RUNE’s mentions jumped 4x overnight, but the price didn’t keep up: public discussion saw quotes ranging from 0.74 to 0.82, with everyone talking in different directions.
What really ignites the topic is something else. Some claim that a trading platform asked THORChain to freeze an address related to their stolen funds, but the request was denied; market reports say that roughly $6.3 million was then converted into BTC and withdrawn.
There are also lawyers who say that whether a developer constitutes the crime of money laundering is not clearly defined legally—this claim is currently awaiting further source verification.
My take: the pricing in this round isn’t being set by the K-line, but by a standoff between “refusal to scrutinize” and “compliance costs.”
At the same time, the nodes are preparing scanning for the ZEC integration—once the scan is healthy, the next churn can be opened. This is solid progress, yet it hasn’t been picked up by the current narrative.
Around 0.80, every rebound gets pushed back, suggesting someone is using the debate as an opportunity to reduce exposure.
A question for you: if a protocol must identify and block malicious funds, how much is left without needing permission?
What really ignites the topic is something else. Some claim that a trading platform asked THORChain to freeze an address related to their stolen funds, but the request was denied; market reports say that roughly $6.3 million was then converted into BTC and withdrawn.
There are also lawyers who say that whether a developer constitutes the crime of money laundering is not clearly defined legally—this claim is currently awaiting further source verification.
My take: the pricing in this round isn’t being set by the K-line, but by a standoff between “refusal to scrutinize” and “compliance costs.”
At the same time, the nodes are preparing scanning for the ZEC integration—once the scan is healthy, the next churn can be opened. This is solid progress, yet it hasn’t been picked up by the current narrative.
Around 0.80, every rebound gets pushed back, suggesting someone is using the debate as an opportunity to reduce exposure.
A question for you: if a protocol must identify and block malicious funds, how much is left without needing permission?