Ripple CEO Says Clarity Act Has 90% Chance of Passing by April

TheNewsCryptoPubblicato 2026-02-20Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-20

Introduzione

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse estimates a 90% chance that the Clarity Act will pass through the U.S. Congress by the end of April, following recent discussions between crypto industry leaders and regulators. The bill aims to provide jurisdictional clarity by defining whether digital assets are securities or commodities, with key regulatory roles for the SEC and CFTC. While some complex issues, particularly around stablecoin regulation, remain, Garlinghouse noted that negotiations have narrowed outstanding disagreements. Passage of the act would mark a significant shift in U.S. crypto regulation, potentially encouraging greater institutional involvement by resolving long-standing legal uncertainties.

Brad Garlinghouse, the CEO of Ripple, stated that he thinks the Clarity Act will be passed through the U.S. Congress by the end of April. Garlinghouse estimated that there was a 90% chance of this happening, based on the recent talks in Washington. This was said during and after a meeting at the White House that was held between the leaders of the crypto industry and the banking regulators.

During an interview with Fox Business, Garlinghouse stated that stakeholders focused on the foundational aspects of the bill, such as jurisdictional clarity. The bill seeks to establish the regulatory jurisdiction of major U.S. agencies over digital assets. The bill will provide clarity on whether certain tokens qualify as securities or commodities.

Garlinghouse pointed out that many of the outstanding issues had been narrowed down after talks between the industry and the regulators. This came after several weeks of negotiations between lawmakers, the crypto industry, and Treasury officials. The stablecoin provisions were also part of the talks. The stablecoin yield provisions have made the initial versions of the bill complicated.

However, Garlinghouse also admitted that a compromise may be required to pass the legislation this spring. Other industry officials and prediction markets have also cited a narrowing timeline. Legislators are hoping to move the Clarity Act forward before the congressional recess in April. Some estimates place the chances of passage slightly lower than Garlinghouse’s estimate, but still high.

Regulatory Environment and Industry Implications

The Clarity Act aims to offer long-overdue federal regulatory clarity regarding digital asset regulation. It would provide a clearer definition of jurisdiction between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Industry insiders believe that regulatory clarity could encourage institutional involvement.

Lack of a clear legal framework has resulted in enforcement uncertainty and innovation stagnation for businesses. Regulations on the issuance and trading of stablecoins are some of the most contentious issues in the bill. The White House and Senate panels have been working to reconcile these differences. Passage by Congress would represent a major change in the course of U.S. crypto regulation.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Metaplanet CEO Defends Disclosure Practices Amid Bitcoin Strategy Criticism

Tags# BradGarlinghouseBrad GarlinghouseCFTCClarity ACTRippleSECStablecoin

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the estimated probability that the Clarity Act will pass by the end of April, according to Ripple's CEO?

ABrad Garlinghouse estimates there is a 90% chance that the Clarity Act will be passed by the U.S. Congress by the end of April.

QWhat was the main focus of the discussions between crypto industry leaders and regulators at the White House meeting?

AThe discussions focused on the foundational aspects of the Clarity Act, particularly on establishing jurisdictional clarity for major U.S. agencies over digital assets and determining whether certain tokens qualify as securities or commodities.

QWhy does the article suggest that a compromise might be necessary for the Clarity Act to pass this spring?

AA compromise may be required due to the contentious issues within the bill, such as the regulations on the issuance and trading of stablecoins, which have made the initial versions complicated and require reconciliation of differences.

QWhat are the two major U.S. regulatory agencies that the Clarity Act seeks to define jurisdiction between for digital assets?

AThe Clarity Act seeks to provide a clearer definition of jurisdiction between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

QWhat potential positive outcome does the article suggest could result from providing regulatory clarity for digital assets?

AIndustry insiders believe that regulatory clarity could encourage greater institutional involvement in the crypto industry, as a clear legal framework would reduce enforcement uncertainty and help overcome innovation stagnation.

Letture associate

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit32 min fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit32 min fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit2 h fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit2 h fa

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbit2 h fa

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

marsbit2 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片