Сборщик RSS-лент

The US Treasury on Wednesday released a joint proposed rule from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) that would put meat on the bones of the GENIUS Act, the federal law establishing a regulatory framework for stablecoins. 

The draft rule translates the statute’s requirements into concrete anti‑money‑laundering (AML) and sanctions‑compliance obligations for permitted payment stablecoin issuers (PPSIs), bringing the industry closer to clear standards.

Stablecoin Issuers To Follow Bank Secrecy Act Rules 

The GENIUS Act directs that PPSIs be treated as financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and be subject to the full range of federal rules that apply to US financial firms. 

Treasury’s proposal follows that instruction, seeking to tailor requirements to the scale of each PPSI while aiming to reduce potential illicit‑finance vulnerabilities and protect national security. 

In essence, the draft rule sets out how stablecoin issuers must detect, report, and block unlawful activity while maintaining the tools needed to comply with lawful orders.

Issuers would be obliged to establish and maintain anti‑money‑laundering and countering‑the‑financing‑of‑terrorism (CFT) programs. These programs must be structured and documented to align with the core expectations of regulated entities as outlined by OFAC. 

Issuers are also mandated to adhere to recordkeeping and reporting rules, furnishing OFAC with certifications submitted to their primary federal or state payment stablecoin regulator to confirm the presence of a robust sanctions program.

Additionally, these programs are required to include provisions for reporting suspicious activities and technical capabilities to detect and handle transactions that breach federal or state laws, regulations, or court orders promptly. 

Payment stablecoin issuers must also possess the capacity to act swiftly in compliance with lawful orders and maintain effective sanctions compliance programs in accordance with OFAC standards.

Compliance Under The GENIUS Act

Treasury emphasized that the proposal is meant to be proportionate and adaptable. The GENIUS Act tasks the Secretary of the Treasury with issuing regulations tailored to the size and complexity of PPSIs, and the draft rule reflects that directive by focusing on outcomes and capabilities rather than a one‑size‑fits‑all checklist.

If finalized, the GENIUS Act rule would mark a significant step toward integrating payment stablecoins into the US regulatory regime for financial institutions. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on the matter: 

President Trump is strengthening American leadership in digital financial technology. This proposal will protect the US financial system from national security threats without hindering American companies’ ability to forge ahead in the payment stablecoin ecosystem.

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

The Bitcoin, XRP, and Dogecoin prices are surging today, recording significant gains. This follows an agreement between the U.S. and Iran to a 2-week ceasefire as they work towards a peaceful settlement of the war. 

Why The Bitcoin, XRP, And Dogecoin Prices Are Up Today

The Bitcoin, XRP, and Dogecoin prices are up over 4% today, according to CoinMarketCap data. This comes amid the announcement by both the U.S. and Iran of a 2-week ceasefire. In a Truth Social post, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that both sides had agreed to a temporary ceasefire and that Iran also agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. 

Bitcoin, XRP, and Dogecoin prices also rose as Trump announced that, as part of the ceasefire, he has agreed to suspend bombing and attacks on Iran for 2 weeks. This came just as the president’s deadline to attack Iran’s energy infrastructure neared, with the president already threatening to wipe out their ‘civilization.’

Trump also signaled that they are close to reaching a peaceful and conclusive settlement of the war, which is also a positive for the Bitcoin, XRP, and Dogecoin prices. He noted that they have already met and exceeded all military objectives and are very far along with a definitive agreement concerning long-term peace with Iran and peace in the Middle East. 

Specifically, Trump revealed that they had received a 10-point proposal from Iran and that they believe it is a workable basis for negotiation. He added that almost all the points have been agreed to by the U.S. and Iran, and that the two-week period will allow them to finalize and consummate the agreement. 

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also posted a statement on X confirming the 2-week ceasefire in the U.S.-Iran war. He stated that Iran will cease its defensive operations as long as U.S.-Israeli attacks are halted. Araghchi also confirmed that they will ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz over the next two weeks. 

More Short Positions Liquidated 

The Bitcoin, XRP, and Dogecoin prices have also surged as more short positions are liquidated in the last 12 hours amid the agreement to a 2-week ceasefire by the U.S. and Iran. Over this period, $400 million in short positions have been liquidated while $110 million in long positions have been liquidated, according to CoinGlass data. 

It is worth noting that oil prices have crashed following the agreement of a ceasefire. Both Brent crude and WTI oil futures have crashed below $100, down 14% and 8%, respectively, in the last 24 hours. This comes as traders begin to price in a long-term settlement between the U.S. and Iran, which is a positive for the Bitcoin, XRP, and Dogecoin prices.

Bitcoin surged above $72,000 yesterday and is holding above $70,000 today. The narrative of a bottom is building. And an XWIN Research Japan analysis is asking the more important question: not whether Bitcoin has bounced, but whether anyone understands why it fell.

The report from XWIN Research Japan reframes the past six months in a way that changes how the current recovery should be read. Bitcoin is not, in their framework, a standard risk asset that rises and falls with market sentiment. It is a terminal liquidity asset — the last recipient in a hierarchical financial system where capital flows from central banks to government bonds to equities and finally, at the very end of the chain, to crypto. When the upstream flow weakens, Bitcoin does not experience demand destruction. It receives nothing. The capital simply never arrives.

That is what happened over the past six months. Elevated US interest rates, a strengthening dollar, and rising Japanese bond yields simultaneously tightened global liquidity from multiple directions. Japan — one of the largest external investors in global markets — reduced its capital exports as domestic bond yields made home markets more attractive. The result was not investors selling Bitcoin. It was investors who never bought it.

The bounce above $72,000 is visible. Whether the conditions that prevented the capital from arriving have changed is the question the price chart cannot answer.

The Sell-Off Was Not Spot. It Was Credit

The analysis adds the second layer that completes the structural picture. As global liquidity tightened and capital stopped reaching Bitcoin, the derivatives market compounded the damage through a mechanism separate from — and more destructive than — simple selling.

Excess leverage accumulated during the bull run began unwinding in cascading liquidations. Each forced exit consumed demand that would have entered the market in future sessions. The downside was not just the selling that happened. It was the buying that was destroyed before it could occur.

The on-chain data confirms this interpretation without contradicting it. STH-SOPR holding below 1.0 for sustained periods reflected short-term holders realizing losses — an outcome of the liquidity squeeze, not its cause. The Coinbase Premium Gap staying negative reflected weak US spot demand — again, an outcome. These indicators describe what was happening to participants at the retail level while the structural cause operated several layers above them in the global capital hierarchy.

The forward conditions are equally structural and equally precise. A new all-time high requires capital to flow back through the system — from central banks, through bonds, through equities, and finally to the terminal edge where Bitcoin waits. Two catalysts could accelerate that flow specifically: US midterm elections influencing fiscal expansion and rate expectations, and a potential Japan Bitcoin ETF that would open access to one of the largest pools of household savings in the world.

The past six months were not a verdict on Bitcoin. They were a consequence of where it sits in the financial system. The next major move will arrive when the system above it changes — not when the narrative does.

Bitcoin Reclaims $70K but Trend Structure Remains Unresolved

Bitcoin has pushed back above the $70,000 level after a sharp recovery from its February lows, but the broader structure remains technically fragile. The chart still reflects a clear downtrend sequence from late 2025, with price consistently trading below the 100-day (green) and 200-day (red) moving averages. Both remain downward sloping, indicating that the macro trend has not yet shifted despite the recent bounce.

The February capitulation event marked a local exhaustion point, with a spike in volume and a rapid wick below $60,000, followed by stabilization. Since then, the price has formed a range between roughly $62,000 and $72,000, with multiple failed attempts to sustain a breakout above resistance. The recent move above $70,000 is notable, but it has not yet been accompanied by a decisive expansion in volume or follow-through.

Short-term momentum has improved, as Bitcoin is now testing the 50-day moving average (blue), but this level has acted as dynamic resistance throughout the downtrend. A confirmed reclaim of this zone would be the first structural signal of strength. Until then, the current move appears corrective within a broader bearish framework, not a confirmed trend reversal.

Featured image from ChatGPT, chart from TradingView.com 

A Ponzi scheme worth $200 million. A fake token sale that pulled in $100 million from unsuspecting investors. These are the kinds of cases the US Securities and Exchange Commission says it now wants to focus on — not the pile of enforcement actions it quietly admitted this week were a waste of time.

SEC Turns On Its Own Track Record

The SEC released its 2025 enforcement results on Tuesday, and buried inside was a striking admission: a large number of cases brought in prior years against crypto companies produced no real benefit for investors.

According to the agency, 95 enforcement actions and $2.3 billion in penalties tied to record-keeping violations since fiscal year 2022 “identified no direct investor harm.”

The SEC added that seven cases involving crypto firm registrations and six others centered on the legal definition of a dealer also fell into that category.

Those cases, the agency said, reflected a bias toward racking up numbers rather than protecting the people the commission exists to serve.

That self-criticism landed with force. It was a direct indictment of the approach taken under former SEC Chair Gary Gensler, who for years pursued what critics called regulation by enforcement — using legal action as a substitute for clear rules in the crypto space.

The agency itself used the phrase “unprecedented rush” to describe the push to file cases in the weeks before US President Donald Trump took office in January 2025.

Atkins Refocuses The Agency

Paul Atkins took over as SEC chair in April 2025 and moved quickly to change course. Officials said the commission has since redirected its attention toward fraud, market manipulation, and breaches of trust — the categories of misconduct that cause the clearest damage to ordinary investors.

Atkins said the old model prioritized “volume and record-setting penalties” over genuine protection.

Data shows the numbers back that up. Based on reports from consulting firm Cornerstone Research, SEC enforcement actions against public companies — including crypto firms — fell roughly 30% in fiscal 2025 compared to the year before.

Despite the pullback, the commission has not gone quiet. In May 2025, the SEC sued Unicoin and four of its executives, alleging the company raised $100 million by misleading investors about token rights and equity. Unicoin has disputed the agency’s version of events.

Ethereum’s current price structure is being compared to a phase that once played out in a major stock price, where years of sideways movement and repeated rejections eventually gave way to a powerful breakout above resistance. The comparison, shared by crypto analyst Crypto Tice on X, points out that what looks like long-term stagnation around $2,000 on Ethereum’s chart may be a setup that has appeared before in Netflix’s price history.

A Repeating Structure Inside A Range

Technical patterns have a way of resurfacing across different markets, which is why analysts often study past price behavior of one cryptocurrency to predict how another cryptocurrency could also play out in the future. In many cases, these comparisons stay within the crypto market itself or extend to traditional stores of value like precious metals, where similarities in cycles and investor behavior are easier to justify.

This analysis, however, takes a different approach by stepping outside those usual comparisons. It provides a comparison between Ethereum’s current price structure and the way Netflix, Inc. (NFLX) traded between 2003 and 2009.

The chart highlights a sequence of six distinct interactions with range boundaries in both assets. In Netflix’s case, the price spent years bouncing between support and resistance, forming a compressed structure with multiple failed breakout attempts. Each rejection added to the range but also built pressure over time.

Ethereum’s price action on a multi-year timeframe is showing a nearly identical formation. Since 2021, the Ethereum price has repeatedly pushed into resistance around $4,900, pulled back to support, and returned again for another attempt. 

The current price action, which is the sixth interaction, places Ethereum near the lower boundary of the range, which is just the same stage Netflix was before its eventual breakout.

Price Chart Comparison. Source: @CryptoTice_ On X

Pressure Building. What Comes Next?

The structure outlined in the chart ultimately points to one outcome: a breakout rally. This is how Netflix broke out of the resistance trendline in 2009. The important thing for Ethereum now is reclaiming and holding above resistance above $4,900 with conviction. However, there are other intermediate price targets that Ethereum needs to break above before this move. These targets include $2,150, $2,350, $3,100, $3,900, and $4,600.

The analogy, however, is not without its critics. Some comments argue that comparing Ethereum to Netflix ignores the fundamental differences between the two. One comment, for instance, noted that Netflix’s consolidation took place during a period of steady business expansion, with clear growth in subscribers and revenue supporting its long-term trajectory.

Ethereum’s situation, on the other hand, is more layered and has a different economic regime. The rise of Layer 2 networks has moved activity away from the base layer, reducing fee generation at the protocol level. These factors, and many others, introduce unknowns that cannot be represented through chart structure.

Американская майнинговая компания CleanSpark закрыла свою майнинговую ферму мощностью 25 МВт, проработавшую пять лет в округе Вашингтон штата Теннесси. На шум фермы жаловались местные жители.

Иран планирует взимать $1 за каждый баррель нефти, провозимой через Ормузский пролив во время двухнедельного перемирия, только что достигнутого с США. Расчеты будут проводиться в биткоинах, сообщил Financial Times представитель Союза иранских экспортеров нефти и газа Хамид Хоссейни (Hamid Hosseini).

In a strange move, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has clarified shortcomings in its past approach by dropping seven lawsuits against crypto companies, among them Binance and Coinbase.

Another Crypto-Mishap…But From Regulators

Strange things are happening in crypto today. Not only a top U.S. legacy outlet released a piece claiming to have uncovered Satoshi Nakamoto’s identity, but the SEC’s new Fiscal Year 2025 Enforcement Report contains an unusually blunt self‑critique: it admits prior leadership misallocated enforcement resources to chase media headlines and raw case counts instead of real investor protection.

Central to an effective enforcement program is determining which cases to bring and responsibly stewarding Commission resources. Regrettably, such resources have been misapplied in prior years to pursue media headlines and run up numbers, and in turn, led to misguided expectations on what constitutes effective enforcement.

According to the statement, since 2022 the Commission brought 95 “off‑channel communications” book‑and‑record cases with $2.3 billion in penalties, plus seven crypto registration and six “dealer definition” actions. The current Commission now says these showed “no direct investor harm”, produced “no investor benefit” and reflected a misinterpretation of federal securities law.

The Commission itself now characterizes these 95 book‑and‑record cases and 13 crypto matters as resource misallocation driven by a “bias for volume of cases brought versus matters of investor protection.”

The statement also notes that the SEC has dropped seven crypto-focused cases since February 2025, targeting Coinbase, Binance, Cumberland, Consensys Software, Payward (Kraken), Dragonchain, and Balina.

The Atkins Era: Crypto Enforcement 2.0

The SEC is publicly distancing itself from earlier, more expansive readings of securities law in crypto, implying that some marquee cases were built on legal glosses that will not be repeated and that may be harder to defend in court going forward. The recent interpretive release on crypto assets and the SEC‑CFTC alignment are part of the same course correction toward clearer categories of what is or isn’t a security, rather than treating tokens themselves as inherently embodying an investment contract.

SEC Chair Paul Atkins, who assumed the role in April 2025, has faulted his predecessors, claiming the agency did not keep pace with technological innovation. With Atkins, the SEC is recentering enforcement on classic fraud, market manipulation, and breaches of fiduciary duty. The FY 2025 results show 456 actions focused on misconduct that directly harms investors and market integrity

The Trump‑era shift has already seen crypto enforcement actions fall to their lowest level since 2017.

Market Implications

The SEC admission should reduce some litigation overhang and may encourage more projects to operate in the U.S., but fraud, market manipulation, and deceptive offerings remain squarely in the SEC’s crosshairs.

Enforcement reset could gradually improve risk sentiment around high‑quality assets and U.S. venues, though the unwinding of old cases and the new legal framework will likely produce periods of regulatory volatility and headline risk.

This represents a move from opaque, adversarial tactics toward clearer lines between commodities, tools, and true securities. Sophisticated traders should watch how quickly this policy shift flows into actual dismissals, settlements, and new listings.

Cover image from Perplexity. BTCUSD chart from Tradingview.

Рост биткоина выше $71 000 оказался всего лишь реакцией на объявление перемирия между США и Ираном — но риски дальнейшего падения актива сохраняются, предположили аналитики компании QCP Capital.

Bitcoin moved back above $72,000 after US President Donald Trump said he would pause military action against Iran for two weeks, a shift that quickly eased pressure across markets.

The move came after days of rising tension and landed just hours after Trump had warned Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or face strikes on key infrastructure.

Trump’s Deadline Eases Pressure

Trump made the announcement in a Truth Social post on Tuesday. “I agree to suspend the bombing and attack of Iran for a period of two weeks,” he said.

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council then accepted the ceasefire, while stressing that the pause did not mean the war was over. Bitcoin jumped 2.55% in the hour after the news and reached $72,150 at the time of publication.

The rebound pushed Bitcoin above a level it had not seen since March 18. It also came after a rough stretch for the crypto market, where sentiment had weakened and traders had been bracing for more conflict. The last few sessions had been marked by caution rather than confidence.

That reaction fit a pattern seen before. When geopolitical stress climbs, risk assets often take a hit. When the pressure eases, money can move back just as fast. Bitcoin has been caught in that swing during past flare-ups, and this one was no different.

NEW: The United States and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire brokered by Pakistan on April 7 and will begin negotiations in Islamabad, Pakistan, on April 11. The Iranian Supreme National Security Council announced that the regime agreed to the ceasefire on April 7, several… pic.twitter.com/HXJssnavbX

— Institute for the Study of War (@TheStudyofWar) April 8, 2026

Fear Still Lingered In Crypto Trading

Even after the pop, the market picture was far from calm. Market observers pointed to the Crypto Fear & Greed Index, which sat at an “Extreme Fear” reading of 11 on Tuesday. That suggested many traders were still wary despite the price bounce.

Trump had already added to the tension a day earlier, saying on Monday that “a whole civilization will die tonight” if the situation continued. By Tuesday, the tone had changed, but only for now. The ceasefire was tied to a short window, not a lasting settlement.

A Fast Move, But A Fragile One

The speed of Bitcoin’s rise showed how quickly traders were ready to buy when the threat of more fighting eased. The price crossed $72,000 for the first time in 20 days, but the backdrop was still unstable, with both sides signaling that the conflict was not fully resolved.

For now, the market is treating the pause as relief, not closure. Bitcoin’s jump was sharp, but it was built on a ceasefire that could still shift if talks break down or the fighting resumes.

Featured image from Reuters-Yonhap, chart from TradingView

Консорциум крупнейших банков Швейцарии начал тестировать государственный стейблкоин, обеспеченный швейцарским франком (CHF). Если апробация пройдет успешно, власти страны рассчитывают запустить токен для расчетов внутри страны и трансграничных платежей в 2027 году.

Комиссия по ценным бумагам и биржам США (SEC) назвала ошибочной свою прежнюю практику судебного преследования криптокомпаний при экс-председателе ведомства Гэри Генслере (Gary Gensler).

Журналисты газеты The New York Times провели расследование, по результатам которого объявили, что создателем Биткоина, скрывшимся под псевдонимом Сатоси Накамото, с высокой вероятностью является британский криптограф Адам Бэк (Adam Back).

Поведение долгосрочных инвесторов и активность в сети Биткоина сейчас, в апреле 2026 года, напомнили аналитикам ончейн-платформы CryptoQuant 2024 год — а точнее время, которое предшествовало росту курса первой криптовалюты.

Bitcoin is approaching a sensitive stage in its broader market cycle, according to new analysis shared by Joao Wedson. The post pointed to a macro indicator designed to track the long-term structure of the market. Based on the latest reading of this model, the data suggests Bitcoin may be moving toward a zone where distribution risks may begin to increase, making the next phase of the cycle particularly important to monitor.

Bitcoin’s Macro Cycle Indicator Explains Where The Market Stands

In a recent X post, Wedson drew attention to the Accumulation Distribution Cycle Index (ADCI), a macro framework created by @arch_physicist and now used in research at Alphractal. The indicator was designed to analyze Bitcoin’s position within the broader structure described by the Wyckoff Method.

The ADCI organizes the market cycle into three distinct ranges, each representing a different stage of market behavior. When the index stays between 0 and 3, Bitcoin is typically in accumulation. These periods usually appear when sentiment is weak and participation is low, allowing larger investors to quietly absorb supply.

The 30 to 70 range signals a market that has already begun moving. In this zone, trends start to develop and expand. The direction of the index during this phase can reveal whether momentum is strengthening or beginning to deteriorate.

When the index moves between 70 and 100, the risk of distribution increases. This phase historically appears when market optimism grows, and demand expands, creating conditions where larger holders can begin offloading supply.

The chart shared alongside the post illustrates this pattern across multiple Bitcoin cycles. Previous peaks in the indicator appear near major price highs, while deep drops in the index tend to align with long accumulation periods that later preceded large price expansions.

What Investors Should Watch As Bitcoin Approaches This Phase

Wedson noted that distribution in the current cycle may not appear the same way it did in earlier markets. In the past, Bitcoin cycles often ended with a sharp blow-off top followed by a rapid correction.

However, as the market matures, distribution may occur more gradually. Instead of a sudden spike and collapse, the market could move sideways for extended periods while repeated rallies begin losing strength.

This type of structure allows stronger holders to slowly release supply while public demand remains active. Because of this, the key signal to watch is not just price spikes but signs of repeated exhaustion, slowing momentum, and prolonged sideways movement.

This is why macro indicators like the ADCI are being emphasized. By focusing on structural positioning rather than short-term price action, the model aims to identify whether Bitcoin is being accumulated or distributed before the shift becomes obvious to the wider market. If the index continues rising toward its upper range while price action begins showing exhaustion, it could indicate the market is entering the distribution phase of the cycle.

В ближайшие два–три года модель непрерывной работы майнинговых ферм от электросети станет в России экономически невыгодной, сообщила майнинговая компания «Алгоритм», сославшись на свое исследование.

Министерство юстиции США выступило против попытки сооснователя Tornado Cash Романа Шторма использовать недавнее решение Верховного суда США по делу интернет-провайдера Cox Communications и звукозаписывающей компании Sony Music Entertainment для прекращения его уголовного преследования.

A New York Times journalist just released a long-form investigation claiming that, after a year of intensive research, he finally uncovered the real identity of the creator of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto.

A NYT Journalist Claims To Have Unmasked Bitcoin’s Creator

A reporter trying to unmask Satoshi Nakamoto (and claiming success) is hardly news. Across 15 years of hunting, there have been countless of theories and tons of serious journalists assuring they had finally pinned down the real name of the creator of Bitcoin. However, this is the first time a top U.S. legacy outlet has directly named a Satoshi Nakamoto candidate: Adam Back, 55‑year‑old British cryptographer, Blockstream CEO, Hashcash creator, former Cypherpunk. The piece was written by John Carreyrou, an investigative reporter for the NYT who has won two Pulitzer Prizes.

This is also not the first time Back’s name is brought on as a Satoshi contendat. Back himself has denied this theory repeatedly, following years of YouTube sleuths, HBO docs and research reports circling his name. Carreyrou, however, found his denials so unconvincing that he used them as fuel to continue investigating on the connection.

The idea that Back is Satoshi came to Carreyrou after watching the 2024 HBO documentary “Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery”, that pointed at Hard Fork, a Canadian software developer. The journalist found the way Back tensed up in the documentary at the mention of his name amongst the Satoshi more convincing than the doc’s conclusion.

The E-Mail Lead

The other big idea Carreyrou had was to use the Satoshi Nakamoto e-mails that surfaced in the context of the UK COPA v. Craig Wright trial, where Wright tried to prove in court that he was Satoshi to assert copyright over the Bitcoin whitepaper –which clearly signaled that he wasn’t the creator of Bitcoin, as Satoshi Nakamoto disliked the idea of copyright and patents, and was a fierce advocate of open-source and public domains.

Emails Satoshi sent to other early Bitcoin adopters had surfaced before, but none came close in volume to the Malmi dump. If Satoshi was ever going to be found, I was convinced the key lay somewhere in these texts.

Amongst the submitted e-mails was correspondence shared between Back and Satoshi during 2008-2009, independently discussing Bitcoin’s design with Back, citing Hashcash and only learning about Wei Dai’s b‑money through Back’s recommendation —an incongruence Back himself has acknowledged, as Dai’s b-mobey was cited in the Hashcash whitepaper.

The Cypherpunk And Technological Leads

According to Carreyrou’s investigation, both Back and Satoshi sat in the same Cypherpunk lists in the 1990s, including the more obscure Cryptography list, trading emails about anonymized communication, digital cash and crypto‑anarchist ideals. The journalist provided evidence showing that Back sketched almost every core Bitcoin ingredient in the Cypherpunk list a decade before launch: decentralized e‑cash, independent nodes, resistance to government/censorship, and proof‑of‑work style spam prevention.

Back proposed combining his own Hashcash with Wei Dai’s b‑money idea, essentially the same recipe Satoshi later used for Bitcoin’s architecture. Hashcash itself is the direct conceptual ancestor of Bitcoin’s proof‑of‑work, and Satoshi explicitly cited Back’s paper in the 2008 whitepaper.

When Satoshi Nakamoto floated Bitcoin for the first time in Halloween 2008, Back disappeared from the conversations. However, Back got fully involved again after an Argentinian cryptographer made Satoshi’s fortune public on April 17, 2013.

For more than a decade, whenever electronic money was discussed on the Cypherpunks or the Cryptography list, Mr. Back had almost always chimed in, often with long, detailed posts. But when Bitcoin, the closest manifestation of the vision he had laid out, arrived, Mr. Back was nowhere to be found.

Back also holds a doctorate in distributed computer systems, matching the specialized skill set needed to design Bitcoin’s peer‑to‑peer network, incentive design and security model. He used the same programming language Satoshi used (C++) and worked professionally on securing computer networks and public‑key cryptography, which mirrors Satoshi’s toolkit.

The Linguistics Lead

Despite traditional stylometry not working, NYT’s Dylan Freedman used AI-based computational text analysis to filter thousands of old cypherpunk posts for British spelling, specific grammar tic patterns (like “also” at sentence ends, certain hyphenation mistakes and “its/it’s” slips). Back’s writing survived every filter, landing him in a tiny pool of eight final suspects.

Summing up, the investigation argues that the overlap of ideology, technical design, code skills, network position and language quirks is so tight that to call it “coincidence” stretches plausibility.

Back continued to deny being Satoshi when Carreyrou confronted him with this evidence during a Bitcoin conference held in El Salvador. Carreyrou, however, argues that Back’s way of denying it strengthened his suspicions once again.

Market Implications

Every serious “Satoshi theory” so far has eventually run into the same wall: nobody has produced cryptographic proof. Hal Finney and Nick Szabo had the right ideas at the right time, from reusable proof‑of‑work to “bit gold,” but both denied being Satoshi and never signed a message with early keys. Newsweek’s Dorian Nakamoto scoop, the Len Sassaman hypothesis and Craig Wright’s courtroom implosion all showed how fragile narrative‑driven cases are once they meet hard evidence. Even newer theories that cast Jack Dorsey or a shadowy “2010 megawhale” as the mastermind rely on stylistic forensics and on‑chain heuristics, not on movement of Satoshi‑era coins or a verifiable signature.

Many Bitcoin builders argue that not knowing Satoshi is a feature: it strengthens the “no founder, no CEO” commodity narrative. A persuasive mainstream story that “Bitcoin has a de facto founder” could embolden regulators and litigants to re‑open questions about control, intent and even securities‑style arguments, even if the crypto community rejects the premise.

Unless the NYT story is followed by an on‑chain move from Satoshi‑linked wallets or hard evidence, the market is likely to fade the headline and revert to watching funding, options skews and ETF flows. A genuine proof‑of‑identity event, however, would be a volatility shock with unknown tail risks.

Cover image from Perplexity. BTCUSD chart from Tradingview.

Инвестиционный директор Bitwise Мэтт Хоуган (Matt Hougan) заявил, что ключевое отличие текущего цикла биткоина от предыдущих заключается в смене структуры владения активом.

The conversation around crypto and Real-World Assets (RWA) have often centered Ripple and XRP in recent times. This comes as no surprise, as the crypto firm has made major strides in moving into this potential trillion-dollar market over the last few years, making them one of the most recognizable names in the space. However, when looking at the space as a whole and going through the numbers, it shows that despite Ripple’s efforts, the blockchain is not the leader.

Ripple Falls Behind Others For RWA Value

Data from the RWA.xyz website, which is a website that tracks the RWA market and the performance of blockchains in the space, shows who the RWA leaders are by numbers, and Ripple unfortunately falls behind. While the XRP Ledger is doing decent numbers, other blockchains continue to lead in this regard.

One example of this is that when it comes to the total distributed RWA value, Ethereum is the leading blockchain and not the XRP Ledger. In fact, using this metric, Ripple’s XRP Ledger does not even fall in the top 5 by volume, with competitors taking charge in this regard.

The top 5 RWA chains by distributed value are Ethereum, BNB Chain, Solana, Stellar, and Liquid Network. Their values come out to $15.54 billion, $3.5 billion, $1.949 billion, $1.41 billion, and $1.32 billion, respectively. The XRP Ledger comes in 8th place with $458.46 million, putting it behind the likes of Arbitrum and Avalanche.

XRP Ledger Ranks Low For RWA Users

The distributed value is not the only metric where the XRP Ledger falls behind competitors. Another metric is the user count, where the XRP Ledger is struggling even worse. In this case, the network ranks 10th place with fewer than 5,000 users. This is a stark contrast to Plume’s 259,000 users, Solana’s 184,000, and Ethereum’s 164,000, making them the top 3 chains by user base.

However, one metric where the XRP Ledger seems to shine when it comes to RWA is the represented value on the blockchain. While it is still not in first place, it ranks behind ZKsync Era with $2.2 billion for ZKsync Era and $1.5 billion for XRP Ledger. This puts it ahead of the likes of Ethereum, Solana, and Plume in this metric, showing there is still active participation on the blockchain.

Nevertheless, the RWA space looks to be rising rapidly as the website shows that the total Distributed Asset Value across blockchains has crossed into $27.68 billion. Meanwhile, there are over 710,000 holders, and $441.38 billion in Represented Asset Value.