Ripple CTO Emeritus David Schwartz, one of the original architects of the XRPL, is set to take the stage at the upcoming XRP event.
BitcoinWorld Tornado Cash Indictment Sparks Outrage: Buterin Condemns Unjust Prosecution of Developer In a significant development for cryptocurrency regulation, Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin has publicly condemned the U.S. government’s indictment of Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm as fundamentally unjust. This statement, reported by The Block on March 15, 2025, represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate about privacy, software development, and financial surveillance in the digital age. Buterin’s intervention highlights growing concerns within the technology community about the criminalization of neutral tools and their creators. Tornado Cash Indictment: The Core Legal Battle The U.S. Department of Justice indicted Roman Storm in August 2023 on serious charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering and operate an unlicensed money transmitting business. Prosecutors allege that Tornado Cash, the privacy-focused cryptocurrency mixing service Storm co-developed, knowingly facilitated the laundering of hundreds of millions of dollars, including funds linked to North Korean hacking group Lazarus. However, Storm maintains his innocence and is currently out on bail awaiting trial in New York. Buterin’s letter argues that punishing Storm essentially criminalizes the act of software development itself. He describes Tornado Cash not as a criminal enterprise but as a legitimate privacy tool designed to counter what he characterizes as an increasingly pervasive surveillance society. This perspective reflects a fundamental philosophical divide between regulatory authorities seeking to prevent financial crime and developers advocating for privacy as a fundamental digital right. The Technical Functionality of Privacy Tools To understand this controversy, one must examine how cryptocurrency mixers operate. These services pool and scramble transactions from multiple users, making it difficult to trace individual funds on public blockchains. While this provides legitimate privacy benefits for ordinary users, law enforcement agencies argue that bad actors exploit these same features to obscure illicit financial flows. The legal question centers on whether developers bear responsibility for how others use their neutral technologies. Key Timeline: Tornado Cash Legal Developments Date Event August 2022 U.S. Treasury sanctions Tornado Cash August 2023 DOJ indicts Roman Storm and Roman Semenov September 2023 Storm released on $2 million bond March 2025 Vitalik Buterin publicly condemns indictment Pending Trial proceedings in New York Broader Implications for Software Development This case extends far beyond cryptocurrency, potentially establishing precedents affecting all software creators. Legal experts note several critical implications: Developer Liability: Could programmers face criminal charges for how others use their open-source code? Privacy Technology: Might this create a chilling effect on privacy-enhancing innovation? Financial Surveillance: Does this represent a shift toward less private digital transactions? International Jurisdiction: How do global regulations intersect with decentralized technologies? Furthermore, the prosecution raises questions about intent and knowledge. Prosecutors must demonstrate that Storm knowingly designed Tornado Cash to facilitate money laundering rather than creating a neutral tool with legitimate privacy applications. This distinction forms the crux of the legal defense and Buterin’s public criticism. Historical Context of Technology Regulation Similar debates have emerged throughout technological history. Encryption software, peer-to-peer file sharing, and even web browsers faced regulatory scrutiny when authorities perceived potential for misuse. The current case continues this pattern but within the novel context of decentralized finance and blockchain transparency. Unlike previous technologies, cryptocurrency transactions are permanently recorded on public ledgers, creating unique investigative challenges and opportunities. Cryptocurrency Community Response and Division Buterin’s statement has ignited vigorous discussion across the cryptocurrency ecosystem. Many developers and privacy advocates echo his concerns about overreach, while others acknowledge legitimate regulatory interests in preventing financial crime. This division reflects broader tensions within the industry between decentralization ideals and practical compliance requirements. Several industry organizations have filed amicus briefs supporting Storm’s defense, arguing that the indictment threatens innovation and establishes dangerous precedents. Conversely, law enforcement agencies and some regulatory bodies maintain that without accountability, privacy tools will continue enabling significant criminal activity, including ransomware attacks and sanctions evasion. The financial stakes are substantial. Blockchain analytics firms estimate that illicit addresses have laundered over $10 billion through cryptocurrency mixers since 2020. However, these same firms acknowledge that the majority of mixer transactions likely involve legitimate privacy-seeking users rather than criminals. This statistical reality complicates the regulatory approach. Comparative International Approaches Different jurisdictions have adopted varying stances toward cryptocurrency privacy tools. The European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation includes provisions addressing anonymity-enhancing technologies, while some Asian countries have implemented outright bans. The United States approach, as demonstrated in this case, involves targeted enforcement actions against specific entities and individuals rather than blanket prohibitions. Technical and Legal Complexities of Decentralization Tornado Cash presents particular challenges because of its decentralized nature. After initial development, the service operated through smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain without centralized control. This raises complex questions about whether developers maintain responsibility for autonomous code they initially created but no longer control. Legal scholars debate whether existing statutes adequately address these technological realities. Money transmission regulations traditionally apply to centralized entities with clear points of control, not decentralized protocols governed by code. The Storm case may help clarify how century-old laws apply to twenty-first century technologies. Additionally, the open-source nature of the code complicates attribution. Anyone can copy, modify, or deploy the software, potentially creating identical services beyond any single developer’s influence. This technological reality challenges conventional legal frameworks designed for more controllable systems. Conclusion The Tornado Cash indictment represents a landmark case at the intersection of technology, privacy, and regulation. Vitalik Buterin’s condemnation highlights deep concerns within the developer community about criminalizing neutral tools and their creators. As this legal battle progresses through the courts, it will likely establish important precedents affecting not just cryptocurrency but all software development. The outcome may fundamentally shape how societies balance individual privacy rights against collective security interests in an increasingly digital financial system. Regardless of the verdict, this case has already sparked essential conversations about responsibility, innovation, and freedom in the age of decentralized technologies. FAQs Q1: What exactly is Tornado Cash? Tornado Cash is a cryptocurrency privacy service that uses smart contracts to mix Ethereum-based transactions, making them more difficult to trace on the public blockchain while maintaining the security of decentralized verification. Q2: Why does Vitalik Buterin consider the indictment unjust? Buterin argues that prosecuting Roman Storm for developing Tornado Cash essentially criminalizes software creation itself, punishing developers for how others might use their neutral tools rather than for intentional wrongdoing. Q3: What are the specific charges against Roman Storm? The U.S. Department of Justice has charged Storm with conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business, and conspiracy to violate sanctions laws. Q4: How does this case affect ordinary cryptocurrency users? This legal precedent could influence the availability of privacy tools, potentially affecting users who seek financial privacy for legitimate reasons such as protection against surveillance or financial targeting. Q5: What happens next in the legal process? Roman Storm awaits trial in New York, where prosecutors must prove he knowingly designed Tornado Cash to facilitate money laundering rather than creating a neutral privacy tool with legitimate applications. This post Tornado Cash Indictment Sparks Outrage: Buterin Condemns Unjust Prosecution of Developer first appeared on BitcoinWorld .
Coincheck Group signs a stock purchase agreement to buy 97% of 3iQ for about $112 million. Coincheck Group N.V., the holding company of Japan’s leading crypto exchange Coincheck, announced that it has entered a stock purchase agreement with Monex Group to acquire approximately 97% of 3iQ Corp., a Canadian digital‑asset manager based in Ontario. The
The Bitcoin price could be in for more pain as a crypto analyst has just released a gloomy short-term outlook, warning that another crash may be on the way. The analyst believes that Bitcoin’s overall market structure remains bearish. As a result, he expects the price to fall to about $76,000, representing a 20% decline from current levels. Bitcoin Price At Risk Of 20% Crash Crypto market analyst Roman has issued a warning that Bitcoin could be heading for another sharp decline, with his primary target set near $76,000. In his post on X, he emphasized that the current market structure shows no evidence of a sustainable price bottom and that downside risk remains dominant. Related Reading: Bitcoin Price To Crash Another 50% As Analyst Marks $40,000 Bottom Target Roman explained that his bearish outlook is based on the daily timeframe, where Bitcoin has struggled to regain strong bullish momentum after a significant correction. He also noted that the price is still trading within a broader bearish trend, suggesting the market may simply be taking a pause before the next move lower. The accompanying chart shows BTC trading above $90,000 while still well below the previous resistance area near $96,000. Each attempt to push higher has been rejected, suggesting sellers remain firmly in control of the market. Notably, Roman’s chart has revealed that the expected move lower could start with a drop back to the mid $80,000s, followed by a deeper slide between $78,500 and $75,000. The hand-drawn projection on the chart also illustrates a sharp fall after a brief relief rally, suggesting that BTC’s decline could speed up once support breaks. Volume behavior also plays a key role in Roman’s bearish outlook. The chart shows noticeably weak trading volume during Bitcoin’s recent rebound, which the analyst previously said is typical of holiday-driven pumps. Additional Signals That Support Analyst’s Bearish Forecast Roman’s $76,000 Bitcoin crash forecast is a follow-up to previous posts in which he explained several reasons why the leading cryptocurrency is in a bear market and could correct again soon. He referenced historical indicator behavior to justify his latest prediction. Related Reading: Bitcoin Price Crash To $25,000: Why The Bottom Is Much Lower The analyst explained that Bitcoin’s Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) and Relative Strength Index (RSI) were extremely oversold after its price dropped roughly 40% from its all-time high. As a result, the current consolidation has given these indicators a chance to reset. Roman sees the lack of strong buying pressure during this reset as a warning sign. He stressed that a true bullish reversal would need rising volume and clear higher highs, which are not showing on the daily chart. The analyst also noted that Bitcoin’s longer-term trend remains bearish, with the market continuing to form lower highs within a declining range. He has concluded that until clear reversal signals appear, traders should treat any upside moves as corrective, not the start of a fresh bull run. Featured image from Getty Images, chart from Tradingview.com
BitcoinWorld Polymarket Prediction Loss: ‘tiffanytrump’ User’s $24K Blunder Exposes Political Betting Perils In a stark reminder of the volatile nature of decentralized prediction markets, a Polymarket user operating under the conspicuous username ‘tiffanytrump’ has suffered a substantial financial setback. According to data from the on-chain analytics firm Lookonchain, this trader incurred a total loss of $24,472 across seven consecutive failed predictions on high-stakes political and geopolitical events. This incident, occurring within the rapidly evolving landscape of 2025, provides a compelling case study on the intersection of cryptocurrency, speculative betting, and real-world uncertainty. Furthermore, it underscores the critical importance of due diligence in markets where anonymity often masks a lack of privileged insight. Polymarket Prediction Loss: Deconstructing the $24,472 Setback The core of this story revolves around a series of failed contracts on Polymarket, a decentralized platform built on Polygon where users can speculate on real-world outcomes. Lookonchain’s analysis, which tracks wallet activity on the blockchain, revealed the precise scope of the losses. The user ‘tiffanytrump’ placed bets on seven distinct event contracts, each resolving against their position. Consequently, the cumulative loss reached $24,472. Importantly, analysts noted the username, while evocative, likely bears no connection to any individual with insider knowledge. This detail highlights a common phenomenon in pseudonymous markets: usernames can be misleading and should not be interpreted as signals of expertise. Polymarket itself has grown into a major platform for “event contracts,” allowing users to trade shares on binary outcomes. For instance, contracts might ask: “Will a specific candidate win an election?” or “Will a military conflict conclude by a certain date?” Shares for “Yes” or “No” trade between $0.00 and $1.00, with the price reflecting the market’s perceived probability. A resolution in your favor yields $1.00 per share; an incorrect prediction results in a total loss of the stake. The platform utilizes blockchain technology for transparent, trustless settlement, a feature that also enables firms like Lookonchain to publicly audit trading activity. Analyzing the Failed Political and War-Related Contracts While the specific contracts traded by ‘tiffanytrump’ were not detailed in the initial report, we can contextualize them within Polymarket’s typical offerings. During recent periods, the platform has featured numerous contracts on topics such as: National Elections: Outcomes of presidential, parliamentary, or gubernatorial races worldwide. Geopolitical Events: Predictions on the escalation, de-escalation, or specific milestones in ongoing international conflicts. Policy Decisions: Market sentiment on central bank interest rate changes or major legislative votes. Legal Proceedings: Speculation on court rulings or regulatory actions against major corporations or figures. Betting on such complex, multifaceted events carries inherent risk. Unlike sports with defined rules, political and war outcomes are influenced by countless unpredictable variables—diplomatic backchannels, unforeseen economic data, or sudden strategic shifts. A trader, even one with a politically charged username, operates with the same publicly available information as other participants. Therefore, consistent losses suggest a miscalibration in interpreting that information or a failure to adequately hedge positions. Hypothetical Breakdown of Prediction Market Risks Risk Type Description Relevance to ‘tiffanytrump’ Case Information Asymmetry Some participants may have non-public knowledge. Lookonchain explicitly dismissed insider advantage for this user. Market Sentiment Bias Prices can be driven by emotion, not rational analysis. Following crowd sentiment on volatile events may lead to losses. Liquidity Risk Difficulty entering/exiting positions at desired prices. Niche political contracts can have lower liquidity, amplifying price impact. Resolution Ambiguity Disputes over how an event is objectively determined. Polymarket uses designated resolvers, but ambiguity can arise in complex situations. The Critical Role of On-Chain Analytics and Lookonchain The very discovery of this trading pattern exemplifies the transparency—and scrutiny—inherent in decentralized finance (DeFi). Lookonchain and similar firms parse blockchain data to uncover narratives, from whale movements to retail trading trends. Their report on ‘tiffanytrump’ serves multiple purposes. First, it provides a real-world, data-driven cautionary tale for new market participants. Second, it demonstrates the utility of blockchain analytics for financial journalism and risk assessment. Finally, it reinforces that in Web3, while your identity may be private, your financial transactions are often an open book for those with the tools to read it. This public ledger aspect is a double-edged sword, promoting accountability while eliminating privacy. This incident also touches on broader regulatory discussions surrounding prediction markets. Regulators in various jurisdictions continue to debate whether these platforms constitute gambling, financial securities trading, or a novel asset class. High-profile losses, especially on sensitive subjects like politics and war, inevitably attract regulatory attention. Proponents argue they are valuable information aggregation tools, often cited for their predictive accuracy compared to polls. Critics, however, contend they can trivialize serious events and enable financially damaging speculation. The ‘tiffanytrump’ loss will likely be referenced in both arguments. Broader Implications for Cryptocurrency and Prediction Markets The story extends beyond a single trader’s misfortune. It reflects on the maturation—and persistent pitfalls—of the prediction market sector. As of 2025, these platforms have seen increased adoption but remain niche compared to traditional financial or sports betting markets. A loss of this magnitude, while not catastrophic for the ecosystem, serves as a potent reminder. Key takeaways for the industry include: Risk Education is Paramount: Platforms face growing pressure to better educate users on the probabilities and mechanics of event contracts. Pseudonymity vs. Responsibility: The use of attention-grabbing usernames raises questions about market integrity and potential misleading impressions. Analytics as a Standard: On-chain due diligence is becoming a standard practice for serious participants, shifting the advantage to those who can interpret chain data. For the average observer, this episode demystifies the often-glamorized world of crypto trading. It illustrates that significant losses occur regularly, detached from the hype of bull markets. The blockchain merely records these outcomes impartially. Moreover, it highlights that in markets driven by global events, even a seemingly informed position can be wrong, and diversification—or extremely cautious position sizing—is a fundamental principle often ignored in the pursuit of high returns on binary bets. Conclusion The Polymarket prediction loss endured by user ‘tiffanytrump’ is a multifaceted event with clear lessons. It underscores the high-risk nature of speculating on political and military outcomes, even on technologically sophisticated platforms. The analysis from Lookonchain confirms that a notable username does not equate to trading prowess or insider knowledge. For the broader cryptocurrency and prediction market community, this case reinforces the necessity of rigorous personal risk management and the invaluable role of transparent on-chain data. As these markets evolve toward 2025 and beyond, integrating such real-world cautionary tales into user education will be crucial for sustainable growth and responsible participation. FAQs Q1: What is Polymarket and how do its prediction contracts work? Polymarket is a decentralized prediction market platform built on the Polygon blockchain. Users trade “shares” in binary event outcomes (e.g., Yes/No on an election result). Shares settle at $1.00 if correct and $0.00 if incorrect, with market prices reflecting collective probability estimates. Q2: Did the user ‘tiffanytrump’ actually have insider political information? No. According to Lookonchain’s analysis, the on-chain trading patterns and outcomes suggest the user did not possess or benefit from any privileged insider information, despite the suggestive username. Q3: How can the public see details of a trader’s losses on Polymarket? Because Polymarket operates on a public blockchain, all transactions are recorded on the ledger. Analytics firms like Lookonchain use these public records to cluster wallet addresses, identify trading activity, and calculate profit and loss for specific entities. Q4: Are prediction markets like Polymarket legal? The legality varies significantly by jurisdiction. Some regions treat them as a form of gambling, others as financial markets. Users are responsible for understanding and complying with the laws in their country of residence. Q5: What is the main risk highlighted by this ‘tiffanytrump’ trading loss? The primary risk highlighted is the danger of speculative trading on complex real-world events without superior information or effective risk management. It demonstrates that significant financial loss is possible even on a transparent, decentralized platform. This post Polymarket Prediction Loss: ‘tiffanytrump’ User’s $24K Blunder Exposes Political Betting Perils first appeared on BitcoinWorld .
As the price of Ethereum sits below $3,200, awaiting upgrades inside the network and more ETF inflows to trend-follow the subsequent phase in its price action, an additional project is taking a more apparent and quicker path of expansion. The attractive alternative in the best crypto investment options to be entered is Mutuum Finance (MUTM) at $0.04 price in the current presale phase. Instead of relying on the overall bull market trends, MUTM is applying intrinsic mechanisms that include peer-to-contract yield and revenue-sharing mechanism where investors earn annual yields. Ethereum Price Analysis Ethereum is retaining its strength through institutional accumulation coming from entities such as BitMine, as well as through projects such as Glamsterdam. ETH is also leading in the tokenization of real-world assets, having surpassed $12 billion However, this is still a rather sluggish pattern in its price, which depends on global economic conditions. This causes those searching what crypto to buy now to pivot from Ethereum to a smaller project set to provide faster gains. MUTM Presale The presale of Mutuum Finance is one of the reasons it has been identified as the best cryptocurrency to invest in. Currently in its 7th phase at a price of 0.04, the cryptocurrency has managed a 300% increase from its initial value. However, with the upcoming Phase 8 expected to increase the price by another 20%, the benefits of early entry are still there. When Mutuum Finance launches at $0.06, an investor who starts with $1500 in presale phase 7 today will have $2250 in their portfolio. That’s a $750 profit even before market activity takes the price higher. This cheap cryptocurrency has a fixed supply of 4 billion tokens, where 45% of the supply has been allocated to the presale. Over $19 million has been raised so far. Observers believe that longer-term strategies such as a multi-chain network expansion and a native stablecoin make MUTM a contender for the title of next big crypto. Peer to Contract Model: Direct Yield Generation MUTM is not solely resting on price speculation since it offers DeFi functionality through its concept of Peer-to-Contract lending. As an example, a deposit of $10,000 earning 15% APY can make $1500 a year. For a borrower, they can access a loan at a reasonable interest rate while benefitting from the price increases of the token used as collateral. Buy-and-Distribute Model Mutuum Finance has a buy-and-distribute approach, which is one of the reasons why it is given the title of the best crypto to invest in. It uses the platform fees to buy MUTM tokens, which are then distributed to the stakers. If the annual protocol fees hit $5 million, then a fraction goes to buying back MUTM and resharing it among mtToken stakers. Obtaining Excessive Rewards Ethereum is considered to be a top player in the market, although it is expected to grow slowly. This is why many investors asking the cheap crypto to buy right now have started to diversify their investment portfolios with newer opportunities. The Mutuum Finance investment opportunity is based on three models, including an attractive lending and borrowing rates, a buyback and redistribute engine as well as a fast-progressing presale. For investors looking to invest in the best cryptocurrency that has a higher ROI value, MUTM is one of the options that are fundamentally driven and are soon to be noticed as yet another top cryptocurrency in decentralized finance. For more information about Mutuum Finance (MUTM) visit the links below: Website: https://mutuum.com/ Linktree: https://linktr.ee/mutuumfinance
BitcoinWorld USDT Minted: Tether Treasury’s Monumental 1,000 Million Injection Sparks Liquidity Debate On-chain analytics platform Whale Alert reported a significant blockchain event on March 21, 2025: the Tether Treasury minted 1,000 million USDT, a move immediately scrutinized by market participants for its potential impact on cryptocurrency liquidity and stability. USDT Minted: Decoding the Treasury’s Billion-Dollar Transaction The creation, or “minting,” of 1,000 million USDT represents a standard operational procedure for Tether Operations Limited. Consequently, this process involves authorizing new digital tokens on the Tron blockchain. Importantly, these tokens enter the company’s treasury reserve before eventual distribution to exchanges and market makers. Furthermore, such large-scale mints typically precede anticipated market demand for dollar-pegged stablecoin liquidity. Historical data, for instance, often correlates these events with periods of high trading volume or volatility. Tether’s transparency page confirms the mint, providing a verifiable, on-chain record of the transaction. The company consistently states that all USDT in circulation remains fully backed by reserves. These reserves reportedly include cash, cash equivalents, and other assets. Regular attestations from a third-party accounting firm aim to provide external validation of these claims. Metric Detail Asset Tether (USDT) Amount Minted 1,000,000,000 Reporting Entity Whale Alert Primary Blockchain Tron (TRC-20) Common Industry Term “Authorized but not issued” The Mechanics and Market Context of Stablecoin Issuance Stablecoin minting serves as a critical infrastructure function within digital asset markets. Market makers and large institutions frequently request substantial USDT quantities to facilitate trading pairs and provide liquidity. Therefore, a treasury mint acts as a preparatory step, ensuring sufficient inventory exists to meet these institutional requests without causing market disruption through large, direct purchases. Several key factors provide essential context for this 2025 mint: Regulatory Landscape: By 2025, stablecoin issuers like Tether operate under increased regulatory scrutiny in major jurisdictions like the EU and the United States. Market Dominance: USDT maintains its position as the largest stablecoin by market capitalization, often influencing overall market sentiment. On-Chain Transparency: Tools like Whale Alert allow real-time tracking, making such operations public and subject to immediate analysis. Expert Analysis: Liquidity Signals and Reserve Management Financial analysts specializing in crypto-markets interpret treasury mints through a dual lens. Primarily, they view the action as a bullish signal for liquidity demand. A proactive mint suggests Tether anticipates client needs for substantial stablecoin inflows. This often precedes or coincides with increased trading activity across cryptocurrency exchanges. Conversely, skeptics and researchers consistently call for greater detail regarding the composition of the reserves backing new tokens. They argue that while the mint is technologically simple, the underlying financial mechanics require rigorous, real-time auditing to maintain systemic trust. The process highlights the centralized governance model of fiat-backed stablecoins, where a single entity controls the issuance valve based on internal assessments of demand and reserve adequacy. Historical Precedents and Comparative Impact Historically, similar large-scale mints have occurred during specific market phases. For example, significant mints often preceded major bullish rallies in 2021 and 2024, as traders sought stable entry points into volatile assets. Alternatively, mints also happen during market stress to provide a liquid safe haven, allowing investors to exit positions into a stable asset without leaving the blockchain ecosystem. Compared to algorithmic or decentralized stablecoins, Tether’s model offers predictability. The mint is a discretionary corporate action, not an automated response to a collateral ratio. This provides stability but also centralizes a key market function. The immediate market impact of a mint is typically neutral on USDT’s peg, as the tokens are not immediately sold on the open market. The long-term impact depends entirely on how and when the treasury distributes the newly created supply into the circulating economy. Conclusion The minting of 1,000 million USDT by the Tether Treasury represents a significant yet standard operation in the digital asset infrastructure. This event underscores the ongoing demand for stablecoin liquidity and highlights the transparent, yet centrally managed, nature of major fiat-backed stablecoins. As the market evolves in 2025, the processes behind such events remain critical for analysts monitoring liquidity flows, regulatory compliance, and the overall health of the cryptocurrency trading environment. The USDT minted today will likely facilitate billions in future transactions, emphasizing its role as a core pillar of market operation. FAQs Q1: What does it mean when Tether mints new USDT? Minting refers to the authorized creation of new USDT tokens on a blockchain. These tokens are added to Tether’s treasury reserves and are not immediately in public circulation. The company states this is done to meet future demand from exchanges and institutional clients. Q2: Does minting new USDT cause inflation or dilute the value? No, not directly. Tether maintains that every USDT is 100% backed by reserves. Therefore, minting new tokens should correspond to an equivalent increase in their reserve holdings (like cash or bonds). The value is designed to remain pegged to $1, not subject to inflationary dilution like a traditional currency. Q3: How can the public verify this mint happened? The transaction is recorded on public blockchains like Tron or Ethereum. Analytics platforms like Whale Alert track large transactions. Additionally, Tether’s official transparency page shows the total authorized supply across all blockchains, which updates following a mint. Q4: Is a large mint always a sign of a coming bull market? Not always. While mints often precede increased trading activity, they can also occur to provide liquidity during volatile periods or to fulfill specific, large institutional orders. It is a signal of anticipated demand, but the nature of that demand can vary. Q5: What is the difference between “minted” and “in circulation”? “Minted” or “authorized” tokens exist in Tether’s treasury wallet. “In circulation” refers to tokens that have been sold or distributed to the public and are actively traded on exchanges and held in private wallets. A large mint increases the potential supply, not the immediate circulating supply. This post USDT Minted: Tether Treasury’s Monumental 1,000 Million Injection Sparks Liquidity Debate first appeared on BitcoinWorld .
XRP saw a substantial surge in payments volume on the market, with the possibility of hitting levels even higher.
Despite Polymarket unveiling new fees for the 15-minute crypto markets in an apparent effort to curb high-frequency algorithmic trading, the probable trading bot that managed to turn a $300 investment into more than $400,000 in profits appears to have continued its winning streak . Specifically, the profile designated 0x8dxd has made an additional 700 predictions between January 6 and press time on January 9, increasing its one-month profits from $438,000 to nearly $512,000, and its all-time profits to over $550,000 on the prediction market. Polymarket statistics for 0x8dxd. Source: Polymarket Furthermore, the trading bot’s strategy appears, for the time being, unchanged as it has continued making directional bets for major cryptocurrencies with the most common predictions ‘objects’ being Bitcoin ( BTC ), Ethereum ( ETH ), Solana ( SOL ), and XRP . Previously, it has been suspected that the system leverages the slight lag between the data from major digital assets exchanges such as Binance and Coinbase to place its bets after the likely outcome has been revealed, but Polymarket’s odds are still priced as being at approximately 50:50. Polymarket unveils new 15-minute market fees Still, it is worth noting that it remains uncertain if the strategy can be replicated given the announced changes to Polymarket. Additionally, it is possible that the trading bot could soon become significantly less profitable. Indeed, the prediction market unveiled that it shall be collecting additional fees only in 15-minute crypto markets and that it will redistribute some of the proceeds as rebates to makers that ensure liquidity for the platform. The system’s structure appears to be targeting the strategy likely employed by the highly-successful trading bot as the new ‘tax’ will be highest at 50% odds, and will be growing substantially smaller toward the extremes of 0% and 100% probabilities. With that being said, the fees themselves will be rather low even at their highest values as they will never exceed 1.56%. According to Polymarket, the change is aimed at ensuring the fast-moving markets remain ‘deeper, tighter, and easier to trade.’ Featured image via Shutterstock The post Polymarket trading bot that turned $300 into $400,000 — Is now up this much appeared first on Finbold .
A new Digital Asset Act will regulate stablecoins, requiring 100% reserve backing and user redemption rights.