Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

State of TRON Q3 2026 Report Highlights $2.21 Trillion in Stablecoin Settlement Amid Network Activity Growth

Blackrock is dominating the Aptos ecosystem.

Layer-1 blockchain Aptos has launched an optional new feature that could help shield traders from attacks involving maximal extractable value (MEV), including frontrunning and sandwich attacks. 

On Monday, Aptos said its Encrypted Mempool feature is now live on its mainnet, allowing users to opt in to keep pending transactions encrypted until their block ordering is finalized. Aptos said the feature was built for institutions submitting large transactions to the chain, traders wanting to avoid MEV risk, AI agents and builders. 

“When you send a transaction on any major chain today, anyone watching the network can see the details before it executes, the function you’re calling, the assets and amounts involved, and the contracts you’re interacting with,” Aptos said. “Bots use that visibility to trade against you or copy your strategy.”  

Sandwich attacks, one form of MEV attack, cost Ethereum traders about $60 million over the 12 months through October 2025, according to Cointelegraph’s analysis of EigenPhi data. On Solana, sandwich attacks generated $29.7 million for bots over an 11-month period examined by Bitquery, which identified nearly 6.9 million attacks affecting about 2.2 million wallets. 

How Encrypted Mempool works When a user opts in, a compatible wallet or app encrypts the transaction’s contents on their device before sending it to Aptos. Details such as the assets and amounts involved stay hidden, while the sender’s address and gas fee remain visible. 

The encrypted transaction enters the mempool, which is where pending transactions wait to be included in a block. Validators agree on the order of the transactions while being blind to their contents. 

Once the ordering is finalized, validators collectively decrypt the transactions, which are then executed and recorded onchain. No single validator can decrypt a pending transaction on its own. 

Keeping transaction details hidden until their ordering is fixed can prevent bots from reading pending orders and inserting trades ahead or around them to profit at users’ expense. 

The protection comes with added costs and a small delay. Encrypted transactions carry a minimum gas price at twice the network’s base minimum, according to Aptos’ developer documentation. Aptos also said the system adds around 20 milliseconds per block in tests involving 50 nodes, compared to the existing consensus implementation. 

Aptos joins other networks offering protection against harmful MEV. Gnosis Chain launched an encrypted mempool using Shutter in July 2024, while Ethereum’s Flashbots Protect routes transactions privately to block builders. Aptos said its distinction is that its existing validators handle both transaction ordering and decryption, rather than relying on a separate decryption committee or trusted builders.

Magazine: Ledger attack spreads to EU, AI finds ’18 trillion XRP’ bug: Hodler’s Digest

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

At 19:59 UTC on October 12, 2026, Blur said it will deprecate the Blur frontend on November 12, 2026. The marketplace protocol will remain operational onchain, and $BLUR holders will retain control of its fee switch.

The same deadline applies to Blend’s loan-matching service. Blur said Blend will stop matching new loans on November 12. Borrowers have until then to repay their loans or allow them to default. After the cutoff, Blur plans to provide a frontend tool that helps users withdraw assets from Blend.

The announcement separates the interfaces from the contracts. Blur is retiring the website used to reach its marketplace, while the marketplace protocol itself stays live. Blend’s change is narrower in wording but more direct for borrowers: new loan matching stops, existing borrowers face a repay-or-default decision, and asset withdrawal moves to a tool that Blur has not yet released.

What the Blend cutoff changes
Blend was designed as a peer-to-peer perpetual lending protocol for arbitrary collateral, including NFTs. Its published design has no oracle dependency and no fixed expiry. A borrowing position can remain open until liquidation, while lenders set loan terms through market offers rather than a protocol price feed.

The lack of an oracle changes where risk decisions sit. Blend does not ask a shared price feed to decide when an NFT position should be liquidated or what rate a borrower should pay. Each lender chooses the interest rate and loan-to-value ratio it will accept. The protocol then tests whether another lender will refinance the debt when the current lender wants to leave.

The design also avoids scheduled maturity dates. Blend says a position rolls automatically for as long as some lender remains willing to finance the amount against the collateral. Users need an onchain transaction when a rate changes or when either side exits. This cuts routine rollover transactions, but continued financing still depends on lender availability.

In the normal flow, a lender signs an offchain offer specifying the principal, interest rate and collateral collection. A borrower accepts a compatible offer onchain, places the NFT in a vault with a lien, and receives the principal. Blend matches each loan individually instead of pooling lenders’ funds.

The perpetual structure does not guarantee that a borrower can keep a position forever. Loans continue only while a lender is willing to finance the debt against the collateral. Interest accrues continuously, and the contract calculates repayment when an interaction requires it. Borrowers can repay at any time. They can also replace a loan atomically by taking a new loan against the same collateral and using the new principal to close the old debt.

Lenders have two exit paths in the design. A lender can submit a compatible offer from another lender and transfer the position without an auction. Otherwise, the lender can trigger a refinancing auction in which the offered interest rate rises until a new lender accepts. The replacement lender pays the old lender the full repayment amount and takes over the loan at the auction’s rate.

If no lender accepts before the auction reaches its defined maximum rate, the protocol treats the position as non-viable and liquidates the borrower. The existing lender can then claim the collateral. Blend therefore uses the availability of refinancing, rather than an oracle’s estimate of the NFT’s value, to determine whether debt can continue.

Stopping new matching removes the path Blur currently provides for originating loans after November 12. The announcement does not explain whether any refinancing functionality will remain available through other interfaces or direct contract calls. It tells current borrowers to repay or allow default before the deadline, which makes the status of each open loan the immediate operational question for users.

What remains onchain
Blur said the marketplace protocol will continue running after the frontend disappears. Traders or developers may still be able to interact with those contracts through other software, but Blur did not name a replacement marketplace interface in the announcement. The team also said $BLUR will continue to control the protocol’s fee switch.

That governance role is consistent with the original Blend design. The paper says Blur’s implementation gives $BLUR governance control over selected protocol parameters after a 180-day waiting period. Those parameters include borrower and lender fees, the maximum interest rate reached before liquidation, and the formula used to raise the offered rate during a refinancing auction. The protocol does not ask governance to value collateral or set loan-to-value ratios.

The announced withdrawal tool is different from keeping the full Blend loan interface open. Blur described it only as a way to help users withdraw assets after the deadline. No separate release date accompanied that promise. It did not provide the tool’s URL, contract scope, release time or instructions for borrowers whose loans enter refinancing near the cutoff.

For marketplace users, the key distinction is that contract availability does not preserve Blur’s own web access. For Blend users, the practical deadline concerns debt rather than the token fee switch. Borrowers need to review open positions before November 12 and choose between repayment and the default path described by Blur. Lenders need to account for the end of new matching through the official interface and for the absence of published details about post-cutoff refinancing.

The next dated milestone is November 12, 2026. Blur still needs to specify when its withdrawal tool will appear and whether users will have any supported route for refinancing or managing active Blend loans after matching stops.

NFT marketplace Blur said Monday it will shut down its frontend next month, while its onchain marketplace protocol will remain operational. BLUR will continue to control the protocol's fee switch.

"Blend will stop matching new loans on November 12, 2026," Blur said in a post on X. "Borrowers have until then to repay their loans or allow them to default. After this date, we will provide a frontend tool to help users withdraw their assets from Blend."

The announcement comes shortly after the Ethereum Layer 2 Blast said it would wind down, followed by the Pudgy Penguins-backed Ethereum L2 Abstract.

Blast was created by Tieshun "Pacman" Roquerre, Blur's founder, and developed by the same core team. Roquerre outlined his ambition to build the "Binance of NFTs" in early 2023, when he doxxed himself. Blur's low creator-royalty policy also helped intensify competition among NFT marketplaces and put pressure on creator revenues, including those of Yuga Labs, the company behind Bored Ape Yacht Club.

Blur has faced criticism for its incentive-driven approach to NFT trading, which critics say encouraged airdrop farming and suspected wash trading while putting pressure on creator royalties. Its association with Blast has also drawn scrutiny over the sustainability of growth strategies built around token incentives and liquidity rewards.

Blur's monthly trading volume peaked at around $1.43 billion in March 2023; exactly three years later, monthly volume had plummeted to under $7 million, according to The Block's data.

Ethereum NFT marketplace monthly volume. Source: The Block/Token Terminal The BLUR token fell more than 20% following the announcement to around $0.015, giving it a market capitalization of approximately $44 million. The token traded above $5 in early 2023.

An account holding over $10 million in unrealized profit buys the dip again, opening combined long positions in BTC, HYPE, and ZEC totaling more than $60 million.

According to TradingBeats’ monitoring, a whale address on Hyperliquid starting with 0xedcd made consecutive buys of approximately 96 BTC, 17,283 HYPE, and 1,215 ZEC this morning, at average prices of roughly $81,597, $80.59, and $1,145.83 respectively. The combined notional value of these three new long positions totals around $10.62 million, with an unrealized profit of roughly $300,000 so far. The address’s total long position value now exceeds $60.95 million, bringing its total unrealized profit to approximately $11.91 million. The address was previously labeled a suspected "819 Insider Whale" by market participants after it loaded up on $38.72 million worth of positions roughly one hour before the ETH rally began on August 19. Currently, the whale still holds 20,000 ETH long positions, worth approximately $50.33 million, with 4x full leverage, and an unrealized profit of around $11.61 million.

3 minutes ago

Is the iPhone version of Doubao Assistant on the way? Pelican lets AI keep running on the lock screen.

Beating AI News Brief: Developer Finn Voorhees has unveiled Pelican, an iPhone AI Agent app now in limited TestFlight testing with a full launch planned for the near future. The app supports tools including MCP, browser operations, and maps, and can connect to AI models from various vendors. According to Voorhees, the Agent executes tasks directly on the iPhone, continuing to work even when switching apps or locking the screen—eliminating the need for an additional Mac mini. Just days ago, he demonstrated Pi Agent paired with Claude Opus 5.5 to operate an iPhone, automatically opening Ryanair to search for flight tickets, with no computer involved in the entire process. Voorhees previously open-sourced PiDurableKit, which leverages Apple’s JavaScriptCore to run Pi Agent on iPhone and uses SQLite to save task states, allowing the Agent to resume execution after being interrupted by the system. PiChat, a chat app built on this framework, also uses Apple’s background task mechanism to keep the Agent working after switching to other apps. When asked if Pelican runs entirely locally, Voorhees replied that all components except model API requests run on the device. He also plans to integrate small local models, so the Agent can handle some private data without uploading it to the cloud. Pelican remains in early testing, and Voorhees has not yet confirmed whether it includes the cross-app click capability demonstrated earlier.

3 minutes ago

Two addresses linked to BIT each purchased 12,000 ETH, pushing their total long position to $60 million.

According to TradingBeats' monitoring, this morning, addresses under BIT (formerly Matrixport) — 0xbd1c…ff0e and 0x2371…0883 — successively added positions, purchasing 12,000 ETH each for a total of 24,000 ETH bought. The average holding prices of the two addresses are approximately $2,420 and $2,422 respectively. Currently, the combined ETH long positions held by the two addresses use 20x full-position leverage, with a position value of around $60.29 million and total unrealized profit of roughly $2.19 million. ETH is currently trading at approximately $2,512, up about 3.8% from the average holding price of the two addresses.

3 minutes ago

OKX will launch WUSD and BLURUSD-denominated X-Perp contracts today.

OKX official announcement shows that the platform will launch WUSD and BLURUSD-based X-Perp contracts on October 13, with support for web, mobile app and API trading. The specific opening times (Beijing Time) are as follows: 16:00 for WUSD-based X-Perp contracts, and 16:15 for BLURUSD-based X-Perp contracts.

3 minutes ago

Papertrade’s revenue reached $4.02 million in the past 24 hours, surpassing Pump and Hyperliquid.

According to DefiLlama data, Papertrade’s 24-hour revenue hit $4.02 million, placing it third in the overall protocol revenue rankings. It outpaces Pump ($2.11 million) and Hyperliquid ($1.7 million), coming in second only to Tether and Circle.

3 minutes ago

Neura will shut down its v1 testnet and Neuraverse.

AI-native economy Layer 1 (L1) blockchain project Neura announced via tweet that it will take offline its v1 testnet and Neuraverse as it moves to the next phase. The team has taken full snapshots of point balances, leaderboards, task completions, and activity histories to ensure no data is lost.

3 minutes ago

An account holding over $10 million in unrealized profit buys the dip again, opening combined long positions in BTC, HYPE, and ZEC totaling more than $60 million.

According to TradingBeats’ monitoring, a whale address on Hyperliquid starting with 0xedcd made consecutive buys of approximately 96 BTC, 17,283 HYPE, and 1,215 ZEC this morning, at average prices of roughly $81,597, $80.59, and $1,145.83 respectively. The combined notional value of these three new long positions totals around $10.62 million, with an unrealized profit of roughly $300,000 so far. The address’s total long position value now exceeds $60.95 million, bringing its total unrealized profit to approximately $11.91 million. The address was previously labeled a suspected "819 Insider Whale" by market participants after it loaded up on $38.72 million worth of positions roughly one hour before the ETH rally began on August 19. Currently, the whale still holds 20,000 ETH long positions, worth approximately $50.33 million, with 4x full leverage, and an unrealized profit of around $11.61 million.

3 minutes ago

Is the iPhone version of Doubao Assistant on the way? Pelican lets AI keep running on the lock screen.

Beating AI News Brief: Developer Finn Voorhees has unveiled Pelican, an iPhone AI Agent app now in limited TestFlight testing with a full launch planned for the near future. The app supports tools including MCP, browser operations, and maps, and can connect to AI models from various vendors. According to Voorhees, the Agent executes tasks directly on the iPhone, continuing to work even when switching apps or locking the screen—eliminating the need for an additional Mac mini. Just days ago, he demonstrated Pi Agent paired with Claude Opus 5.5 to operate an iPhone, automatically opening Ryanair to search for flight tickets, with no computer involved in the entire process. Voorhees previously open-sourced PiDurableKit, which leverages Apple’s JavaScriptCore to run Pi Agent on iPhone and uses SQLite to save task states, allowing the Agent to resume execution after being interrupted by the system. PiChat, a chat app built on this framework, also uses Apple’s background task mechanism to keep the Agent working after switching to other apps. When asked if Pelican runs entirely locally, Voorhees replied that all components except model API requests run on the device. He also plans to integrate small local models, so the Agent can handle some private data without uploading it to the cloud. Pelican remains in early testing, and Voorhees has not yet confirmed whether it includes the cross-app click capability demonstrated earlier.

3 minutes ago

Two addresses linked to BIT each purchased 12,000 ETH, pushing their total long position to $60 million.

According to TradingBeats' monitoring, this morning, addresses under BIT (formerly Matrixport) — 0xbd1c…ff0e and 0x2371…0883 — successively added positions, purchasing 12,000 ETH each for a total of 24,000 ETH bought. The average holding prices of the two addresses are approximately $2,420 and $2,422 respectively. Currently, the combined ETH long positions held by the two addresses use 20x full-position leverage, with a position value of around $60.29 million and total unrealized profit of roughly $2.19 million. ETH is currently trading at approximately $2,512, up about 3.8% from the average holding price of the two addresses.

3 minutes ago

OKX will launch WUSD and BLURUSD-denominated X-Perp contracts today.

OKX official announcement shows that the platform will launch WUSD and BLURUSD-based X-Perp contracts on October 13, with support for web, mobile app and API trading. The specific opening times (Beijing Time) are as follows: 16:00 for WUSD-based X-Perp contracts, and 16:15 for BLURUSD-based X-Perp contracts.

3 minutes ago

Papertrade’s revenue reached $4.02 million in the past 24 hours, surpassing Pump and Hyperliquid.

According to DefiLlama data, Papertrade’s 24-hour revenue hit $4.02 million, placing it third in the overall protocol revenue rankings. It outpaces Pump ($2.11 million) and Hyperliquid ($1.7 million), coming in second only to Tether and Circle.

3 minutes ago

Neura will shut down its v1 testnet and Neuraverse.

AI-native economy Layer 1 (L1) blockchain project Neura announced via tweet that it will take offline its v1 testnet and Neuraverse as it moves to the next phase. The team has taken full snapshots of point balances, leaderboards, task completions, and activity histories to ensure no data is lost.

3 minutes ago

2 min read

A snapshot of the Blur website as of Asian morning hours Tuesday. (CoinDesk)Summary

Blur will close its NFT marketplace website on Nov. 12 and stop arranging new loans through Blend, though its Ethereum smart contracts will remain operational.Monthly trading volume plunged more than 99.5%, from about $1.43 billion in March 2023 to less than $7 million in March 2026, while the fee-free marketplace recorded no protocol revenue over the past three years.The closure follows the shutdown announcement for Blast, another project created by Tieshun Roquerre, and sent the BLUR token down more than 20%.Blur, once the largest marketplace for trading Ethereum NFTs, is shutting down its website next month after trading activity collapsed more than 99% from its peak, marking the second major retreat in ten days for projects built by crypto entrepreneur Tieshun Roquerre.

The marketplace said Monday that its website will close on Nov. 12, while its NFT lending service, Blend, will stop arranging new loans.

Borrowers have until that date to repay their loans or allow them to default. Blur plans to provide a separate tool afterward for withdrawing assets from Blend.

Blur’s underlying smart contracts will remain operational on Ethereum, meaning the shutdown does not eliminate the blockchain-based trading system. BLUR tokenholders will retain control of its fee switch — a mechanism that allows them to vote on whether the marketplace should start charging trading fees.

The decision follows the Oct. 2 shutdown announcement from Blast, an Ethereum scaling network also created by Roquerre, better known as Pacman, and developed by the team behind Blur.

Blast once attracted more than $2 billion in assets, partly through rewards offered to users depositing funds. That figure had fallen to approximately $32 million when developers announced the closure, saying the network cost more to operate than it generated in revenue.

Blur's rise was just as dramatic.

Launched in 2022, it challenged the-then leader OpenSea by offering professional traders faster transactions, low fees and token rewards.

The strategy helped Blur capture more than 70% of Ethereum NFT trading volume in March 2023, when activity on the platform reached approximately $1.43 billion, DefiLlama data shows

By March 2026, that monthly volume had fallen below $7 million, a decline of more than 99.5%.

But Blur's marketplace generated no revenue from transaction fees for all that trading activity. The platform charged traders nothing, and Token Terminal records $0 in protocol revenue over the past three years, despite billions of dollars in NFT trades. However, the figure does not establish whether Blur earned money from its lending service or other activities.

Blur's aggressive incentive programs had attracted criticism for encouraging speculative trading and putting pressure on royalties paid to NFT creators. The trading figures alone do not establish how much activity came from genuine buyers rather than traders seeking rewards.

Meanwhile, unlike Blast, Blur has not publicly attributed its shutdown to operating losses.

Its website still advertises zero marketplace fees and more than $7.4 billion in lifetime trading volume, a reminder of how quickly the business once grew.

BLUR fell more than 20% following Monday's announcement, trading around $0.015. Blast users have until Oct. 26 to withdraw through the network's regular interface. Blur's separate shutdown follows on Nov. 12.

12345678910

Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.

Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA.

Kaspa ($KAS) trims its mining reward about 5.6% each month, producing one full halving a year, while Bitcoin halves roughly every four years. Here is how the schedule works.

Kaspa ($KAS) reduces its mining reward every month, rather than in a single step every four years as Bitcoin ($BTC) does. The result is a smoother issuance curve, but one that pushes miners toward fee income much sooner, according to a post from @BSCNews.

How Kaspa's monthly reduction worksBitcoin's protocol cuts the miner reward in half every 210,000 blocks, roughly every four years. The most recent halving, in April 2024, took the reward from 6.25 to 3.125 BTC per block, per Blockstream.

Kaspa uses what it calls a chromatic emission schedule. The reward is reduced every month by a factor of (1/2)^(1/12), or about 5.6%. After 12 such cuts, the reward has fallen by half, so Kaspa effectively halves once a year without a single cliff event.

The reward began at 440 KAS per second. According to the original post, it now sits near 20.6 KAS per second, or about 2.06 KAS per block. Schedule data from Tokenradar shows the per-second reward at roughly 21.8 for the period from September to October 2026, which is consistent with a further monthly cut to around 20.6.

Kaspa sets its reward per second, not per block. That means the move to 10 blocks per second splits the same payout across more blocks, which is why the per-block figure is far smaller than the per-second figure.

What it means for miners and supplyBecause Kaspa's reward halves four times as often as Bitcoin's, transaction fees will have to make up a larger share of miner income much sooner. Bitcoin's halving affects only the subsidy, not fees, which depend on demand for block space. The same logic applies to Kaspa.

Most of the supply has already been issued. The original post puts about 27.75 billion KAS in circulation out of a total supply of roughly 28.7 billion. Spark Money reports that over 27.5 billion KAS had been mined by mid-2026, around 96% of the cap.

The front-loaded issuance has been a point of debate. One analysis noted that some investors worry miners create constant sell pressure when large amounts of a coin reach the market quickly. How fee revenue develops as the reward keeps shrinking will be a key test for Kaspa's long-term security model.

SourcesSpark Money: Bitcoin vs Kaspa mining and emission compared
Blockstream Help Center: What is the Bitcoin halving?
Tokenradar: Kaspa (KAS) tokenomics and emission schedule

Growing stablecoin adoption is no longer just a sign of a blockchain’s capital influx.

More than that, it has become a harbinger of the adoption to come. The reason is simple: As stablecoin use cases expand, now spanning TradFi, cross-border payments, state treasury accumulation, and more, rising stablecoin flows could reflect growing utility and an enhanced likelihood of wider adoption to follow.

With that said, SUI’s recent development is promising. According to the chart below, Sui’s native stablecoin, USDsui, has attained a record of $80 million in supply. Issued by Stripe’s Bridge, USDsui has grown by 20.5% within the last 90 days, signaling a steady rise in stablecoin activity on the network. 

Source: DeFiLlama From an on-chain perspective, the impact is notable.

According to DeFiLlama data, SUI’s total value locked (TVL) rose over 20% during the same period, reaching $530 million. This indicates that stablecoins are contributing to the expansion of the entire ecosystem as more and more capital flows into the L1 blockchain.

However, with strategic partnerships, buybacks, and increasing use of AI in focus, is USDsui reaching a record supply, a sign that Sui [SUI] is shifting its focus to a more ‘future-focused’ approach to growth?

USDsui hits new high as SUI’s ecosystem expands The record-breaking supply of USDsui may not be a coincidence.

The token’s rise follows the L1’s recent efforts. The Sui Foundation has just launched a $30 million investment in DATA Network. In turn, adding to the network’s push into AI-related infrastructure. Meanwhile, the Sui Foundation and Mysten Labs are partnering with OpenAssets to bring the Open Tokenized Asset Standard to SUI, which aims to boost the network’s adoption of tokenized assets.

At the same time, Sui has repurchased 830,300 SUI, worth around $646,000, using yield from stablecoin reserves. This is buying pressure for SUI and highlights that stablecoin activity can also bolster demand for the network’s native token. In this context, SUI’s stablecoin market cap crossing the $480 million mark for the first time since the Q3 peak could create more room for future buybacks.

Source: DeFiLlama Together, these developments put USDsui’s growth in focus.

Given the strategic partnerships, buybacks, and increased use of artificial intelligence in the SUI network, its record-breaking stablecoin supply contributes to the overall expansion of the network for future growth. If this trend holds, USDsui could be shaping to be a critical growth driver for the altcoin, making its stablecoin adoption a crucial element in the network’s expansion.

Final Summary USDsui hits a record $80 million supply, while Sui’s TVL rises to $530 million.

AI investments, new partnerships, and buybacks support the altcoin’s broader growth and adoption.

On Unchained, ARK Invest's Lorenzo Valente said wealth managers mostly ask about quantum risk, not token metrics, and that he is more confident than a year ago that Bitcoin will move to new signatures in time.

ARK's Lorenzo Valente says most adviser questions are about quantum risk

Posted October 12, 2026 at 10:57 pm ET.

Professional money managers who ask ARK Invest about crypto mostly want to know about quantum computing, not token economics, according to Lorenzo Valente, ARK’s director of research for digital assets.

Valente estimated on Unchained, in a livestream recorded Oct. 12, that “probably 70%” of the questions ARK fields from registered investment advisers and wealth-management platforms concern quantum risk. They ask whether the signatures securing blockchains will have to be replaced and which networks have the better plan, he said. Metrics insiders assume such clients track, like token inflation or protocol revenue, are largely unknown to them, he added.

Host Laura Shin said on the show that she found it “impressive that they’re that sophisticated.” Valente suggested a reason: quantum “is more of a general technology that they’ve heard also like in other fields.”

Get Unchained’s crypto news in your inbox with the free Unchained Daily newsletter.

A Long Forecast, Shortened by AI
Valente was clear that quantum is not his own research area. “I’m not the one specifically that, that has done the work on that,” he said on the show, adding that ARK’s internal view places the threat roughly 10 to 20 years out. He also noted, “I’m not a cryptographer.”

The discussion came days after researcher Justin Drake wrote on Oct. 7 that ECDSA, the elliptic-curve signature scheme behind Bitcoin and Ethereum keys, could break “in the worst case in months not years,” citing AI’s rapid progress in math. Unchained covered the debate that followed. The speed of AI advances has made it much harder to set timelines for investment theses, Valente said, calling the situation “definitely scary.”

More Optimistic on Bitcoin
Asked how Bitcoin can handle the threat, Valente said ARK has been in talks with large industry players and with core developers, and that it is in a “consortium with MicroStrategy and some of the other companies that are thinking about this.”

That group is the Bitcoin Security Consortium, which Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, announced in July with ARK, BlackRock, Coinbase, Fidelity Digital Assets and others among its founding members.

Valente said he now expects Bitcoin to find a solution before Q-Day, the point at which a quantum computer could break today’s cryptography, and make the transition. “I was much more worried a year ago,” he said. “I think people are aware of this, and they’re working on it.”

Valente said ETF issuers, exchanges, developers and miners all now have a stake, and that “there are just more companies that are depending on Bitcoin right now than, like, two or three years ago.”

Related Listen: One Type of Post-Quantum Cryptography Is Most Popular. Why Is Crypto Trying Out Three?

AI-assisted content: This article was produced with the assistance of AI tools and was reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by a member of the Unchained editorial team before publication.

Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.

Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA.

TLDR

Table of Contents

NVDA stock retreated toward $225 after reaching a record $243.37 on October 6.
Microsoft’s Maia 300 targets 40% greater processing efficiency than leading GPU systems.
OpenAI’s reported $50 billion annualized revenue figure renewed scrutiny of AI spending expectations.
Nvidia reportedly considers expanding its investment in Reflection AI through a potential acquisition.
SpaceX seeks $40 billion in financing for Nvidia chips as AI infrastructure costs rise.

Nvidia (NVDA) shares fell toward $225 on October 12, after hitting a $243.37 record on October 6. NVDA stock weakened alongside chipmakers as investors assessed the cost of expanding artificial intelligence infrastructure.

NVIDIA Corporation, NVDA

The retreat followed Microsoft’s new processor announcement, questions about OpenAI revenue figures and reports of heavy borrowing for AI hardware amid rising data center costs. Nvidia remains a leading data center chip supplier, although major customers are developing alternatives.

Microsoft Unveils Maia 300 to Cut Costs
Microsoft expects its Maia 300 chip to produce 40% more tokens per megawatt than leading GPU systems. A 96-accelerator rack could deliver up to seven times Maia 200’s token output, Microsoft said.

Microsoft plans production deployments in 2027 across its Azure cloud services. Its processors could reduce dependence on outside suppliers, although Nvidia GPUs remain widely used for AI training and other computing tasks.

OpenAI Revenue Figures Draw Investor Attention
OpenAI’s annualized revenue reached roughly $50 billion in September, Reuters reported, below earlier estimates near $68 billion. Reuters attributed the difference partly to how cloud partner sales enter the calculations. Annualized revenue projects a current rate over twelve months.

The revenue debate added to concerns about AI stock market concentration. An analysis found 42 AI companies generated 67% of S&P 500 price gains since January 2024. Investors are watching whether infrastructure spending translates into revenue.

Nvidia Considers Reflection AI Deal
Nvidia is considering acquiring Reflection AI or raising its investment, the Financial Times reported. Nvidia has invested about $800 million in the company, which develops open-weight AI models. Talks remain preliminary, with no formal deal announced.

An acquisition would broaden Nvidia’s business beyond processors into AI software. The company would also assume another investment commitment. Semiconductor stocks have fallen together as traders assess customer spending plans and financing.

Debt Plans Put NVDA Stock Back in Focus
SpaceX is reportedly seeking $40 billion in financing for Nvidia chips through loans and bonds, Reuters reported. The plan shows how AI customers increasingly rely on borrowing to finance expensive chips and data centers. No financing agreement has been announced.

NVDA stock traded near $226 on Monday after touching below $225 during another losing session. Its October peak remains a reference point for traders, who are monitoring AI orders, spending, and how quickly customers deploy competing processors.

TLDR

Table of Contents

CME Group shares slide 1.18% despite faster Globex cloud performance test results.
Google Cloud testing delivers faster trading response times for CME Globex systems.
Aurora Cloud Region construction advances ahead of schedule for 2027 testing.
CME Group targets late 2027 for its livestock market migration to Aurora cloud.
Dallas disaster recovery testing continues as CME drops interim relocation plans.

CME Group (CME) stock fell 1.18% to $277.24 on Monday, October 12, losing $3.32 despite progress on its cloud migration. The company completed initial performance testing for CME Globex on Google Cloud, achieving faster trading response times. Meanwhile, CME Group confirmed an accelerated construction schedule for its Aurora Cloud Region, supporting its planned market migration.

CME Group Inc., CME

CME Group Stock Declines Despite Cloud Trading Milestones
CME Group shares reversed earlier gains during Monday’s session as selling pressure increased throughout trading. The decline came as the company announced progress toward modernizing its global derivatives trading infrastructure. However, the announcement did not prevent the stock from ending the session lower.

CME Group completed initial performance tests for CME Globex, its electronic trading platform, using Google Cloud infrastructure. The tests achieved faster round-trip times, which measure how quickly trading systems process and return messages. Consequently, the results marked progress toward delivering ultra-low-latency trading through cloud technology.

The company also reported faster construction progress at its Aurora Cloud Region and co-location facility. Google Cloud will provide specialized infrastructure designed to support the trading requirements of CME Group’s markets. CME Group expects the Aurora facility to become available for client testing by mid-2027.

Google Cloud Migration Advances Toward 2027 Launch
CME Group Chairman and CEO Terry Duffy said the migration program continues to advance faster than initially expected. He attributed the accelerated schedule to construction progress and strong results from initial performance testing. Furthermore, the company expects its cloud infrastructure to support ultra-low-latency trading services ahead of its original schedule.

CME Group plans to move its livestock markets to the Aurora Cloud Region during late 2027. Previously, the company considered an interim relocation to Dallas before completing the transition to Aurora. However, faster construction progress eliminated that requirement and allowed CME Group to simplify its migration plans.

CME Group’s Dallas disaster recovery facility has supported client testing since June 2026. The facility remains part of the company’s broader infrastructure modernization program. Additionally, CME Group expects clients to access Google Cloud-managed services and co-location capabilities in Aurora during late 2027.

CME Group Expands Cloud Infrastructure for Global Markets
CME Group operates one of the world’s largest derivatives marketplaces, serving participants across several major asset classes. Its exchanges provide futures and options tied to interest rates, equities, currencies, cryptocurrencies, energy, agricultural commodities, and metals. The company also operates BrokerTec, EBS, and CME Clearing across its trading and clearing businesses.

CME Globex supports electronic futures and options trading, making reliable infrastructure essential to CME Group’s daily operations. The Google Cloud migration aims to combine specialized computing systems with the speed requirements of electronic markets. The transition will provide clients with managed cloud services and physical co-location options.

The latest milestones strengthen CME Group’s planned transition while establishing clearer testing and deployment targets for 2027. However, Monday’s stock decline contrasted with the operational progress outlined in the company’s announcement. CME Group will continue preparing its Aurora infrastructure as it advances the next stages of cloud migration.

If someone invested $100 in gold in 2011, today they’d have $216, more than double in return. The profit on Silver is not as lucrative, but you’d still have $122 today. But the same hundred dollars invested in diamonds would be worth $30 today.

Bloomberg’s Diamond Standard Index, which tracks investment-grade stones, just hit its lowest level in over 20 years. So, are diamonds becoming worthless?

Factories Can Grow Diamonds. Nobody Can Grow Gold.Diamonds’ attraction as an investment asset has been washed away because of laboratory innovation.

Lab-grown diamonds are made of the same carbon as mined ones. A certified 1-carat lab stone now sells wholesale for $76 to $87, data from analyst Edahn Golan shows.

Bloomberg’s Diamond Standard Index. Source: BloombergShoppers followed the price. Among US couples married in 2025, 61% picked a lab-grown engagement stone, The Knot found. Now, reports claim Walmart sells half-carat lab-grown earrings for $12.

Walmart is selling real diamond earrings for $12.

Not a typo. Half-carat lab-grown diamonds, same carbon, graded by the same labs that grade the stone in your engagement ring. A jeweler can't tell them apart without a machine.

And that $12 price tag is why the company that… https://t.co/BdASP6FC6o

— Aakash Gupta (@aakashgupta) October 12, 2026
BeInCrypto found lab-grown studs from third-party sellers on Walmart’s site, with some retailing at significantly discounted prices.

“Diamonds are about to be absolutely worthless,” noted one user.

Notably, De Beers kept prices high for decades by tightly controlling supply. Now the company is for sale. Valued at nearly $13 billion in 2011, it may fetch about $1 billion.

Gold and Silver Crashed in 2026. They Still Beat Diamonds.Gold trades near $4,157, about 23% below its January peak. Silver, at $60.46, has nearly halved since topping $116.

Gold and Silver Price Performances in 2026. Source: TradingViewThat selling tracked rising US bond yields, not new supply, as the recent gold and silver sell-off showed. China’s central bank even made its largest gold purchase since 2023 in September.

Are Diamonds Really Becoming Worthless?The data says not yet. Diamond analyst Paul Zimnisky told Marketplace that owners selling a stone might recover about half of what they paid.

“For most people, I wouldn’t look at it as an investment,” he said.

Natural prices also ticked up in September, Rapaport data shows. Golan called recent gains an early sign of stability, not a recovery.

Gold has one global price and a supply no factory can add to. A diamond now has neither.

THE STREET: Simple wallets and index products: How investors are getting access to Bittensor

Summary: Activate optimistic governance for ZIPs by deploying the council, veto, and supermajority contracts created by Scopelift, and set parameters outlined in the Specification section.

Field
Details

Title
Activate Optimistic Governance for ZIPs

Proposal Type
ZIP

One Sentence Summary
This ZIP activates Optimistic Governance for ZIPs which allows Security Council members to propose protocol upgrades and for the Token Assembly to veto any ZIP prior to execution.

Proposal Author
ZKsync Association

Proposal Sponsor
[TBC]

Date Submitted
[TBC]

Version
1

Summary of Action
Activate optimistic governance for ZIPs by deploying the council, veto, and supermajority contracts created by Scopelift, and set parameters outlined in the Specification section.

Abstract
This proposal activates Optimistic Governance for ZIPs. Security Council members will propose protocol upgrades and the Token Assembly will have the opportunity to veto any ZIP before it can proceed to execution. This removes the requirement for the Token Assembly to affirmatively approve every ZIP and focus voting on Token Program Proposals and Governance Advisory Proposals, while preserving its ability to veto a proposal.

Motivation
ZIPs are technical proposals that can upgrade the ZKsync protocol, its core contracts, and the governance system. The Security Council currently has responsibility for reviewing and approving protocol upgrades before they are executed. Allowing Security Council members to propose ZIPs places responsibility for driving upgrades with the governance body best positioned to assess them.

Under the current process, every ZIP must receive at least 630 million ZK in affirmative votes and a simple majority of votes cast. This means a proposal can fail because it does not reach quorum, even where there is no material opposition. It also requires the Token Assembly to approve technical changes before the Security Council completes its review.

Optimistic Governance shifts the Token Assembly’s role from approving every ZIP to having the ability to veto any ZIP, as well as increasing their focus on token programs, mechanics, and governance advisory. Once adopted, optimistic governace means protocol upgrade proposals can proceed without an affirmative Token Assembly vote, but 630 million ZK can stop it. A veto can only be overridden if at least 1.26 billion ZK votes For and there are more For votes than Against votes. This allows technical experts to drive protocol upgrades while keeping the Token Assembly as a check on whether they proceed.

This ZIP only changes the Protocol Upgrade path. The Token Governor (TPPs) and GovOps Governor (GAPs) are unchanged.

Specification
This proposal deploys a council token, a Council Governor, a Veto Governor, a Supermajority Governor, and a dedicated supermajority timelock on ZKsync Era. It reuses the existing Protocol Timelock so that successful proposals continue to reach the existing ProtocolUpgradeHandler on Ethereum.

Changes Proposed
1. Security Council proposal process
Each of the eight Security Council member entities will receive one non-transferable and non-delegable seat through CouncilERC20. Each seat will be held by that member entity’s SAFE multisig on ZKsync Era.

A seated member of the Security Council may submit a proposal through BasicCouncilGovernor. Any Security Council member entity can submit a protocol upgrade onchain. This submission equates to that entity sponsoring the ZIP. It is expected that the sponsor of the ZIP then casts a vote ‘FOR’ the proposal. One Security Council member entity voting FOR is sufficient to forward the proposal to the Token Assembly veto stage. The Security Council voting delay will be one day, enabling proposals to be cancelled and resubmitted if there is an error in the initial submission. The council voting period will be a maximum of three days. A one-seat super-quorum allows a proposal to advance as soon as the first valid FOR vote is cast.

The ZKsync deployment will use council vote-counting logic under which a valid FOR vote from one seat satisfies sponsorship regardless of Against votes. This preserves the intended one-member sponsorship model and prevents the council stage from becoming a separate majority-approval gate.

A successful council proposal is forwarded to the Veto Governor. It cannot be queued directly for execution through the Council Governor.

Council Members:

Matter Labs: 0xe38dc029623f0af56BdC46E5318610E257d6b760
Nethermind: 0x870Ec9631E28ee6C8b304e238E9b6890a99ab8aA
Open Zeppelin: 0x305798C076B64Be35Aa6367C6632b79e29D0113A
Spearbit: 0x356cF4Ac9fA86F0a9dDdc62e48082FE5Cd14bE7b
Chainlight: 0x3043bF9c9A512d20Dda2c2b2C3D69AF6f7Fcd5B1
Cyfrin: 0x9BC8d216d63b38c390e465D664FEb63B67659c13
Dedaub: 0xdbc2E250cBA867D6619Bed342Ca3Eca7b71e8b82
Peckshield: 0x46fc9a8A72456c84F42c5c9e5df46984c0078B15

2. Token Assembly veto process
Every proposal forwarded by the Council Governor will enter a Token Assembly veto process through BasicCouncilVetoGovernor. Delegated ZK voting power may cast veto votes during the configured veto period.

A proposal succeeds by default unless veto votes reach 630 million ZK. If the threshold is reached, the proposal is defeated unless the Token Assembly subsequently approves an override through the process described below.

The veto threshold will be set at a fixed threshold of 630 million ZK.

The veto vote will remain open for seven days. Once the veto votes reach 315 million ZK—50% of the veto threshold—the voting period will be extended by two days.

3. Token Assembly Supermajority Vote
A veto may be overridden by a Token Assembly supermajority:

at least 1.26 billion ZK voting For, equal to twice the 630 million ZK veto threshold; and
more For votes than Against votes.

The Supermajority Governor [ZKsync Supermajority Governor] will use the existing ZK token and the same fractional-counting model as the current Protocol Governor. It will have a proposal threshold of 21 million ZK, a one-day voting delay, a seven-day voting period, and a three-day late-quorum extension.

Successful supermajority proposals will execute through a dedicated self-administered TimelockController with a one-day minimum delay. That timelock will hold the Veto Governor’s vetoOverrideRole. No externally owned account, Security Council Safe, Foundation Safe, or general governance administrator will hold the supermajority role.

The supermajority vote must execute within 14 days after the veto deadline. This window accommodates the override vote, possible late-quorum extension, and supermajority-timelock delay.

Under the proposed implementation, the supermajority may apply to any proposal in the Defeated state, including a proposal stopped through the Foundation’s safety veto. This prevents the Foundation from becoming a unilateral denial-of-service point, but means its veto acts as a delay rather than an absolute stop when at least 1.26 billion ZK supports a proposal proceeding.

Following a successful supermajority vote, anyone may queue the proposal on the Veto Governor and, after the applicable timelock conditions are satisfied, execute it through the Council Governor. The existing L1 approval process still applies.

4. Foundation safety veto
The ZKsync Foundation will retain veto power in the Veto Governor’s vetoGuardian role via its L2 multisig, 0xF197677d63BF6E2841F5108b8dFd2FD6eCEff74B.

The Foundation may stop a proposal while it is Pending or Active by calling vetoByGuardian() on ZKsync Era. The Foundation cannot use this role to originate, affirmatively approve, queue, or execute a proposal.

A Foundation-vetoed proposal may be restored through the 1.26 billion ZK Token Assembly override described above.

5. Standard ZIP process
The standard process will be:

One Security Council member submits a ZIP through the Council Governor.
The proposing Security Council member, or any other council member, casts one FOR vote to advance the proposal to the Token Assembly veto stage.
The proposal enters the Token Assembly veto process.
The Foundation may exercise its safety veto while the proposal is Pending or Active.
If no veto occurs, the proposal succeeds at the end of the veto period.
If a veto occurs, the proposal proceeds only if the Token Assembly approves an override with at least 1.26 billion ZK voting For and more For votes than Against votes.
The Veto Governor queues and executes the proposal through the existing Protocol Timelock.
The Protocol Timelock sends the L2-to-L1 message to the ProtocolUpgradeHandler.
The upgrade proceeds through the existing L1 approval, delay, and execution stages.

Every standard ZIP is subject to the Token Assembly veto process. Only a higher-threshold Token Assembly vote may reverse a veto on L2.

6. Council Governor parameters

Parameter
Initial Value

Name
ZKsync Protocol Upgrade Council

Council Veto Governor
Deployed Veto Governor

Governor admin
0xf41eca3047b37dc7d88849de4a4dc07937ad6bc4

Voting delay
86,400 seconds (1 day)

Voting period
259,200 seconds (3 days)

Proposal threshold
1e18 (one seat)

Quorum fraction
12% (one of eight seats)

Super-quorum fraction
12% (one of eight seats)

Vote-success rule
One FOR vote is enough

7. Veto Governor parameters

Parameter
Initial Value

Name
ZKsync Protocol Upgrade Veto Governor

Token
ZK at 0x5A7d6b2F92C77FAD6CCaBd7EE0624E64907Eaf3E

Voting delay
86,400 seconds (1 day)

Voting period
604,800 seconds (7 days)

Proposal threshold
0 (propose() is restricted to the Council Governor)

Veto Guardian
0xF197677d63BF6E2841F5108b8dFd2FD6eCEff74B

Veto override duration
1,209,600 seconds (14 days)

Voting-period extension
172,800 seconds (2 days)

Extension threshold
50% of veto threshold (315 million ZK)

Veto threshold
630 million ZK

Protocol Timelock
0x085b8B6407f150D62adB1EF926F7f304600ec714

Governor admin
0xf41eca3047b37dc7d88849de4a4dc07937ad6bc4

Council
Deployed Council Governor

Veto override role
Deployed Override timelock

8. Council token parameters

Parameter
Initial Value

Name
ZKsync Protocol Upgrade Council Seat

Symbol
ZKPUC

Admin
0xf41eca3047b37dc7d88849de4a4dc07937ad6bc4

Maximum tokens per member
1e18

Initial members
Matter Labs: 0xe38dc029623f0af56BdC46E5318610E257d6b760; Nethermind: 0x870Ec9631E28ee6C8b304e238E9b6890a99ab8aA; Open Zeppelin: 0x305798C076B64Be35Aa6367C6632b79e29D0113A; Spearbit: 0x356cF4Ac9fA86F0a9dDdc62e48082FE5Cd14bE7b; Chainlight: 0x3043bF9c9A512d20Dda2c2b2C3D69AF6f7Fcd5B1; Cyfrin: 0x9BC8d216d63b38c390e465D664FEb63B67659c13; Dedaub: 0xdbc2E250cBA867D6619Bed342Ca3Eca7b71e8b82; Peckshield: 0x46fc9a8A72456c84F42c5c9e5df46984c0078B15

Tokens per initial member
1e18

Transferability
Non-transferable and non-delegable

9. Supermajority Governor parameters

Parameter
Initial Value

Name
ZKsync Supermajority Governor

Token
ZK at 0x5A7d6b2F92C77FAD6CCaBd7EE0624E64907Eaf3E

Proposal threshold
21 million ZK

Fixed For-vote quorum
1.26 billion ZK

Success condition
At least 1.26 billion ZK FOR and more FOR than AGAINST

Voting delay
86,400 seconds (1 day)

Voting period
604,800 seconds (7 days)

Late-quorum extension
259,200 seconds (3 days)

Override timelock minimum delay
86,400 seconds (1 day)

Override timelock proposer and canceller
Veto Override Governor

Override timelock executor
Open (address(0))

Override timelock administration
Self-administered

10. Existing Protocol Timelock migration
This design requires no changes to the existing ProtocolUpgradeHandler and continues to use the existing Protocol Timelock at 0x085b8B6407f150D62adB1EF926F7f304600ec714.

The migration will:

grant PROPOSER_ROLE, EXECUTOR_ROLE, and CANCELLER_ROLE on the Protocol Timelock to the new Veto Governor; and
revoke those roles from the current ZkProtocolGovernor at 0x76705327e682f2d96943280d99464ab61219e34f.

The Veto Governor requires EXECUTOR_ROLE because it calls executeBatch() itself. The Protocol Timelock is self-administered and currently has a minimum delay of zero. This ZIP does not change that delay.

11. Administration and council membership
The governorAdmin roles for the Council Governor and Veto Governor, as well as the CouncilERC20 admin role, will be assigned to the L2 alias of the ProtocolUpgradeHandler, 0xf41eca3047b37dc7d88849de4a4dc07937ad6bc4.

As a result, parameter changes and council seat changes must pass through the full ZIP process, including the L1 approval and delay stages, before the ProtocolUpgradeHandler sends the corresponding L1-to-L2 call.

The L1 Security Council membership and the L2 council-seat list are separate. A change to one does not automatically update the other. Any membership change must update both systems where applicable.

12. Prerequisite Guardian-dissolution ZIP
This proposal assumes that a separate ZIP has already:

assigned the ZKsync Foundation Safe to the ProtocolUpgradeHandler Guardian role;
deployed and activated an Emergency Upgrade Board that is composed of the Security Council plus Foundation, requiring both bodies; and
retired the prior three-body Emergency Upgrade Board.

That prerequisite ZIP must execute before this optimistic-governance migration. Any corresponding changes to Guardian roles in the Token Governor and GovOps Governor must be handled separately through the applicable TPP and GAP processes.

13. Scope
This proposal applies only to the Protocol Upgrade Governor and its timelock. It does not change:

the Token Governor or the affirmative Token Assembly vote required for TPPs;
the GovOps Governor or the affirmative Token Assembly vote required for GAPs;
the L1 ProtocolUpgradeHandler approval thresholds established by the prerequisite ZIP;
the Security Council’s existing freeze powers; or
the Emergency Upgrade Board established by the prerequisite ZIP.

Execution Impact
Security Council
Each Security Council member entity will receive one seat held through its Safe on ZKsync Era. Any one member may sponsor a proposal and forward it to the Token Assembly veto stage. The Security Council will continue to act collectively during the L1 approval stage.

L2 seat custody is operationally separate from the existing L1 Security Council membership. The signer sets and membership records must be kept aligned.

Token Assembly
The Token Assembly will no longer need to reach affirmative quorum for every ZIP. Instead, every standard ZIP will enter a public veto period.

Delegates may stop a proposal with 630 million ZK in veto votes. A disputed veto may be reversed only through a separate Token Assembly vote with at least 1.26 billion ZK voting For and more For votes than Against votes.

This proposal does not change Token Assembly approval rights for TPPs or GAPs.

ZKsync Foundation
The Foundation may veto Pending or Active proposals through an L1-to-L2 transaction. Under the proposed implementation, the Token Assembly may reverse that veto through the same 1.26 billion ZK override process.

The Foundation retains the L1 fallback approval and legal-veto-extension functions established by the prerequisite Guardian-dissolution ZIP.

Governance interfaces and monitoring
The governance interface must support council proposal, council sponsorship, Token Assembly veto, veto extension, override proposal, override execution, Protocol Timelock, and L1 approval states.

All council proposals and vetoes should trigger public notifications to delegates, Security Council members, the Foundation, and the wider community. Interfaces should display the 630 million ZK veto threshold, the 315 million ZK extension threshold, the 1.26 billion ZK override requirement, and the applicable deadlines.

Governance Procedures
The ZKsync Governance Procedures must be amended to reflect Security Council proposal rights, the Token Assembly veto and override processes, the Foundation safety veto, and the revised role of the current Protocol Timelock and Protocol Governor.

Backwards Compatibility
This proposal changes the governance process for future ZIPs and is therefore not procedurally backwards compatible with the current affirmative-vote model.

After activation:

ZIPs must be originated through the Council Governor;
delegated ZK voting power will ordinarily be used to veto rather than affirmatively approve ZIPs;
a separate higher-threshold Token Assembly process will govern veto overrides;
the new Veto Governor will replace the current Protocol Governor as proposer, executor, and canceller on the existing Protocol Timelock; and
governance interfaces and indexing services must support the council-to-veto and override lifecycles.

The proposal does not change application-facing transaction formats, smart contract interfaces, or validity rules for ordinary ZKsync transactions. The Token Governor and GovOps Governor proposal processes remain unchanged.

Any ZIP pending in the current Protocol Governor at the activation boundary must be handled under a published transition plan. No proposal should remain dependent on roles that are revoked during migration.

Security Considerations
The optimistic model allows a proposal to advance without affirmative Token Assembly participation. This improves liveness but makes public notice, monitoring, accessible technical materials, and a meaningful veto period essential. The seven-day veto period, late-veto extension, Foundation veto, Token Assembly override process, collective Security Council L1 approval, and existing L1 delays provide defense in depth.

The 1.26 billion ZK override protects against veto griefing and a unilateral Foundation denial of service, but it also means that a veto is not absolute. The override remains a Token Assembly decision: neither the Security Council, the Foundation, nor the administrator can invoke it without the required token vote. The feasibility of reaching 1.26 billion ZK in For votes should be assessed against historical participation before deployment.

As proposed, the override can reverse both a token-holder veto and a Foundation safety veto because both place the proposal in the Defeated state. Restricting the override to token-holder vetoes would require additional state tracking and a further modification to the audited code. The final implementation and documentation must make the selected behavior explicit.

If the Security Council cannot satisfy the L1 approval threshold, the Foundation may use the fallback approval path established by the prerequisite ZIP. If both bodies refuse or are unavailable, the upgrade will not execute. This is the intended two-body blocking property of the design.

The governorAdmin and council-token admin may change parameters and membership. Assigning these roles to the aliased ProtocolUpgradeHandler subjects their use to the full ZIP and L1 approval path, but also makes correct L1-to-L2 aliasing and cross-domain execution critical. All aliases and administrative calls must be tested on a fork.

The existing Protocol Timelock is retained because the ProtocolUpgradeHandler accepts messages only from that address. Incorrectly revoking the current governor’s roles before the Veto Governor is fully configured could make protocol governance inoperable. The role migration must be atomic where possible and verified against the final execution manifest.

The generic council-governance contracts were reviewed by Certora in December 2025 at commit 6680eb4, according to the supporting technical materials. The ZKsync-specific council counting, fixed veto-supply base, deployment parameters, override-governor integration, L1-to-L2 administration, and complete role migration require their own review before submission.

Allora’s Forge platform has opened a new prediction topic built around Hyperliquid, and it comes with an unusual twist: there is no fixed list of assets.

The Hyperliquid Log Return topic, designated topic 90, went live on October 8, 2026. It asks AI and machine learning models to forecast three-minute log returns across Hyperliquid’s perpetual futures markets, with the set of markets rebuilt every round.

How topic 90 actually works Topic 90 works differently from static prediction setups. The market set for each round is assembled dynamically, based on what models choose to submit.

Each submission is capped at 100 keys. A key, in this context, is essentially a market the model wants to weigh in on.

Zeros are treated as the default and dropped from the registry. So a model that has no opinion on a given market simply leaves it out, rather than padding its entry with empty guesses.

The target itself is a three-minute base-10 log return. A log return measures how much a price moved over a window, expressed as a logarithm of the ending price divided by the starting price.

To settle who was right, Allora pulls ground truth from Hyperliquid’s one-minute candle data through its Atlas platform.

The scoring system punishes fence-sitting Allora’s answer to zero-padding is the CZAR loss function, short for Composite Zero-Agnostic Return. It is designed to reward forecasts that actually take a directional stance and to penalize predictions that hedge toward nothing.

Models are assessed on several criteria, including directional accuracy and correlation with realized returns.

The bar for graduating is also explicit. To move to mainnet, a model must pass seven statistical tests per topic and worker.

One of those tests requires the lower confidence bound on directional accuracy to sit above 50%. That means a model has to show, with statistical confidence, that it beats a coin flip at calling direction.

Forge, Hyperliquid and the bigger picture Forge functions as a competitive arena where models build reputations through testing. According to the research findings, more than 2,000 models are already active on the platform.

Those models are spread across 18 topics. The Hyperliquid Log Return topic joins others focused on price, volatility and commodity forecasts.

Hyperliquid is a high-performance Layer 1 blockchain optimized for perpetual futures and spot trading. Its HyperCore infrastructure handles order matching and liquidations.

Notably, the launch does not introduce a new token or any new trading mechanism. It is a model-performance play: a new arena with new rules, aimed at the people building predictive systems rather than the people trading on Hyperliquid directly.

What this means for model builders and traders The dynamic market set is the most interesting design choice here. By letting models pick their own markets, up to 100 at a time, Forge shifts some of the strategy from “how good is your forecast” to “where are you confident enough to forecast at all.”

The CZAR loss function and the seven-test mainnet gate address a credibility problem common in AI prediction projects. Requiring a directional accuracy lower bound above 50% forces models to demonstrate an edge, not just low error.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Diego Almada Lopez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Gold perpetuals on Aster DEX, settled in World Liberty Financial's USD1, are reportedly the exchange's third most traded market behind $BTC and $ETH.

Gold perpetual futures on @Aster_DEX, settled in @worldlibertyfi's $USD1 stablecoin, have become the third most traded asset on the exchange, according to a post from BSC News. The post cites data from @MSBIntel showing the contract traded roughly $6.7 billion over the past month, placing it behind only $BTC and $ETH.

The figures come from the social media post and the cited analytics account. We have not independently verified them.

How USD1 became the settlement assetThe gold market is part of a broader tie-up between Aster and World Liberty Financial.

The structure differs from most rivals. According to CryptoAdventure,

The relationship has since deepened. According to CryptoRank,

What it means for Aster and WLFIIf the reported volume holds, tokenized gold is now a core product on Aster rather than a side listing. It also gives $USD1 a concrete use case as a trading settlement asset.

Aster remains one of the larger venues in the sector. One October 2026 ranking put Measured against that monthly total, a $6.7 billion gold contract would represent a meaningful share of activity, though the two figures come from different sources and may use different methodologies.

Aster is also entering a crowded field. CryptoRank noted that Leveraged commodity products also carry high risk, and traders should check contract terms and liquidity before taking positions.

SourcesAster DEX Makes USD1 Sole Settlement for Commodity Perps (OurCryptoTalk)
Aster Launches USD1 Perp Markets for Stocks, Oil, and Gold Trading (CryptoRank)
Aster DEX Replaces Tether With USD1 for Gold, Silver, Oil Perps (Stocktwits)

By Joseph Wilkins and Kirk Maltais

Bitcoin fell below $83,000 on Monday after Russia continued strikes on Ukraine's energy infrastructure, this despite a post from President Trump over the weekend declaring an "energy cease-fire" between the two.

The flagship cryptocurrency dropped 1.6%, to $82,311, after a weekend of geopolitical tumult saw Trump announce an unconfirmed energy truce between Ukraine and Russia, while conflict between Saudi Arabia and Houthi militants in Yemen continued to escalate.

But the ceasefire was quickly broken, with Russia striking Ukrainian infrastructure hours after Trump's post on Truth Social calling for a cease-fire. Ukraine is expected to retaliate, escalating the situation. The Wall Street Journal reports that Russia's strikes hit Ukrainian gas infrastructure, a power plant and a substation.

Persistently high energy prices are weighing on Trump's popularity ahead of the midterm elections, with the ongoing war in the Middle East also continuing to escalate. The threat of no future relief on energy prices has kept pressure on riskier assets, including cryptocurrencies.

"Higher energy costs can intensify inflationary pressures and reduce the likelihood of rapid interest rate cuts, limiting the appeal of riskier assets," said Antonio Di Giacomo, Senior Market Analyst at XS.com.

Since consolidating above the $80,000 threshold, bitcoin has struggled to mount a further push beyond $87,000. A key test for crypto for the rest of 2026 rests on whether softer inflation and wage growth can bring down Treasury yields and cause the dollar to weaken, which would ease financial conditions for cryptocurrencies.

Investors are looking ahead to U.S. inflation data on Wednesday for clues on future interest-rate decisions.

"Wednesday's CPI is likely to show elevated inflation thanks to rising energy prices, and while there will be much scrutiny on the month-over-month numbers, the bottom line is that inflation is still well above the Fed's 2% target and that is a problem for the central bank," said Clark Bellin, chief investment officer at financial planning firm Bellwether Wealth.

Write to Joseph Wilkins at [email protected] and Kirk Maltais at [email protected]

Bitcoin Could Rally to $94K, but First It Must Break Through This Key Price Zone

On Sunday, the 11th of October, Bitcoin [BTC] bounced 1.68% to reach a local high of $84,199. The $84.5k local resistance was not tested.

Across the crypto market, the past 24 hours saw $208.64 million in liquidations, $148.79 million of them positioned short.

Short squeeze and opportunistic buy wall behind Sunday’s move Bitcoin faced $50.86 million in liquidations, and $42.69 million (83.9%) worth of short positions taken out. The price pushed up toward the cluster of short liquidations around $84k before receding.

Source: Maartunn on X Crypto analyst Maartunn observed in a post on X that the bid/ask ratio briefly jumped to 0.3 to show strong buying pressure during the price move into the short liquidations overhead.

Source: Darkfost on X At $83k, 53% of the wealth invested in Bitcoin was above the market price. Hence, buying BTC at this level would leave one better off than just over half the BTC investors, wrote crypto analyst Darkfost.

There were two key clusters to watch out for. The $84k-$85k zone is the largest distribution zone, and investors are expected to react to this zone. A break of this level could be a sign that the trend favored the buyers once again.

Meanwhile, the $77k-$79k and also the $64k-$65k areas to the south were key support zones to watch.

The Bitcoin bull run is only getting started Source: Axel Adler Jr. The Bitcoin Young Supply Index has risen from 1.4 to 13.2 since June, as prices rose from $59k to $84k. Higher readings on the metric point to a stronger shift toward younger supply, a sign of new money entering the ecosystem.

The index’s reading was still relatively low, but comparable to the 2015 and 2019 early-stage market recoveries.

Source: Joao Wedson on X Analyst Joao Wedson used the Realized Cap Impulse scores to highlight that the market was still in an accumulation-to-neutral zone, rather than a bull run underway. There was space for a more sustainable bullish trend to emerge.

Investors need not worry about being late to the bull run – it appears the run is yet to start.

Final Summary The Bitcoin price surge above $84k on Sunday was driven by a sudden uptick in buying pressure targeted at taking out a cluster of overhead short liquidations. Short-term caution is still the play, but in the long term, the bull run has yet to get going properly.

The UK High Court has delivered a key ruling in one of the largest cryptocurrency-related legal disputes to date, centering on the fate of 61,000 Bitcoins seized during a sweeping investigation into a major international investment fraud and money laundering operation.

Background of the caseThe case traces back to 2014, when Chinese national Qian Zhimin, also known as Yadi Zhang, incorporated Tianjin Lantian Gerui Electronic Technology in China. Through this company, Qian orchestrated a complex fraudulent investment scheme, attracting thousands of participants.

Between 2014 and 2017, the company offered investment opportunities in digital assets, senior care services, and other ventures, promising high returns. Investigation documents reveal that 128,409 investment agreements were signed, accumulating around 40.23 billion yuan, which is equivalent to $5.9 billion at current rates.

Of these funds, about 34.1 billion yuan were repaid to some investors under a structure resembling a Ponzi scheme. Qian converted portions of the raised capital into Bitcoin, purchasing over 100,000 BTC through the crypto exchange Huobi from June 2014 to June 2017.

By late 2018, UK law enforcement raided properties linked to Qian and her associate Jian Wen. The authorities seized electronic devices and private keys, ultimately taking control of more than 61,000 Bitcoins, currently valued at over $1.7 billion.

Mini dictionary: Tianjin Lantian Gerui Electronic Technology, a Chinese company established as the front for a large-scale fraudulent scheme targeting investors across various sectors, leading to the largest Bitcoin seizure ever in the UK.

Legal dispute over the seized BitcoinThe ongoing legal battle pits roughly 16,000 Chinese victims against British authorities, with both groups seeking the rights to the Bitcoin haul. The investors hope to recover losses stemming from Qian’s fraudulent operation, while prosecutors are pursuing claims related to criminal proceedings.

Chinese victims have argued that, by applying English property law, their money could be traced through Qian’s activities and connected to the Bitcoin now in custody, potentially allowing recovery of the cryptocurrency itself in addition to the original investments.

Court’s application of Chinese lawIn the October 12 decision, Mr. Justice Turner stated that Chinese law must govern the dispute, rather than English law. The majority of the fraudulent activities, investment contracts, and Bitcoin acquisitions were all embedded in China, prompting the court to apply the legal principles from that jurisdiction.

Chinese law will be used to determine whether the investors have rights of ownership over the confiscated Bitcoin. However, this decision does not settle whether any individuals will receive compensation or gain title to the assets, as no final ruling has yet been made regarding the actual ownership claims.

If Chinese law is ultimately upheld, investors may only recover their initial contributions plus interest, rather than benefiting from the enormous increase in Bitcoin’s value since the original purchases.

ScenarioPotential RecoveryEnglish property law appliesPossible claim to actual Bitcoin, including value gainsChinese law appliesInitial investment amount plus interest onlyThe court’s decision leaves the ultimate fate of the Bitcoin stash uncertain, as further legal arguments are expected before any distribution or compensation takes place.

The result is a major setback for the fraud victims, who had hoped to benefit from the cryptocurrency’s appreciation but now face a much narrower path to recovery.

Table of contents

Strategy (Nasdaq: STRF, STRC, STRK, STRD, MSTR) bought 250 Bitcoin in the week ended October 11, adding about $21.5 million to its treasury while its weekly purchase size shrank for a second straight week. The company disclosed the figures in a capital markets update on October 12 that also showed $192 million of STRC preferred-stock repurchases over the same period.

According to the company’s announcement, $21.0 million of the Bitcoin buy was funded with proceeds from MSTR common-stock sales and the remaining $0.5 million from cash. The additions lift Strategy’s total holdings to 848,250 BTC, keeping it the world’s largest corporate holder of the asset.

A Shrinking Weekly Buy Meets a Larger Buyback
The 250 BTC addition is smaller than the 334 BTC Strategy bought in the week ended October 4 and the 1,665 BTC it acquired the week before that. Its STRC repurchases, by contrast, climbed from $176.3 million to $192.4 million. Strategy now spends roughly nine times more on preferred-stock buybacks than on new Bitcoin, a sharp reversal of the allocation pattern that built its treasury.

As of October 11, the company’s U.S. dollar reserve stood at $4.88 billion, with another $640.5 million in cash held for broader treasury purposes. The reserve is earmarked to support dividends on its preferred stock and interest on its debt, while the cash balance remains available for future Bitcoin buys. It still has $354.8 million authorized for preferred-stock repurchases and $1.0 billion for MSTR stock buybacks.

What the Allocation Shift Signals
The pivot toward buybacks arrives as Bitcoin trades near $83,000 after U.S. spot ETFs posted their largest weekly redemptions since June. The smaller purchases do not signal an exit from Bitcoin; Strategy remains a net accumulator. But its marginal capital is increasingly flowing toward supporting preferred-stock value, a choice that weighs the yield and stability of its own instruments against further BTC exposure.

What Comes Next
Strategy retains ample dry powder to resume larger buys if conditions change. Executive Chairman Michael Saylor has historically telegraphed upcoming purchases on social media ahead of Monday filings, and the company’s last major addition of 1,665 Bitcoin showed the pace it can still reach. Whether the slowdown extends will depend on market conditions, its at-the-market share-sale program, and how management prices preferred-stock buybacks against Bitcoin’s expected return.

AUTHOR

Tokoni Uti is a Lagos-based writer with several years of experience. Her work has appeared in the Huffington Post, the Los Angeles Free Press and the San Diego Free press among others. She is a graduate of Bowen University.