40 Days Of Deadlock: US Shutdown Risks ETF Delay Amid Soaring Demand

bitcoinistPubblicato 2025-10-19Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-10-19

Introduzione

The US federal funding lapse has stretched on, creating new delays for regulatory decisions tied to crypto products. According to...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

The US federal funding lapse has stretched on, creating new delays for regulatory decisions tied to crypto products. According to reports, the shutdown has lasted beyond 40 days in some scenarios used by market forecasters, and reduced staffing at federal agencies is slowing routine approvals.

Shutdown Stretches Past 40 Days

Reports have disclosed a market estimate putting the chance of a prolonged shutdown at about 55% for certain stretches, which traders say complicates timing for filings and reviews.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is operating with fewer staff, and that has forced some rulemakings and approval windows to be pushed back. For applicants hoping for quick sign-offs, this means waiting longer than planned.

Source: Kalshi

Investor Interest Remains High

Despite the holdup, investor appetite for regulated crypto products appears strong. According to filings and traffic data cited in market reports, clients of Charles Schwab hold roughly 20% of the US crypto ETF market by assets under custody, and web visits to crypto information pages have jumped about 90% on an annualized basis. That shows demand is not evaporating while regulators are idle.

What That Means For Markets

When reviews resume in force, some strategists expect pent-up demand to move into newly approved products. Based on reports, the delay has simply shifted the calendar rather than killed the approvals.

Yet market reaction is not guaranteed to be large; some money may already be waiting on the sidelines, while other investors have moved on.

Bitcoin is currently trading at $107,147. Chart: TradingView

Backlog Could Trigger A Fast Response

Regulatory staff will face a backlog when full operations return. Papers awaiting attention may be prioritized, and several issuers will press to get decisions cleared.

Sources tracking the space warn that a sudden cluster of approvals could follow the end of the funding gap, creating rapid inflows into the newly cleared funds.

Risks Beyond Timing

The shutdown is one of several risks. Reports point to the fact that approvals depend on legal arguments, compliance steps, and the agency’s view on market structure.

A temporary staffing shortfall delays work, but it does not change the substantive questions the regulator must answer before signing off. That means some applications could still be rejected or heavily conditioned.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Christian, a journalist and editor with leadership roles in Philippine and Canadian media, is fueled by his love for writing and cryptocurrency. Off-screen, he's a cook and cinephile who's constantly intrigued by the size of the universe.

Letture associate

Large Language Models Ace All Exams, Yet Move Farther from AGI: What Does This Paper Reveal?

The article discusses the ongoing challenge of defining and achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). It notes that industry leaders have set vague, often profit- or time-based benchmarks for AGI, while the concept itself lacks a consensus definition—a situation the article compares to a "Rorschach test." It highlights a recent 2025 paper by researcher Michael Timothy Bennett, who proposes a new, measurable definition. Bennett frames AGI not as mimicking human performance on tests, which current large language models (LLMs) have already mastered, but as an "artificial scientist." A true AGI, according to this view, should be able to widely and efficiently adapt to new environments and tasks within real-world constraints (like computational and energy limits), focusing on the *discovery of new knowledge* rather than the replication of existing data. The author contrasts this with the current dominant approach of "scale-maxing"—massively scaling up data, parameters, and compute. While powerful, this method leads to models that fail on out-of-distribution problems and lack core intelligent abilities: they are passive learners, cannot reason causally, and cannot actively experiment or balance exploration with exploitation. The article argues that Bennett's framework offers a crucial shift. It makes AGI a quantifiable engineering problem and proposes new evaluation "adaptation benchmarks" that test an AI's ability to actively learn in novel scenarios. The conclusion is that achieving AGI will require a fundamental reset—a fusion of multiple methodologies beyond simple scaling, moving AI from mimicking patterns to embodying the scientific spirit of inquiry and discovery.

marsbit1 h fa

Large Language Models Ace All Exams, Yet Move Farther from AGI: What Does This Paper Reveal?

marsbit1 h fa

Pope Issues First AI Encyclical: 40,000 Words, 10 Key Points, Clarifying AI Anxiety

Pope Leo XIV's historic encyclical "Magnifica Humanitas," released in May 2026, marks the Catholic Church's first major document addressing artificial intelligence. The 40,000-word text moves beyond theological abstraction to confront practical AI anxieties affecting society. It argues that AI is no longer a mere tool but an embedded environment influencing daily decisions in areas like employment, healthcare, justice, and information, often without users' awareness. The encyclical presents ten core concerns. It highlights that the central issue isn't just regulation, but who holds the underlying *power*—control over data, compute, and platforms—often concentrated in private entities. It warns that even developers cannot fully explain AI systems, creating accountability gaps. While AI can simulate human interaction and creativity, it cautions against treating it as a moral agent capable of bearing true responsibility or forming genuine relationships. Key risks identified include AI's role in opaque decision-making for jobs or welfare, the amplification of persuasive disinformation, and the potential for education to focus on tool use over critical thinking. The document stresses that work has value beyond efficiency, and AI should enhance human capabilities, not merely replace roles. It firmly states that irreversible decisions, especially involving life and death, must remain under human judgment. Ultimately, the encyclical frames AI's challenge as anthropological, not just technological. As AI simulates uniquely human capacities like judgment and creation, it forces a re-examination of what makes human action meaningful: our capacity for responsibility, vulnerability, and bearing real consequences. The Pope concludes that technology is never neutral; its development and deployment are shaped by human values and choices, making an inclusive, ethically grounded dialogue essential for its future.

marsbit1 h fa

Pope Issues First AI Encyclical: 40,000 Words, 10 Key Points, Clarifying AI Anxiety

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片