Crypto World
Robinhood Invests in Crypto.com and OG.com via Prediction Markets
Robinhood has agreed to take equity stakes in Crypto.com and its newly spun-off prediction markets platform, OG.com, in a multi-year arrangement designed to bolster Robinhood’s event-contract infrastructure in the United States. The move links Robinhood’s expanding prediction markets business to OG.com’s CFTC-regulated derivatives exchange and clearinghouse.
As part of the deal, Robinhood will route retail event contracts through OG.com’s infrastructure. A rollout is set to begin Tuesday for eligible US customers, according to Robinhood’s announcement carried by PR Newswire.
Key takeaways
- Robinhood will use OG.com’s CFTC-regulated derivatives exchange and clearinghouse to process retail event contracts.
- Robinhood is taking equity stakes in both Crypto.com and OG.com, but the companies did not disclose the size or value of the holdings.
- The equity stakes are priced using valuations established by an earlier Citadel Securities investment in the platforms.
- The agreement arrives shortly after OG.com’s spin-off from Crypto.com and follows recent reporting that Robinhood was exploring ways to expand prediction markets.
Robinhood’s event-contract routing shifts to OG.com
The core operational change is straightforward: Robinhood plans to route retail event contracts through OG.com’s CFTC-regulated derivatives exchange and clearinghouse. In the PR Newswire announcement, Robinhood described OG.com as its infrastructure partner for prediction market event contracts, with the initial rollout beginning Tuesday for eligible customers in the US.
This matters for participants because event-contract trading depends not only on market access and product availability, but also on the plumbing—exchange execution, clearing, and regulatory oversight. By centering that plumbing on OG.com’s CFTC-regulated setup, Robinhood is effectively tightening the link between its prediction-market offering and a regulated derivatives framework.
Equity stakes accompany the infrastructure deal
In addition to becoming a customer of OG.com’s infrastructure, Robinhood will receive initial equity stakes in both Crypto.com and OG.com under the multi-year agreement. The announcement states that the stakes are priced at the valuations set by an earlier investment from Citadel Securities. However, neither Robinhood nor the counterparties disclosed how much Robinhood will receive or the dollar value of the holdings.
The equity component is a notable feature of the arrangement. Many infrastructure partnerships are structured around service fees rather than ownership participation. Here, ownership ties can align long-term incentives for both product expansion and operational reliability—especially for a business area where regulatory permissions and market structure are central to scalability.
OG.com independence—and a broader push into derivatives
OG.com recently spun off from Crypto.com at a $5 billion valuation, and Robinhood’s agreement arrives less than two months after reports that Robinhood had been in talks with Crypto.com to expand its prediction markets offering.
OG.com will operate independently from the crypto exchange. CEO Kris Marszalek said the company plans to expand beyond prediction markets into futures and perpetual contracts. That direction is consistent with the idea that regulated event-contract infrastructure can serve as a stepping stone toward more generalized derivatives products, though the specific pace and regulatory pathway for futures and perps would still depend on applicable jurisdictional requirements.
Why prediction markets remain a legal flashpoint
Robinhood’s expansion efforts are happening in parallel with a widening legal dispute about how US states should be allowed to regulate event contracts—particularly sports-related ones.
Robinhood launched its prediction markets hub in March 2025 with CFTC-regulated exchange Kalshi, later expanding its prediction market infrastructure. Cointelegraph previously reported on developments in this space, including partnerships and platform expansion plans. The business has also grown quickly: Robinhood said event contracts generated $156 million in revenue in the second quarter of 2026, up more than tenfold from a year earlier. In the same reporting cycle, Robinhood indicated that its equities transaction revenue was $129 million and that crypto contributed $100 million—figures from the company’s investor relations release.
Analyst estimates cited in the original reporting add another layer to the stakes: Bernstein analysts projected in July that Robinhood’s revenue, including prediction markets, could reach $1.7 billion by 2028. At the same time, those projections sit against uncertainty driven by regulatory and court fights.
Several legal challenges have targeted the classification of prediction-market event contracts. In April, a Nevada judge extended a ban preventing Kalshi from offering event contracts in the state without a gaming license, ruling that the products were effectively indistinguishable from traditional betting. The decision rejected Kalshi’s position that the contracts should be treated as swaps governed exclusively by CFTC oversight.
The dispute has escalated further. Last week, New Jersey petitioned the US Supreme Court to consider whether states can regulate sports contracts offered on CFTC-regulated prediction markets. In a post tied to the move, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport said companies such as Kalshi argue they can offer legal sports betting nationwide while refusing to comply with state gambling laws, and she urged the Supreme Court to resolve the jurisdictional conflict.
For investors and traders, these cases are more than abstract legal drama. Platform operators often rely on regulators and courts to define the product boundaries—whether a state can apply gambling rules to event contracts even when the market structure is built within CFTC-regulated derivatives frameworks. Any shift in legal interpretation could affect product listings, market access, and compliance costs.
What to watch next as infrastructure and regulation converge
With Robinhood routing retail event contracts through OG.com’s CFTC-regulated exchange and clearinghouse beginning Tuesday, the immediate operational question is how quickly eligible customers can access the expanded flow. Just as important, the next watch item is the broader legal trajectory around state authority over sports-related event contracts—because the infrastructure build-out may face constraints or redesigns depending on how courts ultimately define the regulatory boundaries.
The House killed eight voting days, Polymarket odds crashed from 82% to 16%, and the ethics clause nobody can agree on may bury the most important crypto bill in a generation.
Summary
- The Senate cloture vote on the CLARITY Act is set for September 15, but House Republican leaders canceled the weeks of September 21 and 28, leaving just four voting days before lawmakers leave Washington until after the November 3 midterm elections.
- Polymarket odds for the bill becoming law in 2026 collapsed from 82% in February to roughly 16% in early September, while Galaxy Digital cut its own estimate to 10% on August 14.
- The ethics clause banning the president, vice president, and members of Congress from issuing or sponsoring digital assets is the single provision most likely to kill bipartisan support, with Democrats calling the current language toothless and Republicans warning stronger restrictions would lose White House backing.
- If cloture fails, crypto regulation defaults to a patchwork of agency rulemaking from the SEC, CFTC, OCC, and FASB that can be reversed by any future administration, with no realistic path to unified federal legislation before 2029.
- The week of September 15 carries three overlapping catalysts: the August CPI print on September 11, the FOMC rate decision on September 16, and the SEC 24-hour trading roundtable on September 17.
The CLARITY Act was supposed to be the easy one. After the GENIUS Act cleared both chambers and became law in July 2025, the crypto industry expected the market structure companion bill to follow within months. Fourteen months later, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act sits in a procedural limbo that would have been unimaginable when prediction markets gave it an 82% chance of passage in February.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture on the motion to proceed just before the August 7 recess, setting up a procedural vote for Tuesday, September 15. That vote requires 60 senators to agree to even begin debating the bill. It is not a vote on the legislation itself. And between the filing and the return, the House went and blew a hole in the calendar that may have made the Senate vote irrelevant.
On September 3, House Republican leaders announced they were removing the weeks of September 21 and September 28 from the voting schedule. Eight days, gone. Representatives will return after Labor Day on September 14, work four days, and leave Washington on September 17. They will not come back until after the midterm elections on November 3. For a bill that still needs floor time in both chambers, that is not a scheduling inconvenience. It is a death sentence on the timeline.
The 60-vote math that does not work
The Senate cloture threshold has always been the CLARITY Act’s central obstacle. Republicans hold 53 seats, meaning Thune needs at least seven Democrats to cross over. In the Banking Committee markup, only two did. The gap between two and seven might look manageable on paper. In practice, it represents a chasm that five months of negotiation have failed to bridge.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has said she supports federal crypto legislation in principle but firmly opposes the current bill, arguing it fails to address corruption, consumer protection, and national security. Senators Chris Murphy, Chris Van Hollen, and Jeff Merkley have taken similar public positions. That is four confirmed Democratic no votes already eating into the margin.
The math gets worse when you consider what those seven crossover votes would require. Every Democrat who votes yes will face attack ads accusing them of supporting a bill that benefits President Trump’s crypto portfolio. In a midterm year, that is not abstract political risk. It is a concrete calculation that every campaign manager in a competitive district is making right now.
Republicans, meanwhile, are dealing with their own fragility. Galaxy Digital’s August analysis noted that the party expects to lose Senators Josh Hawley and Rand Paul on procedural grounds, bringing the effective Republican count closer to 51. If even one additional Republican defects, Thune would need nine Democratic votes instead of seven.
The ethics clause that broke the coalition
If the CLARITY Act fails, the cause of death will almost certainly be Section 13152.
The ethics provision, added to the July 22 draft, bans the president, vice president, and members of Congress from issuing or sponsoring digital assets while in office. Their spouses are covered too. The Department of Justice would enforce the restriction with fines of up to $250,000 per day. On its face, it reads like a reasonable safeguard. In practice, it has become the provision that three different constituencies can each find a reason to reject.
A poll showing 63% of Americans believe Trump crossed the line on crypto has given Democrats political cover to demand stronger language. Warren and her allies want the ban extended beyond January 20, 2029, the date it currently sunsets, which also happens to be the last day of Trump’s second term. They want state attorneys general to share enforcement authority with the DOJ, arguing that a presidential appointee cannot be trusted to investigate the president’s own financial interests. And they want existing holdings addressed more aggressively: the current text allows officials to place crypto in blind trusts, which critics say is insufficient when the assets in question are publicly traded tokens whose prices respond to presidential statements.
Republicans counter that the provision already goes further than any ethics restriction in existing securities law. Strengthening it further, they argue, would lose the White House’s support entirely. Trump urged Congress to pass the CLARITY Act in August, but that endorsement came with an implicit ceiling on how restrictive the ethics language could become.
The third constituency is the crypto industry itself. Companies like Coinbase, which earns roughly $1.35 billion annually from USDC rewards, care far more about the stablecoin yield provisions than the ethics debate. But the ethics fight has consumed so much oxygen that the yield question, which directly affects business models, has been pushed to the margins of the negotiation.
What the bill actually does and why it matters
The CLARITY Act would draw the first statutory line between the SEC and the CFTC on digital assets. Right now, the two agencies rely on a joint interpretation issued in spring 2026 that names 16 tokens, including XRP, SOL, and DOGE, as digital commodities. That guidance is better than nothing. It is also non-binding, revocable, and far narrower than what the industry needs.
Under the bill, tokens would fall into four categories: digital commodities, assets offered through investment contracts, permitted payment stablecoins, and securities such as tokenized stocks or bonds. The CFTC would take primary jurisdiction over digital commodities. The SEC would oversee digital securities and investment contract offerings. Both agencies would share authority over intermediaries, trading venues, and customer asset protections.
The framework also introduces registration requirements for exchanges, brokers, and dealers. Platforms would need to meet disclosure rules, anti-money-laundering controls, and customer segregation standards. For DeFi protocols, the bill proposes a classification system that is still hotly debated, with unresolved questions about whether autonomous smart contracts can be regulated as intermediaries.
The international stakes make this more than a domestic housekeeping exercise. The EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation has been operational since June 2024. The UAE’s Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority has licensed over 20 exchanges. Japan finalized its token classification rules in 2025. Singapore’s Payment Services Act covers stablecoins and digital payment tokens under a single license. Each of these frameworks gives local firms a rulebook to build against. American companies are still guessing which agency will knock on their door first.
The current US regulatory map is a patchwork stitched together from enforcement actions, no-action letters, and agency guidance documents. The CLARITY Act would replace that patchwork with legislation that survives changes in administration. That durability is the bill’s real value, and the reason its potential failure carries consequences far beyond 2026.
The prediction market collapse tells the story
Polymarket has become the unofficial scoreboard for the CLARITY Act’s chances, and the numbers are brutal.
In February, when the Senate Banking Committee was making bipartisan progress on draft language, traders priced the bill’s passage at 82%. That number held through March and into April as committee negotiations continued behind closed doors. Then the ethics fight went public.
By mid-July, after Warren rejected the July 22 draft within hours of its release, odds had fallen to roughly 38%. The August recess without a vote pushed them below 20%. As of early September, Polymarket shows approximately 16% with over $7.2 million wagered on the contract. A single wallet placed an $818,000 bet against passage in late August, the largest individual position on the contract.
Galaxy Digital’s institutional research desk cut its own odds to 10% on August 14, the lowest estimate from any major financial firm. The reasoning was direct: unless the motion to proceed passes immediately upon the Senate’s return and the bill dominates the entire working session, there is not enough calendar to get it done. Galaxy noted that the window is not just narrow. It requires every remaining day to go perfectly, with zero procedural delays, zero extended amendment battles, and zero additional controversies.
The collapse from 82% to 10% is not the story of a bill that lacked support. It is the story of a bill that could not survive the collision between three constituencies whose demands were mutually exclusive: Democrats who wanted stronger ethics rules, Republicans who could not deliver them without losing the White House, and an industry that needed the yield provisions settled before either side would commit.
If cloture fails, regulation goes dark
The consequences of a failed cloture vote extend well beyond the CLARITY Act itself.
If the motion to proceed does not get 60 votes on September 15, the bill is effectively dead for this Congress. Midterm politics will dominate the floor from October onward, and no serious observer expects unified crypto legislation to return before the 119th Congress convenes in January 2029. Even then, the composition of the Senate and the political dynamics around crypto could look entirely different.
In the interim, regulation defaults to a collection of agency actions that lack the permanence of legislation. The SEC proposed Regulation Crypto Assets on August 19, a 402-page framework that creates two new exemptions from Securities Act registration for crypto offerings, plus a safe harbor letting tokens shed security status once networks are sufficiently decentralized. The CFTC is writing rules under its existing authority. The OCC is finalizing GENIUS Act stablecoin regulations with a November target. FASB has proposed accounting rules for stablecoins.
Each of these tracks provides some guidance. None of them provides the unified framework the industry has been asking for since 2018. And all of them can be reversed, amended, or reinterpreted by the next administration. A Republican SEC chair’s safe harbor becomes a Democratic SEC chair’s enforcement target. A CFTC classification that treats a token as a commodity today could face a challenge tomorrow. The entire structure rests on administrative discretion, not statutory authority.
For businesses trying to build in the United States, this patchwork creates a compliance environment that favors large, well-resourced firms over startups. Coinbase and Kraken have legal departments that can navigate overlapping agency guidance. A four-person DeFi team in Austin does not. The irony of the CLARITY Act’s potential failure is that the people who need regulatory clarity the most are the ones least equipped to survive without it.
The market impact of a failed vote is harder to predict than most analysts suggest. Bernstein projects a 10% to 25% correction in bitcoin if major legislation stalls, potentially testing the $55,000 to $60,000 range. But the GENIUS Act’s passage in 2025 showed that markets can rally on partial progress. If the SEC and CFTC accelerate their rulemaking tracks quickly enough, the practical effect on token prices could be muted even as the legal profession mourns the loss of statutory clarity. The deeper damage would show up over quarters, not days: fewer US-based token launches, more projects incorporating in Singapore or Dubai, and a slow drain of engineering talent toward jurisdictions where the rules are written down.
The week that decides everything
The week of September 15 is not just about crypto regulation. It is one of the most event-dense periods of the year for financial markets, and every item on the calendar interacts with the CLARITY Act vote.
On September 11, the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases the August CPI report. Markets currently price roughly a two-thirds probability of a 25 basis point rate increase at the following week’s FOMC meeting, driven by persistent inflation and energy price shocks. A hot CPI print would reinforce that expectation and put risk assets, including crypto, under pressure heading into the vote.
On September 15, the Senate reconvenes and the cloture vote is scheduled. The same day marks the start of the FOMC’s two-day meeting.
On September 16, the Federal Reserve announces its rate decision. If the Fed hikes, crypto markets will react. And if crypto markets are selling off on the morning of September 16, the political calculation for senators considering a yes vote on the CLARITY Act shifts. Nobody wants to be photographed supporting the crypto industry on a day when token prices are falling and retail holders are losing money.
On September 17, the SEC holds its roundtable on 24-hour equity trading, with BlackRock, Nasdaq, NYSE, Robinhood, Citadel, and Jane Street on the panel. That session explores whether traditional exchanges should adopt the continuous trading model that crypto markets pioneered. It is a symbolic marker: the SEC is already building the future of market structure through rulemaking, whether Congress acts or not.
The House leaves Washington on September 17. If the Senate has not passed the CLARITY Act by then, the bill needs to wait for the House to return. And the House is not returning until after the midterms.
The opposing case: why the bill could still survive
The bearish consensus deserves scrutiny. Polymarket odds and Galaxy estimates are not votes. They are probability assessments that can move fast in both directions, and there are genuine reasons the CLARITY Act could still clear cloture.
First, the bipartisan infrastructure exists. The House passed H.R. 3633 with votes from both parties in July 2025. The Senate Banking Committee advanced its version with two Democratic crossovers. The base of support is real, even if the ethics fight has temporarily obscured it.
Second, the stakes are high enough to force compromise. Every senator in that chamber understands what happens if the bill fails: two years of regulatory patchwork, potential enforcement whiplash after the midterms, and a signal to global competitors that the United States cannot legislate on digital assets. Singapore, the EU under MiCA, and the UAE under VARA are not waiting. Japan finalized its framework in 2025. The competitive pressure is not theoretical.
Third, the ethics clause has a natural compromise point. Extending the ban beyond 2029, adding state AG enforcement authority, and tightening blind trust requirements would address Democratic concerns without fundamentally altering the bill’s market structure provisions. The question is whether both sides have the political will to accept a deal that neither side loves, which is, historically, how most major financial legislation gets passed.
Fourth, Thune would not have filed cloture if he did not believe he could get close to 60. Senate leaders do not schedule votes they expect to lose by 15. The filing suggests private conversations have produced commitments that have not yet been made public.
The counterargument to all of this is the calendar. Even if cloture passes, the Senate needs time for amendments, debate, and a final vote. Then the bill goes to conference with the House, which is leaving town on September 17. A short-term continuing resolution or a lame-duck session after the midterms could theoretically provide a window, but those scenarios introduce their own complications. Lame-duck crypto votes are politically toxic, and a CR negotiation would consume whatever floor time remains.
What to watch
- September 11 CPI print: A year-over-year number above 3.2% would harden rate hike expectations and put downward pressure on crypto heading into the cloture vote. Below 3.0% gives the Fed room to hold, which would be mildly positive for risk sentiment.
- September 15 cloture vote count: The magic number is 60. Watch for the specific Democratic crossovers. If Senators Mark Warner and Kyrsten Sinema vote yes, it signals the moderate lane is still open. If they vote no, the bill is almost certainly dead.
- House continuing resolution language: If the CR includes any provision extending legislative business past September 17, it reopens the calendar window for the CLARITY Act. If it does not, the House exit date is hard.
- Polymarket contract movement in the 48 hours before the vote: Sharp upward movement would indicate insider confidence that a deal has been struck. Continued decline below 15% suggests the market sees no path.
- Post-vote SEC and CFTC statements: If cloture fails, watch for accelerated agency rulemaking announcements. The speed at which regulators move to fill the vacuum will determine how the industry operates for the next two years.
What is the CLARITY Act and what does it do?
The CLARITY Act, formally the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (H.R. 3633), is a bill that would create the first statutory framework for regulating digital assets in the United States. It divides oversight between the SEC and the CFTC, classifies tokens into four categories, and sets registration requirements for exchanges and brokers. The House passed it in July 2025. The Senate has not voted on it yet.
What is a cloture vote and why does September 15 matter?
Cloture is a Senate procedure that requires 60 votes to end debate and move to a final vote on legislation. On September 15, the Senate will vote on whether to proceed to debate on the CLARITY Act. It is not a vote on the bill itself, but if cloture fails, the bill cannot reach the floor for a final vote. Given the compressed calendar, failing on September 15 likely means the bill is dead for 2026.
Why did the House cut eight voting days from September?
House Republican leaders removed the weeks of September 21 and 28 from the voting schedule on September 3, giving members more time to campaign ahead of the November midterms. After passing a stopgap spending bill, leadership determined there was less immediate need to keep representatives in Washington. The revised schedule leaves just four voting days before the House breaks until after the elections.
What is the ethics clause and why is it so controversial?
Section 13152 of the bill bans the president, vice president, and members of Congress from issuing or sponsoring digital assets while in office. The ban sunsets on January 20, 2029. Democrats argue the provision is too weak because the DOJ, led by a presidential appointee, is the sole enforcer, and the sunset conveniently aligns with the end of Trump’s term. Republicans say it already goes further than any existing securities law ethics restriction.
How much money has Trump made from crypto?
Trump’s 2025 financial disclosure reports more than $1 billion in crypto-related income. Roughly $635 million came from $TRUMP memecoin royalties through CIC Digital LLC. Another $515 million to $592 million came from World Liberty Financial token and equity sales. Public Citizen estimates Trump-linked crypto ventures left investors $4.7 billion underwater.
What are the Polymarket odds for the CLARITY Act passing?
As of early September 2026, Polymarket shows approximately 16% odds of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026, down from 82% in February. Over $7.2 million has been wagered on the contract. A single wallet bet $818,000 against passage in late August. Galaxy Digital’s institutional research desk separately cut its estimate to 10%.
What happens to crypto regulation if the CLARITY Act fails?
Regulation defaults to a patchwork of agency rulemaking. The SEC moves forward with Regulation Crypto Assets. The CFTC writes rules under existing authority. The OCC finalizes stablecoin rules by November. None of these actions carry the permanence of legislation, and all can be reversed or reinterpreted by future administrations. Unified federal crypto legislation would not return before 2029 at the earliest.
Should I make investment decisions based on the CLARITY Act vote?
Legislative outcomes are inherently unpredictable, and the interaction between the cloture vote, the FOMC decision, and the CPI data makes the week of September 15 unusually volatile. Past regulatory votes have produced sharp short-term price moves that reversed within days. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.
Disclaimer: This article was published on Sept. 7, 2026. The information provided is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or investment advice. Always conduct your own research before making any investment decisions.
Bitcoin’s near-term holder “whales” are sitting on paper profits at levels not seen before, and the margin for turning those gains into selling pressure is shrinking as BTC trades closer to key break-even levels. New on-chain analysis from CryptoQuant highlights both the scale of unrealized profit among short-term holders and the way quickly that profitability can evaporate when prices dip.
At the same time, exchange-side data points to Binance reserves hovering near a two-year high, reinforcing the idea that any upside move will have to contend with readily available BTC supply. For traders and market participants, the combination matters: record unrealized gains can create a fast-moving sell response, while concentrated reserves can affect how easily spot demand translates into sustained price strength.
Key takeaways
- CryptoQuant data shows short-term holder (STH) whale unrealized profits surged to $9.07 billion on Sept. 4, the largest reading since its whale-profit tracking began in 2016.
- That profitability is highly sensitive to price swings—CryptoQuant reports STH whale unrealized profit fell about 17% the day after BTC/USD dropped just under 2%.
- Binance BTC reserves climbed to 691,658 BTC on Sept. 2, the highest level since November 2024, approaching a two-year peak.
- CryptoQuant characterizes whale participation in exchange inflows as “relatively contained,” but the elevated reserve base raises the stakes for any sustained breakout above $83,000.
Why short-term holder whales may be more likely to sell
CryptoQuant defines short-term holders as wallets holding BTC for less than six months. In its latest analysis, the firm reports that this cohort’s aggregate unrealized profit has pushed above $9 billion, with the STH whale category reaching $9.07 billion on Sept. 4. CryptoQuant says this is the highest figure it has recorded since it began tracking whale profitability in 2016.
Importantly, the analysis emphasizes that STH whales are not just sitting on gains—they are sitting on gains that are closely tied to the current spot price. CryptoQuant notes that STH whale breakeven levels are nearer to the market price than the breakeven levels for long-term holders (LTHs). As a result, even small daily movements can shift the cost-basis picture quickly.
CryptoQuant also points to real-time sensitivity. After Sept. 4, as BTC/USD declined by just under 2%, the STH whale unrealized profit fell roughly 17% the following day. CryptoQuant ties that drop to the structure of STH breakevens: with the cost basis around $69,000, losses or reduced profit potential can emerge rapidly as price fluctuates.
CryptoQuant warned that unrealized profit at that scale can become “exposure” and that STH whales are historically among the fastest cohorts to take profit when gains are visible.
For investors, the practical takeaway is straightforward: a record paper-profit situation can still translate into real selling if BTC dips just enough to bring those investors closer to their own decision points. The question becomes whether any pullback is large or prolonged enough to trigger that behavior broadly across the STH whale cohort.
Exchange reserves rise as traders watch $83,000
Beyond whale profitability, exchange inflows and reserves offer another lens into near-term supply dynamics. The on-chain thread in the analysis points to increased BTC movement toward exchanges since early May, and it highlights Binance specifically.
According to the on-chain figures cited by CryptoQuant, Binance BTC reserves reached 691,658 BTC on Sept. 2—its highest level since November 2024 and close to a two-year high. In other words, the market appears to have accumulated a large “buffer” of BTC at a major venue even as price action has remained constrained.
This matters because exchange reserves can affect the effort required for upside. If a price breakout begins to attract buyers, sellers with coins already on-exchange can respond quickly, increasing the supply that spot demand must absorb. CryptoQuant frames the market tension in those terms while focusing on a key level: $83,000.
CryptoQuant argues that Binance liquidity and positioning look orderly, but the elevated reserve base means any meaningful move above $83K would likely require “strong, sustained spot absorption” to clear available supply—something that depends on more than short bursts of buying.
Spot absorption still looks like the missing ingredient
The analysis also ties these reserve and profit dynamics to a broader theme: Bitcoin spot demand. CryptoQuant reiterates that the key question remains whether spot demand can return decisively. The report referenced in the article suggests that, during 2026, spot demand has been insufficient relative to what’s needed to drive a clean supply-clearing cycle.
That backdrop matters for how traders interpret whale signals. If spot demand is strong and persistent, even large reserve bases may not translate into immediate selling pressure, because higher buying activity can outpace the supply ready on-exchange. If spot demand remains weak or intermittent, then elevated reserves coupled with whale cohorts holding record paper gains can create a market where dips are more likely to stimulate profit-taking.
What to watch next
With STH whale unrealized profits at a record high and Binance reserves near multi-year levels, the next decisive test is whether BTC can sustain strength above the $83,000 area without triggering renewed profit-taking from short-term holders. Market participants should watch both the direction of BTC spot demand and whether further price softness leads to additional exchange inflows that would keep liquidity “ready” at major venues.
XRP futures volume surged to a six-month high in August. Binance, Bybit, and OKX together processed $64.6 billion in XRP contracts. The rally pushed XRP up nearly 30% for the month.
Binance Leads Record XRP Futures Volume
Binance processed roughly $37 billion in XRP futures during August. That figure represents about 57% of total volume across three exchanges. Bybit followed with $14.54 billion, while OKX cleared $12.88 billion.
Price action fueled much of the surge in XRP trading. XRP climbed from $1.06 early in August to $1.50 by August 24. The token then settled near $1.35 as the month closed.
Spot markets mirrored the futures rally and confirmed the trend. Spot XRP volume also hit a six-month high across major exchanges. Binance again led spot activity, followed by Upbit and Bithumb.
Institutional Interest Shifts Toward Regulated XRP Venues
CME overtook Binance as the largest venue for XRP open interest. CME open interest reached near $530 million, compared with Binance at $510 million. Offshore exchanges, however, still dominate raw XRP trading volume.
Institutional players continued to build positions in XRP-linked products. Citadel expanded its bullish XRP ETF holdings during the second quarter. Goldman Sachs also reclaimed its spot as a top XRP ETF holder.
Combined spot XRP ETF assets stood near $1.48 billion by month-end. Cumulative inflows into XRP ETFs approached $1.7 billion during the period. These flows gave trading desks reason to hedge and warehouse inventory.
Crowded Positioning Raises Risk for XRP Traders
Rising volume alone does not confirm a bullish direction for XRP. Analysts note that turnover can reflect covering, new shorts, or hedging activity. Traders must therefore separate raw volume data from actual positioning.
XRP’s leverage ratio on Binance reached 0.213, a seven-month high. Open interest grew crowded near $3.4 billion to $3.5 billion in size. That concentration adds risk ahead of a key regulatory vote.
Ripple re-locked 700 million XRP after its scheduled monthly unlock event. This escrow move reduced near-term sell pressure on XRP supply. Meanwhile, the XRPL 3.3.0 upgrade advances toward mid-September activation.
The US Treasury’s planned $22 billion debt buyback added a macro tailwind. Broader crypto markets turned bullish alongside the XRP derivatives buildup. The Senate’s CLARITY Act cloture vote on September 15 looms next.
Traders using the CME’s FedWatch tool put the FOMC September 2026 odds of a 25-basis-point rate hike at the Federal Reserve’s September 16 meeting at nearly 56%, CNBC reported.
The change followed Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh’s keynote speech at the central bank’s Jackson Hole symposium and left the September FOMC decision looking closely contested in market pricing.
WE ARE LESS THAN 10 DAYS AWAY FROM THE NEXT FOMC MEETING — WOLF (@WOLF_Financial) September 8, 2026
There is currently a 53% chance that Kevin Warsh and the 
FOMC will raise rates at the September 17th press conference pic.twitter.com/it8Qo60PWl
For Bitcoin and other crypto assets, the immediate development is a shift in the interest-rate backdrop rather than evidence of a confirmed price response.
CNBC’s reporting documents changing rate expectations and a move in short-term Treasury yields, but it does not establish a corresponding move in Bitcoin, altcoins, crypto derivatives, or liquidations.
FOMC September 2026 Odds: A Jackson Hole Speech Reset Rate Expectations
The repricing was reflected across several market-based measures. Kalshi traders assigned a 48% probability to a quarter-point increase, while Polymarket traders indicated 49% odds that the Fed would raise rates. Fed funds futures traders, as measured through CME FedWatch, saw nearly a 56% chance of a quarter-point hike.
Before Warsh’s speech, odds that the Fed would keep rates unchanged in September were nearly 70%, CNBC reported. The article also noted that investors had previously been more focused on the possibility of a hike after the Fed’s July meeting, when three members of the Federal Open Market Committee disagreed with the decision to leave rates steady and argued that rates needed to move higher in response to elevated inflation.
Rate-hike odds then declined after a weaker-than-expected July employment report showed that the U.S. lost jobs and inflation cooled while remaining above the Fed’s 2% target. In his Jackson Hole remarks, Warsh said that better-than-expected summer inflation readings did not demonstrate that underlying trends had meaningfully improved. He said the central bank needed confidence that underlying inflation was moving toward its objective clearly and quickly enough.
Earn $50 and Enter $300K Prize Draw on EdgeX
What a Coin-Flip Fed Means for Bitcoin And What It Doesn’t Prove
The available evidence supports reassessing September policy expectations, not a settled conclusion about crypto-market consequences. Bitcoin may remain relevant to traders monitoring broader risk sentiment, but the cited reporting does not show that the change in Fed probabilities has already produced a specific Bitcoin-market outcome.
Short-term yields did respond to the speech. CNBC reported that the 2-year Treasury yield, which closely follows short-term Fed rate decisions, reached its highest level since late July. That reaction shows that interest-rate markets were responding to the possibility of a September move.
The inflation backdrop remains central to the debate. In an Aug. 5 speech, Fed Governor Lisa D. Cook said the personal consumption expenditures price index rose 3.7% in the 12 months through June, while core prices rose 3.3%.
Cook described inflation as too high and said she was prepared to support a rate increase if necessary, while also noting that disinflationary forces could move inflation toward the Fed’s target without an increase.
Cook also said the June unemployment rate was 4.2% and characterized the labor market as stable in a low-hire, low-fire environment. Her assessment illustrates why incoming inflation and employment data remain important to the policy discussion ahead of the meeting.
Have Your Say on the FOMC Rate Hike Odds With $25 For Free on Kalshi
Maxi Doge Targets Early Mover Upside as Rate Hike Fears Cause Short-Term Panic
FOMC September 2026 odds of a rate hike pushing above 50% are exactly why traders looking for asymmetric upside are rotating attention toward earlier-stage plays with room to actually multiply.
Enter Maxi Doge ($MAXI), a meme token built around 1000x-leverage trading culture and a 240-lb canine mascot that embodies the “never skip leg-day, never skip a pump” ethos.
The presale has raised $4.8M so far, with tokens priced at $0.0002837 and dynamic APY staking live for early holders. Standout features include holder-only trading competitions with leaderboard rewards and a Maxi Fund treasury earmarked for liquidity and partnerships.
Get Ahead of Next BIG Meme Coin Launch Here
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
The post FOMC September 2026 Odds for a Rate Hike Surpass 50% appeared first on Cryptonews.
Kraken told customers on Tuesday that withdrawals were stuck, the second service fault the exchange disclosed in a single day.
The notice went up shortly after 2 p.m. UTC. Kraken said it had identified the cause. However, it gave no timeline, no list of affected coins, and no account of what broke.
Funding Faults Pile Up at Kraken
Funding is the exchange’s term for money moving in and out, meaning deposits and withdrawals. Trading, the website and Kraken’s data feeds all stayed operational.
“We are aware of a temporary hiccup affecting withdrawals, which may be briefly delayed at this time,” read an excerpt on Kraken status page.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
The company’s status board listed 23 of its 725 funding services as degraded. Most of that damage predates Tuesday.
On September 4, the exchange paused deposits across more than 20 blockchain networks. Cosmos (ATOM) and Celestia (TIA) were among them, and that incident remains open.
A Bad Week Before a Big Year
Hours earlier, Kraken reported that account balance histories had gone stale. Daily figures have since recovered, while hourly figures remain behind.
Reliability carries unusual weight for the firm right now. BeInCrypto reported last week that Kraken parent Payward is wiring itself into Nasdaq and the London Stock Exchange. Meanwhile, the firm keeps delaying its own IPO, now aimed at 2027.
Institutional clients judge an exchange on whether money moves when they ask for it. A run of funding faults complicates that pitch. Payward is also preparing to sell tokenized London stocks to investors in 110 countries.
Kraken has not said what failed. Whether Tuesday’s problem is new, or another symptom of the September 4 outage, the next update should say.
The post Kraken Says Withdrawals Are Stuck as Funding Problems Hit 23 Services appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Kalshi has lost an emergency injunction request at the 10th Circuit, leaving Utah free to enforce its gambling laws while the prediction market operator pursues its appeal.
Summary
- The 10th Circuit denied Kalshi’s request for an injunction pending appeal.
- Utah may now bring civil or criminal enforcement action against the prediction market operator.
- States have won 12 consecutive federal rulings since an earlier Minnesota decision favored prediction markets.
- New Jersey has asked the Supreme Court to settle the federal-versus-state jurisdiction dispute.
Utah can enforce its gambling laws against Kalshi
Legal analyst Daniel Wallach said in an X post that the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had denied Kalshi’s emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal.
Kalshi sought temporary protection after a federal judge allowed Utah to apply its gambling restrictions to the platform’s sports event contracts. The requested order would have stopped the state from bringing civil or criminal proceedings while the appeal remained before the 10th Circuit.
With the request denied, Wallach said Utah may enforce its laws during the appeal. The appellate court’s decision does not settle Kalshi’s challenge to the earlier ruling, but it removes the temporary protection the company sought against state action.
Kalshi initially sued Utah earlier in 2026 as the state prepared to tighten its restrictions on prediction markets. The company argued that Utah could not regulate contracts listed on an exchange registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
In August, U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby rejected Kalshi’s request to prevent enforcement. According to the Associated Press, Shelby found that the federal law cited by the platform did not stop Utah from applying its gambling rules.
Utah Attorney General Derek Brown said after the district court ruling that his office intended to enforce state law, although officials were still considering their available options. Utah’s rules prohibit proposition betting on events within a game, a category that accounts for an important part of the sports products offered by prediction markets.
Kalshi disagreed with Shelby’s decision and moved the dispute to the 10th Circuit. Its emergency filing sought protection during that process, rather than a final appellate ruling on whether federal derivatives law overrides Utah’s restrictions.
Kalshi argues that sports contracts fall under CFTC control
Kalshi’s legal position rests on its status as a CFTC-regulated designated contract market. The company classifies its sports products as event contracts or swaps governed by the federal Commodity Exchange Act, rather than wagers controlled by individual states.
State regulators dispute that description. Their lawsuits and enforcement actions generally argue that contracts tied to game results, player performance, and other sporting events function as sports bets, requiring operators to follow state licensing, age-limit, and consumer-protection rules.
The distinction determines whether Kalshi can provide the same sports markets across the United States or must change its products according to local gambling laws. State victories could require geofencing, product removals, or licensing in jurisdictions that classify the contracts as wagers.
For American users, the unresolved issue means access may depend on where they live. As crypto.news previously reported, 38 active prediction-market cases were pending across 21 states as of Sep. 8, while exchanges had received cease-and-desist letters in at least 10 jurisdictions, according to Casino.org’s Prediction Market Litigation Tracker.
Court orders have already produced different rules among states. Washington directed Kalshi to restrict contracts covering sports, elections, politics, entertainment, culture, technology, and science, while allowing markets tied to commodities, climate, economics, and finance to remain available.
In Michigan, a preliminary injunction required Kalshi to keep sports contracts unavailable to residents. The Michigan court order exposed the platform to possible fines of $500,000 for every day a court found it out of compliance.
States extend their winning run in federal courts
Wallach said the Utah order extended a run of 12 consecutive federal court decisions favoring states over prediction market operators since a Minnesota ruling had gone the other way.
In the Minnesota case, a federal judge granted preliminary relief that blocked the state’s proposed prediction-market ban shortly before it was due to take effect. Later decisions, however, have increasingly allowed regulators to apply state gambling laws while the underlying cases proceed.
One of the most important rulings came from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Aug. 28. A unanimous panel concluded at the preliminary stage that Kalshi’s sports products were likely bets rather than swaps, allowing Nevada regulators to enforce their gaming requirements.
“The CFTC is not a national gambling regulator,” Circuit Judge Ryan Nelson wrote in the 9th Circuit opinion.
The Nevada appellate decision conflicted with an April ruling from the 3rd Circuit in Kalshi’s case against New Jersey. In that dispute, a divided panel kept an injunction in place and found that Kalshi had shown a reasonable likelihood of proving that its sports event contracts qualify as swaps under federal law.
According to Wallach, states have prevailed in 35 of 41 rulings involving requests for preliminary injunctions, temporary restraining orders, stays, or injunctions pending appeal. The figure represents an 85% success rate for states in those procedural contests.
Such orders do not always decide the full legal merits of a case. Courts considering emergency or preliminary relief assess factors including the applicant’s likelihood of success, possible irreparable harm and the public interest before the underlying litigation is complete.
Supreme Court petition could settle the jurisdiction dispute
New Jersey has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the 3rd Circuit decision that favored Kalshi. Filed on Sep. 2, the state’s petition asks whether the Commodity Exchange Act prevents states from applying sports-gambling laws to contracts offered through a CFTC-registered market.
The Supreme Court petition argues that Congress did not clearly remove state authority over sports wagering when it passed the Dodd-Frank Act. New Jersey also disputes the 3rd Circuit’s finding that the contracts may qualify as swaps covered by the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction.
Kalshi has maintained that federal oversight preempts conflicting state restrictions. Addressing New Jersey’s filing in a statement previously shared with Front Office Sports, the company said it remained confident in the lower courts’ rulings and that the petition had not changed its position.
The Supreme Court has not agreed to hear the case. Kalshi may respond to the petition before the justices decide whether to grant review, a step that requires support from at least four members of the court.
Polymarket traders were assigning a 31% probability that the Supreme Court would accept a sports event contract case by the end of 2026, according to market data cited in the original report. A prediction-market price represents participants’ trading positions rather than a judicial forecast or confirmation that the court will act.
DBS and Citi settled a US dollar cross-border payment between Singapore and New York on September 5 using tokenized deposits on SWIFT’s shared ledger, clearing the transfer in minutes over a weekend when a conventional payment can take up to two business days.
The banks used tokenized deposits, commercial-bank money issued on a blockchain, with SWIFT’s ledger acting as an orchestration layer that matched and netted the obligations between the two institutions before final settlement ran through existing payment rails.
“In a global digital economy that never sleeps, businesses need to move money more quickly and efficiently across borders to stay competitive,” said Rachel Chew, Group Chief Operating Officer and Co-Head of Digital Assets, Global Transaction Services at DBS.
DBS Builds Out Tokenized Rails
DBS, Southeast Asia’s largest bank, launched DBS Token Services in 2024 and is the only Asian-headquartered bank in the 12-member core design group behind SWIFT’s ledger.
It also runs DBS Treasury Tokens, a permissioned blockchain for corporate treasury and liquidity management, and has teamed with Ripple and Franklin Templeton to launch tokenized repo markets on the XRP Ledger, listing Franklin’s sgBENJI money market token and Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin on DBS Digital Exchange.
Asia’s outbound cross-border payments are projected to reach $24 trillion by 2033, up from $13.5 trillion in 2025, according to figures cited in the announcement, which also said half of finance leaders are exploring blockchain-based tools for liquidity and foreign exchange management.
“This milestone with DBS on Swift’s ledger reflects Citi’s commitment to building financial infrastructure for our clients and partners that is always-on, interoperable and fit for the future,” noted Mridula Iyer, Head of Services for Asia South at Citi.
Banks Line Up on Swift’s Ledger
The DBS-Citi payment follows the first live tokenized deposit transfer on the network, which HSBC and Standard Chartered ran on August 19.
“With our new ledger capability, we’re extending the trust and stability of established finance into the frontiers of digital money,” said Thierry Chilosi, Chief Business Officer at Swift. Seventeen banks from six continents, among them ANZ, BNP Paribas, MUFG, UBS and Wells Fargo, are piloting live transactions on the ledger, which Swift announced in September 2025 and had Consensys prototype.
Bank of America’s Mark Monaco has said clients are not “beating down the door” for tokenized deposits, though interest is growing. A competing US network, The Bridge, is being built by The Clearing House with JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo for the first half of 2027 and is open to all US banks.
The post DBS and Citi Settle 24/7 Cross-Border Dollar Payment on SWIFT’s Ledger appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Republican senators say the CLARITY Act is likely to fail when the Senate returns next week, according to Semafor. Crypto’s lobbying arm calls that pessimism a bargaining tactic rather than a count of votes.
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act would decide which US regulator polices crypto trading. It has never reached a full Senate vote. The blockage is ethics language covering President Donald Trump and his family.
Named Republicans Put a Date on the Collapse
Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota told Semafor the outlook was poor. Two Democratic aides said negotiations over the ethics provision have barely moved since July.
“…if there’s no interest in the White House in trying to bridge the gap on the ethics language, it is going to fail,” Semafor reported, citing Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Senators vote at 2:15 p.m. ET on September 15, next Tuesday. That vote needs 60 supporters and only opens debate, so it cannot pass the bill by itself. The White House says Trump still wants the law and has already conceded sweeping ethics terms.
Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas added that voters back home never raise the bill with him.
Democrats disagree. A Reuters/Ipsos survey in August found most Americans disapproved of the money the president’s family drew from digital assets.
The Lobby Says the Quotes Are Positioning
Alexander Grieve, vice president of government affairs at crypto investment firm Paradigm, reads the gloom as theater. He argues lawmakers leak pessimism to reporters to extract last-minute concessions from the White House or Senate leadership.
Bank lobbying and advertising money is still moving ahead of the vote, he notes, which would be odd spending on a corpse. He accepts the calendar is a real problem.
“But this thing is not dead, not by a longshot,” Grieve noted.
Traders side with the senators, with Polymarket pricing 2026 enactment near 16%, down from above 75% earlier this year.
BeInCrypto reported in August that the bill would likely fail at this month’s vote, and that Grayscale researchers saw the industry advancing without new legislation.
The Senate then disappears for almost all of October before the Nov. 3 midterms. Tuesday’s vote decides whether the ethics fight was ever a negotiation or simply a wall.
The post CLARITY Act Death Watch: Crypto Lobby Says Washington Is Bluffing appeared first on BeInCrypto.
In January 2026, a new community popped up on Reddit, the online message board site. Called /r/GirlDinnerDiaries, it now has a sizable 6 million members and invites people to post a photo of a meal—whether it’s something you’re eating while you post or another meal that gets at your state of mind—along with an anonymous blurb venting or soliciting advice. “My partner only feels disgust at the idea of me as a mom,” reads one. “I feel like it’s never going to be OK,” says another.
The point is to activate the feeling of sharing over food, but over the internet. The snapshots are messy, yet evocative: French fries consumed in a nightclub, a breakfast burrito in a diner, yesterday’s lunch eaten hastily over a keyboard with a plastic fork. The posts wax poetic about the fate of marriages and the bizarre serendipity of life. Reading these dishy dispatches feels like staying up late with friends you rarely see, working over all that’s gone down in your life in search of some meaning.
Why are millions of people so captivated by these nameless confessionals served with a side of candid, unposed food photography? Scientists who study self-disclosure—the act of sharing personal, sensitive information with others—have some thoughts about why we share our deepest, darkest secrets on the internet.
Revealing ourselves builds trust
Talking about yourself feels pleasurable, and there’s science to back that up, says Leslie John, a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School and author of the book Revealing. She points to experiments conducted by psychologists Diana Tamir and Jason Mitchell, where people having their brains scanned in an fMRI machine answered either normal trivia questions or questions about themselves. “They found that in the ones that got to self-disclose, the pleasure centers of the brain were activated,” says John. “That’s pretty powerful.”
Sharing feels good because it’s necessary for human social interaction, John speculates. “When you self-disclose, when you take the social risk—and it really is a social risk—of sharing something a little bit personal, a little sensitive, you’re modeling that you trust the recipient. That gesture is implicitly saying, ‘Hey, I trust you not to make a fool out of me; otherwise, I wouldn’t be sharing this.’ And when you do that, it causes the other person to trust you back. So trust begets trust,” she says.
In fact, John’s work has found that people are more interested in dating a hypothetical person who admits that they’ve done something terrible than someone who declines to answer the question. “It’s better sometimes to admit the worst possible thing than to conspicuously abstain,” she says.
Posting a photo of a paper plate with yesterday’s messy BBQ and a brownie you ate while processing getting fired is, in the age of the perfectly lit Instagram plate, a similar kind of move. “It’s super relatable,” says John. “Showing things that are unvarnished is kind of paradoxically attractive.”
How the internet changes the equation
Psychologists and sociologists used to think of self-disclosure mainly in the sense of sharing with people you know in real life, says sociologist Tamar Ashuri of Tel Aviv University. “The original studies back in the ’50s and ’60s on self-disclosure focus on face-to-face interactions,” she says. “In intimate relationships, people disclose, and it’s kind of an ultimate goal. You can’t sustain an intimate relationship if you don’t.” Another situation where people might self-disclose is the stranger-on-a-train context. It’s also face-to-face, but there is no lasting link, so the risks of disclosure are lower.
But the arrival of the internet, and social media especially, produced new forms of self-disclosure that scientists are still working to characterize and understand. In the case of /r/GirlDinnerDiaries, says Ashuri, posters are anonymously disclosing intimate thoughts in a public forum, stranger-on-a-train style, with no face-to-face interaction, and yet it is still somehow gratifying.
That combination emerged almost by accident, says the subreddit’s founder, a young woman named Taylor, who asked to be identified only by her first name. She had been posting frequently in another community, called Girl Dinner, and noticed a split: Some people wanted to know the slice-of-life stories behind the meals, while others only wanted to see the food. She created Girl Dinner Diaries as an overflow space for people who wanted both—and it took off almost immediately. “One of my favorite things is going out with the girls for some drinks and some appys and venting, getting it all off my chest,” Taylor says. Girl Dinner Diaries offered a place to do that without leaving the couch.
Not every diary is wrenching. Taylor’s favorite post is a happy one: A woman woke up to discover that her husband had created a scavenger hunt for her, then shared a photo of the pasta with burrata they ate that evening. “It looked quite fancy,” Taylor says. “It looked very delicious.”
Whether the story is heartwarming or devastating, the meal is an essential part of the formula. “Food provides a very positive, ordinary, culturally familiar medium,” Ashuri says. “But in this case, and this is what makes it so special, it allows people to express extraordinary issues…The food makes the extraordinary feel more ordinary.” She gives the example of one recent post, in which a woman posted a birthday cake and revealed that she and her son had celebrated his birthday in a domestic violence shelter. “I think this combination is extremely significant,” she says.
The setup allows posters to reveal what are sometimes extreme experiences to a community gathered around a shared sensibility—with the unifying force of a leftover chimichanga presiding over it all. Food helps make the extreme relatable. The subreddit also tightly controls who can enter the conversation: Only approved commenters are allowed to respond, adding a layer of protection to a forum built around unusually intimate disclosures.
Should we all be self-disclosing more?
There’s a happy medium to everything—don’t, perhaps, take to the web with every mental dip or life hiccup. And sharing online may not bring the same benefits as sharing in real life, cautions John. “Social media in so many ways facilitates self-disclosure,” she says. “But in many ways this medium doesn’t give you the benefit you’re looking for (e.g., real social bonding, connectedness).”
Indeed, research suggests that people who post to social media every day tend to score worse on measures of mental health. Posting online can give easy access to reassurance from others, but this behavior can sometimes become destructive—if we don’t get the reassurance we seek, that’s a big blow, and constant reassurance may not help in solving the larger problems.
But John thinks that in general, offline, we overestimate the harms of oversharing, while underestimating the costs of staying silent.
The impulse to put an experience into words may help even when no one else reads them. Some of social psychologist James Pennebaker’s research suggests that privately writing about traumatic events can provide significant psychological relief, and even boost the immune systems of some patients.
John never really applied her findings about disclosure to her own life, though, until she was working on her book about sharing. “Every time in my life that I could think of where I overshared, where I felt that cringe of TMI, it sucked in the moment. But every single time there was something amazing and redeeming in the long haul about it,” she says. “That made me think, ‘Oh wow, the decision we’re making is systematically biased’…You get immediate negative social feedback, but there are benefits too. People trust you, people like you, people confide in you. Those come down the road.”
That journey never left him. When the war ended, Europe was filled with people who had also lost their homes, their families and, in many cases, nearly their lives. Around 11 million people were displaced in Germany: Holocaust survivors, former prisoners of war, forced laborers, and others left in camps, waiting for the world to decide what came next.
My grandfather returned to Europe and put his medical training to work for people whose own lives had been broken by the same war he had fled. He joined the UN Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, one of the first humanitarian agencies and a precursor to UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency. In a camp in Göttingen, Germany, he treated tuberculosis, typhoid, and people whose bodies had survived the war but still bore its scars.
The world had learned, at unbearable human cost, what happens when people fleeing war have nowhere safe to go. Through WWII, Families were turned away from protection, people returned to countries where they feared for their lives, and millions were left in camps because home was no longer safe or even existed at all.
Correct Way To Use a Wallet
Telegraph Fantasy Football tips: Game Week 3
Government urged to make Cotswold Airport major drone hub and unlock 450 jobs
-
Tech9 hours agoMemory prices are slowing because buyers ran out of money
-
NewsBeat7 hours agoEngland up in reading, maths and science rankings as Scotland and Wales dip
-
Business11 hours agoEgyptian TV Presenter Sarah Khalifa, 11 Others Sentenced To Death In Major Drug Trafficking Case In Cairo
-
Tech11 hours agoStrong Password Policy and Password Manager Guide
-
Crypto World11 hours agoVisa expands stablecoin card network to 160 programs
-
NewsBeat6 hours agoTehran’s assertive rhetoric signals a new and dangerous phase in conflict
-
Politics6 hours agoThe Ultimate September Reset Guide: How To Refresh Your Mind And Life This Autumn
-
Tech6 hours agoGoogle’s revived nuclear power plant gets $1.9B loan from US government
-
Business11 hours agoClaim Your Share Of $50 Million Disney Streaming Price Settlement By Sept. 8 Tonight
-
Business9 hours agoUS-Canada tariffs: Canada braces for prolonged trade war as counter-tariffs on US take effect
-
Tech6 hours agoESP32-P4 Powers Video Alarm Clock
-
Crypto World10 hours agoArm Stock: Arm Extends Reach To Physical AI
-
Fashion7 hours agoNew tops for women from EGO
-
Sports6 hours agoThere’s only one Ricky Hatton – Special Edition on sale now
-
Business6 hours agoCorning Stock Climbs On Multibillion-Dollar Verizon Network Deal
-
Entertainment6 hours agoYou Can See Everything Trailer Reveals A24’s Elizabeth Holmes Documentary
-
Crypto World6 hours ago
Zcash (ZEC) Rockets 2,200% as Privacy Coins Become Crypto’s Biggest Outlier
-
Sports5 hours agoHow Much Is Florida State Coach Mike Norvell’s Buyout? Contract Details In 2026
-
Fashion5 hours agoPhia Is the Shopping App That Styles You From Your Own Closet
-
Crypto World11 hours agoStablecoins could save South Korean merchants up to $3.8 billion a year, budget office says
You must be logged in to post a comment Login