Validators would still be paid the same way for doing the same work, and they keep all the transaction fees and tips they earn from building blocks. Only the newly created ETH gets burned. The deduction from validator rewards arrives slowly, phasing in over 18 months, with about six months before that while the upgrade ships, so roughly two years to adjust.

Six researchers signed the proposal, including Justin Drake of the Ethereum Foundation. It landed days before the deadline for smaller changes to be considered for Hegotá, Ethereum’s next network upgrade.

The problem, as the authors see it, is that staking never stops paying. Even if every ETH were staked, the yield would still sit near 1.5%, so there is always a reason to add more.

Jérôme de Tychey, one of the proposal’s authors, projects more than 70 million ETH staked by January 2028 if nothing changes. Past a certain level, the proposal states, extra stake makes Ethereum less secure rather than more, because the ETH ends up held by exchanges and staking providers instead of its owners, while small individual stakers get squeezed out.

About 41 million ETH is staked today, or close to 34% of supply. Another 2.5 million sits in the queue waiting to be activated, trackers show, a wait of six weeks or more, and nobody is queuing to leave.

Ethereum limits how fast validators can join or leave, so both directions form a line. The cap exists so a large bloc can’t enter or exit fast enough to destabilize the network. Entry queue is ETH waiting to start staking, exit queue is ETH waiting to stop. Currently about 57,600 ETH a day can activate.

Bybit has taken another step toward expanding its regulated business in Europe after its Austria-based payments unit, Bybit Payments GmbH, received an electronic money institution (EMI) license from the country’s Financial Market Authority. The approval gives the exchange a clearer regulatory foundation to introduce payment-related products alongside its existing Europe-focused platform.

In an announcement shared on Tuesday, Bybit said the EMI authorization enables its future payment capabilities, which may eventually include person-to-person transfers, merchant payment services, open banking functionality, and card products. For users and partners, the practical impact is that Bybit is positioning to offer payment rails and e-money services under a supervisory framework rather than relying solely on third-party arrangements.

Key takeaways

• Bybit Payments GmbH has received an electronic money institution license from Austria’s Financial Market Authority.
• The authorization is intended to support future payment and e-money products, potentially including P2P, merchant solutions, open banking, and cards.
• Payments will be offered through Bybit.eu alongside existing services from a separate Austrian crypto-licensed entity.
• Bybit EU GmbH continues to operate under EU MiCA authorization (granted in May 2025), with responsibilities kept distinct from the EMI permissions.
• Bybit stated Malta is excluded, citing MiCA passporting requirements that must be met for each jurisdiction.

Austria approval lays groundwork for regulated e-money and payments

The EMI license centers on Bybit Payments GmbH’s ability to provide regulated electronic money and payment services. Bybit did not describe a specific go-live date for any particular product, but it tied the authorization to a broader plan to expand payments features as they are introduced.

For institutional and business users, this matters because payment services typically require ongoing regulatory oversight that extends beyond exchange operations. By obtaining an EMI license, Bybit can create a more direct, jurisdictionally supervised pathway to integrate with banks, payment providers, and enterprises—potentially improving operational control and reducing dependence on external payment infrastructure.

How Bybit plans to split roles across two Austrian entities

Bybit’s European structure now hinges on two different Austrian entities, each carrying different regulatory permissions. The exchange said Bybit Payments GmbH will manage the EMI and payment-related activity as e-money and payment products are launched. Meanwhile, Bybit EU GmbH—another Austrian entity—remains responsible for crypto services under EU Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).

According to Bybit, Bybit EU GmbH is authorized to provide crypto custody, exchange, placement, and transfer services. This separation is designed to keep permissions and obligations distinct: one entity under the crypto regime for crypto-asset activities, and the other under the payments regime for electronic money and regulated payment products.

Bybit also said both services will be made available through Bybit.eu, suggesting the user-facing platform will continue to act as a single destination while the underlying compliance responsibilities are managed by the appropriate licensed entity.

Which regions will have access—and why Malta is missing

Bybit Payments GmbH’s services are expected to run through Bybit.eu for users across the European Economic Area (EEA), with an exception: Malta.

Bybit did not give a specific operational reason for the exclusion. Instead, it referenced its own website guidance, stating that services are offered only in jurisdictions where applicable MiCA passporting requirements have been met. The statement suggests that regulatory coverage for the overall Bybit offering—including how crypto and payments are packaged for particular regions—depends on whether passporting conditions have been satisfied.

For readers, the key takeaway is that licensing alone may not automatically translate into immediate availability across every EEA jurisdiction. Even when an entity is licensed in one country, market access can hinge on broader cross-border permissions tied to the regulatory framework involved.

Why the milestone could change how Bybit partners with banks

Beyond product expansion, Bybit framed the EMI license as a relationship-strengthening development with banks, payment providers, and enterprises. Bybit suggested the new approval could also reduce reliance on third-party payment infrastructure.

That shift is particularly relevant in Europe, where fintech and crypto firms often face a trade-off: speed to market versus the cost and complexity of building and maintaining compliant payment operations. Establishing an EMI license can support more direct routing of payment flows and potentially help standardize integrations with counterparties. It may also make it easier for partners to understand which part of Bybit’s business is responsible for regulated payment activities.

At the same time, it remains to be seen how quickly Bybit will convert the license into concrete consumer-facing offerings. An EMI authorization provides a regulatory capability, but product rollouts—especially those involving card services or open banking—typically require additional implementation work and coordination with payment networks and partners.

Related: Crypto exchange Bybit launches in Indonesia after NOBI acquisition

Investors and users should watch how Bybit translates the EMI license into specific payment features on Bybit.eu, and whether the exchange later broadens availability to additional jurisdictions currently excluded—particularly Malta. The other open question is the pace of integration between the MiCA-authorized entity and the newly licensed EMI unit, since the two permissions are meant to stay distinct even if the experience is unified.

Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan said on Aug. 4 that the crypto industry would continue expanding even if the U.S. Senate fails to advance the CLARITY Act before its August recess.

In a new investor memo, Hougan said crypto “will be fine” without immediate congressional action. He argued that Securities and Exchange Commission rulemaking could provide an alternative path while traditional financial companies continue adopting digital assets. His assessment is a forward looking industry view, not a confirmed regulatory outcome.

The bill’s immediate prospects remain uncertain. The Senate’s Aug. 4 floor schedule did not include H.R. 3633, and the chamber’s official list of pending cloture motions named two unrelated matters. No cloture filing for the CLARITY Act had been announced by the end of Tuesday’s session.

CLARITY Act faces an Aug. 5 procedural test

Hougan identified Wednesday, Aug. 5, as the practical deadline for Senate leaders to file cloture and preserve a possible Friday procedural vote. Senate Rule XXII ordinarily requires a cloture vote one hour after the chamber meets on the following calendar day but one after filing. Sixteen senators must sign the motion.

Ending debate on legislation normally requires three fifths of senators duly chosen and sworn, or 60 votes when every seat is filled. The measure could move faster under a unanimous consent agreement, but such an arrangement would require cooperation that Senate leaders have not announced.

The Senate Banking Committee approved the bill 15 to 9 on May 14. Senator Cynthia Lummis later released a merged 616 page proposal combining work by the Banking and Agriculture committees. The revised measure remains on the Senate legislative calendar but has not received a full chamber vote.

As crypto.news reported on Aug. 4, government funding legislation and nominations occupied the available floor schedule. The omission does not legally kill the CLARITY Act, but it leaves little time for debate, amendments and a final vote before lawmakers depart.

SEC rules could help but cannot replace the bill

Hougan based his fallback scenario on comments from SEC Chair Paul Atkins, who said the agency was “ready, willing, and able” to address several matters covered by the legislation. Hougan believes rules adopted under Atkins could initially prove more favorable to innovation than compromises required for a bipartisan law. He said they “may even be an accelerant,” although no such effect is assured.

Atkins has supported agency action through Project Crypto, including work on token classifications, capital formation and securities market rules. However, he has also backed congressional legislation. In an official speech, Atkins said statutory language provides the strongest protection against future regulators reversing the current approach.

The distinction matters because the CLARITY Act would divide digital asset jurisdiction between the SEC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The updated congressional summary covers token disclosures, digital commodity exchanges, customer property, decentralized finance, stablecoin rewards and anti money laundering requirements.

The SEC can change rules governing securities, registered intermediaries and token offerings within its existing authority. It cannot independently grant the CFTC nationwide authority over digital commodity spot markets. SEC rules could therefore provide part of the framework, but not the complete structure Congress is considering.

As previously reported by crypto.news, agency rules would also be less durable than legislation. A future commission could revise or withdraw them through another regulatory process. A federal statute could only be changed through new congressional action.

Political disputes still threaten Senate support

Seven Democratic senators said on July 22 that the updated Republican text “falls short.” Catherine Cortez Masto, Angela Alsobrooks, Cory Booker, Ruben Gallego, John Hickenlooper, Mark Warner and Raphael Warnock requested stronger rules for elected officials, consumer protection, illicit finance, conflicts of interest and market integrity. They also said negotiations would continue.

The merged bill already contains an ethics division that would restrict covered officials and spouses from issuing or sponsoring digital assets for compensation while in office. It would also require additional financial disclosures. Democrats have not accepted those provisions as sufficient.

Banks are separately seeking tighter restrictions on rewards linked to payment stablecoin balances. The current proposal prohibits interest paid solely for holding stablecoins but allows certain activity and loyalty rewards. Banking groups argue that some exceptions could still resemble deposit interest and draw funds away from community lending.

Prediction markets have created another dispute. Twelve senators asked committee leaders to prevent CFTC registered platforms from listing contracts that resemble sports wagers or casino games. They also requested protections for state authority, tribal sovereignty and tribal gaming compacts.

These disagreements make the 60 vote threshold harder to reach. They also show why SEC action cannot resolve every issue. Questions involving CFTC powers, banking law, political ethics and tribal gaming require broader federal authority or additional legislation.

A delay would move the fight into a harder calendar

The Senate’s published calendar places lawmakers in a state work period from Aug. 10 through Sept. 11. Failure to act this week would not remove H.R. 3633 from the calendar, but it would push consideration into a period crowded by government funding, the November election and other unfinished legislation.

Hougan described that outcome as a “walking dead” period in which the bill remains alive without a clear route to passage. He suggested lawmakers could revisit it in September or attach provisions to a year end package. Those possibilities remain speculative because Senate leaders have announced neither a fall vote nor an omnibus strategy.

Polymarket traders currently give the CLARITY Act a 23% chance of becoming law by Dec. 31, down from 27% when Hougan published his memo. The market has attracted approximately $3.9 million in volume. Its price measures trader sentiment and is not an official congressional forecast.

A cloture filing on Aug. 5 would be the next concrete development. Without one, ordinary Senate procedure would leave almost no route to a pre recess vote. The industry could still receive narrower SEC rules, but the long term allocation of U.S. digital asset oversight would remain unsettled.

That’s because the ability to write messages is tied to a quirky Bitcoin feature called OP_RETURN, which lets anyone attach a small text string to a transaction. The text gets permanently timestamped into the blockchain alongside the transfer of money. The function exists for technical purposes; mainly, developers use it to timestamp documents or embed small proofs. That said, users can use the function to leave personal notes.

The Coldcard hardware wallet exploit, first detected on July 30, has snowballed into a major self-custody breach, with confirmed losses now topping $100 million.

What people are actually writing

The plea that opened this article isn’t the only one. Several similar messages have surfaced, according to on-chain tracker Arkham Intelligence.

One reads “Please Please Please” alongside an address; another bluntly asks for “80% of my 5 BTC” back. Whether these come from genuine hack victims or opportunists capitalizing on the sympathy wave is difficult to verify.

Other messages are opportunistic rather than sympathetic.

One reads, “I clean btc, do kyc and cashout. I take 10%,” complete with a Telegram handle — a laundering pitch hoping to land the hacker as a client. Another begs, “1 BTC for my Bitcoin journey,” which is entirely unrelated to the hack. The sender seems to be using the hacker wallet’s spotlight to solicit money from strangers.

Three Missouri men have pleaded not guilty to a federal charge tied to an alleged plan to steal Bitcoin through a home invasion in Connecticut. 

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut announced the charges on Aug. 4 against Sedric Louis, 32, John Davis, 34, and Martel Williams, 27, all of St. Louis.

A New Haven grand jury returned a second superseding indictment on May 22. It charged the three defendants with conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery, commonly known as Hobbs Act robbery. Federal law allows a sentence of up to 20 years, although any punishment would depend on a conviction and the court’s findings.

According to the Justice Department, the defendants traveled to Connecticut between Aug. 21 and Aug. 24, 2024. Prosecutors allege that they obtained rental vehicles, air rifles and walkie talkies before watching the intended target and his parents for two days.

Bitcoin rose about 1.6% to trade near $63,700 on Aug. 4 after CNBC host Jim Cramer said he planned to sell his holdings because of concerns about quantum computing.

Cramer tied the decision to a CNBC interview with IBM Chairman and CEO Arvind Krishna. Krishna said investors should become “paranoid” about cryptocurrency security within three to four years. Cramer later said, “I’m going to sell mine.” Neither the size of his holdings nor evidence of an executed sale has been disclosed.

Bitcoin rises despite Cramer’s sell plan

Bitcoin climbed from an intraday low near $62,387 to as high as $64,117 before easing. The recovery left the asset about 1.6% higher over 24 hours, although the price remained inside the range that has controlled trading since the June decline.

The market reaction does not prove traders dismissed Cramer’s warning. Bitcoin was also absorbing Strategy’s recent sale, miner distribution estimates and the Coldcard security incident. As crypto.news reported, buyers continued defending the area above $60,000 despite those pressures.

The TradingView daily chart supplied with the story shows Bitcoin consolidating after its sharp June decline. Support remains near $60,000, while $65,000 to $67,000 is the main resistance zone. Volume near 5,950 BTC appeared modest compared with earlier selloff periods, suggesting the rebound still lacked strong participation.

A sustained move above $67,000 would strengthen the recovery case. Until that happens, the price remains range bound rather than in a confirmed new uptrend.

Quantum warning describes a future risk

Krishna’s three to four year estimate is a forecast, not proof that a quantum machine can currently break Bitcoin. IBM’s official roadmap targets a large scale, fault tolerant system called Starling for 2029. The company says the planned machine would use 200 logical qubits and perform 100 million quantum operations. IBM has not claimed that Starling could recover Bitcoin private keys.

Google Quantum AI tightened the theoretical risk estimate in March. Its researchers said a future cryptographically relevant quantum computer could solve the elliptic curve problem used by many digital assets with fewer than 500,000 physical qubits under stated hardware assumptions. The estimate was about 20 times lower than previous calculations.

However, Google described this as a future capability. It urged blockchains to begin moving toward post quantum cryptography before such machines become available. Current systems do not have the scale and error correction needed to conduct the proposed attack.

Glassnode has measured which Bitcoin outputs could face exposure if that capability emerges. Its May analysis classified 1.92 million BTC, or 9.6% of issued supply, as structurally exposed because the associated public keys are already visible.

It placed another 4.12 million BTC in an operationally exposed category linked largely to address reuse and custody practices. Glassnode explicitly said its study did not predict whether or when a practical quantum attack would become possible. As crypto.news reported, the figures measure exposure rather than an active theft risk.

Whale transfer and thin trading add caution

Blockchain tracker Lookonchain reported that a wallet holding 16,400 BTC, worth about $1.04 billion, transferred its full balance to a new address after seven months of inactivity.

The transaction was a wallet to wallet movement. The funds did not go directly to an identified exchange, meaning the transfer does not establish that the holder was preparing to sell. It may have reflected custody changes, security measures or internal wallet management.

Market depth remains a separate concern. The Kobeissi Letter, citing Kaiko data, said daily spot activity across 44 exchanges fell to about $15 billion, around 70% below its January peak.

The underlying Kaiko dataset was not available in a public report reviewed for this article. The $15 billion figure should therefore remain attributed to the post rather than treated as an independently confirmed market total.

Social media users also revived the “inverse Cramer” meme, which treats his bearish calls as contrarian buy signals. The meme reflects several widely discussed calls that later moved against him, but it is not a tested indicator and does not explain Bitcoin’s price movement by itself.

Bitcoin must reclaim $67,000

Bitcoin’s immediate test remains the $65,000 to $67,000 resistance band. A sustained close above that area, supported by stronger volume, would improve the short term structure. Failure to maintain the current recovery could return attention to $62,000 and then the key $60,000 support level.

The longer term question is whether developers, exchanges and custodians accelerate preparations before quantum computers become cryptographically relevant. Bitcoin companies have begun funding post quantum research, while BitGo recently introduced four wallet controls designed to measure and reduce public key exposure.

Cramer’s statement does not change Bitcoin’s current security, and no practical quantum computer is known to have broken its cryptography. The next verified developments would include evidence that Cramer completed a sale, movement of the 16,400 BTC toward an exchange, stronger spot volume or measurable progress on Bitcoin’s post quantum migration plans.