CFTC Expands Advisory Team With Top Coinbase, Ripple Figures

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-02-13Última atualização em 2026-02-13

Resumo

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has formed a 35-member Innovation Advisory Committee, including prominent crypto industry leaders such as Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse. The committee aims to provide the CFTC with up-to-date industry perspectives on derivatives, market structure, and token classification. CFTC Chair Mike Selig stated that the group will help align the agency’s decisions with real market conditions and support the development of clear regulatory guidelines. The committee comprises a diverse mix of crypto executives, DeFi founders, and traditional finance representatives. While the move is seen as a way to improve policy feedback and create workable regulations, some observers caution about potential conflicts of interest. The committee will soon begin meetings focusing on custody, tokenization, derivatives oversight, and market data.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) moved this week to build a new bridge with the crypto industry, naming a 35-member Innovation Advisory Committee that includes top exchange and blockchain leaders.

Reports say the roster gives industry executives a formal line into policy talks, and it lists a mix of crypto founders, exchange bosses and traditional market players.

CFTC Execs Granted A Seat At The Table

Among those tapped are Coinbase chief executive Brian Armstrong and Ripple chief executive Brad Garlinghouse, whose firms have been central to recent debates over how digital assets should be regulated in the US.

The committee’s purpose is to give the regulator up-to-date industry perspective as it considers rules for derivatives, market structure, token classification and other technical issues.

CFTC Chair Mike Selig said Thursday that the committee’s 35 members will help “align the CFTC’s decisions with real market conditions” and allow the commission to “establish clear guidelines for what he called the Golden Age of American Financial Markets.”

What The Roster Looks Like

The membership list reads like a cross-section of the market: centralized exchanges, DeFi founders, trading-venue operators and a handful of established financial firms.

Some reporting highlights that around 20 members have direct ties to crypto firms, while others represent legacy market infrastructure, which creates a mix of viewpoints the commission can tap when drafting guidance or vetting ideas.

Why Industry Leaders Joined

Reports note executives accepted the roles for different reasons. For some, it is an opportunity to press for clearer rules. For others, it may be a way to protect business models as regulators decide which activities fall under commodity rules and which fall under securities laws.

The move follows a period of public lobbying and high-profile disputes over jurisdiction that have left firms searching for predictability.

BTCUSD trading at $66,906 on the 24-hour chart: TradingView

Voices And Risks

Giving industry a formal advisory channel can shorten feedback loops. But it also raises questions about how the regulator will manage conflicts and preserve impartiality.

Some observers say close engagement may help craft workable policy that recognizes market realities.

Others warn that heavy industry presence could shape rules in ways that favor incumbents over smaller innovators or the public interest.

Reports say the commission will have to balance open input with careful governance.

What Comes Next

The committee will begin meeting in the coming weeks, and the public will be watching for the topics it raises and the recommendations it produces.

Meetings are likely to focus on custody rules, how tokenized assets are classified, oversight of derivatives, and the handling of market data.

Whether those talks lead to concrete rule proposals will show if this new advisory setup truly shifts how digital asset policy is shaped in the US.

Featured image from V-graphix | Istock | Getty Images, chart from TradingView

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the purpose of the CFTC's newly formed Innovation Advisory Committee?

AThe committee's purpose is to give the CFTC up-to-date industry perspective as it considers rules for derivatives, market structure, token classification, and other technical issues, helping to align the regulator's decisions with real market conditions.

QWhich two prominent crypto industry CEOs were named to the committee?

ACoinbase chief executive Brian Armstrong and Ripple chief executive Brad Garlinghouse were named to the committee.

QAccording to the article, what are some of the potential risks of giving the industry a formal advisory role?

AThe risks include potential conflicts of interest and questions about how the regulator will preserve impartiality, with concerns that heavy industry presence could shape rules in ways that favor incumbents over smaller innovators or the public interest.

QWhat are some of the topics the new committee is likely to focus on in its meetings?

AMeetings are likely to focus on custody rules, how tokenized assets are classified, oversight of derivatives, and the handling of market data.

QHow many members are on the new advisory committee, and what is the composition of its membership?

AThe committee has 35 members, which includes a mix of crypto founders, exchange bosses, and traditional market players. Reports highlight that around 20 members have direct ties to crypto firms, while others represent legacy market infrastructure.

Leituras Relacionadas

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

The article "a16z: AI's 'Amnesia' – Can Continual Learning Cure It?" explores the limitations of current large language models (LLMs), which, like the protagonist in the film *Memento*, are trapped in a perpetual present—unable to form new memories after training. While methods like in-context learning (ICL), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and external scaffolding (e.g., chat history, prompts) provide temporary solutions, they fail to enable true internalization of new knowledge. The authors argue that compression—the core of learning during training—is halted at deployment, preventing models from generalizing, discovering novel solutions (e.g., mathematical proofs), or handling adversarial scenarios. The piece introduces *continual learning* as a critical research direction to address this, categorizing approaches into three paths: 1. **Context**: Scaling external memory via longer context windows, multi-agent systems, and smarter retrieval. 2. **Modules**: Using pluggable adapters or external memory layers for specialization without full retraining. 3. **Weights**: Enabling parameter updates through sparse training, test-time training, meta-learning, distillation, and reinforcement learning from feedback. Challenges include catastrophic forgetting, safety risks, and auditability, but overcoming these could unlock models that learn iteratively from experience. The conclusion emphasizes that while context-based methods are effective, true breakthroughs require models to compress new information into weights post-deployment, moving from mere retrieval to genuine learning.

marsbitHá 55m

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

marsbitHá 55m

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

An individual manipulated a weather sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport with a portable heat source, causing a Polymarket weather market to settle at 22°C and earning $34,000. This incident highlights a fundamental issue in prediction markets: when a market aims to reflect reality, it also incentivizes participants to influence that reality. Prediction markets operate on two layers: platform rules (what outcome counts as a win) and data sources (what actually happened). While most focus on rules, the real vulnerability lies in the data source. If reality is recorded through a specific source, influencing that source directly affects market settlement. The article categorizes markets by their vulnerability: 1. **Single-point physical data sources** (e.g., weather stations): Easily manipulated through physical interference. 2. **Insider information markets** (e.g., MrBeast video details): Insiders like team members use non-public information to trade. Kalshi fined a剪辑师 $20,000 for insider trading. 3. **Actor-manipulated markets** (e.g., Andrew Tate’s tweet counts): The subject of the market can control the outcome. Evidence suggests Tate’sociated accounts coordinated to profit. 4. **Individual-action markets** (e.g., WNBA disruptions): A single person can execute an event to profit from their pre-placed bets. Kalshi and Polymarket handle these issues differently. Kalshi enforces strict KYC, publicly penalizes insider trading, and reports to regulators. Polymarket, with its anonymous wallet-based system, has historically been more permissive, arguing that insider information improves market accuracy. However, it cooperated with authorities in the "Van Dyke case," where a user traded on classified government information. The core paradox is reflexivity: prediction markets are designed to discover truth, but their financial incentives can distort reality. The more valuable a prediction becomes, the more likely participants are to influence the event itself. The market ceases to be a mirror of reality and instead shapes it.

marsbitHá 1h

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片