screen, Secret Wars is a tidy way to justify a new cast and a rebooted storyline. How Jean Grey fits into this plan is unclear. She could survive the incursions and wind up on Battleworld, possibly alongside Peter Parker, who winds up in space in a Brand New Day post-credits. Or perhaps she will become an early recruit to the X-Men team after the events of Secret Wars.
When will there be a new X-Men movie?
A new X-Men movie is in the works, though fans won’t see it until after 2027’s Secret Wars. Thunderbolts* director Jake Schreier is helming with a script by Lee Sung Jin (Beef) and Joanna Calo (The Bear).
At the San Diego Comic-Con in 2026, Feige told fans, “I can’t wait for all of you to see Avengers: Doomsday. We have a movie after that called Avengers: Secret Wars, and then after that the mutants are coming, and the X-Men are coming. That’s been a dream of mine.” He has since said the cast will be young, as the characters are in the comics.
A lot is riding on the Marvel Studios’ execution of the X-Men saga. Fans have expressed frustration at how convoluted the Marvel multiverse has become and how newer additions to the MCU haven’t reached the emotional highs of Iron Man or Captain America. Refocusing on the X-Men could open up new stories and offer a more streamlined Marvel storytelling experience going forward.
Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.
All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.
New York has filed a lawsuit against prediction market platform Kalshi, arguing the company operates an illegal, unlicensed gambling business in the state by offering contracts tied to outcomes such as sports events and elections. The case seeks to halt Kalshi’s alleged activity, recover money described as illegal gains, and impose civil penalties.
New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement that “no matter what they call themselves, prediction markets like Kalshi are gambling platforms, plain and simple,” adding that the state is acting to enforce its laws and protect residents. The complaint also follows regulatory action by the New York State Gaming Commission, which previously issued a cease-and-desist order.
Key takeaways
- New York is suing Kalshi to stop what it characterizes as unlicensed gambling conducted through “event contracts” tied to outcomes including elections and sports.
- The lawsuit seeks forfeiture of alleged illegal gains, restitution to users, and civil penalties stated as three times those gains.
- The dispute reflects a wider U.S. jurisdiction fight over whether states can enforce gambling laws against event contracts listed by federally regulated exchanges.
- The CFTC has argued—through emergency court filings in connection with the case—that it holds exclusive authority under the Commodity Exchange Act.
- Regulatory pressure on prediction markets comes as the segment grows, including through blockchain-based products and large-scale event-driven trading activity.
New York’s claims against Kalshi
According to the lawsuit, New York’s core position is that Kalshi’s prediction products amount to gambling under state law because they allow users to wager on outcomes. The state is asking the court for multiple remedies: an order stopping the alleged illegal operation, forfeiture of illegal gains, restitution to affected users, and civil penalties equal to three times those gains.
New York’s filing also follows earlier enforcement steps. The New York State Gaming Commission issued Kalshi a cease-and-desist order in October 2025. Kalshi responded by suing the regulator in federal court.
As described in the lead-up to the new lawsuit, a judge denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction in July, and an appeals court later rejected Kalshi’s attempt to block enforcement while its appeal continues.
Kalshi disputes New York’s framing. Elisabeth Diana, the company’s head of communications, said the action is “political theater,” arguing that states cannot simply shut down a federally licensed exchange, and warning that such a move would push users “offshore.”
CFTC says federal oversight should control
New York’s case sits within a broader legal contest about regulatory authority over prediction markets. In the days leading up to the lawsuit, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) filed an emergency motion in federal court seeking to block New York’s enforcement efforts.
The CFTC argued that New York’s approach interferes with the agency’s exclusive authority under the Commodity Exchange Act to regulate designated contract markets, including platforms such as Kalshi. Put differently, the federal regulator is asserting that once an exchange is operating within the CFTC’s framework, state gambling laws should not be used to restrict the same kinds of event contracts.
The CFTC has taken similar stances in disputes involving multiple states, positioning the conflict as an issue of federal supremacy and consistent commodities oversight. The regulator’s concern, as reflected in its court filings, is that allowing individual states to prohibit event contracts listed by federally regulated venues would create conflicting rules and “undermine federal commodities regulation.”
This framing matters for participants because it affects where prediction market activity can legally occur and how compliant operators must be. It also has practical implications for platform design and market access: if a state can apply its gambling rules regardless of federal designation, exchanges could face uneven compliance burdens across jurisdictions.
Prediction markets and mainstream momentum
Prediction markets operate by allowing participants to buy and sell contracts tied to future outcomes, with contract prices intended to reflect the market’s estimate of the probability that an event will occur. In recent years, this model has attracted increased attention—especially around high-profile events that draw large audiences.
Kalshi is not the only major player facing regulatory scrutiny. Polymarket, another prominent prediction market, has also encountered challenges abroad, with reporting noting restrictions and investigations tied to gambling and licensing concerns.
Meanwhile, the sector has continued to experiment with blockchain-based infrastructure. Kalshi began expanding into blockchain-based infrastructure in December 2025, launching tokenized prediction markets on Solana and later adding support for multiple blockchain networks. That shift underscores how prediction market operators are adapting product delivery, potentially changing how users access contracts and where trading activity occurs.
On-chain prediction markets have also shown signs of scale around major global events. According to analytics firm Chainalysis, blockchain-based prediction markets processed about $20 billion in trading tied to the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with more than 400,000 wallets participating—an example of the demand that can emerge when widely watched events create an appetite for probability-based trading.
What to watch as the legal fight advances
For market participants, the key question is whether the courts treat event-contract regulation as primarily a matter of federal commodities oversight—or whether states retain meaningful authority to apply their gambling laws to prediction platforms operating within (or near) federally regulated structures. The CFTC’s emergency motion and New York’s pursuit of enforcement remedies suggest the case could be used to clarify that boundary.
Readers should watch next for how federal courts address the CFTC’s arguments about exclusive jurisdiction, and whether any interim rulings change Kalshi’s ability to offer specific event contracts within New York while the broader appeal process plays out.
“I fancy gingers” Wedding guest creep left women terrified at luxury hotel
Stellantis to recall 1.5 million Ram 1500 pickup trucks over seat belt issue
Crypto News, July 31: July Round Up, Kospi Coming Back, Bitcoin Price Ignores Political Noise as Market Splits
-
Fashion7 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Sports5 days agoCommonwealth Games boxing: Jadumani Singh seals dominant 5-0 win over Pakistan’s Sumama Rehman to enter quarter-finals | Commonwealth Games News
-
Business2 days agoWhy Trees Belong on the Risk Register
-
Tech5 days agoIntel is reversing course and bringing hyper-threading back to its server chips
-
Crypto World6 days agoRipple bought a bank in pieces. The $4 billion audit
-
Politics4 days agoLuke Littler dismantles Gerwyn Price to retain title in Blackpool
-
Politics3 days agoThe Part of the Electric Transition Nobody Wants to Discuss
-
News Videos5 days agoBITCOIN JUST ENTERED THIS CRITICAL ZONE…
-
Business2 days agoMajor shareholder moves on Canyon
-
Crypto World5 days agoXRP Ledger adds $2.6B as RWA inflows rank second
-
News Videos1 day agoBitcoin Enters the 3rd Stage of the Bear Market
-
Politics5 days agoSpain sweeps the board at 2026 World Cup with individual awards
-
Entertainment3 days ago‘Stargate’ Creator’s New Sci-Fi Series Returns for Season 3 Tomorrow
-
Entertainment6 days agoSara Gilson Killed By Husband After Viral “Pedophile” TikTok Video
-
Tech6 days agoAnthropic launches Claude Opus 5, a cheaper AI model for coding, agents and enterprise workflows
-
Crypto World3 days agoKraken Enables Retail Access to Jersey Mike’s IPO via Tokenized Shares
-
News Videos3 days agoClaude: Build Financial Dashboards in Minutes (2026)
-
Tech4 days agoNew macOS Sequoia & Sonoma security updates for older Macs
-
Politics23 hours agoLuke Littler’s dominance sparks GOAT debate
-
Sports15 hours agoSeema Kaliramna Wins Discus Throw Bronze, Takes India’s CWG Medals Tally To 17
You must be logged in to post a comment Login