# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Crypto

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Crypto", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

Why Must Banks Ban Stablecoin Yields?

The article "Why Banks Are Determined to Ban Yield-Bearing Stablecoins?" explores the ongoing debate around the U.S. cryptocurrency market structure bill (CLARITY), particularly the fierce opposition from large banks against interest-bearing stablecoins. Banks argue that such stablecoins could cause deposit outflows, but the author refutes this, explaining that funds used to purchase stablecoins like USDC ultimately flow back into the banking system as reserves held by issuers like Circle. The real concern for banks is not the total volume of deposits but a shift in deposit structure. U.S. major banks (e.g., Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase) rely heavily on "low-interest banking," where transaction deposits (used for payments, transfers) pay near-zero interest, creating a significant spread between deposit rates and the Fed’s benchmark rate. This model generates massive profits—over $360 billion annually from interest differentials and transaction fees. Stablecoins directly compete with transaction deposits by offering similar utility (payments, settlements). If stablecoins can generate yield, users may shift funds from bank transaction accounts to stablecoins to earn higher returns. While the money remains in the banking system (as stablecoin reserves), it moves from low-cost transaction deposits to higher-yield instruments, squeezing bank profit margins and reducing fee income. Thus, banks oppose yield-bearing stablecoins to protect their lucrative low-cost deposit base and maintain control over profit distribution, making it a central issue in the CLARITY legislative battle.

marsbit01/19 09:43

Why Must Banks Ban Stablecoin Yields?

marsbit01/19 09:43

Coinbase: The Evolution from a Fringe Project to Global Financial Infrastructure

Coinbase's journey from a 2012 Y Combinator project to a global crypto financial infrastructure is a story of contrarian strategy, internal turmoil, and aggressive political maneuvering. Its early success stemmed from a focus on compliance and trust in a rebellious industry, securing banking relationships and state licenses to become a safe haven after the Mt. Gox collapse. Internally, the company faced crises, including a 2020 "apolitical" cultural purge where 5% of employees left, and serious racial discrimination allegations. It also navigated the first crypto insider trading case, which became a legal prelude to SEC challenges. Facing regulatory pressure, Coinbase fought back legally and politically. It spent over $119 million in the 2024 election cycle, successfully ousting crypto-skeptic Senator Sherrod Brown, and shifted Washington's stance on crypto. Financially, Coinbase transformed its business model. While 96% of its revenue came from trading fees in 2020, by 2025, nearly half is from stablecoin services (USDC), staking, and ETF custody—where it holds an 85% market share of Bitcoin ETF assets. Looking ahead, Coinbase is expanding into Web3 with its Base blockchain (adopting a no-token strategy) and aims to become an "Everything Exchange," offering stocks and commodities. However, its dominance creates systemic risks, as its concentration of ETF custody assets makes it a potential single point of failure.

marsbit01/19 06:20

Coinbase: The Evolution from a Fringe Project to Global Financial Infrastructure

marsbit01/19 06:20

Institutions Besiege the Crypto World: Deconstructing Three Fatal Traps, A Core Guide for Retail Investors to Avoid Pitfalls

Amidst the recent crypto market hype—such as the London Stock Exchange adopting blockchain settlement, prediction markets hitting $700M in daily volume, and Vietnam’s high USDT payment success rates—many retail investors are eager to jump in. However, this article warns of three major traps set by institutions to exploit散户 (retail investors). First, the LSE’s move is not an endorsement of crypto but a strategic power grab to control on-chain asset pricing and settlement rules, sidelining retail participants. The advice: avoid short-term speculation on "institutional narrative coins" and focus on long-term spot holdings. Second, prediction markets are dominated by professional Wall Street teams using quant models, insider information, and arbitrage strategies. Retail traders, relying on limited information, are at a severe disadvantage. The guidance: only use disposable funds for such high-risk activities. Third, while USDT adoption in Vietnam appears promising with 97% payment success, it serves mainly as a hedge against currency volatility rather than mainstream payment. Challenges like trust issues, slow confirmations, and limited usability hinder broader adoption. The core advice for散户 is to avoid chasing hype, not overweight high-risk sectors, and stick to long-term positions in major cryptocurrencies like BTC and ETH. Separate entertainment funds from investment capital, and stay rational to survive institutional dominance.

marsbit01/19 05:39

Institutions Besiege the Crypto World: Deconstructing Three Fatal Traps, A Core Guide for Retail Investors to Avoid Pitfalls

marsbit01/19 05:39

Predicting Market True and False Gambling Gods: Debunking the 8300x Miracle; Price Manipulation Nets $230,000

The article exposes two controversial cases on the prediction market platform Polymarket, highlighting issues of manipulation and deception. First, a trader named "ascetic" claimed to have turned $12 into over $100,000—an 8300x return—through 16 consecutive successful bets on Bitcoin volatility. However, another trader, "Moses," accused ascetic of using multiple fake accounts (a "Sybil farm") to fabricate the results. Moses provided evidence suggesting ascetic operated several accounts that started with small amounts and only promoted the one that succeeded, while others failed. Despite denials, the credibility of the "miracle" was heavily questioned. Second, a different trader exploited Polymarket’s "15-minute XRP price prediction" by manipulating the market. Using $1 million in capital on Binance, the trader bought XRP shortly before the prediction window closed, artificially inflating the price by 0.5% to ensure a winning "up" bet. After cashing out $233,000 in profit on Polymarket, the trader quickly sold the XRP, incurring minimal cost in slippage and fees. This manipulation drained liquidity from automated trading bots on Polymarket, one of which lost $160,000 in annual profits. The piece warns users to be cautious of sensational claims and manipulative strategies in prediction markets, where rules and outcomes can be exploited.

marsbit01/19 05:09

Predicting Market True and False Gambling Gods: Debunking the 8300x Miracle; Price Manipulation Nets $230,000

marsbit01/19 05:09

Predicting Market True and False Gambling Gods: Debunking the 8300x Miracle; Price Manipulation Nets $230,000

This article exposes two controversial cases on the prediction market platform Polymarket, highlighting issues of manipulation and deception. The first case involves a trader, ascetic, who claimed an 8,300x return—turning $12 into over $100,000 through 16 consecutive successful bets on Bitcoin's short-term volatility. However, he was accused by another trader, Moses, of operating a "Sybil farm"—using hundreds of accounts with small initial deposits to artificially create the illusion of a miraculous winning streak. Moses provided evidence of multiple accounts with similar trading patterns, suggesting the story was a fabricated marketing ploy. The second case details a more sophisticated manipulation: a trader known as a4385 exploited low liquidity during weekend trading to profit $233,000. He heavily bought "Yes" shares in a 15-minute XRP price prediction market, driving up the price of the shares. Then, just minutes before the market settled, he purchased $1 million worth of XRP on Binance, artificially inflating its price by 0.5% to ensure his Polymarket bet would win. After settlement, he quickly sold the XRP. This maneuver, with a minimal cost of around $6,200 in fees and slippage, effectively drained the liquidity from automated trading bots on Polymarket, one of which lost its entire annual profit of $160,000. The article concludes by warning users to be cautious and discerning, as not all spectacular gains are genuine, and platform rules can be exploited for manipulation.

Odaily星球日报01/19 05:03

Predicting Market True and False Gambling Gods: Debunking the 8300x Miracle; Price Manipulation Nets $230,000

Odaily星球日报01/19 05:03

活动图片