XRP Builder Funding Shifts In 2026 As Ripple Backs New Model

  vor 6 Monaten

Ripple is reshaping how builders on the XRP Ledger get funded in 2026, arguing that the ecosystem has reached a point where support needs to flow through more than Ripple-linked programs alone. The change matters because it signals a deliberate move away from a relatively centralized funding structure toward a broader network of DAOs, independent hubs, universities and venture partners. In its latest ecosystem update , Ripple said more than $550 million has already been deployed into XRPL initiatives since 2017, spanning non-equity grants, builder incentives, strategic partnerships and growth programs. Since 2021, those efforts have included hackathons, builder bounties, XRPL Grants and the XRPL Accelerator, with nearly 200 projects supported across areas including payments, DeFi, tokenization, AI, gaming, e-commerce and enterprise finance. XRP Ledger Enters New Phase The core message is that 2026 marks a structural pivot. Ripple said ecosystem funding has historically flowed through Ripple-supported channels, but that the next phase will lean on a “more distributed model” in which independent organizations, regional hubs, venture firms and community-led initiatives take on a larger role. The company framed the objective as giving builders “multiple channels” to access capital and support, rather than relying on a single gatekeeper. At the center of that shift is a new FinTech Builder Program aimed at startups building institutional-grade financial applications on XRPL. Ripple said the program will focus on use cases including stablecoin payments , credit infrastructure, tokenization and regulated financial services, while offering more than a traditional grants track. According to the post, founders will get support “across the entire development lifecycle,” from product design through market launch, with help on XRPL integration, strategy and partnerships. Ripple also outlined a wider support stack around that program. That includes expanded accelerator partnerships with venture firms and startup platforms, regional startup competitions, and builder awards meant to help projects after hackathons or competitions, when early traction still needs a bridge to something durable. The emphasis throughout is less on one-off experimentation and more on getting teams to production-ready financial products. The more interesting signal, though, may be where decision-making starts to move. Ripple highlighted XAO DAO as a hybrid DAO built for XRPL that will fund developers, community builders and early-stage ideas through microgrants. It said the DAO is designed to “amplify community voice” and create feedback loops where members submit proposals, vote on priorities and help steer the ecosystem’s direction. In parallel, XRPL Commons is positioned as an independent pillar of support, with Ripple explicitly saying the aim is to ensure that “no single organization becomes the sole gatekeeper” for ecosystem funding. Other pieces of the 2026 map point to geographic and institutional expansion. Ripple said XRP Asia is being developed as a dedicated APAC hub with a long-term plan for localized funding and regional ecosystem growth. UDAX, first launched with UC Berkeley in fall 2025, is set to expand this year to Fundação Getulio Vargas in São Paulo, Oxford in the summer, and Berkeley again in the fall. Ripple also pointed to growing venture participation from firms including Dragonfly, Pantera, Franklin Templeton and Tenity as another sign that XRPL is trying to mature from grant-backed experimentation into a venue for fundable, production-scale startups. At press time, XRP traded at $1.3773.

Weiterlesen

Bitcoin Manipulation By Jane Street? Ex-Wall Street Market Maker Says No

  vor 6 Monaten

The latest Jane Street debate on X is meeting a blunt rebuttal from Ari Paul. The BlockTower founder, who says he used to work as a Wall Street market maker 15 years ago, argues that Bitcoin’s failure to push higher is better explained by spot sell-side than by a long-running suppression campaign. Paul’s answer was direct. “In short: no,” he wrote, before adding that market makers do “game the system” in many ways, but that in liquid products such as BTC ETFs, the effect is usually limited to “meaningful but small costs to consumers,” not a lasting distortion of the underlying asset price. He framed the distinction as one between short-term microstructure games and a broader claim that one firm kept Bitcoin from reaching far higher levels. Bitcoin Manipulation? Small Moves, Fast Reversions To make that case, Paul pointed to the kind of behavior traders on desks know well. “For example, market makers may manipulate the price to run stop limit orders,” he wrote. “But that’s typically on an intraday timeframe. So they might run an asset like MSFT or BTC 2% in a weak market to trigger stops, then a few seconds or minutes later, the price is mostly back to where it was before.” In his telling, that is still manipulation, but it is not the same as structurally pinning Bitcoin below some imagined fair value for months. Related Reading: Bitcoin Spot Volumes Sink To 2024 Lows As Coinbase Selling Pressure Eases That argument lands against a more conspiratorial narrative now circulating online, why Bitcoin is not already at $150,000. Paul’s pushback does not deny that large Wall Street firms can shape short-term trading conditions. It rejects the stronger claim that such activity is the central explanation for Bitcoin’s broader price path. Paul’s core point was much less dramatic. “Why is BTC down? Because OGs sold tens of thousands of coins, and not enough people wanted to buy them.” That line closely matched the view from renowned on-chain analyst James Check, who argued that “Jane Street didn’t suppress the Bitcoin price” and that “HODLers all did,” by selling large amounts of spot into the market. Jane Street didn’t suppress the Bitcoin price folks. HODLers all did. It’s just not that hard, stop summoning your inner salty goldbug but blaming manipulators. People. Sold. A. Fucktonne. Of. Spot. Bitcoin. https://t.co/CrWgPUzUFP pic.twitter.com/N3VhgYjKhm — _Checkmate 🟠🔑⚡☢️🛢️ (@_Checkmatey_) February 26, 2026 He added: “My point has always been the same; manipulation is a thing that has always, will always, and is indeed the literal job of large wall street firms. However, you do not need that as the central argument to explain why the price didn’t go higher, nor why it went lower. That can be well and truly explained by looking at spot sell-side.” Paul did leave room for exceptions. He wrote that there are rare cases where Wall Street manipulates an asset in major ways over a longer period, but said those cases are uncommon because they are risky and harder to profit from than people assume. Related Reading: Is Jane Street Why Bitcoin Isn’t At $150K? Expert Debunks The Myth “There are rare exceptions where Wall Street manipulates an asset in major ways longer term, but this is quite rare because it’s very risky and not as easy as it looks to profit. 99% of the time that an asset isn’t moving like you want and people are crying “manipulation”, it’s best to embrace the cognitive dissonance, avoid the “easy way out” of blaming manipulation,” Paul wrote. That leaves the current Jane Street argument in a narrower frame. Yes, large firms can influence intraday flows, liquidity, and execution quality. But based on Paul’s account, that is a long way from proving that one market maker is the reason Bitcoin is not trading materially higher. Notably, the Jane Street theory picked up fresh attention after Terraform Labs’ wind-down administrator sued the firm in Manhattan federal court, alleging insider trading tied to Terra’s 2022 collapse. The complaint says Jane Street used a private chat called “Bryce’s Secret” to obtain non-public information and alleges an 85 million UST trade on Curve that helped trigger a selloff; Jane Street has denied wrongdoing and called the case opportunistic. At press time, BTC traded at $66,090. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com

Weiterlesen

MARA Holdings Weathers $1.71 Billion Loss, Banks on AI and Data Center Expansion

  vor 6 Monaten

MARA Holdings reported a $1.71 billion loss, mainly caused by Bitcoin's steep price decline. The company is shifting focus toward artificial intelligence and data center investments. Continue Reading: MARA Holdings Weathers $1.71 Billion Loss, Banks on AI and Data Center Expansion The post MARA Holdings Weathers $1.71 Billion Loss, Banks on AI and Data Center Expansion appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .

Weiterlesen

Trump orders US agencies to halt Anthropic AI use after Pentagon ethics dispute

  vor 6 Monaten

The US President Donald Trump blacklisted Anthropic, mandating a federal ban on its technology following an intense disagreement between the AI firm and the Pentagon on matters regarding the military’s application of this technology. At this moment, negotiations between Anthropic and the Department of Defense had stalled, as both sides refused to compromise, while the deadline to reach an agreement approached. Concerning the Pentagon’s request , sources said officials at the United States Department of Defense headquarters demanded that Anthropic loosen its ethical guidelines; failure to do so could result in severe repercussions. Meanwhile, Trump shared a post on Truth Social outlining his viewpoint on the matter. In the post, he noted that, “The Leftwing extremists at Anthropic have made a DISASTROUS MISTAKE by trying to STRONG-ARM the Department of War and forcing them to follow their Terms of Service instead of our Constitution,” further adding that, “WE will determine our Country’s future – NOT some out-of-control, Radical Left AI firm led by people who don’t understand what the real world is like.” Notably, during this time, the deadline was merely one hour away. Anthropic-Pentagon’s dispute sparks security concerns Earlier, Anthropic declined Pentagon officials’ request for contractors to grant approval for the utilization of their systems for any lawful purpose. At this point, the AI firm refused to ease limitations that prevented Claude from being used effectively for mass domestic surveillance or for fully autonomous weapons. Given the intensity of the situat ion , Trump characterized the incident as a significant threat to US troops and national security. In a statement, he argued that, “Their selfishness is putting American lives at risk, our troops in danger, and our national security in jeopardy.” Following Trump’s argument, reports highlighted that Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, demonstrated efforts to calm things down. Even so, several analysts admitted that reducing tensions remains a tough task . On the other hand, Pete Hegseth, the United States Secretary of Defense, argued that labeling Anthropic a supply chain risk threatened to terminate the connection between US military vendors and the AI company. Hegseth made these remarks roughly 24 hours after the CEO of Anthropic, Dario Amodei, issued a statement alleging that his firm cannot comply with the Defense Department’s request. According to him, the request was against Anthropic’s conscience. This situation prompted analysts to conduct research, which revealed that the defense contract dispute centers on AI in national security. In the meantime, after months of private dialogue, the AI firm recently decided to make the discussion public, noting that the new contract language, framed as a compromise, was written in legal jargon that effectively rendered the stated protections susceptible to constant neglect. Generative AI secures popularity among several companies amid the AI boom era Regarding the heated conflict between Anthropic and the Pentagon, reports highlighted that the generative AI field leverages advanced models to create realistic but inaccurate software code, text, images, and other outputs that closely mimic human creativity. To achieve this outcome, some sources noted that the models function by identifying underlying patterns in the training data to produce context-aware responses to user inputs. At this point, it is worth noting that Generative AI moves beyond mere analysis to actively generating content. According to analysts’ research, this capability could revolutionize numerous industries, including defense. At the same time, developing these models poses serious challenges, including ethical concerns and potential existential risks. Even so, several companies have demonstrated a strong commitment to allocating substantial funds to the field. For instance, Pentagon officials released a statement last summer claiming they had secured individual contracts with major industry players, including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and xAI. Notably, each contract was reported to be valued at $200 million, particularly for frontier artificial intelligence initiatives. At this particular moment, reports highlighted that Anthropic views itself as a committed company to the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies. To underscore this dedication, the firm labels itself a “Public Benefit Corporation,” asserting its commitment to developing and maintaining safe, advanced AI for the lasting benefit of humanity. Get seen where it counts. Advertise in Cryptopolitan Research and reach crypto’s sharpest investors and builders.

Weiterlesen

Ethereum’s Market Order Imbalance Hits Record Negatives: $1,850 Is Now The Line In The Sand

  vor 6 Monaten

Ethereum is attempting to stabilize around the $2,000 level as the broader crypto market shows tentative signs of relief. After weeks of persistent pressure, price action has paused its decline, but sentiment remains fragile. The recent rebound has helped ease immediate downside momentum, yet the technical structure still reflects a market recovering from significant damage rather than entering a confirmed uptrend. Related Reading: Engine Stalled: How The $8 Billion ‘October Shock’ Left Bitcoin’s Spot Market In A Liquidity Trap According to a CryptoQuant analyst, Ethereum endured a severe liquidation-driven sell-off in recent weeks, falling sharply from local highs near $3,300 to lows around the $1,850 region. The intensity of this move becomes particularly evident when analyzing the Net Taker Volume (30-day moving average), a metric that measures aggressive market order activity. In February, this indicator plunged to its most negative level since last November, highlighting the dominance of aggressive sellers during the decline. Such extreme negative readings typically reflect panic-driven execution rather than orderly repositioning. When taker volume skews heavily to the sell side, it often signals forced exits, stop-outs, and cascading liquidations across derivatives markets. While Ethereum’s attempt to hold $2,000 suggests that immediate selling pressure may be easing, the underlying data confirms that the market recently absorbed one of its most intense bouts of downside aggression in months. Net Taker Volume Signals Capitulation — But Not Confirmation The dominance of towering red bars in Ethereum’s Net Taker Volume underscores how aggressively sellers controlled the order books during the recent decline. When taker sell orders consistently exceed taker buy orders by such a magnitude, it reflects urgency. This is not passive distribution; it is market participants hitting bids aggressively, often under stress. The combination of panic-driven exits, systematic short positioning, and forced long liquidations likely amplified the move from $3,300 to sub-$1,900 levels. Notably, the only meaningful cluster of green bars — representing aggressive buying — emerged in mid-January, coinciding with Ethereum’s local peak near $3,400. That brief resurgence in demand failed to sustain itself, after which sell-side momentum reasserted control. Structurally, this pattern suggests that upside liquidity was exhausted before a broader deleveraging cycle unfolded. Extreme negative Net Taker Volume readings are often associated with capitulation phases. Historically, such flushes can mark exhaustion points, as aggressive sellers eventually deplete themselves. However, capitulation alone does not confirm reversal. For a structural shift to materialize, the imbalance must normalize. A contraction in red bars followed by sustained green dominance would signal renewed conviction from aggressive buyers. Related Reading: The $2,000 Fault Line: Why Ethereum’s Record Volatility Signals An Imminent Explosion Ethereum Struggles To Reclaim $2,000 As Downtrend Persists Ethereum remains structurally weak despite brief stabilization attempts near the $2,000 level. The chart shows a clear breakdown from the $3,400–$3,600 region earlier this year, followed by a sequence of lower highs and lower lows — a textbook downtrend formation. The recent bounce has not altered this structure. Price is currently trading below the 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day moving averages, all of which are sloping downward. This alignment confirms bearish momentum across short-, medium-, and long-term horizons. Notably, the 50-day average has accelerated lower, reflecting sustained selling pressure rather than a temporary liquidity vacuum. Related Reading: Digital Gold Is Dead: The Institutional Architecture Binding Bitcoin To The Nasdaq In The 2026 Downturn The sharp decline toward the $1,850 zone was accompanied by a significant spike in volume, suggesting forced liquidations and aggressive distribution. Since then, volume has moderated during consolidation, indicating that while panic may have eased, conviction among buyers remains limited. Technically, $2,000 functions as a psychological pivot rather than confirmed support. A sustained move above the 50-day average would be required to signal improving momentum. Conversely, failure to hold the current range could reopen downside risk toward deeper liquidity pockets. Featured image from ChatGPT, chart from TradingView.com

Weiterlesen

Year Of The Underdog: Why Dogecoin Is On The Verge Of A Major Recovery

  vor 6 Monaten

It has been a brutal few months for Dogecoin in terms of price action. At the time of writing, Dogecoin is trading just below $0.10, below all of its moving averages, and sitting more than 86% below its all-time high. The price action looks bad for Dogecoin; however, a look at the on-chain data tells an entirely different story of resilience and network activity that’s being ignored. If history is any guide, this is exactly the kind of environment before a major recovery. Dogecoin’s Network Growth Price is often the last thing to move during rallies. Before any significant rally materializes, bullish sentiment tends to show up first in the data, and right now, Dogecoin’s network data is showing signs that demand serious attention. At the time of writing, daily active addresses are currently around 54,500, having recently spiked to nearly 58,000 this week. Even more notable is the longer-term trend. As noted by crypto analyst PennybagsCX on X, average address activity has grown from 806,000 earlier in the year to above 1.05 million in recent readings. This growth is happening during a price dip, showing participants are choosing to engage with the network at a time when it would be easy to walk away. For context, Dogecoin currently ranks third among all Proof-of-Work blockchains by 24-hour active addresses, commanding a 12% share of total PoW activity and outperforming blockchains like Dash and Bitcoin Cash. Buyers Are Hunting, Long-Term Holders Holding Derivatives’ positioning is also starting to tilt bullish. According to Coinglass’ long/short ratio data across Binance, OKX, and Bybit, retail traders are heavily positioned on the long side. On Binance, the retail long/short ratio stands at 2.29, while whale accounts show a ratio of 2.73, both indicating bullish sentiment. Whale positions on Binance also have a 1.94 long bias. Retail positioning on OKX is more pronounced, with a long/short ratio of 3.49, categorized as extremely bullish. Whale accounts on OKX show a 1.61 ratio leaning bullish, although whale positions currently have a more cautious stance in open exposure at 0.79. Bybit data shows similar optimism, with retail at 2.98 and whale accounts at 2.99 on the long side. Whale positions on Bybit are also close to neutral at 0.99, suggesting balanced positioning but not outright bearish pressure. The only note of caution in the data is Smart Money Sentiment, which reads as bearish across all three of the biggest Dogecoin exchanges. Another telling signal has been the Taker Volume Ratio, which recently climbed to around 63%. This means traders executing market buy orders are dominating the activity. When the ratio moves above 50%, it means a stronger demand, as buyers are willing to pay prevailing prices. Furthermore, Dogecoin’s Profit-Days metric has surpassed 1,100 for the first time in its history . This long-cycle indicator moves based on sustained profitability among holders. History shows that moves above 800 days are major turning points that were followed by parabolic runs in subsequent months.

Weiterlesen

Copyright © 2026 Aktuelle Krypto Kurse. - Impressum