Connect with us

Crypto World

U.S. Investigates Deadly Strike on Wedding in Iran, Vance Says

Published

on

U.S. Investigates Deadly Strike on Wedding in Iran, Vance Says
An aerial view of funeral and burial ceremonies for victims of an alleged U.S. strike on a wedding party in Kuhestak, southern Iran, on Sept. 3, 2026. Iranian officials said four people, including a child, were killed and 68 injured in the strike. —Morteza Akhondi—Getty Images

The U.S. is investigating a strike on a wedding in southern Iran, Vice President J.D. Vance said Thursday, as reports suggest American weapons killed at least five people and injured dozens of others.

“We’re investigating it because obviously we care,” Vance told reporters. “We want to know.”

The strike represents the U.S.’s latest controversial action in its war with Iran, raising questions about its conduct and civilian harm. Washington and Tehran have escalated their attacks this week, ending a lull in hostilities since July.

But Vance said he was “extremely skeptical” about reports coming from Iranian state media, arguing they have “not been a very good scribe about what’s happened in the conflict thus far.”

Iranian state media reported that a residential building in Kuhestak was attacked on Tuesday evening, where a wedding was being celebrated. Among the casualties was a 4-year-old kid. Reuters and the New York Times independently verified footage from the scene and found that a wedding was taking place when the building was struck.

Advertisement

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that it “will respond to these savage crimes with firmness”—and responded to a broader barrage of American attacks by launching missiles and drones at sites used by the U.S. in Middle East states. The Iranian Red Crescent Society, a humanitarian group, also urged a probe from the International Criminal Court to assess potential violations of international law.

The U.S. Central Command said Wednesday it was already looking into reports of the incident but argued that the “U.S. military never targets civilians, unlike the [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps],” referring to Iran’s armed forces branch.

Vance also defended U.S. military action, telling reporters: “If we do make mistakes, again, this is a big difference between us and Iran: when our military makes mistakes, they learn from them to try to get better from them.”

What we know about the strike

On the evening of Sept. 1, CENTCOM reported strikes on military targets, including “air defense sites, radar systems, maritime assets and facilities, mine laying capabilities, and communications sites.”

Advertisement

Iranian media later reported four deaths and at least 68 injured in Kuhestak, a coastal town on the Strait of Hormuz, where trade has been bottlenecked since the start of the U.S.-Iran war in late February. The strikes happened at around 9:30 p.m. local time, per the Red Crescent.

Analyses of footage from the incident conducted by Reuters and the New York Times reveal that wedding guests were gathered in a Kuhestak building. Amid the celebration, what was likely a U.S. munition hit the building and, as the Times put it, “brought down the roof.”

Experts told Reuters and the Times that weapon fragments seen in Iranian media were consistent with what Americans have used.

The attacks on Kuhestak also hit a communications tower roughly 100 m away from the building. A human rights group told the Associated Press that one of the four people initially reported killed—a 16-year-old—was struck by shrapnel near the tower rather than at the wedding. Iranian state television said Thursday that a 22-year-old woman had since died in hospital following the strike, bringing the reported death toll to five.

Axios reported that CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper ordered an internal review of the strike. 

Advertisement

Civilian casualties raise concern

The Red Crescent sent a letter to the International Criminal Court Wednesday calling for “an independent, impartial, thorough, and effective investigation,” citing the “civilian character” of the strike’s location.

The organization also argued that under the Rome Statute, intentionally directing attacks on civilians and knowingly launching a clearly excessive attack may constitute “war crimes.” However, both Iran and the U.S. are nonparties to the Rome Statute, so the ICC does not have automatic jurisdiction over them.

Still, “the laws of war state that civilians are protected from military attacks,” Melanie O’Brien, a professor of international law at the University of Western Australia, tells TIME. “A wedding is not a military objective, particularly in a civilian residential building. It is clear that there was a direct missile hit to the home. This would render the attack unlawful.”

It’s also not the U.S.’s first involvement in strikes that hit civilian structures without obvious military use and that endangered or killed civilians. On the first day of the war with Iran on Feb. 28, a U.S. Tomahawk missile hit a primary school in Minab—just 30 km (18 mi) away from Kuhestak—where more than 100 children were killed.

Advertisement

O’Brien, however, says she is skeptical about any result from the U.S.-led investigation of the wedding strike: “The U.S. track record is to only investigate when allegations gain significant public traction, and even when any convictions occur, the penalties are minor or pardons are given.”

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Pineapple Financial’s Onchain Mortgage Records Cross $1B

Published

on

Pineapple Financial’s Onchain Mortgage Records Cross $1B

Pineapple Financial has moved more than $1 billion in residential mortgage records onto Injective, a layer-1 blockchain focused on financial applications, as part of a broader effort to migrate its historical loan portfolio onchain.

Pineapple plans to eventually migrate more than 29,000 funded mortgages worth over $10 billion onto the network, Injective said Friday. Each mortgage is represented by an onchain record tied to the underlying loan file, rather than being repackaged as a new mortgage security.

The records contain more than 500 data points, including loan-level information designed to support verification, audit trails and risk analysis. Pineapple’s dashboard shows that the migration now includes 2,079 mortgage records, up from 1,259 when the initiative launched in December 2025.

PAPL0, which tracks the mortgage records onchain, has an asset market cap of about $1.1 billion, up 48.2% over the past nine months, according to Token Terminal data. The tokens represent mortgage records rather than ownership of the underlying loans.

Advertisement

PAPL0 market cap on Injective. Source: Token Terminal

The mortgage migration is part of Pineapple’s broader relationship with Injective, which includes a separate $100 million Injective (INJ) digital asset treasury. Pineapple stakes INJ from the treasury, with Kraken serving as a primary validator for the holdings.

Related: The 5 types of real world assets being tokenized fastest onchain

Real estate tokenization gains momentum

Real estate has become a growing focus of the push to bring traditionally illiquid assets onchain, where tokenization can make property or investment interests easier to divide, transfer and access.

In June, Apex Group joined Goldman Sachs, Archax and LRC Group on a tokenized real estate fund whose shares are issued as digital tokens through Goldman Sachs’ Digital Asset Platform. The structure gives investors blockchain-based ownership of fund shares, rather than simply recording property data onchain.

Advertisement

Dubai has also expanded its real estate tokenization efforts. In February, the Dubai Land Department launched the second phase of a pilot after about $5 million in property had been tokenized, with transactions recorded on the XRP Ledger.

However, tokenized real estate still remains a small part of the broader real-world asset (RWA) market. The sector has about $226.5 million in distributed value, up 11.7% over the past 30 days, compared with $38.8 billion across tokenized RWAs tracked by RWA.xyz.

Tokenized real estate. Source: RWA.xyz

Magazine: Token buybacks are booming. But are they good for crypto projects?

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

QuFi Debuts Post-Quantum Verification Platform Using Bitcoin Testnet Proof

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Post-quantum security-focused startup QuFi Network has launched a verification platform aimed at protecting digital assets from potential future quantum computing attacks—without forcing users to upgrade or fork existing blockchain settlement layers. The approach, according to QuFi, is built around separating “verification” from “settlement,” so that transactions can be validated with post-quantum cryptography while value is ultimately settled on familiar networks.

Alongside the platform, QuFi introduced uBTC, a proof of concept that applies the verification system to Bitcoin collateral. uBTC is currently running on Bitcoin testnet, with redemptions designed to complete as standard Bitcoin transactions after the verification step produces cryptographic proofs that govern how value can move between settlement environments.

Key takeaways

  • QuFi’s platform validates transactions using post-quantum cryptography before settling them on existing blockchain networks, avoiding direct post-quantum signature deployment on-chain.
  • uBTC is a Bitcoin-focused proof of concept on testnet, verifying BTC collateral and issuing proofs that constrain value movement, while final settlement remains standard Bitcoin transactions.
  • QuFi says the design uses three post-quantum cryptographic standards—ML-DSA-65, SLH-DSA, and ML-KEM-1024—to handle signatures and secure key exchange.
  • The company’s stated goal is to reduce potential increases in storage, bandwidth, and computation that can come with using larger post-quantum primitives directly within blockchains.
  • The launch lands as multiple parts of the ecosystem experiment with quantum-resistant techniques, including Bitcoin signature proposals and efforts by institutions and protocol developers.

A verification layer instead of a blockchain upgrade

QuFi’s main product concept centers on an external verification layer. Rather than asking each settlement network to adopt new post-quantum cryptographic rules, QuFi proposes using a decentralized set of nodes to validate transactions with post-quantum cryptography ahead of settlement.

In QuFi’s framing, this architecture helps address one of the most common implementation challenges in the post-quantum transition: larger keys and signatures can translate into higher on-chain costs and performance overheads. By performing verification off the settlement path, QuFi says it aims to avoid added storage, bandwidth, and computing demands that could arise from integrating post-quantum primitives directly into individual chains.

The platform uses post-quantum standards that cover both digital signatures and key exchange. QuFi lists ML-DSA-65 and SLH-DSA for signatures, and ML-KEM-1024 for secure key exchange—building blocks it says are used to generate and check cryptographic proofs prior to settlement on existing blockchains.

Advertisement

uBTC on Bitcoin testnet: proofs constrain value movement

QuFi also launched uBTC, described as a proof-of-concept system applying the verification approach to Bitcoin. The system is currently operating on Bitcoin testnet4.

Per QuFi’s description, uBTC verifies BTC collateral and generates cryptographic proofs that govern how value moves between settlement environments. Importantly, QuFi says the redemptions ultimately settle as standard Bitcoin transactions. That means the Bitcoin network would not be required to run post-quantum signatures as part of the final settlement step—at least within this proof of concept.

For investors and developers tracking quantum-readiness, this structure is notable because it suggests one possible pathway for gradual migration: keep the “trust anchor” settlement layer stable while introducing stronger cryptographic verification elsewhere. The remaining question is how widely such proof-based settlement constraints can be adopted—especially when interacting with multiple networks and wallets that may have different assumptions about validation and finality.

Why the timing matters: quantum defense work is accelerating

QuFi’s announcement arrives amid a broader push across crypto to prepare for quantum-related risks. In August, StarkWare reportedly tested a quantum-resistant Bitcoin transaction on mainnet without requiring a fork. While the test demonstrated feasibility, the same coverage noted that the transaction required hours of computation and cost roughly $150 to $200, and it used a nonstandard format that required direct miner submission.

Advertisement

That earlier experiment highlights the practical friction QuFi is trying to bypass: even when post-quantum methods are technically possible, making them efficient and compatible with mainstream blockchain transaction flows is difficult. QuFi’s verification-layer approach is positioned as one way to reduce those integration costs.

Institutional and regulatory efforts are also part of the picture. According to prior reporting, banks and regulators across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia joined a pilot testing post-quantum wallets and onchain transfers using ML-DSA-65—one of the standards QuFi says it uses in its platform. Meanwhile, the Ethereum Foundation reportedly dropped its planned Poseidon hash function from a post-quantum architecture in favor of established alternatives such as SHA or BLAKE, reflecting a preference for reducing uncertainty by leaning on primitives with broader operational familiarity.

Bitcoin’s protocol-level experiments: trade-offs are already showing

Beyond off-chain or verification-layer approaches, some Bitcoin-focused quantum defenses are being explored directly at the protocol or signature scheme level. In August, Blockstream researchers published a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal for SHRINCS, an experimental post-quantum signature scheme intended to reduce size and performance costs associated with quantum-resistant signatures.

However, the same coverage also emphasized constraints and open issues. SHRINCS relies on stateful signatures to shrink signature size, which would require wallets to track signing keys previously used. It also remains early-stage, with no completed security proof referenced in that reporting, and it adds complexity that could increase user error risk if wallet implementations do not correctly manage state.

Advertisement

Compared with these protocol-level directions, QuFi’s emphasis is on reducing direct changes to settlement chains. For readers, the practical takeaway is that quantum readiness is not a single technology swap—it’s a spectrum of strategies, ranging from experimental signature schemes that modify transaction formats to separate verification systems that attempt to preserve existing settlement processes.

As QuFi’s platform and uBTC evolve, the key things to watch are how proof generation and verification perform under realistic load, whether the proofs integrate cleanly with broader wallet and settlement workflows, and how the project’s approach compares in cost and usability to protocol-level quantum defenses like SHRINCS. The next milestones—especially any expansion beyond testnet and any evidence of interoperability—will likely determine whether verification-layer quantum protection can move from concept to practical deployment.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

FinCEN Ties $13B in Crypto Scams to Non-US Operations

Published

on

FinCEN Ties $13B in Crypto Scams to Non-US Operations

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.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

AI Will Transform Work, But It Can’t Replace Relationships

Published

on

AI Will Transform Work, But It Can't Replace Relationships

This kind of change isn’t unique to real estate. It’s happening in education, finance, manufacturing, and virtually every other industry. No matter your profession, you may spend tremendous amounts of time on administrative work: writing spreadsheet formulas, analyzing documents, sending email, producing marketing content, organizing information, preparing presentations, and tackling repetitive tasks that add little strategic value.

What AI can’t replace

But whether you’re an attorney, consultant, plumber, financial advisor, or sales executive, your greatest value doesn’t come from routine administrative work. It comes from solving problems and building relationships.

Tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini can analyze contracts, create reports, summarize research, review documents, and automate a plethora of other tedious tasks. They allow professionals to spend less time on administration and more time serving their clients and building meaningful relationships. But AI isn’t replacing the qualities that matter most. 

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

How to Support Someone With Postpartum Depression

Published

on

How to Support Someone With Postpartum Depression

It doesn’t always look the way people expect, either. Sometimes, the moms who are suffering the most appear to have everything under control, says Jayme Scarfo, a licensed professional counselor in Surprise, Ariz., who specializes in working with pregnant and postpartum women. They’re showering, cooking, going to the gym, and insisting: “It’s hard, but don’t worry. I’ve got it.”

You don’t need to decide whether someone meets the diagnostic criteria before checking in. Describe what you’ve noticed without labeling her, Scarfo suggests: “I know this is a huge adjustment, and you haven’t seemed like yourself lately. How are you really doing?” Or: “You seem much more anxious than usual, and I’m worried about you. Can we talk about it?”

Consider who should initiate that conversation, too. “The best person to ask those hard questions is often going to be whoever she feels the least pressure to perform for,” Scarfo says. That might be a sister, best friend, therapist, or fellow mom—not necessarily her partner or mother. 

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

US Law Enforcement Group Moves to ‘Neutral’ position on CLARITY Act

Published

on

US Law Enforcement Group Moves to ‘Neutral’ position on CLARITY Act

The National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) has dropped its opposition to a cryptocurrency market structure bill scheduled for a vote later this month when the US Senate returns to session.

In a Thursday letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the US law enforcement group said that it was changing its position on the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act to “neutral.” The NSA cited the “significant work undertaken by Congress, the Administration, and stakeholders to navigate the many legal, regulatory, and enforcement considerations involved” in addressing the bill.

“At this time, we believe the most appropriate course is to step back and allow the legislative process to proceed to establish a clear, effective, and much needed regulatory framework,” said NSA president Troy Wellman and CEO and executive director Justin Smith.

The NSA previously expressed opposition to provisions in the CLARITY Act, saying it had “significant concerns” about amendments to exempt crypto mixers from many registration requirements. According to the group, the provision could “[impair] law enforcement’s ability to trace transactions and digital assets, and recover victims’ money.”

Advertisement

“The CLARITY Act protects the crypto industry, not the public,” said Sheriff Jim Skinner in a July video from the NSA.

Related: Rushed CLARITY Act vote could set legislation back, Gallego warns

Passed by the US House of Representatives in July 2025, the CLARITY Act has faced several hurdles since it was sent to the Senate for consideration. Although the Senate agriculture and banking committees passed their versions of the bill in 2026, many interest groups and lawmakers continue to raise concerns about aspects of the legislation, including stablecoin rewards, tokenized equities and potential conflicts of interest from President Donald Trump and his family. 

Before breaking in August, Thune filed a motion to hold a cloture vote on the bill on Sept. 15 after senators return from state work periods. 

Advertisement

US regulators to move forward without CLARITY?

In August, Trump stood alongside the heads of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and several digital asset companies to push for passage of CLARITY. SEC Chair Paul Atkins and CFTC Chair Michael Selig — both nominated by Trump — have signaled that their agencies would address crypto regulation if Congress were unable to pass the market structure bill.

Magazine: Token buybacks are booming. But are they good for crypto projects?

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

QuFi Rolls Out Post-Quantum Security Layer with uBTC Bitcoin Test

Published

on

QuFi Rolls Out Post-Quantum Security Layer with uBTC Bitcoin Test

Post-quantum infrastructure company QuFi Network has launched a verification platform designed to protect digital assets against future quantum computing threats without requiring changes to existing blockchain settlement networks.

The platform separates verification from settlement, using a decentralized network of nodes to validate transactions with post-quantum cryptography before they are settled on existing blockchain networks.

QuFi also launched uBTC, a proof-of-concept that applies the verification system to Bitcoin (BTC) and is currently operating on Bitcoin Testnet4. The uBTC system verifies BTC collateral and generates cryptographic proofs governing how value moves between settlement environments, while redemptions ultimately settle as standard Bitcoin transactions.

The platform uses three post-quantum cryptographic standards — ML-DSA-65, SLH-DSA and ML-KEM-1024 — for digital signatures and secure key exchange.

Advertisement

QuFi said the external verification layer is intended to avoid the added storage, bandwidth and computing demands that can come with adopting larger post-quantum signatures directly on individual blockchains.

Related: Crypto’s first quantum attack will look like unexplained breach: Quantus founder

Crypto ramps up quantum defenses

The platform arrives amid a series of recent efforts to prepare blockchain networks for potential quantum computing threats.

In August, StarkWare tested a quantum-resistant Bitcoin transaction on mainnet without requiring a fork. However, the transaction took hours of computation and cost roughly $150 to $200, and its nonstandard format required direct submission to a miner.

Advertisement

Jonas Nick announces the BIP SHRINCS proposal on Aug. 26. Source: Jonas Nick

The same month, banks and regulators across Europe, the Middle East and Asia joined a pilot testing post-quantum wallets and onchain transfers using ML-DSA-65, one of the same cryptographic standards incorporated into QuFi’s platform. Meanwhile, the Ethereum Foundation dropped the Poseidon hash function from its planned post-quantum architecture in favor of established alternatives such as SHA or BLAKE.

Bitcoin developers are also exploring protocol-level defenses. In August, Blockstream researchers published a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal for SHRINCS, an experimental post-quantum signature scheme designed to reduce the size and performance costs associated with quantum-resistant signatures.

The approach comes with trade-offs. SHRINCS uses stateful signatures to reduce their size, requiring wallets to track previously used signing keys. The scheme remains in an early stage without a completed security proof, and its design adds complexity and potential user failure modes.

Magazine: Bitcoin’s new quantum defenses, 18.9M SOL cancelled: Hodler’s Digest

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Recent Pi Network (PI) Price Forecasts, Ethereum’s (ETH) Potential, and More: Bits Recap September 4

Published

on

Pi Network’s native token has soared by 11% over the past month and has recently drawn mixed price predictions.

Ethereum seems ready to post substantial gains in September, while Shiba Inu may not fare so well this month.

PI’s Next Targets

The token has rebounded by roughly 35% from its July historic bottom and currently trades at around $0.095 (per CoinGecko). It remains among the most discussed cryptocurrencies, and, as expected, many industry participants have paid attention to its recent price performance and made interesting predictions.

X user OxNeena noted that PI is holding a key support zone around $0.09-$0.10 after a long consolidation, envisioning a massive uptrend above $0.30 if bulls reclaim $0.20.

Advertisement

Nakamoto Files argued that “something is moving behind the scenes” at Pi Network, while CT News believes that if the next altcoin rotation reaches PI, the coin could climb much faster than most think.

“The sleeping giant may not stay asleep forever,” they added.

Meanwhile, there has been growing speculation that the team behind Pi Network intends to implement a burning mechanism that could positively impact the price. However, the X account BSCN and other users rejected the development.

ETH in September?

The second-largest cryptocurrency jumped by nearly 5% over the past 24 hours, once again exceeding the psychological $2,500 mark. Some important factors, including strong demand from institutional investors, suggest that the coming weeks may deliver further gains.

SoSoValue’s data shows that spot ETH ETFs posted 12 consecutive green days before the run paused on September 2. The momentum quickly returned, with the following 24 hours adding another strong inflow.

Advertisement

The amount of ETH stored on cryptocurrency exchanges is another bullish element. Several days ago, the figure plunged to roughly 14.9 million coins, the lowest since the summer of 2016. Later on, there was a slight move north, yet the total remains below 15 million. Such a development signals that many investors prefer to avoid centralized platforms, thereby reducing immediate selling pressure.

At the same time, Ethereum’s seasonal performance serves as a warning. The asset has ended 7 of the past 11 Septembers in the red, and there hasn’t been a year in which both August and September closed with gains. Recall that last month delivered a 32% price increase for ETH.

SHIB’s Perspective

Unlike ETH, the self-proclaimed Dogecoin killer appears more likely to underperform in September than to post a major rally. The worrying signals include Shibarium’s stalled activity, the declining burn rate, and others.

Moreover, September has been a predominantly poor month for SHIB, with its valuation finishing the timeframe in the red three out of five times.

Advertisement

There is still a glimmer of optimism. Back in 2021, both August and September closed in the green, giving the SHIB Army hope that history could repeat itself, especially since the meme coin pumped by 7.5% last month.

The post Recent Pi Network (PI) Price Forecasts, Ethereum’s (ETH) Potential, and More: Bits Recap September 4 appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Tesla drops 6% as Cybercab faces federal audit

Published

on

Tesla drops 6% as Cybercab faces federal audit

Tesla Cybercabs stock crashed 6% in an hour this morning following news of a compliance audit.

Yesterday, Tesla commercially deployed Cybercabs onto public streets in Austin, Texas. By the end of the day, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) quietly opened a new probe, Audit Query AQ26002, of up to 1,000 Tesla vehicles, which would more than cover the company’s Cybercab fleet of only a few dozen vehicles.

Tesla stood behind its claim that “Cybercab is engineered to be the safest car on the road.”

Chart of Tesla from September 3 close through noon on September 4. Source: TradingView

The NHTSA doesn’t typically pre-approve vehicles for compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).

Manufacturers self-certify compliance with FMVSS standards, or request a limited exemption in advance.

Advertisement

Whenever the NHTSA suspects non-compliance with FMVSS standards, the agency may probe conduct and pursue remedies. In Tesla’s case, the NHTSA said it “is opening this AQ to examine the process and technical data on which Tesla relied when certifying the Cybercab and related issues.”

Cybercab has no permanently attached steering wheel, brake pedal, accelerator pedal, or rearview mirrors. In Tesla’s view, these omissions make the car look futuristic and are safe.

An Audit Query is not an allegation of misconduct. The NHTSA’s Cybercab notice doesn’t announce a recall or any current determination of noncompliance.

Read more: CHART: Value of Tesla’s BTC holdings have fallen by two-thirds

Advertisement

Tesla self-certifies Cybercab, sought no exemption

Last year, the NHTSA announced three proposed rules for automated vehicles without manual controls.

Its existing route allows manufacturers to sell up to 2,500 vehicles per year that don’t fully comply with traditional FMVSS.

Zoox is a recent example of an NHTSA audit ending unremarkably. In its case, the NHTSA closed its self-certification inquiry in August 2025, delivering a list of requests to Zoox that the company fulfilled. Zoox then received a formal, temporary FMVSS exemption for its commercial deployment that began July 2026.

Zoox may legally operate cars on public roads under this exemption.

Advertisement

Tesla chose the bolder route. It began commercial deployment with a self-certification, rather than proactively applying for a special exemption.

Tesla didn’t immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment on yesterday’s NHTSA audit.

By noon in Nasdaq’s trading session today, shares of Tesla were trading 6.5% below yesterday’s closing price despite a relatively sideways Nasdaq 100 index at -0.5%.

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on XBluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Quantum Memory: The Device That Breaks Bitcoin and Replaces It

Published

on

A 1997 Mailing List Holds a Clue to the Satoshi Puzzle

The most consequential device in cryptography does not exist yet. Quantum memory, an Oxford lecturer argues, will decide whether Bitcoin (BTC) breaks or gets replaced by something better.

Stefano Gogioso published that argument on Tuesday. He says the promise of quantum cryptography now rests on building a single piece of hardware.

“The development of portable long-term quantum memory will be one of the most consequential milestones of quantum technology. These devices will power an entirely new class of applications, such as quantum money, the ultimate incarnation of a digital store of value.”

Gogioso, a quantum computing lecturer at the University of Oxford and co-founder of quantum security firm Spooqy, told BeInCrypto.

The Bottleneck Quantum Money Never Cleared

An earlier report from the BeInCrypto Experts Council ended on an unsolved problem. Quantum money cannot be forged, because quantum states cannot be copied.

Advertisement

Nobody, however, can hold those states for long. The best laboratory systems keep one alive for seconds, which is why the case for quantum money has stayed theoretical.

Gogioso’s post sets out what a usable device would actually need. Stability measured in months, or ideally forever. Portability, first inside a shipping crate and later inside a pocket. Capacity running to billions of separate states.

He also rules out the more familiar idea of quantum RAM. Nothing in his design needs random access or in-place editing. States are drawn in order and spent once.

The distance between seconds and months is the entire problem.

Advertisement

Why Gogioso Calls Quantum Memory Inevitable

His answer arrives in two steps, and the first one is categorical.

A fault-tolerant quantum computer must keep fragile states alive at scale, against noise, for as long as a calculation runs. That requirement is what fault tolerance means.

Remove the computing, Gogioso argues, and a quantum memory device is what remains. Denying one therefore means denying the other.

The reframing matters commercially. Billions of dollars are already committed to fault-tolerant machines. The memory sits inside those roadmaps as an unavoidable step.

Advertisement

His second step concerns portability. Machines running at cryogenic temperatures will keep their states at the bottom of a refrigerator for years to come.

Atom-based designs are different. They store information in properties that nature already keeps isolated. That turns the problem into hard engineering rather than physics.

Gogioso also lowers the bar in a way the debate has mostly ignored. A memory does not have to survive decades. A sealed single-use cartridge, filled at a facility and spent state by state, would serve every application he describes.

The Same Machine Breaks Bitcoin and Builds Its Replacement

Follow that argument into crypto and it produces an awkward symmetry.

Advertisement

In March, Google Quantum AI worked with the Ethereum Foundation and Stanford on the cost of attacking Bitcoin. The team put the requirement at fewer than 500,000 physical qubits.

Such a machine only works if it is fault tolerant. And fault tolerance, by Gogioso’s own definition, is quantum memory.

The conclusion is uncomfortable for both camps. The hardware that would expose Bitcoin’s signatures would also fuel quantum money.

Every dollar chasing fault tolerance therefore funds both futures at once. No version of this story exists where quantum computers break Bitcoin and the alternative stays impossible.

Advertisement

Gogioso and Daniela Herrmann, chief executive of quantum firm Dynex, made the wider case on the panel above.

Why a Stolen Shipment Would Not Matter

The security model behind all of this inverts an old assumption.

Classical key material is dangerous in transit. Whoever copies it owns it, and leaves no trace of having done so.

An entangled pair carries no information at all while it sits in storage. The randomness that becomes a key appears only at the moment of measurement.

Advertisement

A hijacked crate would therefore cost a supplier its stock rather than its secrets. Gogioso writes that the worst a corrupt supplier can deliver is a tank of useless gas.

A second consequence is stranger. These resources burn. A key consumes entangled pairs, and a banknote gets spent across its own verifications.

Gogioso calls the effect cryptography by combustion. Money built this way would arrive with a fuel gauge.

Q-Day Has a Calendar. Quantum Money Does Not.

The two halves of this story move at very different speeds.

Advertisement

The attack side is full of dates. IBM expects quantum computing to move its earnings by 2028 or 2029. Hong Kong has set its banks a quantum readiness deadline of 2030.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology plans to retire current elliptic-curve signatures by 2030. It would disallow them outright by 2035.

The replacement side has no calendar whatsoever. Gogioso declines to supply one. His post argues for the inevitability of the resource, not the imminence of a product.

He was more forward-looking on the panel, suggesting provably impossible applications within five to seven years. That estimate covered quantum resources broadly, not a memory small enough for a wallet.

Advertisement

Herrmann drew the same boundary during the discussion.

“Quantum money is the vision, once this all plays out. Right now, quantum money as such isn’t available yet. But as soon as the chips advance, these things have to be handled with real responsibility.”

What the Argument Leaves Open

Two questions survive it.

Somebody still has to fill the memories. That leaves an issuer inside a system advertised as having no custodian.

A bearer instrument with no ledger also has no recovery. A note that is lost, stolen, or simply left to decay takes its value with it.

Advertisement

The industry is building the machine regardless. It has not yet decided which of the two things it wants.

The post Quantum Memory: The Device That Breaks Bitcoin and Replaces It appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025