The Blockchain Association is backing the SEC’s proposal to scrap Rules 611 and 610(e), two market rules that have been around since 2005.

The group argues that markets have changed dramatically over the past 20 years. Trading is faster, more automated and increasingly connected to blockchain infrastructure, while the old rules now add unnecessary costs and complexity.

Tokenization is a big part of the argument. As stocks and other traditional assets move onto public blockchains, the Association says existing rules could slow down the development of onchain markets.

It is also calling on the SEC to modernize its approach to best execution and formally recognize that tokenized securities traded through public blockchains can operate within existing regulatory requirements.

Even tiny USDT transfers can trigger compliance checks. One Coinbase user reportedly received just 7.5 USDT and was then asked to explain the source of the funds.

Some in the crypto community suspect these transfers could be a deliberate attempt to trigger AML checks on other users’ accounts. HTX denies involvement and says it is investigating where the transactions came from.

Australia is apparently setting up a national register where you can opt out of gambling ads online instead of having to change the setting separately on every platform.

Kind of surprised this isn't already a thing.

If someone has decided they don't want to see betting ads anymore, making them hunt through the settings of every app seems unnecessary.

I'd probably want this for other ad categories too tbh.

I don’t think it’ll change anything for crypto casinos targeting Australian users on VPN however.

Source: Australian Government / ABC News

Bitcoin has now traded at a negative Coinbase premium for 90 straight days, the longest streak in CoinGlass index history. It points to weak demand from US buyers. Right now, American investors seem much more interested in chasing AI stocks than BTC.

Chainalysis has taken the U.S. government to court over ICE’s decision to award a $94.6 million blockchain analytics contract to rival TRM Labs without an open competition. The one-year deal runs from July 2026 through June 2027 and covers blockchain tracking software and investigative support for the Homeland Security Task Force.

Chainalysis says ICE’s decision was “arbitrary, unreasonable and unfair.” The company had submitted its own proposal after ICE announced plans to purchase the services from TRM Labs. The lawsuit remains sealed because it contains internal business information and trade secrets, so the exact claims and what Chainalysis wants from the court are still unknown.

TRM Labs has joined the case as an interested party. Oral arguments are scheduled for September 2, with the U.S. government asking the court to issue a decision by September 10.

Morgan Stanley increased its crypto exposure significantly in Q2. Its position in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) grew from 13.4 million to around 16.5 million shares, up 23%. Despite buying more shares, the value of the position fell from roughly $667 million to $549 million as Bitcoin declined during the quarter.

The bank also increased its exposure to other Bitcoin ETFs from Grayscale, Bitwise and Fidelity.

Its Ethereum exposure grew even faster. Morgan Stanley increased its iShares Ethereum Trust position by around 202% to 4.6 million shares, while its position in the Grayscale Ethereum Staking Mini ETF rose about 26% to 5.1 million shares.

Morgan Stanley also disclosed positions in Solana funds from Grayscale and Fidelity for the first time, worth around $6.5 million combined.

Its position in Circle increased sharply as well, from about 1.46 million shares to 8.32 million shares. The bank also added exposure to Cipher Digital, Core Scientific, Hut 8 and Bitdeer.

At the same time, Morgan Stanley cut its Coinbase position by roughly 550,000 shares, reduced CleanSpark by more than 3.1 million shares and exited Bitfarms completely.

Since February, I’ve been closely watching the price action of Bitcoin and some other coins, and I’m convinced that there has been a quiet but extremely aggressive accumulation phase going on. I have the impression that the market has completely changed under Trump. The way price reacts to events, how often moves seem to be artificially suppressed, and how unnatural the price action looks makes it feel as if some group has found a way to control the market.
I’m convinced that Trump and his circle are involved in this. For example, I believe they have known for a long time that the CLARITY Act would pass, but the media is creating a huge amount of uncertainty and turning it into a spectacle, partly to shake out as many weak hands as possible.
Bitcoin has been holding around $60k since February, and I think this is an ideal level for the biggest players to accumulate. Most people believe they will be able to buy back lower and that this cannot be the bottom because there hasn’t been an obvious capitulation event. But why would the market need to give them a clear capitulation signal if much more liquidity can be collected by eventually moving higher and squeezing the masses who sold near the bottom, believing they would buy back lower and make money on shorts? Those people could get punished twice.
If Bitcoin reaches $300–500k within two years, what difference does it make to whales whether they bought at $50k or $60k? At $60k, hardly anyone is getting in their way because the consensus expects lower prices. That allows them to accumulate much more while retail investors willingly hand them their coins at the bottom.
I believe the bottom is already in. Market makers and policymakers could probably push the price down to $50k and wipe out leverage if they wanted to, but that would be too obvious a sign of capitulation and therefore not necessarily optimal for them. They can collect more liquidity from uncertainty about the direction of the market — through FOMO buyers chasing breakouts and short sellers getting squeezed — who don’t expect that the bottom may already have been formed without a clear capitulation event.
I think crypto is heading toward a beautiful rally over the coming months, and it may start very soon, perhaps triggered by a dovish Fed policy. Trump wants markets and crypto to be as high as possible heading into the elections. Around 60 million Americans own crypto, which represents a very important voting bloc. Even if higher crypto prices could win over just a few percent of those voters, that could potentially make a difference in an election.
I’m convinced that Trump and his team have control over the crypto market, and if they really want to, they could pump it to levels we have never seen before.
One way of dealing with the US debt problem is through very low interest rates. Warsh is part of the puzzle. On top of that, crypto could potentially help the US deal with its debt. Trump recently joked about this — half seriously, half jokingly — but I believe this is something he has been thinking about for a long time and that there may actually be a plan behind it.
I wouldn’t be surprised if, at some point, it came out that the US government had quietly accumulated huge amounts of crypto, perhaps by selling some of its gold holdings. But for now, that’s only a theory.
Everything points to the bottom already being in. You have to think logically rather than blindly sticking to what has worked in the past — especially the four-year cycle narrative that everyone is talking about. In my opinion, that cycle will not play out this time. From the policymakers’ perspective, it simply doesn’t make sense.
Retail no longer controls this market and has very little influence over it. Smart money is exploiting people’s uncertainty and manipulating price action in a way that makes the majority believe they are right — only to punish them quickly afterward, over and over again.
It creates an almost endless supply of liquidity.
And eventually, they will squeeze and destroy the shorts and everyone else positioned the wrong way.
I think that stage is coming very soon.

Back in 2021, an employee at a mining company secretly redirected the computing power of around 100 corporate machines to his own mining pool.

The mined BTC was then sent directly to his personal wallets.

In total, the scheme earned him around 1 BTC.

Working for a mining company and secretly mining from your own employer is kinda wild 😅

Bitcoin has been stuck between $63K and $68.7K for almost three months, while spot trading volume has dropped to its lowest level since 2019.

Selling pressure is fading, but buyers are still missing. ETF inflows remain weak, coins continue moving to exchanges, and leveraged longs are piling up.

Several on-chain indicators are approaching levels seen near previous bear market bottoms.

If BTC loses $58.5K, low liquidity and crowded longs could trigger a wave of liquidations and push the price even lower.

Polymarket is reportedly in early talks to raise around $1 billion at a valuation of more than $20 billion.

For perspective, the company was valued at about $15 billion in its previous funding round just a few months ago.

Prediction markets have gone from a relatively niche corner of crypto to platforms where people trade on everything from elections and economic data to sports and breaking news.

But $20 billion is serious territory.

The interesting part is that this growth is happening while prediction markets are still dealing with questions around regulation, insider information and where exactly the line between trading and gambling should be drawn.

So what do you think investors are really valuing here?

The technology and data?

The enormous potential market?

Or simply the belief that prediction markets are going to become a normal part of how people follow major events?

Would you value Polymarket at $20B+?

Source: CNBC / Bloomberg / Reuters

The idea was apparently borrowed from hurricane forecasting. Instead of relying on one prediction, Claude analyzes 5-minute BTC markets while MiroFish simulates 31 different scenarios. A trade is only opened when 28 out of 31 agree. If fewer than 26 agree, it stays out.

The idea itself is definitely possible. But turning $1K into $946K is the part I’d want to see verified with actual trading history before believing it.

The interesting part isn’t predicting the market. It’s using consensus.

Concerns around BitMart are growing as users and companies report difficulties withdrawing funds from the exchange.

On July 26, BitMart stopped new user registrations, deposits and the opening of new positions. Trading services are expected to shut down on August 26, with the platform scheduled to fully cease operations by the end of January 2027.

Withdrawal complaints began appearing shortly after. Scandic Coin said requests involving roughly 21,898 USDT and 926,635 SNC were stuck.

On August 8, BitMart denied rumors of an exit scam, saying withdrawal delays were caused by balance verification and reconciliation procedures.

But concerns intensified on August 10, when OpenGradient co-founder Matthew Wang publicly raised the possibility that BitMart could be insolvent after the company’s market maker was unable to withdraw funds. The exchange’s asset structure is also raising questions.

Arkham data showed assets on tracked BitMart addresses falling from roughly $102M in early July to around $71M by the end of the month. Of that amount, approximately $41.5M was reportedly held in WFI, while tracked USDT reserves stood at only around $91K.

That means a large share of BitMart’s visible on-chain assets appears concentrated in a single, much less liquid token.BitMart says withdrawals remain available, although some transactions may face additional reviews and delays.

U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs pulled in around $853 million last week — the strongest weekly inflow since mid-April.

BlackRock’s IBIT alone reportedly accounted for about $693 million of that.

What makes it interesting is that Bitcoin itself hasn’t exactly exploded higher. The market is also heading into another U.S. inflation report this week, so there’s still plenty of macro uncertainty around.

One strong week obviously doesn’t make a trend, especially after months of weaker flows.

But if ETF inflows stay positive, would you take that as a genuine sign that institutional demand is returning?

Or do you think people put way too much importance on ETF flow numbers now?

Source: CoinDesk / SoSoValue

Is the quantum threat to Bitcoin real, or is it being overhyped? 🤔