Mastercard, Chainlink Use CCIP to Bring Payments Onchain

TheCryptoTimesPubblicato 2025-10-16Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-10-16

Mastercard’s partnership with Chainlink has entered a new phase. This time, focusing on Chainlink’s Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) to securely bridge legacy payment information with blockchain networks.

The partnership aims to link Mastercard’s 3.5 billion cardholders directly to blockchain-based services, in what’s being seen as a major step to bring traditional finance and Web3 closer together.

According to Chainlink, the initiative uses CCIP to move verified payment data from Mastercard’s system to blockchain networks securely. XSwap plays a key role, taking that verified data and executing a real-time on-chain swap. In other words, turning ordinary Mastercard transactions into blockchain-ready actions.

About the partnership

This builds on a June announcement, when Mastercard teamed up with Chainlink and other Web3 partners, including XSwap, Swapper Finance, Shift4 Payments, and ZeroHash. 

While the earlier phase focused on letting users buy crypto, the current effort goes further: it now supports verified on-chain execution of payment data, integrating blockchain more smoothly into Mastercard’s existing systems.

The goal is to make blockchain usage transparent to the end user. Practically, it implies that a Mastercard payment might cause activity on decentralized networks, e.g., tokenized transactions or instant cross-border settlement, without users having to deal with wallets or crypto explicitly.

Behind the scenes, Chainlink maintains payment data passing securely, XSwap manages technical processing onchain, and Swapper Finance bridges liquidity across decentralized exchanges so everything settles smoothly.

If implemented at scale, the initiative could provide a template for how large financial networks integrate blockchain capabilities into their operations without changing the user experience.

Also Read: Ant Digital Launches Ethereum L2 Jovay With Chainlink Integration

Mobile Only Image

Letture associate

Google Engineer Arrested For Using Company’s Own Search Data To Win $1.2 Million On Polymarket

A Google information security engineer, Michele Spagnuolo, has been arrested and charged with commodities fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering. Prosecutors allege he used confidential internal Google search data to place bets on the crypto-based prediction market Polymarket, winning approximately $1.2 million by knowing outcomes before the public. Using an internal tool showing real-time search trends, he reportedly placed successful wagers on contracts tied to Google's "Year in Search" rankings for 2025. This is the second federal criminal case involving Polymarket insider trading in just over a month, following an April arrest of a U.S. Army sergeant accused of using classified military information. The cases highlight increasing legal scrutiny of prediction markets, with blockchain transparency aiding prosecutors. Google placed Spagnuolo on leave and is cooperating with authorities.

bitcoinist49 min fa

Google Engineer Arrested For Using Company’s Own Search Data To Win $1.2 Million On Polymarket

bitcoinist49 min fa

Galaxy Weighs Theories After $8.3M Bitcoin Burn Mystery

Galaxy Research is investigating a mysterious Bitcoin transaction where approximately 107 BTC (worth $8.3 million) was deliberately sent to a provably unspendable "burn" address. The primary question is the motive behind destroying such a large sum. Galaxy proposed several theories, including a tax-loss strategy (though deemed unlikely for old coins), a religious or ideological act, an attempt to dispose of illicit funds, or coercion. The firm suggested a plausible explanation could be an automated error, where a trading system mistakenly sent funds to a known burn address labeled "Counterparty" instead of the intended recipient. Galaxy acknowledged all theories are speculative, and the true reason may never be known.

bitcoinist2 h fa

Galaxy Weighs Theories After $8.3M Bitcoin Burn Mystery

bitcoinist2 h fa

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

A disgruntled early Ethereum developer and token holder presents six core criticisms of the project's trajectory, contrasting it with Solana's rise. 1. **Premature Complacency**: The Ethereum Foundation shifted from a "building" to an "infrastructure" mindset too soon, adopting a passive, "retired chairman" posture before securing market dominance, reflected in ETH's ~65% decline against BTC post-Merge. 2. **Misguided Messaging**: The Merge was marketed primarily on ESG (99.95% energy reduction) rather than user benefits like speed or yield, appealing to internal ideals instead of market demands. 3. **Delayed Execution**: Proof-of-Stake, on the roadmap since 2015, took seven years to launch, ceding critical narrative and development windows. Competitors like Solana built entire ecosystems in that time. 4. **Poor Native Staking UX**: Years after the Merge, there is still no first-party, user-friendly staking application, forcing reliance on centralized services like Lido and undermining ETH's "sound money" narrative. 5. **Managed Decline**: The rollup-centric roadmap deliberately weakens the base layer's fee capture, outsourcing value and profitability to L2s like Arbitrum and Base, which issue their own tokens and fragment capital. 6. **Ideology Over Product**: Ethereum culture prioritizes philosophical purity ("credible neutrality," "public goods") over competitive product delivery that meets user demands (e.g., financialization), while Solana's ecosystem focuses on coordinated execution. The diagnosis is accumulated execution debt, not a coordination failure. Ethereum possessed a structural advantage in 2021 but spent years in governance debates, while Solana efficiently executed. The current market cap reflects these specific strategic failures, not abstract theory.

marsbit2 h fa

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

marsbit2 h fa

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

Six Grievances from an Ethereum Developer The author, an early investor and developer still building on Ethereum, expresses deep frustration with its trajectory and declining ETH/BTC price since the merge. The core argument is that Ethereum's current market position stems from concrete failures in execution and strategy, not abstract coordination problems. The first grievance targets a shift in the Ethereum Foundation's mentality from builders to "infrastructure," adopting a premature posture of a retired victor. Second, marketing the Merge around ESG (99.95% energy reduction) is seen as talking to its own conscience rather than the market, which prioritizes user experience and yield. Third, the seven-year delay in delivering Proof-of-Stake (PoS) ceded critical narrative and development time to competitors like Solana. Fourth, three years post-merge, there is still no user-friendly first-party staking application, forcing reliance on centralized services like Lido and undermining ETH's monetary narrative. Fifth, the rollup-centric roadmap has strategically surrendered base-layer fee capture to L2s, fragmenting value within the ecosystem while Solana demonstrates an integrated L1's value accrual. Finally, the author criticizes an institutional culture that prioritizes philosophical ideals (credible neutrality, pluralism) over competitive product delivery focused on what users actually want. The diagnosis is "accumulated execution debt." Ethereum possessed a structural advantage in 2021 but spent years in governance debates, while Solana's ecosystem coordinated efficiently to deliver and capture the next wave of value. The conclusion is that Ethereum's market cap reflects its abandonment of the fight for asset appreciation.

链捕手2 h fa

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

链捕手2 h fa

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the 'Accounting Era'

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the "Accounting Era" Enterprise AI is shifting from the question of "whether to adopt" to "how to account for it." As AI inference costs evolve from experimental budgets into ongoing operational expenses, CEOs and CFOs are demanding proof of value: what tangible results does each dollar spent on tokens deliver? The core of "Token Budget Wars" is not simply about reducing AI bills, but about intelligently allocating compute resources. It involves determining which business processes warrant more computational power, which tasks can use cheaper models, which can be outsourced or handled manually, and which are merely inefficient consumption. A key insight is that AI usage (token consumption) does not equal value. While SaaS usage indicated software adoption, AI token usage only indicates the "meter is running." The same workflow can cost vastly different amounts due to factors like prompt quality, context, model choice, and retries. The critical metric for scaling is "marginal token utility"—the business value created per additional dollar of inference cost. However, this is difficult to measure due to challenges like the long tail of retries, context inflation (where costs can scale quadratically with context length), and inefficient model routing (defaulting to the most powerful model for all tasks). The competition for token allocation is intensifying because, in the AI era, influence is tied to how much intelligence one can command, not just team size. AI spending is essentially competing with labor costs, whether for replacing external BPOs, internal staff, or generating new revenue. BPO contracts provide a clearer benchmark as they are priced per completed unit. The missing layer is attribution from tokens to business outcomes. Companies need a system that connects inference spending to completed work and results, capturing the agent's decision trajectory—what it saw, retrieved, tried, and why it succeeded or failed. This recorded rationale becomes a valuable asset. Ultimately, those who master token-to-outcome attribution will control the allocation of AI resources within enterprises, deciding which workflows get more compute, which are capped, or which revert to humans. The first phase of enterprise AI proved models could do the work. The next phase will determine how much of that work is worth paying for.

marsbit3 h fa

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the 'Accounting Era'

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures

Articoli Popolari

Come comprare LINK

Benvenuto in HTX.com! Abbiamo reso l'acquisto di ChainLink (LINK) semplice e conveniente. Segui la nostra guida passo passo per intraprendere il tuo viaggio nel mondo delle criptovalute.Step 1: Crea il tuo Account HTXUsa la tua email o numero di telefono per registrarti il tuo account gratuito su HTX. Vivi un'esperienza facile e sblocca tutte le funzionalità,Crea il mio accountStep 2: Vai in Acquista crypto e seleziona il tuo metodo di pagamentoCarta di credito/debito: utilizza la tua Visa o Mastercard per acquistare immediatamente ChainLinkLINK.Bilancio: Usa i fondi dal bilancio del tuo account HTX per fare trading senza problemi.Terze parti: abbiamo aggiunto metodi di pagamento molto utilizzati come Google Pay e Apple Pay per maggiore comodità.P2P: Fai trading direttamente con altri utenti HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): Offriamo servizi su misura e tassi di cambio competitivi per i trader.Step 3: Conserva ChainLink (LINK)Dopo aver acquistato ChainLink (LINK), conserva nel tuo account HTX. In alternativa, puoi inviare tramite trasferimento blockchain o scambiare per altre criptovalute.Step 4: Scambia ChainLink (LINK)Scambia facilmente ChainLink (LINK) nel mercato spot di HTX. Accedi al tuo account, seleziona la tua coppia di trading, esegui le tue operazioni e monitora in tempo reale. Offriamo un'esperienza user-friendly sia per chi ha appena iniziato che per i trader più esperti.

832 Totale visualizzazioniPubblicato il 2024.12.13Aggiornato il 2025.03.21

Come comprare LINK

Discussioni

Benvenuto nella Community HTX. Qui puoi rimanere informato sugli ultimi sviluppi della piattaforma e accedere ad approfondimenti esperti sul mercato. Le opinioni degli utenti sul prezzo di LINK LINK sono presentate come di seguito.

活动图片