新奖励计划能否为PYUSD扭转局面

marsbitPublished on 2024-08-22Last updated on 2024-08-22

2023 年 8 月, PayPal凭借其美元支持的PYUSD加入稳定币大战,加密行业庆祝 TradFi 公司进入由加密原生公司TetherCircle主导的竞争舞台。但推出一年后,PYUSD 仍落后于竞争对手,市值不到 10 亿美元,与 Tether 的 1170 亿美元相比相形见绌。

为了提高采用率,PayPal 正在与Anchorage Digital(唯一一家拥有联邦银行特许的美国加密货币公司)合作,向在其美国银行、新加坡子公司或通过其非托管钱包Porto持有 PYUSD 的 Anchorage Digital 合格投资者用户群提供奖励。

但该计划的推出也引发了人们对稳定币利息支付监管不确定性的质疑,因为这一不断增长的资产类别仍然是美国不同机构之间争论的焦点,而国会在通过立法方面也拖拖拉拉。

Anchorage Digital 坚称 PYUSD 和奖励计划不构成证券发行,也不属于银行监管机构的管辖范围。不过,该产品正在开拓新领域。佐治亚州立大学银行和行政法教授托德·菲利普斯 (Todd Phillips) 在接受《财富》杂志采访时表示:“这是银行首次参与加密货币奖励减息生态系统,这真的很新颖。”

细则

虽然稳定币可以与任何基础资产挂钩,例如欧元或贵金属,但在过去几年中,像 Tether 和 USDC 这样的美元支持产品才大受欢迎。Tether 成功地瞄准了希望持有与美元挂钩资产的美国以外的投资者,而 USDC 发行商 Circle 则专注于希望使用稳定货币进行交易的加密应用用户。

在当前利率不断上涨的时代,支持稳定币的资产(通常是美国国债和类似工具)为其发行人带来了巨额利润,但这些利润大部分并未转嫁给持有人。部分原因是稳定币缺乏明确的监管规则,这使得美国公司对提供利息支付持谨慎态度。一些有收益的稳定币项目(如Mountain Protocol)明确在美国境外运营,尽管它们提供美元支持的产品。

稳定币的监管地位仍然不明朗。尽管美国证券交易委员会认为某些稳定币(包括TerraUSD和币安的 BUSD)属于证券,但联邦法院并不总是同意这一结论。7 月,美国证券交易委员会放弃了对 BUSD 发行商 Paxos 的调查,后者也发行了 PYUSD。

甚至在美国证券交易委员会遭遇法律挫折之前,Coinbase就已大胆采取行动,为 USDC 提供奖励,包括向零售客户提供奖励,尽管它在自己的会计中将该计划标记为营销费用。

在接受《财富》采访时, Anchorage Digital 联合创始人兼首席执行官 Nathan McCauley 表示,PYUSD 的回报将明确来自于基础资产的收益率,而不是营销费用。

那么,为什么它不受美国证券交易委员会的监管呢?更重要的是,它与银行的储蓄账户有何不同?

Anchorage Digital 辩称其奖励计划不构成证券发行。不过,由于其产品(例如银行托管和非托管钱包)仅供机构投资者使用,McCauley 表示,如果 SEC 反对,Anchorage Digital 将坚持认为其符合一种豁免规定(即 Reg D),该规定允许公司向合格投资者出售证券,而无需向 SEC 注册。

银行业务问题则更为复杂。虽然安克雷奇数字银行的客户如果托管 PYUSD,将有资格享受奖励计划,但从法律上讲,奖励计划并非来自银行。相反,奖励将由位于开曼群岛的一家名为 Anchorage Digital Neo 的实体支付。在法律细则中,母公司辩称,这意味着该计划“不受开曼群岛或任何其他司法管辖区的监管”。

这是美国加密行业惯用的混淆视听的伎俩,该行业仍然缺乏护栏,但仍在与监管机构不断突破界限。虽然许多公司都在争取立法,但 PYUSD 奖励仍将在没有类似银行产品(如 FDIC 保险)的传统保护的情况下运作。

“这就像一个半受监管的银行账户,”菲利普斯说。“这比在 Coinbase 上持有加密货币要好一点,但也好不了多少。”

PayPal 继续使其产品多样化,其中包括结账工具 Fastlane,这推动了PayPal 股价近期上涨。

麦考利认为,新计划将帮助那些希望持有 PYUSD 但仍想利用有利利率环境的机构投资者。他告诉《财富》杂志: “最终目标是提高稳定币的采用率。”

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

In May, Meta imposed internal restrictions on its engineers regarding the use of Claude Code and Codex, two widely used AI programming tools. Despite being a major client, Meta's guidelines, still in effect, prohibit these external models from being used for specific tasks to prevent potential "escalations with partners." The core concern is "distillation"—the risk that outputs from Claude or Codex could inadvertently contaminate the training data and evaluation processes for Meta's in-house AI coding assistant, MetaCode. If MetaCode is trained or evaluated using data generated by these external models, it risks learning their capabilities rather than developing its own, blurring the line of intellectual origin. The restrictions are precise: engineers cannot use the external models to generate test questions, debug source code, or suggest test cases. AI-generated content is also barred from environments accessible to MetaCode. However, AI can still assist with peripheral tasks like workflow setup and code organization, provided all outputs are manually reviewed. This caution reflects a broader industry dilemma. While distillation is a common technique, using a competitor's model output for training raises legal and ethical questions about the ownership of derived capabilities. Contractual terms from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic explicitly forbid using their outputs to build competing products, putting enforcement power in the hands of rivals. The move is also financially motivated, as Meta seeks to reduce its hefty internal AI spending, estimated in the billions this year. Meta's policy illustrates the delicate balance companies must strike: leveraging powerful external AI tools while safeguarding the integrity and independence of their own AI development. As AI systems increasingly help build other AIs, distinguishing the origin of capabilities becomes a fundamental challenge for the entire industry.

marsbit7m ago

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

marsbit7m ago

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

The article "Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?" explores the complex and often contentious integration of AI into the cultural and creative industries, particularly film and television. It begins with the cancellation of Amazon's AI-generated animation "Punky Duck," highlighting the ethical debates surrounding AI content. AI's rapid advancement is transforming video production, enabling cost-effective, full-length AI films (e.g., "RAPHAEL," "Dreams of Violets") while sparking industry resistance over issues like "synthetic actors." The core debate has shifted from whether to use AI to how to use it responsibly. The article analyzes why AI's entry into film is uniquely unsettling. It distinguishes between "cultural fast food" (short-form, fast-paced content like micro-dramas) and "cultural main courses" (traditional, long-form film/TV). AI currently excels at the former, matching its fragmented narratives, shallow emotional needs, and free-to-consumer models. However, venturing into the latter challenges the human-centric essence of storytelling—creativity, emotional depth, and the unique value of human labor and experience. While AI can generate massive volumes of content and lower costs, it risks devaluing human creativity, leading to homogenized output, and creating unfair competition through potential intellectual property infringement. Its efficiency also amplifies content safety risks, making preemptive governance crucial. To counter these risks, the article proposes establishing clear boundaries guided by a human-centered AI content perspective. It outlines four principles: 1) Amplify, rather than displace, human creative space; 2) Respect and protect human creative output; 3) Ensure human creative control and responsibility remain paramount; and 4) Guarantee transparency and traceability in AI creation. The conclusion emphasizes that humans must act as the "helmsmen" of technology, steering AI development to enhance, not replace, the core human values at the heart of cultural expression.

marsbit32m ago

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

marsbit32m ago

Planck Retracted? The Father of Quantum Tripped by an Algorithm

The recent discovery that two articles (published in 1940 and 1942) by Max Planck, the Nobel laureate and founder of quantum theory, are marked as "retracted" on Springer's digital platform highlights a curious clash between historical publishing practices and modern automated systems. An investigation suggests these retractions are algorithmic errors, not due to fraud or misconduct. The papers, philosophical reflections on science published in *Die Naturwissenschaften*, were likely flagged by the platform's systems. One article, a republished lecture, may have been mistaken for duplicate publication. Another, sharing a title with a prior article by a different author (a common practice for continuing debates at the time), may have triggered a similar automated check. The digital versions have even been replaced with blank pages, contrary to normal practice of preserving retracted texts. This incident underscores how contemporary digital infrastructure, built around concepts like "self-plagiarism" and strict copyright, can misclassify and obscure legitimate historical scholarly communication. It serves as a warning that digital archives are not neutral mirrors of the past but are filtered by platform rules, potentially distorting the scientific record. As AI systems increasingly rely on such databases, such erroneous metadata could propagate, affecting how future tools interpret and access historical knowledge.

marsbit36m ago

Planck Retracted? The Father of Quantum Tripped by an Algorithm

marsbit36m ago

Refunds! Claude 4.8 Sees Overnight Major 'Dumb-Down', GPT-5.6's Computational Power Reportedly 'Halved'

The AI community is currently alarmed by widespread reports of significant performance degradation in two leading models. This article details a "mass self-testing frenzy" triggered by a mysterious prompt designed to detect a hidden "Juice" value, representing a model's reasoning compute budget. On OpenAI's side, users suspect a covert, limited test of a "GPT-5.6-sol" model is underway. When using a specific XML prompt on the Codex platform, a normal "gpt-5.5 xhigh" model reportedly returns a Juice value of 768. However, some users routed to the suspected GPT-5.6 test receive a drastically reduced value of 128—a six-fold decrease. This has sparked debate on whether it signifies a major efficiency leap or a "watered-down, low-cost version" achieved by slashing reasoning depth to save computational expenses. Simultaneously, Anthropic's Claude models, particularly the flagship Opus 4.8 Max, are facing intense user backlash for a perceived "physical brain cut." Users on platforms like Reddit report a dramatic decline in the model's once-impressive reasoning, with complaints of it becoming "absurdly" weakened, performing worse than older, lighter models like Haiku. Specific criticisms include: losing long-context memory, refusing to think deeply even in high-reasoning modes, providing instant incorrect answers, and engaging in unhelpful, argumentative, or "gaslighting" behavior where it contradicts users unnecessarily. The article speculates these "stealth downgrades" might be a calculated corporate strategy. Companies could initially release models with temporarily boosted compute to create an illusion of a major breakthrough, then silently scale back parameters later to manage unsustainable inference costs. A proposed underlying cause is a tightened funding environment, potentially exacerbated by SpaceX's massive IPO soaking up market liquidity, which could delay AI company IPOs and force cost-cutting measures like model "nerfing." The core issue highlighted is the asymmetry of information: subscribers pay for a service that can be silently and fundamentally altered without notification or explanation. The viral "Juice test" resonates because it represents users' desire for transparency about what they are actually paying for.

marsbit1h ago

Refunds! Claude 4.8 Sees Overnight Major 'Dumb-Down', GPT-5.6's Computational Power Reportedly 'Halved'

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

What Are USD Stablecoins? What Makes PayPal's PYUSD Different?

Stablecoins are a type of cryptocurrency designed to maintain a stable value, typically pegged to real-world asset classes or external indicators like a fiat currency, gold, or other commodities.

949 Total ViewsPublished 2023.09.20Updated 2024.02.18

What Are USD Stablecoins? What Makes PayPal's PYUSD Different?

How to Buy PYUSD

Welcome to HTX.com! We've made purchasing Paypal USD (PYUSD) simple and convenient. Follow our step-by-step guide to embark on your crypto journey.Step 1: Create Your HTX AccountUse your email or phone number to sign up for a free account on HTX. Experience a hassle-free registration journey and unlock all features.Get My AccountStep 2: Go to Buy Crypto and Choose Your Payment MethodCredit/Debit Card: Use your Visa or Mastercard to buy Paypal USD (PYUSD) instantly.Balance: Use funds from your HTX account balance to trade seamlessly.Third Parties: We've added popular payment methods such as Google Pay and Apple Pay to enhance convenience.P2P: Trade directly with other users on HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): We offer tailor-made services and competitive exchange rates for traders.Step 3: Store Your Paypal USD (PYUSD)After purchasing your Paypal USD (PYUSD), store it in your HTX account. Alternatively, you can send it elsewhere via blockchain transfer or use it to trade other cryptocurrencies.Step 4: Trade Paypal USD (PYUSD)Easily trade Paypal USD (PYUSD) on HTX's spot market. Simply access your account, select your trading pair, execute your trades, and monitor in real-time. We offer a user-friendly experience for both beginners and seasoned traders.

4.2k Total ViewsPublished 2024.03.29Updated 2026.06.02

How to Buy PYUSD

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of PYUSD (PYUSD) are presented below.

活动图片