Crypto Breaking

<pA crypto-aligned Super PAC is taking shape as the 2026 U.S. midterm cycle approaches, with Jesse Spiro—the head of government affairs at stablecoin issuer Tether—set to chair the Fellowship PAC’s broader political effort. The organizational move signals a more aggressive, industry-backed approach to backing candidates and shaping policy around digital assets, regulation, and open markets.

<pIn its latest communication, the Fellowship PAC said it would coordinate political endorsements for the 2026 elections and beyond. The committee, which launched in August 2025, has claimed to have raised over $100 million from undisclosed backers aligned with the crypto sector. Spiro is slated to assume the chair role ahead of its first endorsements. The PAC’s stated priorities include supporting candidates who advocate for blockchain innovation, regulatory clarity for digital assets, and open, competitive markets.

<p"We have an opportunity to ensure the United States remains the global hub for builders, entrepreneurs, and technological progress," Spiro said. "Fellowship PAC is committed to supporting leaders who understand what’s at stake and are willing to act."

Key takeaways

Jesse Spiro of Tether is poised to chair Fellowship PAC, a crypto-backed political committee planning endorsements for the 2026 U.S. midterms.

The group claims to have raised over $100 million from crypto-aligned backers, though transparency around contributors remains limited.

The Fellowship PAC filed with the U.S. Federal Election Commission on Aug. 7 and had reported no contributions or expenditures as of Dec. 31, raising questions about funding sources and operational timeline.

Industry politics are intensifying as lawmakers weigh digital-asset regulation alongside debates over stablecoins, with broader implications for the sector’s political leverage.

Industry money and the evolving political playing field

<pThe Fellowship PAC’s entrance adds to a growing network of crypto-affiliated political committees aiming to influence the 2026 Congress. Its launch comes against a backdrop of notable industry spending in prior cycles. For example, the Fairshake PAC—backed by Ripple Labs and Coinbase—spent more than $130 million on media buys in the 2024 elections and reported having about $193 million on hand ahead of the 2026 midterms. These figures illustrate a pattern of substantial, strategically deployed resources intended to shape messaging, candidate selection, and policy outcomes in ways perceived to benefit the sector.

<pObservers note that the size of Fellowship’s claimed war chest could augment the political toolkit available to crypto interests, potentially shifting the dynamics of candidate endorsements, advertising, and outreach. Yet the lack of disclosed donors and the opaque timing of contributions complicate assessments of influence and accountability. The Fellowship PAC’s public statements and its FEC filing provide some insight, but the full picture of funding sources and operational plans remains unclear.

Regulatory crossroads: stablecoins, yield, and the CLARITY Act

<pThe political maneuvering around Fellowship PAC unfolds amid ongoing debates over how the United States should regulate digital assets and stabilize the footprint of stablecoins. Tether’s USDt remains the largest stablecoin by market capitalization, and any forthcoming legislation could have meaningful implications for issuers, exchanges, and users alike.

<pThe legislative environment has already seen substantial activity. In the House, a digital-asset market structure bill—commonly referred to as the CLARITY Act—passed in July 2025. However, the measure has faced a stall in the Senate as lawmakers weigh a range of topics, including stablecoin rewards, tokenized securities, and ethics considerations. By midweek, the Senate Banking Committee had not scheduled a markup on the bill since a postponement in January, leaving the path to a full Senate vote unsettled. The absence of a clear timeline adds uncertainty for both issuers and users who are awaiting formal regulatory clarity.

<pFor investors and builders, the evolving regulatory posture matters because it could shape product design, funding models, and market access. Stability and predictability around tokenissuance, custody, and settlement can influence everything from liquidity provisions to cross-border payments. The tension between encouraging innovation and safeguarding systemic risk remains at the heart of the policy conversation, and crypto-focused political committees are likely to be active in shaping which elements of a potential bill survive final passage.

What to watch next in the 2026 cycle

<pAs the primary calendar unfolds, all eyes will be on which candidates receive endorsements from crypto-aligned committees and how those endorsements translate into campaign messaging and fundraising. The Fellowship PAC’s trajectory will depend not only on its ability to secure and deploy resources but also on how its positions resonate with voters, local concerns, and broader economic considerations tied to technology and finance.

<pAdditionally, industry watchers are keeping tabs on whether other crypto-aligned committees will mobilize around specific races or policy topics. The interplay between campaign strategy and regulatory developments could determine how aggressively the sector participates in primaries, debates, and policy testimonies as the midterm contest approaches.

Beyond U.S. politics, observers point to a broader question: will political engagement by the crypto sector translate into tangible regulatory outcomes, or will it primarily serve as signaling to markets and builders? The coming months should reveal how the Fellowship PAC, and others like it, balance signaling with real-world policy influence, particularly as the Senate weighing of the CLARITY Act remains unsettled and as discussions around stablecoins and digital-asset markets continue to evolve.

Cointelegraph and other outlets will continue monitoring filings, endorsements, and the evolving regulatory dialogue to assess how these political moves might shape the crypto landscape through 2026 and beyond.

Readers should watch for developments on who funds Fellowship PAC, how its endorsement strategy unfolds, and whether the Senate reopens consideration of digital-asset reform in a way that aligns with or counters the industry’s political ambitions.

This article was originally published as Tether Exec to Lead Pro-Crypto PAC, Marking Industry’s Midterm Push on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin treasury holders have faced a renewed wave of scrutiny as market stress spread through the sector. Nakamoto (NAKA), a prominent crypto treasury company, disclosed March sales that locked in losses, a signal that broader capital discipline could intensify in the coming weeks. The disclosures come on the heels of a difficult year for digital-asset treasuries, marked by a collapse in net asset value premiums and a downbeat price environment that preceded a notable market downturn in October 2025.

In its latest disclosures, Nakamoto revealed a March sale of 284 BTC for roughly $20 million, implying a sale price near $70,000 per coin. The firm also reduced its stake in Metaplanet by divesting shares at a loss. End-2025 figures show Nakamoto’s BTC treasury at 5,342 coins, with a fair value of about $467.5 million and a quarterly fair-value loss of $166.1 million, according to the company’s 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The broader crypto treasury space has faced mounting headwinds. A period of deteriorating NAV premiums for digital asset treasuries persisted into the third quarter of 2025, and equity prices of related treasury vehicles declined even before the October 2025 market crash that underscored a protracted bear cycle and the ensuing downturn in crypto prices. These dynamics underscore a sector-wide struggle to manage reserves amid volatile asset prices and tightening capital conditions.

Key takeaways

Nakamoto sold 284 BTC in March for about $20 million, a move that appears to have been executed around $70,000 per BTC and coincided with other treasury adjustments, including a loss-laden stake reduction in Metaplanet.

The company’s year-end 2025 10-K shows 5,342 BTC valued at $467.5 million, accompanied by a $166.1 million Q4 loss on the fair value of its crypto holdings.

The crypto treasury space experienced a notable drop in NAV premium strength during Q3 2025, a trend that predated the October market crash and helped set a challenging backdrop for treasury managers.

MAR A, another bitcoin miner turned treasury holder, disclosed a March sale of 15,133 BTC—valued at more than $1 billion—to retire about $1 billion in convertible debt, signaling a tactical liquidity move rather than a wholesale shift away from treasury holdings.

Industry observers warn of potential contagion risk if more treasuries respond to stress with further sales, especially amid macro pressures and regional conflicts that could weigh on BTC price action.

Nakamoto’s March dispositions and what they signify

According to Cointelegraph’s coverage of Nakamoto’s activities, the March sale of 284 BTC for roughly $20 million demonstrated a realized loss relative to prior valuation and raised questions about the persistence of losses across digital-asset treasuries. The firm also reduced its exposure to Metaplanet by offloading shares at a loss, a move that points to broader capital-allocation considerations rather than an outright pivot away from crypto reserves. The combination of these actions illustrates how treasuries are navigating a high-volatility environment where mark-to-market losses can quickly accumulate, even as some holdings remain substantially valuable on an on-paper basis.

End of year 2025 reporting reinforces the scale of Nakamoto’s holdings and the accompanying valuation pressures. The 10-K shows Nakamoto’s 5,342 BTC reserve valued at $467.5 million, with a $166.1 million loss recorded in the fourth quarter on the fair value of digital assets. That quarterly loss aligns with a period when the broader digital-asset sector faced multiple crosscurrents—ranging from wavering demand for treasuries to insurance and financing costs that increased as prices fell from their late-2025 peaks. For readers tracking treasury performance, the 10-K filing offers a concrete snapshot of how market moves translated into reported losses even when long-term holdings remained substantial.

Market context during this period was nuanced. The crypto treasury space had already seen a squeeze on premium valuations in Q3 2025, a trend that predated a broader sell-off and the October market downturn. Analysts argued that a weaker macro and continued volatility could pressure treasury portfolios further, possibly triggering more sales as treasuries attempt to rebalance risk and maintain liquidity during stressed periods. In this backdrop, Nakamoto’s March actions read as a data point in a broader recalibration across the sector rather than an isolated event.

MARA’s March BTC sale: a tactical adjustment rather than capitulation

In a parallel development, MARA—the Bitcoin mining company that also holds a substantial treasury position—disclosed a March sale of 15,133 BTC valued at more than $1 billion. The purpose was to repurchase and retire approximately $1 billion in convertible debt, a move the firm framed as a strategic, short-term liquidity measure rather than a fundamental shift in its treasury strategy. Robert Samuels, MARA’s vice president for investor relations, emphasized that the sale did not indicate a plan to liquidate the majority of its reserves and that the company may buy or sell BTC from time to time based on market conditions and capital-allocation priorities.

The March sale underscores a recurring theme among large treasury holders: the balancing act between deleveraging, maintaining liquidity, and preserving upside exposure to Bitcoin’s longer-term fundamentals. While MARA’s disclosure signals a tactical debt-management objective, it also highlights how treasury activity can be driven by corporate financing needs as much as by crypto-market cycles. For investors and watchers, such moves can be a useful barometer of corporate risk tolerances and the appetite for risk transfer during periods of volatility.

What the ongoing dynamics mean for investors and builders

From an investor perspective, the Nakamoto and MARA disclosures illustrate that even sizable treasury positions are not immune to price volatility and reallocation pressures. The March activity—especially Nakamoto’s significant BTC disposition and Metaplanet stake reduction—adds to a broader narrative about treasury strategy in a regime of rising macro and geopolitical uncertainty. The end-2025 valuations and the quarterly losses documented in the 10-K filings serve as a reminder that mark-to-market moves can erode reported profitability even when blockchain-related assets retain strategic value for the long term.

For traders and builders in the ecosystem, the implications extend beyond single-company moves. The observed NAV premium collapse in Q3 2025 suggested a broader mispricing in crypto-treasury vehicles, a dynamic that can influence funding conditions for new projects, credit lines for miners, and the willingness of traditional finance partners to engage with digital-asset treasuries. With the October 2025 price action illustrating a sharper turn in risk sentiment, observers will be watching whether the sector stabilizes or continues to reprice risk as companies navigate debt maturities, liquidity needs, and potential further sales from treasuries under strain.

In the near term, market watchers should stay alert to several indicators. First, any additional treasury actions from major holders could signal shifting risk tolerance or liquidity pressures. Second, updates to NAV premium trends and the health of associated debt instruments will help gauge the sector’s resilience. Finally, BTC price dynamics—especially around macro- and regional risks—will influence whether treasury holders can avoid a self-reinforcing cycle of losses and forced sales.

As the sector processes these developments, readers should monitor forthcoming earnings and regulatory disclosures for more clarity on how treasuries are being managed in a volatile environment. The March disclosures from Nakamoto and MARA, alongside the 10-K filings, offer concrete data points for assessing whether the current period marks a turning point or a short-lived adjustment in a longer-cycle evolution of crypto treasuries.

Readers can refer to the original reporting for deeper detail on the specific transactions: Nakamoto’s March BTC disposition and Metaplanet stake sale were covered in Cointelegraph’s coverage of the event, while the formal debt-reduction move by MARA was outlined in their SEC filings. The broader market context—DAT market pressures, NAV premium movements, and the October 2025 price shock—has been discussed across multiple industry analyses and related Cointelegraph coverage.

The story remains fluid: as treasuries recalibrate their portfolios, investors should watch how new pricing, debt-financing needs, and macro conditions shape the next round of treasury activity and potential contagion dynamics within the sector.

This article was originally published as Nakamoto BTC Sale Signals Sectorwide DAT Contagion, Analyst Says on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

A crypto governance critique argues that token voting has not fulfilled its decentralized promise, and markets may offer a better coordination mechanism. In a perspective piece, Francesco Mosterts, co-founder of Umia, outlines why the early dream of “on-chain democracy” via token-weighted votes faces fundamental flaws—and how a market-based approach could reshape how on-chain organizations decide what to build and fund.

Mosterts emphasizes that crypto’s strength lies in markets: prices, incentives, and capital flows already coordinate almost every facet of the ecosystem, from token valuations to lending rates and blockspace demand. Yet when governance arrives, the system often abandons markets. He points to ongoing governance frictions across major protocols and a troubling pattern of participation and influence in DAOs. A recent study covering 50 DAOs found a persistent engagement gap: token holders vote inconsistently, and a single large voter can sway about 35% of outcomes, while four voters or fewer can influence two-thirds of decisions. In practice, this means governance power remains highly concentrated even as a decentralization narrative remains loud.

Key takeaways

Token voting suffers from chronic underparticipation: most token holders abstain, leaving decisions to a small, active minority.

Whales wield outsized influence, undermining the egalitarian premise of decentralized governance and risking outcomes dominated by a few large holders.

There is no price signal attached to governance votes, creating misalignment between information, conviction, and action.

Markets-based governance—where outcomes are priced and funded—could transform governance from expression of opinion into a mechanism of measurable conviction.

The promise and limits of token governance

The original vision of DAOs began with a simple idea: token holders would govern by voting on proposals, thereby aligning ownership with decision rights. The first wave of experiments—DAOs launched in 2016 and beyond—sought to replace centralized management with code-driven governance. Tokens, in theory, would symbolize both ownership and influence, enabling any participant to steer a protocol’s direction by casting a vote.

In practice, however, token voting has struggled to live up to that promise. Three core challenges repeatedly surface: participation, the dominance of whales, and incentive misalignment. Participation remains uneven, as many governance decisions require significant time and effort to review and analyze. The result is governance fatigue, with the majority of token holders remaining passive while a narrow cadre of participants makes the call on key proposals.

Whales compound the problem. Large holders can and do tilt outcomes, demoralizing ordinary voters who feel their input matters less than those with bigger balance sheets. This dynamic starkly contrasts with the ideal of a broad, democratic process where every tokenholder has a meaningful voice.

Then there’s the incentive issue. Governance voting lacks a direct economic signal—votes carry equal weight regardless of a voter’s information, due diligence, or risk tolerance. There is little price for being right or penalty for being wrong, which can encourage speculative or uninformed participation rather than careful, conviction-driven decision-making.

Why pricing decisions could fix governance

The argument pivots on a simple observation: crypto already uses markets to allocate capital, price risk, and signal conviction across a spectrum of activities. If governance can be integrated with pricing mechanisms, it could convert opinions into measurable expectations and align participation with real economic incentives. In other words, decision markets could monetize governance outcomes by letting participants buy and sell bets on proposed directions or policies, thereby revealing collective conviction through market activity.

Advocates of this approach point to several possible benefits. First, decision markets would incentivize participants to research proposals more thoroughly, because their capital at stake would fluctuate with the perceived success of a given outcome. Second, pricing governance outcomes would help surface true preferences and risk assessments, reducing the influence of uninformed voting and opportunistic behavior. Finally, markets could extend beyond mere protocol decisions to broader capital allocation—funding the most promising initiatives with transparent, incentive-aligned mechanisms from inception.

There is a growing sense in the ecosystem that the governance bottleneck—characterized by protracted debates, treasury disputes, and stalled proposals—is a symptom of the misalignment between how decisions are made and how value is created. If crypto wants governance to be a true coordination engine, it may need to borrow from markets more aggressively. Predictions markets, futures-like payoffs on governance outcomes, and futarchy-inspired mechanisms are increasingly revisited as potential pathways to price governance bets and coordinate action around credible forecasts.

What changes when governance is priced, not just voted on

Framing governance as a pricing problem could shift the dynamic from passive endorsement to active, informed risk assessment. By attaching economic signals to decisions, participants would be exposed to the consequences of their bets in real-time, incentivizing careful evaluation of proposals and potential trade-offs. The broader implication is a move from “vote for my preferred outcome” to “trade for the outcome you expect to materialize.”

Beyond improving participation and alignment, decision markets could influence how on-chain organizations allocate resources from day one. Startups and protocols might raise capital with built-in incentive structures for governance that reflect the true costs and benefits of proposed initiatives. In this view, token voting remains valuable for signaling preferences, but it becomes part of a wider system where markets determine which directions receive support and funding, and within what conditions.

As the ecosystem debates these ideas, it’s worth noting that some observers have already flagged governance tensions at prominent protocols. For example, coverage from Cointelegraph highlighted governance disputes around Aave’s exit from a DAO governance framework, underscoring the fragility of current models when high-stakes decisions collide with real-world incentives. The ongoing tug-of-war between governance control and treasury strategy illustrates how far the current approach is from a scalable, market-informed model.

What to watch next as markets reshape on-chain governance

The broader market is watching for experiments that meaningfully integrate pricing into governance. If decision markets can demonstrate durable improvements in decision quality and coordination speed without compromising decentralization, they could become a central feature of the next generation of on-chain organizations. The revival of discussions around futarchy, prediction markets, and other market-based coordination tools points to a phase of crypto where governance becomes less about voting rituals and more about economically rational decision-making under uncertainty.

Still, several questions remain unresolved. How would such markets be designed to prevent manipulation or collusion? What safeguards would ensure that price signals reflect diverse risk tolerances and long-term value creation rather than short-term speculation? And how would regulators treat on-chain decision markets that directly influence capital allocation and product strategy?

What’s clear is that token voting, while historically significant as crypto’s first big governance experiment, is unlikely to be the final answer to decentralized coordination. The next era could see governance complemented, or even superseded, by markets that price outcomes, align incentives, and actively guide what gets built with transparent, market-driven signals.

In the meantime, readers should monitor ongoing debates about how to harmonize decentralization with effective governance, particularly where treasury management, proposal execution, and cross-chain coordination are concerned. The direction crypto takes next—whether sticking with traditional voting or embracing a pricing-based framework—will shape how communities decide and fund the protocols they rely on every day.

This article was originally published as Token Voting Undermines Crypto Governance and Incentive Alignment on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Ripple přesouvá digitální aktiva z okrajů firemních financí do srdce pokladních operací. Společnost oznámila aktualizaci své platformy pro správu pokladny, která přidává nativní schopnosti digitálních aktiv, což umožňuje finančním týmům držet, sledovat a spravovat kryptoměny vedle tradičních fiat zůstatků v rámci jednoho systému.

Aktualizace zavádí účty digitálních aktiv a sjednocený panel, který agreguje zůstatky napříč bankovními účty, poskytovateli úschovy a on-chain peněženkami. Výsledkem je viditelnost v reálném čase jak do hotovosti, tak do digitálních aktiv, vše vyrovnáno v rámci rozhraní pokladny Ripple, podle společnosti. Platforma podporuje XRP a Ripple USD (RLUSD), s zůstatky aktualizovanými v reálném čase a zaznamenanými vedle fiat transakcí. API propojují externí opatrovníky a synchronizují aktivity zpět do platformy.

A new generation of investors is drawing crypto deeper into mainstream portfolios, even as it grapples with the asset class’s well-known volatility. Gen Z’s appetite for risk and its digital-native approach to money are shaping both the demand for cryptocurrencies and the conversation around how to manage that risk within a diversified portfolio. Findings from survey data and market commentary point to a multi-faceted dynamic: strong interest in crypto, tempered by an awareness of risk and a heavy influence from social platforms and online narratives.

According to Betterment’s 2025 Retail Survey, 64% of Gen Z and 49% of millennials say they are willing to take on more investment risk. This willingness to push the envelope aligns with a broader tilt toward crypto among younger cohorts. Separately, YouGov’s 2025 US Investment Trends report highlights that nearly two-thirds of Gen Z plan to invest in cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin this year, underscoring crypto’s rising status as a core consideration for younger investors. The combination of greater risk tolerance and a crypto-forward mindset suggests a structural shift in how Gen Z approaches wealth-building, beyond mere speculation.

That said, the Gen Z approach is not blind to risk. Crypto volatility remains a central concern for many, and the generation is keenly aware that price swings occur around the clock. Investopedia notes that while crypto is widely recognized as risky and volatile, many Gen Z investors continue to participate, viewing volatility as part of an entry price rather than a barrier to participation. In other words, recognition of risk does not appear to suppress the impulse to participate; it may even be embedded in the way they frame potential returns.

Key takeaways

64% of Gen Z and 49% of millennials are willing to take on more investment risk, according to Betterment’s 2025 Retail Survey.

YouGov’s 2025 US Investment Trends report finds that nearly two-thirds of Gen Z intend to invest in cryptocurrencies this year.

84% of Gen Z acknowledge that cryptocurrencies are risky and volatile, yet they continue to invest, signaling a structural willingness to tolerate risk for potentially outsized gains.

Financial FOMO drives behavior: about 70% of Gen Z report feeling financial FOMO while scrolling social media, and roughly half have made an investment influenced by that feeling, often in crypto or memecoins.

For many young investors, crypto remains a digital-native asset class with appeal tied to high-growth narratives, but concerns about transparency and regulation persist as the market evolves.

Gen Z’s risk calculus in a digital era

Crypto’s appeal to Gen Z appears inseparable from the broader online ecosystem that shapes their financial world. Gen Z has grown up with the internet, digital wallets, and instant access to markets, which makes digital assets feel native rather than futuristic. The survey data illustrate a generation that is comfortable testing new assets, even as it calibrates its risk exposure to reflect a volatile, 24/7 market environment. The correlation between online influence and investment behavior becomes especially salient when considering how financial guidance is consumed. A notable share of younger investors turns to social platforms for insights, which elevates the importance of evaluating the quality and accountability of information accessed through these channels.

One dimension often cited in this context is how young investors source financial advice. Kiplinger’s coverage notes that about one in four Gen Z Americans obtain financial guidance from TikTok, a statistic that signals the growing role of “finfluencers” in shaping investment decisions. That dynamic, combined with the rapid dissemination of memes and viral narratives, helps explain why certain crypto stories gain outsized attention—even when the underlying fundamentals are murkier than traditional investment vehicles. In this environment, investors must balance curiosity with due diligence and a clear understanding of risk rewards.

Volatility, FOMO and the memecoin cycle

Volatility remains the price of admission for crypto, and Gen Z is not naïve about it. The generation’s understanding of risk reflects a paradox: while they recognize the inherent instability of digital assets, they are drawn by the prospect of outsized profits in a relatively new asset class. The tension between risk awareness and aspirational returns is compounded by social dynamics. Empower’s research on financial FOMO shows that 70% of Gen Z feel this pressure while scrolling social media, and a CFA Institute study cited in the broader discussion indicates that about 50% of Gen Z investors say they have made an investment driven by FOMO, often in crypto or memecoins. In other words, fear of missing out is translating into real capital allocation decisions, particularly toward assets that can deliver rapid visibility and engagement on social platforms.

The memecoin phenomenon sits at the intersection of virality, community hype, and speculative appetite. These tokens are designed to capture attention and momentum, delivering quick, event-driven price action that can attract new participants while amplifying the narrative around crypto’s potential. While this dynamic can drive activity and liquidity, it also raises questions about sustainability, risk management, and the long-term viability of such assets in a diversified portfolio. The cycle—rapid gains followed by swift corrections—has repeatedly underscored the risks associated with chasing headlines rather than fundamentals. As a result, even as crypto admissions rise among younger cohorts, memecoins can reinforce a broader skepticism about the safety and reliability of digital assets as a standalone investment thesis.

Beyond the hype, the behavioral profile of Gen Z investors highlights a broader diversification conversation. Some observers point to crypto as a potential portfolio diversifier, particularly as parts of the traditional market landscape exhibit different risk and return drivers. Yet the same conversations underscore real caveats: during periods of systemic stress, crypto has shown correlations with high-growth equities and even, at times, with traditional safe-haven narratives like gold. That raises practical questions for portfolio construction: if crypto participates in downside markets or moves in tandem with riskier equities, its diversification benefits may be more nuanced than initially assumed. For any investor, understanding when crypto serves as a genuine diversifier versus when it behaves as a high-beta, risk-on asset is essential to avoid overexposure or misaligned expectations.

Another critical theme is the lack of universal transparency and a clear regulatory framework across crypto markets. As a technology- and asset-class experiment in real-time, digital assets have not always benefited from the disclosures and governance that accompany traditional securities. MDPI’s analysis of cognitive biases, including the Dunning-Kruger effect, suggests that younger investors may overestimate their understanding of crypto and underestimate the risks, underscoring the need for robust education and clear regulatory guardrails. In the absence of consistent reporting standards and enforcement, the allure of quick profits can eclipse prudent risk assessment, increasing the likelihood of regrettable losses for inexperienced participants.

Regulation, transparency and the road ahead

While Gen Z’s crypto engagement signals a maturation of digital assets within the retail space, observers agree that regulatory clarity and improved transparency are critical for sustaining long-term participation. The tension between a rapidly evolving technology stack and the slower, more deliberate pace of policy development creates a dynamic where innovation can outpace guardrails, at least in the near term. As policymakers and industry participants negotiate better disclosure, custody standards, and product-level protections, the trajectory of Gen Z’s crypto involvement will hinge on how effectively those guardrails translate into real-world investor protections without stifling innovation.

Some researchers and market observers frame this moment as a test of crypto’s legitimacy as an investable asset class for a new generation. If regulators deliver calibrated, investor-centric rules and platforms improve transparency, crypto could expand from being a niche interest to a more mainstream, risk-aware component of diversified portfolios. Conversely, persistent gaps in transparency or regulatory uncertainty could amplify the very volatility and hype-driven dynamics that have driven memecoin cycles, potentially eroding trust among young buyers who expect clarity and accountability from market participants.

Related coverage in the broader crypto media ecosystem has noted regulators’ concerns about finfluencers and the need for responsible information dissemination, particularly as Gen Z ownership grows. For readers tracking the evolution of this space, pay attention to shifts in regulatory posture, custody and exchange standards, and how platforms adapt to the dual pressures of innovation and investor protection. As the market evolves, the balance between opportunity and risk will likely redefine crypto’s role in Gen Z portfolios.

Investors should watch how education, transparency, and policy alignment impact Generation Z’s crypto participation. The coming months may reveal whether this generation’s early-adopter behavior becomes a durable, risk-aware investment habit or whether volatility and information gaps pull the brakes on broader adoption.

Alex Tsepaev, chief strategy officer at B2PRIME Group, offers this perspective: crypto’s journey into mainstream investing is less about a single narrative of boom-and-bust and more about how a new generation learns to navigate risk, trust, and accountability in a rapidly changing financial landscape.

This opinion piece reflects the author’s view and is not an endorsement of any specific asset. Readers should conduct their own research and consider regulatory developments, platform protections, and risk management practices before making investment decisions.

This article was originally published as Gen Z Embraces Bitcoin as a Core Portfolio Diversifier on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Federal Reserve Governor Michelle Barr said on Tuesday that clearer U.S. stablecoin rules could accelerate the sector’s growth, but she warned that regulators must address money-laundering risks, bank-run concerns and consumer protection as they implement the GENIUS Act.

Speaking at a Federalist Society event on stablecoin regulation, Barr emphasized that the law would provide “needed clarity” for issuers. Yet she stressed that the ultimate impact will hinge on how federal and state agencies translate the statute into concrete rules.

Stablecoins are still primarily used for crypto trading and as a dollar-denominated store of value in certain foreign markets. Barr noted their potential to reduce remittance costs, speed up trade-finance processes and help firms manage treasury operations. She also highlighted risks, including bad actors acquiring stablecoins in secondary markets without identity checks, and the temptation for issuers to pursue yield in reserve assets in ways that could erode confidence during periods of stress.

Her remarks come as U.S. agencies shift from drafting legislation to writing rules. The Treasury Department opened a second round of public comment on implementing the GENIUS Act in September 2025, signaling the administration’s intent to craft a regulatory framework that fosters innovation while addressing illicit finance, consumer protections and financial stability concerns.

Key takeaways

The GENIUS Act provides a federal framework and clarity for stablecoin issuers, but real impact depends on the specifics of forthcoming rulemaking by federal and state authorities.

Regulators are prioritizing guardrails around reserve assets, anti-money-laundering checks, consumer protections and capital/liquidity requirements for issuers.

The Treasury’s ongoing public consultation underscores a balance-driven approach: enabling innovation while mitigating systemic and illicit-finance risks.

Past discussions of stability and trust in privately issued digital money inform the current stance, as officials warn against overreach that could undermine confidence in redemption at par during stress.

GENIUS Act’s framework under scrutiny

The GENIUS Act, signed into law on July 18, 2025, established a federal pathway for U.S. payment stablecoins, mandating one-to-one backing with reserve assets such as U.S. dollars and Treasury securities. The statute anticipated a phased rollout, taking effect 18 months after signing or 120 days after final agency rules are published, whichever comes later. The rulemaking process now centers on translating that framework into practical requirements for issuers, custodians, and the networks that support on-chain dollars.

Barr’s remarks reflect a broader tension in the policy agenda: while the law aims to reduce regulatory uncertainty and spur legitimate adoption, it also raises questions about how to supervise reserve management, ensure robust AML controls and prevent consumer harm if redemption experiences stress. In her view, clear guardrails are essential to prevent a repeat of past fragilities seen during financial upheavals when private money markets faced losses or liquidity strains.

The governance question is not purely theoretical. The act explicitly contemplates reserve-asset backing and the prudential requirements that might accompany it, including capital and liquidity standards. Barr cited the potential for regulatory arbitrage between federal and state authorities as a practical risk if rules are unevenly applied across jurisdictions, potentially fragmenting the market and complicating compliance for issuers operating nationwide.

Beyond issuance, the scope of control – such as whether regulators oversight beyond the mere act of minting stablecoins to include the management of reserves, settlement rails and treasury operations – remains a focal point for policy negotiators. Barr’s framing suggests that a comprehensive approach will be essential to maintain market integrity and reassure users that stablecoins remain a reliable, on-demand dollar proxy even under stress.

Safeguards, compliance frictions and market dynamics

One recurring theme in Barr’s remarks is the risk of illicit finance and the need for rigorous identity checks in secondary markets. The possibility that bad actors could circumvent oversight by acquiring stablecoins off-exchange underscores the demand for robust Know Your Customer and AML controls throughout the ecosystem. Regulators are weighing how to enforce identity verification without stifling legitimate financial activity or driving participants to opaque, cross-border channels.

Another area of focus is the management of reserve assets. The GENIUS Act envisions reserves that can include U.S. dollars and U.S. Treasuries, but the regulatory calculus around what constitutes acceptable collateral, how reserve liquidity is maintained and how stress scenarios are modeled remains unsettled. Barr pointed to the risk that issuers might pursue yields that look attractive in normal times but prove destabilizing when conditions tighten. These considerations are central to preserving confidence that stablecoins can be redeemed on demand at stable value.

The policy conversation is also being shaped by concurrent statements from other U.S. regulators. Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman has indicated that capital and liquidity rules for stablecoin issuers are already in development, while the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation chair has said the agency does not expect deposit insurance for stablecoins under the GENIUS framework. Taken together, the signals suggest a cautious but forward-moving rulemaking process designed to keep stablecoins within a managed risk envelope while supporting legitimate innovation.

From an investors’ perspective, the rulemaking trajectory matters for how quickly stablecoins can scale as a trusted payment instrument, and how exposure to reserve risk or issuer missteps is priced into the market. For users and builders—wallet providers, exchanges and on-chain infrastructure—the clarity around compliance expectations and reserve governance will influence product design, KYC workflows and treasury-management features. The line between activity that is permissible under the law and what would trigger supervisory action remains a critical area to watch as agencies publish draft rules and conduct public consultations.

What to watch next for the stablecoin voyage

With the GENIUS Act as the anchor, the regulatory timetable is shifting toward concrete rules that will define how stablecoins operate in the United States. The ongoing public-comment process signals a willingness to refine the framework to accommodate financial innovation while strengthening protections against financial crime and systemic risk. Key milestones to monitor include the issuance of final agency rules, the precise calibration of reserve-asset standards, and the delineation of permissible activities beyond straightforward issuance—such as on-chain settlement mechanics and intermediation functions by custodians.

Market participants should also gauge how other major economies approach stablecoins, as global operators weigh whether U.S. rules will remain the gold standard or push activity toward more permissive or restrictive jurisdictions. In the near term, investors may see a bifurcation: issuers that align quickly with evolving standards could gain faster access to U.S. markets, while those that lag might encounter higher compliance costs or restricted access to U.S. rails. For users, the prospect of stronger consumer protections and clearer redemption guarantees offers a more predictable environment, though it could come with increased onboarding checks and slower transactions in some cases.

Ultimately, Barr’s speech reinforces a central fact: the GENIUS Act is a landmark attempt to reconcile private, on-chain money with public safeguards. The outcome will hinge on the rigor of rulemaking and the resilience of the safeguards regulators implement. As the process unfolds, the industry will be watching not only how reserve assets are treated, but how the rules address specialized risks such as cross-border use, illicit financing channels and the potential for runs during shocks.

Readers should stay attentive to the pace of rule publication and the specifics agencies publish about capital, liquidity and AML standards, as those details will shape the feasibility and cost of compliant stablecoin programs in the United States.

The evolving regulatory backdrop underscores a broader theme for the crypto space: legitimate-scale adoption depends on credible assurances that stablecoins can deliver on the promise of speed, reliability and safety, without compromising financial stability or enabling misuse.

As policymakers refine the balance between innovation and protection, the market will likely respond with a mix of pragmatic partnerships, new compliance tooling and product innovations designed to navigate a tighter but clearer regulatory horizon.

What remains uncertain is how quickly final rules will land and how issuers, custody providers and exchanges will adapt to a potentially stricter regime. Still, Barr’s remarks emphasize a deliberate, risk-conscious path forward—one that could ultimately help stablecoins mature from niche tools into mainstream financial rails.

This article was originally published as Fed’s Barr Cites Panic of 1907 in Call for Stablecoin Rules on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Block co-founder Jack Dorsey and the company’s lead independent director, Roelof Botha, have laid out a forward-looking vision in which artificial intelligence could fundamentally change how work is coordinated. In a blog post published this week, they describe a model where AI would take on the tasks typically handled by middle managers—tracking projects, flagging issues, assigning work, and sharing critical information faster than human processes allow.

The post comes on the heels of Block’s previously reported workforce restructuring, part of a broader wave of AI-driven cost-cutting across the tech sector. Block disclosed that it cut roughly 4,000 jobs in February, an action Dorsey attributed to the rapid pace of AI adoption and the need to stay competitive. In March, some of the employees who had been laid off were quietly rehired, illustrating a cautionary approach to the current wave of optimization. The blog authors emphasize that AI’s role in the new model is evolving, not yet fully realized, and that Block remains in the “early stages” of testing how an intelligence-centric structure could function in practice.

“We’re questioning the underlying assumption: that organizations have to be hierarchically organized with humans as the coordination mechanism. Instead, we intend to replace what the hierarchy does. Most companies using AI today are giving everyone a copilot, which makes the existing structure work slightly better without changing it. We’re after something different: a company built as an intelligence, or mini-AGI.”

Key takeaways

Block’s leadership proposes replacing traditional hierarchical management with an intelligence-driven framework that leverages AI to coordinate work and decision-making.

The envisioned structure redefines roles around three pillars: individual contributors, directly responsible individuals, and player-coaches who mentor while continuing to contribute technically.

AI would enable real-time visibility into what’s being built, what’s blocked, resource allocation, and overall product performance, potentially speeding up information flow beyond conventional managerial channels.

Despite the AI emphasis, human involvement remains central to strategic and ethical decisions, signaling a blended governance approach rather than a pure automation model.

From hierarchy to intelligence: Block’s strategic shift

The core idea articulated by Dorsey and Botha is a pivot away from the familiar pyramid where instructions travel up and down through layers of management. In a remote-first, machine-readable environment, AI would continuously build and maintain a live picture of organizational activity: what’s in development, what’s blocked, where resources are needed, and what outcomes are proving effective or failing. The authors describe the aim as moving beyond “copilot” enhancements to a more transformative design—an organization that operates as an intelligence rather than a traditional hierarchy.

They emphasize that the pattern could reshape corporate operation across sectors, not just within Block. The argument rests on a simple premise: information flow drives speed and adaptability. If AI can handle the coordination overhead more efficiently than humans, the bottlenecks created by layers of management could recede, enabling faster iteration and more responsive leadership decisions.

To illustrate the proposed shift, Block outlines a three-tier talent model. Individual contributors would be responsible for building and maintaining the operating systems that power the company’s workflows. Directly responsible individuals would tackle specific problems and be empowered to marshal any resources necessary to resolve them. Between these layers, player-coaches would assume manager-like duties—mentoring and supporting others—while continuing to contribute code and substantive work themselves. In this arrangement, the traditional gatekeeping function of middle management would be distributed and augmented by AI-enabled visibility and automation.

People still in the driver’s seat

Even as AI takes on coordination tasks, Dorsey and Botha stress that human judgment remains indispensable. They acknowledge that AI can process information at a scale and speed far beyond human capability, but key business and ethical decisions will continue to require human insight. The blog notes that while AI can present a continuously updated view of operations, it cannot substitute for the values, prudence, and accountability that guide corporate governance.

This stance sits at an important crossroads for investors and workers alike. The acceleration of AI-driven restructuring has historically raised questions about job security, morale, and the long-term viability of new organizational paradigms. Block’s own experience—balancing a major layoff with later rehiring of some affected employees—illustrates a cautious, iterative approach rather than a speculative leap into a fully automated future. The authors’ framing suggests a model where AI acts as a force multiplier for human capabilities, rather than replacing people wholesale.

Why it matters for crypto-adjacent ventures

The broader crypto and fintech sectors have watched Block (the company behind the Cash App and a notable crypto-friendly stance) as a bellwether for technology-enabled financial services. If an AI-first, intelligence-driven corporate structure gains traction, it could influence how other blockchain and payments firms think about product development cycles, regulatory compliance, and governance practices. The potential impact extends to how quickly teams can respond to security risks, how product roadmaps are validated in real time, and how cross-functional collaboration is organized in a hybrid or fully remote environment.

From an investor perspective, the shift raises questions about how governance, risk controls, and performance metrics would be managed in an AI-augmented organization. Real-time visibility into development pipelines and resource allocation could improve transparency, but it also heightens sensitivity to data quality, AI oversight, and ethical considerations in automated decision-making. As with any large-scale adoption of AI in corporate governance, the outcomes will hinge on guardrails, accountability, and the ongoing calibration of human-in-the-loop processes.

Block’s announcement aligns with a wider industry conversation about whether AI can augment, or even replace, certain managerial functions. While the blog presents a staged, experimental path toward an intelligent enterprise, observers will be watching to see whether early pilots yield tangible improvements in productivity, risk management, and employee engagement. The balance between speed and governance will be particularly telling in sectors where regulatory scrutiny and customer trust are paramount.

What to watch next

The immediate questions center on execution and governance. How quickly will Block move from a conceptual framework to concrete organizational changes? What criteria will the company use to assess the success of its AI-driven coordination model? And how will Block address potential pitfalls, such as algorithmic bias, data silos, or accountability for automated decisions?

As AI continues to redefine work patterns across the technology landscape, Block’s approach could foreshadow a broader shift in corporate design. If the model proves adaptable and beneficial, it may prompt other firms to experiment with similar intelligence-driven structures, especially in environments that prize rapid iteration and remote collaboration.

Readers should monitor Block’s forthcoming updates and pilot implementations to gauge whether the vision moves from theory to practice and how those developments influence investor confidence, employee experience, and the broader discourse around AI-enabled governance.

This article was originally published as Dorsey unveils AI-driven workplace strategy after Block’s 40% cuts on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin 2026 Overview

Bitcoin traded near $68,000 as organizers confirmed a major addition to Bitcoin 2026. The event will host Afroman as a headline speaker and performer. The conference will take place April 27–29 in Las Vegas.

The announcement signals a growing overlap between culture and decentralized technology narratives. It also reflects Bitcoin’s expanding role beyond finance into expression and ownership debates. Organizers expect strong engagement from global attendees and industry participants.

The event will occur at The Venetian Resort and feature hundreds of speakers. More than 30,000 attendees are expected to participate across multiple stages. The program will combine education, entertainment, and industry networking.

Legal Victory Shapes Afroman’s Bitcoin 2026 Appearance

Afroman gained renewed attention after a legal battle tied to a police raid in 2022. Authorities searched his home but reportedly found no evidence of wrongdoing. He later used personal footage to create music and commentary about the incident.

The conflict grew when some of the officers took a defamation case against him asking for monetary damages. They asked, as well, to get rid of the artist’s content on public platforms. Despite that, the jury acquitted Afroman and put an end to the case. The result opened up more talk about the rights of creators and the need for public accountability. Afroman saw the verdict as a larger victory for freedom of speech. This viewpoint is in fact very similar to the core philosophy of Bitcoin. More and more, the culture around Bitcoin is making its way into art and expression. The supporters of Bitcoin, as a rule, underline the freedom, openness, and getting the full control over the personal content. Such principles have left their mark not only on the culture but also on the domain of arts. Consequently, in a bold step, the current events deliberately feature creators boldly confronting the authorities and institutions.

Afroman’s involvement reflects the shift in the ecosystem’s trajectory. His unique style is a fusion of music, humor, and insightful commentary on society. Such a message deeply resonates with an audience that supports decentralization of systems. Bitcoin event organizers keep identifying the events as technical gatherings only. They want to put the spotlight on real-life applications and cultural relevance. In this way, the appeal will be extended not only to the developers and financial players.

Exhibition and Global Conference Growth

The conference will feature Afroman’s American flag suit as part of a specially curated art exhibition. It is a protest and resistance symbol from his legal fight. It is also going to be auctioned on a special platform. The exhibition will present topics such as power, reaction, and artistic rebellion. It will feature works tied to Bitcoin’s short but impactful history. These elements aim to connect technology with human stories.

Bitcoin Conference continues to expand its global footprint. Earlier editions managed to draw tens of thousands of people from various regions. The next events are scheduled to cover Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. The Las Vegas meeting will act as a main center for the 2026 programs. It will unite developers, entrepreneurs, and artists. Such a blend further helps positioning Bitcoin as a financial and social movement.

This article was originally published as Afroman to Headline Bitcoin 2026 After Landmark Free Speech Victory on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin has slid roughly 50% this market cycle, a markedly milder pullback than in prior cycles, according to Fidelity Digital Assets. The firm’s researchers note that post-peak declines have historically ranged from 80% to 90%, but this cycle has seen a substantially smaller drawdown.

Fidelity’s data suggest a pattern of diminishing returns when looking at price performance from the previous all-time high, a sign of a maturing market. “Each cycle has been less dramatic to the upside than the previous,” Fidelity analyst Zack Wainwright said, adding that downside risk has been less pronounced in 2026 as well.

From a price perspective, Bitcoin touched a cycle low just above $60,000 on Feb. 6, representing a drop of about 52% from the Oct. 6 all-time high near $126,000, according to TradingView. It has since traded at roughly a 46% retreat from its peak six months earlier. For context, the prior cycle featured a much deeper decline—about 77%—from the 2021 high near $69,000 to a bear-market low just below $16,000 in November 2022.

Key takeaways

Fidelity Digital Assets’ assessment: this cycle’s drawdown (~50%) is substantially smaller than the historical 80–90% range, signaling a maturing market with potentially reduced volatility.

Current price action: cycle low around $60k on Feb. 6, with ~52% fall from the all-time high of ~$126k and ~46% below the six-month peak.

Historical comparison: the previous bear phase saw a sharper 77% decline to a sub-$16k trough in late 2022, underscoring a notable shift in cycle severity.

Halving cadence and bottom timing: Alphractal founder Joao Wedson highlighted a decaying pattern where the top occurred 534 days after the last halving, implying a bottom could fall between 912 and 922 days after halving—pointing to late September or early October 2026, though this remains a cycle-based projection.

Technical watchlist: Bitcoin remains below the 50-day and 200-day exponential moving averages, with the 200-week EMA hovering around $68,000 and acting as a historical support level during downturns.

A shallower cycle, a maturing market

Fidelity’s framework suggests that the current cycle’s more gradual drawdown and compressed upside signal a shift in market dynamics. The research implies growing institutional interest and a broader base of participants that can absorb volatility without triggering extreme selloffs. In discussing the implications, Nick Ruck, director of LVRG Research, described the development as a move toward a more stable Bitcoin—one that could pave the way for deeper adoption beyond speculative trading.

“This shift signals that Bitcoin is changing from a speculative asset toward a more stable store of value, potentially paving the way for greater adoption in the future.”

Where the chart stands and what traders are watching

Despite the shallower drawdown, Bitcoin’s price action remains cautious. The asset has been trading in a zone where traditional trend indicators—such as moving averages—still show a wrestle between momentum and consolidation. The 50-day and 200-day exponential moving averages remain as benchmarks to gauge short- and mid-term momentum, while the 200-week EMA near $68,000 has historically provided a floor during extended downturns. This confluence of levels is a focal point for traders assessing whether a new leg higher can begin or if price action will retest prior support.

Halvings, cycles, and future pacing

Wedson’s observation about the halving cycle adds a nuanced layer to the discussion. He noted that Bitcoin’s peak arrived 534 days after the last halving—a shorter interval than in the previous cycle—highlighting a “decaying pattern” across cycles. If the bottom timing aligns with his projection that bottoms may occur roughly 912 to 922 days after halving, the window would imply a potential low in late September or early October 2026. While such timing draws from historical cycle dynamics, it remains a probabilistic forecast rather than a guarantee, underscoring the uncertainty that still surrounds Bitcoin’s macro path.

That framing reinforces a broader narrative: as cycles compress and volatility bottoms, investors may rely more on structural drivers—institutional participation, macro policy, and on-chain activity—to gauge the sustainability of a new regime for Bitcoin as an asset class.

Looking ahead, market participants will be closely watching whether Bitcoin can reclaim the shorter-term moving averages and whether the observed shallower drawdown persists as macro conditions evolve. The coming months could illuminate whether the market’s maturation translates into steadier pricing, greater institutional involvement, and clearer adoption milestones—or whether fresh shocks reintroduce the volatility that defined earlier cycles.

This article was originally published as Fidelity: Bitcoin drawdown this cycle milder, signaling resilience on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Artificial intelligence is already reshaping industries such as finance, software, design, education and media. Music is now rapidly joining that list, as AI-assisted tools make it possible to move from concept to release in a fraction of the time and cost required by traditional production models.

A new independent experiment is now testing exactly that. The project centers on Lunayah, a virtual artist created as part of a real-world music test, and its debut single “Money Magnet”, a pop-dance track designed to blend catchy, repeatable music with mindset-driven lyrical themes.

The experiment was initiated by Vincenzo Stefanini, entrepreneur, investor and founder of Web3 Digital, a Dubai-based agency operating across digital, AI and Web3-related sectors. While Stefanini does not come from a traditional music production background, he saw AI-assisted music creation as an opportunity to test a broader idea: whether music can evolve from pure entertainment into a practical tool for repetition, emotional conditioning and affirmation-driven listening.

From Affirmations to Music

The concept behind “Money Magnet” is simple but notable. Traditional affirmations are often spoken, repeated or written as part of personal development practices. This project takes a different route by turning those repetitive positive messages into a melodic, commercial pop-dance format that is easier to replay, remember and internalize.

Instead of asking listeners to read affirmations daily, the experiment asks a different question: what happens when those same ideas are embedded into a song structure with rhythm, melody and emotional energy?

That is the central thesis behind “Money Magnet,” which explores themes of abundance, financial well-being and positive mental reinforcement without positioning itself as financial advice or a literal promise. The aim is to create music that is enjoyable first, but also intentionally structured to stay in the mind.

AI as Accelerator, Not Replacement

One of the strongest takeaways from the project is not just the song itself, but the production model behind it. What would previously have required a studio, vocalists, producers, engineers and a significantly longer timeline was instead prototyped, refined and prepared for release in just a few days with the support of AI-assisted creative tools.

That does not mean the process was fully automated or idea-free. The original concept, direction, lyrical intent, stylistic choices, branding, launch strategy and final selection decisions remained human-led. AI functioned as an accelerator, helping translate creative direction into a finished musical product far more quickly than in a conventional setup.

For founders, creators, agencies and independent brands, this may be the more important story. The barrier to producing high-quality commercial music is falling. That opens the door not only to new artists, but to a wider range of experiments, formats and business models.

A New Creative Format

While “Money Magnet” is the first release, the project is being treated as a repeatable framework rather than a one-off track. Future songs may expand beyond financial themes into other areas commonly associated with personal development and emotional focus, including health, self-confidence, love, peace of mind and motivation.

That makes the release relevant beyond the music industry itself. It also points to the growing convergence of AI, branding, audio content, personal development and direct-to-consumer digital products.

In practical terms, the same underlying workflow could be adapted for artists, creators, events, milestone celebrations, personalized songs, branded campaigns and other custom audio experiences. That alone makes the launch of “Money Magnet” more than just another independent release.

Built in Dubai, Released Worldwide

The project was developed from Dubai, a city increasingly associated with entrepreneurship, speed, experimentation and digital-first business models. In a broader environment marked by global uncertainty and rapid technological change, the release reflects a different response: building, testing and shipping rather than waiting for ideal conditions.

“Money Magnet” is being distributed across more than 25 streaming platforms, including Spotify, Apple Music, YouTube Music, Amazon Music and other major services via its global release infrastructure.

The track and project hub are available at lunayah.com, while the direct release page can be accessed at this link.

Why It Matters

AI-generated content is no longer a niche topic. The real question is not whether it can be used, but how it should be used and what kinds of new formats it can unlock. “Money Magnet” may not answer all of those questions, but it offers a practical and public example of what the next phase of music creation could look like: faster, leaner, more experimental and increasingly accessible to non-traditional creators.

Whether this evolves into a larger music brand, a new category of personalized songs, or a service model for creators and businesses, the release marks a notable shift. It shows that music creation is no longer limited to those already inside the music industry.

Listen to the track and follow the project at https://lunayah.com/.

This article was originally published as “Money Magnet”: The AI Song That Turns Affirmations Into Music on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitfarms’ (BITF) shares rose about 6.6% on Tuesday even as the miner reported a widened net loss for 2025, underscoring the market’s focus on its strategic pivot from Bitcoin mining to high-performance computing and artificial intelligence infrastructure.

The company’s full-year results show revenue climbing 72% year over year to $229 million, but cost of revenue running at $248 million produced a gross loss. General and administrative expenses also increased, contributing to a challenging bottom line. The change in fair value of digital assets swung to a $50.5 million loss in 2025 from a $26 million gain in 2024, though a $28.2 million realized gain on the sale of digital assets helped soften the impact.

The earnings backdrop highlights the pressure facing Bitcoin miners as the cycle shifts. Bitcoin mining profitability margins have narrowed as the price of Bitcoin has fallen about 46% from its October peak, and mining difficulty has risen roughly 58.5% since the last halving in May 2024, according to market trackers.

During the earnings call, Bitfarms CEO Ben Gagnon outlined the company’s bold strategic pivot. The firm “made the decision to walk away” from its Bitcoin mining operations in November and has since built a new business focused on HPC and AI data centers. He said, “No half-measures, no compromises, and in time, no Bitcoin. We built a new company.” The plan includes rebranding to Keel Infrastructure and relocating the company’s legal base from Canada to the United States, with shareholder approval already secured.

As part of the pivot, Bitfarms indicates it still holds approximately $161 million in unencumbered Bitcoin, a asset base it intends to leverage as it scales its new infrastructure strategy. Gagnon stressed that the HPC/AI thesis requires “top-tier infrastructure” to support hyperscalers and neoclouds for the next wave of AI applications, and the company is pursuing a large-scale build-out across North America. The filing describes a 2.2 gigawatt digital infrastructure development pipeline designed to deliver this capability.

Bitfarms is part of a broader wave among Bitcoin miners expanding into AI and HPC to pursue higher-margin opportunities. Peers such as Iris Energy, Cipher Mining, Riot Platforms, and MARA Holdings have all signaled or pursued AI-enabled hosting and data-center strategies to diversify beyond pure BTC mining. The competitive backdrop underscores a larger industry transition as miners seek to align their capital-intensive operations with the growing demand for AI-ready compute capacity.

“We are not here to compete with hyperscalers or Neoclouds. We are here to enable them. Our focus is providing the critical and largely invisible foundation that will allow the world’s most advanced AI platforms to deploy on time and scale without interruption.”

Bitfarms is actively advancing the infrastructure push, with a 2.2 GW pipeline across North America intended to support the transition to HPC/AI workloads. The company’s leadership argues that the shift is essential to capture the growth in AI-enabled compute demand, even as the current Bitcoin cycle weighs on near-term profitability.

Market context remains important for readers assessing the viability of Bitfarms’ pivot. The mixed signals from the sector—persistent BTC price volatility, rising mining difficulty, and the capital intensity of large-scale HPC deployments—mean investors will be watching not only the execution of the Keel Infrastructure plan but also how the business manages cash flow during the transition. The company’s 2025 results and the pace at which it converts its unencumbered Bitcoin into strategic capital will shape how the market price of BITF responds in the coming quarters.

BITF shares closed Tuesday trading hours up 6.64% to C$2.73, with investors parsing the company’s long-run opportunity as a strategic reorientation rather than a conventional mining update. For context, the full-year results and the pivot plan were outlined in the company’s results statement available here: full-year results statement. Market data on the stock can be followed at Google Finance.

Bitcoin price data referenced in market coverage shows a substantial decline from October’s highs, while mining difficulty metrics corroborate the tougher operating environment for traditional miners. These dynamics help explain why Bitfarms’ management is pursuing a long-horizon transformation into a scalable AI-ready infrastructure provider, rather than relying solely on cyclical BTC mining margins.

As the transition unfolds, investors should monitor how Keel Infrastructure positions itself with hyperscalers, the pace of North American site development, and any changes to the company’s capital structure or debt strategy. The next earnings cycle and potential partnerships will be telling indicators of whether the new infrastructure-focused strategy can translate into sustainable profitability amid a still-choppy crypto market.

Looking ahead, the key questions are how quickly Bitfarms can scale its HPC/AI deployments, how the company manages the cost of capital during the transition, and whether the pivotal rebrand and US relocation can unlock the longer-term value of its unencumbered Bitcoin and new compute assets.

This article was originally published as Bitfarms posts $285M loss as Bitcoin falls, but shares jump anyway on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Solana’s native token SOL faced a notable pullback after a rejection near the $93 level last Wednesday, slumping about 11% as traders assess the chain’s near-term support. With the price testing the $80 region on multiple occasions in recent days, market participants are watching whether SOL can defend a key floor or if a deeper retracement toward the mid-$70s could emerge.

Amid softer price action, Solana’s on-chain activity remains anchored by its ecosystem’s ongoing revenue generation. The latest data show that while Solana’s DEX volumes cooled, the network continues to support a higher concentration of high-revenue DApps than many rivals, underscoring continued developer interest in the chain. Over the past month, total value locked on Solana stood at roughly $6.3 billion, a fraction of Ethereum’s approximate $54.1 billion. At the same time, Solana’s on-chain fees totaled about $18.5 million in March, a roughly 42% decline from January’s level, driven primarily by softer DeFi activity on the network.

In a broader market context, Ethereum’s on-chain activity remained robust in a shifting landscape dominated by layer-2 solutions. March DEX volumes across Ethereum and its Layer-2 ecosystems reached about $41 billion, down 23% from two months prior. Importantly, when aggregating DEX activity across Ethereum’s layer-2 networks—Base, Arbitrum, Polygon, and Optimism—Ethereum’s DEX market share rose to 42% in March from 33% in January. This marks a clear shift in trading flow toward layer-2s and away from the base chain, reshaping the competitive dynamics between Solana and Ethereum’s expanding L2 ecosystem.

Key takeaways

Solana remains a revenue leader among blockchains, with a cluster of DApps generating $1 million+ in monthly revenue, reinforcing fundamental ecosystem activity even as price declines persist.

Ethereum’s L2 expansion is capturing a larger slice of the DEX market, contributing to a shift in trading activity away from Solana as L2 dominance grows.

Solana’s TVL ($6.3B) lags far behind Ethereum’s ($54.1B), illustrating the ongoing capital gap despite Solana’s ongoing developer engagement.

Solana’s March on-chain fees ($18.5M) fell sharply from January, reflecting softer DEX volumes; meanwhile, Ethereum’s L2s collectively accounted for a meaningful share of DEX activity (42% in March).

Solana leads with 13 DApps reporting $1M+ in revenue over the last 30 days, surpassing Ethereum (11), with BNB Chain and Base at 4 each, highlighting a continued ecosystem strength that could support SOL’s longer-term narrative.

Solana’s price pressure vs. ecosystem resilience

Despite a near-term price retreat, Solana’s DApp revenue momentum stands out as a counterweight to the selling pressure. The fact that Solana hosts more DApps delivering $1 million-plus in monthly revenue than Ethereum suggests a vibrant, revenue-generating ecosystem that could underpin demand for SOL beyond speculative trading. Projects like Pump, Helium Network, and ORE Protocol exemplify the range of use cases attracting developers and users to Solana’s layer-1.

Developers and investors are also weighing strategic ecosystem activity beyond pure on-chain metrics. In recent coverage, Solana has highlighted collaborations and platform expansions that could widen adoption, including development platforms that attract financial services players and large brands seeking to experiment with Web3-enabled capabilities. The broader market context—where Solana’s on-chain activity competes against Ethereum’s expanding L2 footprint—remains a dynamic tension for SOL’s near-term trajectory.

Market structure and shifting dynamics

Solana’s total value locked remains a fraction of Ethereum’s, underscoring the persistent capital gap between the chains. However, Solana’s relative strength on DApp revenue signals an ongoing, qualitative advantage: developers continue to build and monetize on Solana, even as traders redirect some activity toward layer-2 networks on Ethereum. The rise of Ethereum’s L2 market share to 42% in March from 33% in January demonstrates how scaling layers are reshaping the competitive landscape, potentially offering lower costs and faster settlement that attract liquidity away from base-layer chains.

Moreover, Solana’s fee trajectory—$18.5 million in March versus $30 million in January—shows how activity patterns influence on-chain economics. While the fee base shrinks during quieter periods, the underlying ecosystem strength remains a critical factor for SOL’s longer-term health. The contrast with Ethereum’s L2-driven structure suggests that Solana’s path to upside hinges not just on transactional volume, but on sustainable DApp monetization and continued developer onboarding.

What to watch next

As SOL tests the $80 region, investors will be watching whether support holds or if the market revisits the $75 level. The evolving balance between base-chain activity and Ethereum’s expanding layer-2 footprint will be a key driver of SOL’s near-term risk-reward. On the ecosystem side, continued momentum in high-revenue DApps and strategic platform partnerships could reinforce NAV-like support for SOL, even amidst broader price volatility.

Readers should monitor upcoming data on DApp earnings, DEX volumes, and layer-2 adoption trends, which will collectively illuminate whether Solana can sustain its ecosystem-led resilience in a market increasingly driven by cross-chain and layer-2 dynamics.

This article was originally published as Solana DEX volumes hit 2024 low, SOL eyes $80 support on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin se na chvíli dotkl nového denního maxima blízko 68 589 $ poté, co trhy vstřebaly směs geopolitiky a makrosignálů. Tento krok přišel spolu s širokým rizikovým rally na amerických akciích, přičemž index Dow Jones Industrial Average vzrostl o více než 1 125 bodů, S&P 500 vzrostl přibližně o 2,9 % a Nasdaq vzrostl o asi 3,8 %. Titulky dne se soustředily na povídání o ukončení války zahrnující Spojené státy, Izrael a Írán, což povzbudilo sentiment, i když obchodníci zůstali obezřetní, pokud jde o udržení zisků na trhu s kryptoměnami.

Bitcoin a širší kryptoměnový trh se i nadále potýkají s náladou extrémní opatrnosti, protože Index strachu a chamtivosti v kryptoměnách se nachází na hodnotě 11. Tento ukazatel, který kombinuje volatilitu, objem obchodování, sociální momentum a tržní momentum, udržel investory ve stavu „extrémního strachu“ po dobu 12 po sobě jdoucích dnů, s pouze krátkým a přechodným vzestupem kolem 17.–18. března. Tento přetrvávající strach nastává v době, kdy je riziko v tradičních trzích stále zvýšené, což komplikuje obvyklé kontrariánské strategie, které historicky doprovázely takové extrémy sentimentu.

Chainalysis rozšiřuje svůj nástroj na vyšetřování kryptoměn s novou třídou nástrojů nazvanou agenti blockchainové inteligence. Představeno na konferenci Chainalysis Links v New Yorku, tito agenti s podporou AI jsou prezentováni jako specializovaná alternativa k obecným jazykovým modelům AI, kterou firma popisuje jako „zkušeného analytika pracujícího rychlostí stroje.“

Společnost plánuje zavést první agenty toto léto, zaměřující se na urychlení vyšetřování a posílení pracovních toků v oblasti shody. V příspěvku na blogu spoluzakladatel a generální ředitel Jonathan Levin zdůraznil, že počáteční důraz odráží místa, kde mají špatní herci největší pravděpodobnost zneužít AI a kde mohou instituce získat největší dopad: vyšetřování a regulační shoda. „Jak špatní herci stále více využívají AI k rozšíření svých operací, je kritické, aby ti, kteří se je snaží zastavit, dělali to samé,“ napsal.

Overview

US lawmakers introduced fresh legislation to strengthen domestic Bitcoin mining and secure supply chains. The proposal also aims to formalize a national Bitcoin reserve framework. It signals a broader push to position the US as a global crypto leader. Supporters say the framework would cut dependence on volatile foreign supply chains and spur domestic innovation.

Cynthia Lummis and Bill Cassidy introduced the Mined in America Act in Washington. The bill focuses on expanding mining capacity while reducing reliance on foreign hardware suppliers. It also integrates existing federal programs to support infrastructure development. The sponsors describe it as a step toward securing critical infrastructure and national sovereignty in digital assets.

The initiative builds on policies linked to Donald Trump, who has promoted US dominance in digital assets. Lawmakers aim to convert prior executive actions into formal law. The proposal highlights economic and security concerns tied to crypto infrastructure.

@SenLummis : “The Clarity Act could be the best thing to happen to DeFi.”

Says it brings long-awaited legal certainty.

Giving developers, validators, and node operators a potential safe harbor. pic.twitter.com/d47goXr6QJ

— The Crypto Times (@CryptoTimes_io) March 31, 2026

Certification Program and Supply Chain Shift

The bill introduces a voluntary certification program for mining facilities and pools. The Commerce Department would oversee compliance and operational standards. Certified entities would align with national security and efficiency guidelines.

Facilities seeking certification must transition away from hardware linked to foreign adversaries. This requirement targets dependency on overseas manufacturing, especially from China. The measure seeks to strengthen domestic control over critical mining infrastructure. A voluntary program would include clear timelines and auditing to ensure compliance.

US leads global Bitcoin mining by hashrate share. However, most mining hardware still comes from foreign manufacturers. Lawmakers view this imbalance as a strategic weakness in the digital economy.

Domestic Manufacturing and Strategic Reserve Plan

The law encourages the making of mining equipment locally by providing financial help through federal programs. The government departments will help equipment manufacturers design safe and energy-efficient machines. This is in line with the general industrial policy trend of the US. Law codifies the establishment of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve as well.

The Treasury Department would be in charge of the reserve with confiscated digital assets. This arrangement is meant to bring Bitcoin into the country’s financial strategy. Supporters argue that the reserve strengthens financial resilience and innovation. They also connect mining growth with energy infrastructure and job creation. The proposal links crypto expansion with broader economic priorities.

The measure would include transition timelines for hardware replacement and complementary workforce development to ensure a smooth shift for miners and suppliers.

Industry Context and Policy Implications

Mining dominance in the US was achieved after China banned crypto operations in 2021. Since then, various mining companies have spread their operations across several American states. The mining hardware remains largely dependent on foreign suppliers. Industry bodies like the Satoshi Action Fund are in favor of the bill’s approach. They point out supply chain risks and loss of control to foreign entities. The law is intended to handle these issues by way of combined policy interventions.

The sector has faced disruptions like the stoppage of hardware shipments, which reveal the industry’s weaknesses. Such incidents have strengthened the argument for strong domestic production and well-defined regulations. Legislators therefore want to use planned reforms to press on with the industry’s development and expansion. Observers note this shift could accelerate consolidation and require careful policy design.

This article was originally published as US Advances Crypto Mining Policy with New Legislative Push on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin každý týden rozšiřuje stejný příběh: zúžení cenového rozpětí po poklesu na 60 000 $ začátkem února, přičemž býci a medvědi jsou zamčeni v tichém souboji. Poslední dny viděly, jak BTC blikal mezi svými denními maximy a minimy v kompaktní chodbě, což nechává obchodníky debatovat, zda vzor vyšších minim a nižších maxim naznačuje rozhodující průlom nebo obnovený pokles.

Kromě čisté cenové akce několik katalyzátorů formuje sentiment. Instituce obnovily zájem o nákup spotového Bitcoinu a trh sleduje vlnu velkoobjemových nákupů od Strategy, vedle zpráv, že Morgan Stanley připravuje spotový BTC ETF. I přes tyto býčí titulky zůstává riziko řízené grafy nakloněno medvědům v krátkodobém horizontu, přičemž analytici uvádějí, že důležité technické úrovně se musí otočit, aby poskytly jasnou směrovou trakci.

Evoluce obchodování s kryptoměnami je stále více formována umělou inteligencí, transparentností a konvergencí mezi centralizovanými a decentralizovanými trhy.

V tomto exkluzivním rozhovoru s CryptoBreaking, Vugar Usi Zade, provozní ředitel společnosti MEXC, sdílí poznatky o tom, jak umělá inteligence mění obchodní chování, jak mohou burzy obnovit důvěru a proč by budoucnost kryptoměn mohla být definována hybridními tržními strukturami.

Vugar Usi Zade, provozní ředitel společnosti MEXC

Rozhovor s Vugarem Usi Zade, COO společnosti MEXC

Signály akumulace XRP posilují, jak se účast na trhu rozšiřuje

Tržní struktura XRP vykazuje známky akumulace, protože kupci se vracejí během přeprodaných podmínek. Cena nedávno klesla z 1,40 $ a stabilizovala se poblíž úrovně 1,30 $. Tato stabilizace odráží pauzu v prodejním tlaku a postupný posun v momentu.

Současně data z futures ukazují na zvýšenou dlouhou pozici na obchodních platformách. Obchodníci pokračují v otevírání dlouhých kontraktů a snižují krátkou expozici. Tato změna signalizuje důvěru v růst cenového pohybu a posiluje býčí sentiment.

Schiff varuje před právními riziky v propagaci STRC

Peter Schiff kritizoval nedávnou reklamu Strategy a zpochybnil její zobrazení finančních výsledků spojených s akciemi STRC. Tvrdil, že kampaň představuje příliš optimistický narativ životního stylu spojený s výkonností investic, a že takové sdělení může vytvářet nerealistická očekávání mezi retailovými investory.

Reklama zdůrazňuje fiktivního investora, který si užívá uvolněný životní styl po zakoupení akcií STRC. Zdůrazňuje 11% roční dividendu a ukazuje scény volného času a finanční pohody. Schiff však uvedl, že reklama minimalizuje potenciální rizika a zhušťuje je do krátkého odmítnutí.