DD
MM
YYYY

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

PAGES

Home Blog Page 1082

Adoption of USDC and BUIDL As Collateral Highlights A Growing Divide

0

Coinbase Derivatives, in partnership with Nodal Clear, is working to integrate Circle’s USDC stablecoin as eligible collateral for US margined futures contracts. This initiative, which is pending regulatory approval from the CFTC, is expected to be implemented in 2026. The integration aims to diversify collateral options, enhance margin efficiency, and leverage Coinbase Custody Trust for asset safeguarding under New York regulatory oversight.

Crypto.com and Deribit have started accepting BlackRock’s USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL) as collateral for trading operations, including spot, margin, futures, and options transactions. BUIDL, a tokenized US Treasury fund with $2.9 billion in assets, offers a 4.5% annual yield and is available to institutional traders with a minimum investment of $5 million. This move, facilitated by Securitize, allows traders to earn yield on collateral while deploying it for leveraged positions, reducing dependency on traditional stablecoins like USDC and USDT.

These integrations reflect a broader trend of bridging traditional finance and crypto markets, with tokenized assets like BUIDL and stablecoins like USDC enhancing capital efficiency and risk management for institutional traders. Additionally, Coinbase’s planned acquisition of Deribit for $2.9 billion could further expand BUIDL’s adoption across Coinbase’s ecosystem.

The integration of USDC by Coinbase and BlackRock’s BUIDL token by Crypto.com and Deribit as collateral for futures trading has significant implications for the crypto market, traditional finance (TradFi), and the broader financial ecosystem. Using USDC and BUIDL as collateral allows traders to deploy stable, yield-generating assets in leveraged trading strategies. BUIDL, for instance, offers a 4.5% annual yield, enabling institutional traders to earn passive income on their collateral while using it for futures, options, or margin trading. This dual-purpose functionality enhances capital efficiency, as traders no longer need to lock up non-yielding assets.

For Coinbase, integrating USDC (a stablecoin with a 1:1 USD peg) provides a reliable, low-volatility collateral option, reducing the risk of margin calls driven by crypto market fluctuations. BUIDL, a tokenized US Treasury fund, represents a significant step in merging TradFi with decentralized finance (DeFi). By allowing institutional investors to use a BlackRock-managed, blockchain-based asset for crypto trading, platforms like Crypto.com and Deribit are mainstreaming tokenized real-world assets (RWAs).

This move could attract more institutional capital into crypto markets, as BUIDL’s backing by US Treasuries offers a familiar, low-risk asset class for traditional investors wary of crypto’s volatility. Historically, crypto exchanges have relied heavily on volatile assets like Bitcoin or Ethereum for collateral, exposing traders to significant price risk. USDC and BUIDL provide stable alternatives, reducing counterparty risk and enhancing risk management for futures and derivatives trading.

This diversification could lead to more robust margin systems, potentially lowering liquidation risks during market downturns. Coinbase’s use of USDC, backed by Coinbase Custody Trust and regulated under New York’s strict fiduciary standards, signals a push toward regulatory compliance. This could set a precedent for other exchanges to adopt regulated stablecoins as collateral, improving trust and transparency.

BUIDL’s integration, facilitated by Securitize, leverages blockchain’s transparency while adhering to institutional-grade compliance, further legitimizing tokenized assets in regulated markets. Coinbase’s planned acquisition of Deribit for $2.9 billion (pending regulatory approval) could amplify BUIDL’s adoption across Coinbase’s ecosystem, potentially increasing liquidity for tokenized assets. This consolidation may also strengthen Coinbase’s position as a leading derivatives platform, competing with giants like Binance and CME Group.

The broader acceptance of tokenized assets like BUIDL could drive liquidity in on-chain markets, as institutional investors deploy larger capital pools into crypto trading. BUIDL’s 4.5% yield offers a unique value proposition compared to traditional stablecoins like USDC, which typically do not generate yield unless staked in DeFi protocols. This could incentivize traders to hold BUIDL over other collateral types, potentially shifting market dynamics away from pure stablecoins.

BUIDL’s $5 million minimum investment threshold restricts its use to institutional traders, creating a barrier for retail investors. While USDC is more accessible, its integration into Coinbase’s futures trading (pending CFTC approval) may prioritize institutional clients due to the high capital requirements of derivatives markets. Retail traders, who dominate many crypto exchanges, may lack access to yield-generating collateral like BUIDL or the infrastructure to participate in regulated futures markets. This could widen the gap between institutional and retail traders, with the former benefiting from superior tools and opportunities.

Coinbase’s USDC integration, backed by Coinbase Custody and New York regulations, and Deribit’s BUIDL adoption under institutional-grade compliance, cater to regulated markets. These platforms are likely to attract institutional investors and TradFi players seeking compliance and security. Many offshore exchanges (e.g., Binance, Bybit) may continue relying on volatile crypto assets or less-regulated stablecoins like USDT for collateral. This creates a divide between platforms catering to institutional, compliance-focused markets and those serving retail or less-regulated jurisdictions.

USDC’s widespread adoption and 1:1 USD peg make it a go-to choice for stable collateral across exchanges. Its integration by Coinbase reinforces its position as a leading stablecoin in regulated markets. BUIDL, while innovative, is a specialized product targeting institutions with yield-generating potential. Its adoption may remain limited to high-net-worth or institutional traders, creating a divide between stablecoin-based and tokenized asset-based trading ecosystems.

Coinbase’s USDC integration and Deribit’s BUIDL adoption (post-acquisition by Coinbase) are heavily US-focused, aligning with US regulatory frameworks like the CFTC and New York’s BitLicense. This may limit access for non-US traders due to jurisdictional restrictions. Retail traders in regions with less regulatory clarity or restricted access to US-based platforms may be excluded from these advanced collateral options, deepening global disparities in crypto trading opportunities.

Platforms like Coinbase, Crypto.com, and Deribit, which integrate advanced custodial solutions and tokenized assets, require sophisticated infrastructure. Smaller or newer exchanges may lack the resources to adopt similar systems, creating a technological divide between tier-1 and tier-2 platforms. Retail traders using basic wallets or less-developed exchanges may struggle to access tokenized assets or regulated futures markets, further entrenching the divide.

The integration of USDC and BUIDL as collateral marks a pivotal moment in crypto’s evolution, blending TradFi’s stability with DeFi’s innovation. It enhances capital efficiency, attracts institutional capital, and promotes regulatory compliance, but it also underscores a growing divide between institutional and retail traders, regulated and unregulated platforms, and stablecoin versus tokenized asset ecosystems.

As Coinbase, Crypto.com, and Deribit lead this shift, the broader crypto market may see increased stratification, with institutional players gaining disproportionate access to advanced tools and opportunities. Retail traders and smaller platforms will need to adapt to remain competitive, potentially through partnerships, new technologies, or advocacy for broader access to tokenized assets.

Meta’s Multi-Billion-Dollar AI Coup: Zuckerberg Turns to Safe Superintelligence Cofounder After Poaching Scale AI CEO

0

Mark Zuckerberg is accelerating his plan to dominate the next frontier of technology: artificial intelligence. In a sweeping recruitment offensive that’s rattled Silicon Valley, the Meta CEO is aggressively poaching top minds from rival AI firms and investing billions of dollars to build his “AI empire.”

The most recent targets include Daniel Gross, co-founder of Safe Superintelligence—the secretive AI startup launched by former OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever—and Nat Friedman, former GitHub CEO and longtime AI investor. They had earlier reportedly rejected an acquisition bid for their company, which underscores how deeply Zuckerberg is reaching into the heart of AI’s elite circle.

This hiring attempt follows Meta’s $14.3 billion investment in Scale AI, a fast-rising data-labeling and AI infrastructure company, bringing on board its 27-year-old founder Alexandr Wang and several of his top engineers. Scale AI is now reportedly working closely with Meta’s AI division, with Wang taking on a leading role in developing advanced large language models and data tools.

Zuckerberg’s plan is understood to be – to build the most powerful AI team in the world—fast.

Earlier this year, Zuckerberg attempted to acquire Safe Superintelligence outright. The startup, launched in 2023 by Sutskever after his dramatic exit from OpenAI, had recently been valued at $32 billion. But Sutskever rejected Meta’s offer, refusing both acquisition and a direct leadership role.

Undeterred, Zuckerberg went after the next best thing: Gross and Friedman, Sutskever’s co-founders. Sources say Meta sweetened the deal by also acquiring a stake in NFDG, the venture capital firm jointly run by Gross and Friedman, known for early bets on AI and tech unicorns like CoreWeave, Figma, Perplexity, Coinbase, and Character.AI.

Meta reportedly plans to integrate Gross and Friedman under the leadership of Scale AI’s Wang, signaling a power consolidation of AI expertise within the company.

Talent War Reaches New Heights

This move further escalates the ongoing AI talent war between Meta and rivals like OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google. In a recent episode of the Uncapped podcast, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman disclosed that Meta had offered some of his top engineers signing bonuses of up to $100 million, with lucrative compensation packages aimed at luring them away.

“I’ve heard that Meta thinks of us as their biggest competitor,” Altman said. “Their current AI efforts have not worked as well as they had hoped, and I respect being aggressive and continuing to try new things.”

Though Altman said none of his “best people” had taken the bait, industry insiders say Meta’s cash-heavy offers are shaking up compensation norms across the sector.

Meta declined to comment on Altman’s remarks but acknowledged that more announcements are coming. A company spokesperson said, “We will share more about our superintelligence effort and the great people joining this team in the coming weeks.”

With its Reality Labs bleeding billions and the metaverse still struggling to gain traction, Zuckerberg appears to be shifting Meta’s core bet toward AI, betting that breakthroughs in LLMs, autonomous agents, and eventually artificial general intelligence (AGI) will define the next era of computing.

Scale AI, now a major partner, provides the data infrastructure necessary to train such systems. Wang, its founder, launched Scale at 19 and turned it into a key supplier of high-quality datasets to firms like OpenAI, Nvidia, and the US government. His move to Meta, insiders say, gives the company deep bench strength in both talent and tools.

Gross, meanwhile, has a formidable track record. He sold his search engine Cue to Apple in 2013, helped lead Siri’s evolution, and later joined Y Combinator before diving into AI research and venture investing. Friedman was instrumental in transforming GitHub under Microsoft and has remained a powerful force in open-source and AI investing.

Meta’s new AI target trio—Wang, Gross, and Friedman—represent not just elite engineering minds but strategic operators with deep knowledge of data pipelines, model development, and the investor networks funding the next wave of AI labs.

If Meta succeeds, they will become part of a field of tech giants racing for dominance. Microsoft recently bought its way into AI supremacy by hiring DeepMind co-founder Mustafa Suleyman and absorbing Inflection AI in a $650 million deal. OpenAI has brought on Jony Ive, the legendary Apple designer, in a $6.5 billion creative partnership. Google lured back the founders of Character.AI last year.

But Zuckerberg isn’t just buying startups—he’s buying brainpower.

If Meta’s AI gamble pays off, the company may leap ahead in the competition to build AI systems that surpass human capabilities. If it fails, the costs—both financial and reputational—will be massive.

Either way, the AI war is becoming personal, aggressive, and heavily funded, and Zuckerberg is making clear he intends to win it.

Banks Clear 95% of USSD Debt, Paving Way for End-User Billing Across Nigeria’s Telecom Network

0

After several years of drawn-out disagreements and stalled negotiations, Nigeria’s commercial banks have now settled 95% of the N180 billion debt owed to telecommunications operators for the use of Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) services.

This development has cleared the way for the implementation of a new end-user billing system—marking a major turning point in one of the longest-running disputes in Nigeria’s digital finance ecosystem.

The Chairman of the Association of Licensed Telecommunications Operators of Nigeria (ALTON), Engr. Gbenga Adebayo disclosed this on Thursday during a virtual media session on the migration to end-user billing for USSD services. According to Adebayo, only three banks have yet to fully settle their outstanding balances, but they have entered into repayment plans and are expected to complete payments shortly.

A Longstanding Debt Loggerhead

The USSD debt saga began around 2019 when telcos demanded payment for their infrastructure and network usage, which banks used to provide mobile banking services to customers through USSD shortcodes. USSD had become a critical tool for mobile banking, particularly for millions of Nigerians without access to internet-enabled devices or data. However, while the banks charged their customers for USSD transactions, telcos claimed they received little to no compensation for the infrastructure and bandwidth consumed.

The disagreement stemmed from the mode of billing and who should bear the cost. Banks preferred corporate billing, where the cost of USSD sessions was billed centrally and deducted from a shared account. However, telecom operators argued that this model had led to non-payment and mounting debts, even as usage volumes soared.

Tensions came to a head in 2021 when the debt figure surged above N40 billion and ALTON threatened to suspend USSD access for several banks. The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) were forced to intervene multiple times to prevent a disruption of mobile financial services.

Despite various interventions and partial repayments, the debt continued to balloon, reaching around N80 billion in 2022, and later climbing to N180 billion by January 2025, according to ALTON. Each round of talks between the CBN, NCC, telcos, and the banks resulted in temporary reliefs or promises, but no lasting resolution.

From Corporate Billing to End-User Billing

In response to the deadlock and to ensure the sustainability of USSD services, the NCC in June 2024 issued a new pricing and service framework that introduced end-user billing. Under this model, customers are directly billed from their airtime balance, rather than their bank account, for each USSD session. The new system aims to remove inter-party disputes and streamline revenue collection for telecom operators.

Gbenga Adebayo confirmed on Thursday that the clearing of 95% of the debt by banks was one of the major preconditions for migrating to end-user billing. He noted that one major bank has already been fully migrated, with positive trial results. Other banks are currently undergoing the same transition process.

“The migration is not compulsory. Banks that choose to remain on the corporate billing model can do so—as long as they are fully settled with no outstanding debts to the telecom operators,” Adebayo explained.

Safeguards Against Overbilling

Addressing customer concerns about double deductions or billing errors, Adebayo clarified that telecom operators will not charge customers for failed USSD sessions originating from the telcos’ network. However, if a transaction fails on the bank’s end after being successfully processed by the telco infrastructure, the customer will still be billed. In such cases, he advised that complaints should be directed to the banks, not the telecoms.

“If customers see a deduction from both their bank account and airtime for a single transaction, they should query their bank. That’s double billing, and it’s not supposed to happen under this new regime,” he said.

What This Means for Customers

The N6.98 per USSD session remains unchanged under the new system. According to MTN Nigeria’s Chief Enterprise Business Officer, Lynda Saint-Nwafor, the only difference is the mode of payment—from airtime instead of direct bank deductions. She said the telecom industry is working closely with the NCC to improve transparency and accountability, including monthly reporting and error message standardization.

“We are committed to ensuring this is seamless for subscribers, and all operators have been directed to provide monthly performance reports,” Saint-Nwafor said.

The migration to end-user billing is part of a coordinated move by the NCC and the Central Bank of Nigeria to improve transparency, reduce systemic friction, and ensure the long-term sustainability of mobile-based financial services, particularly in rural and underserved communities.

For years, the inability of banks and telecoms to agree on USSD payment terms threatened the very foundation of Nigeria’s digital banking success, despite USSD being a lifeline for millions of Nigerians outside the formal banking space.

Now, with most of the debt settled and a clear path forward, the new billing model could finally stabilize one of the most critical links in Nigeria’s mobile financial chain—and help prevent future disputes.

Trump Sets Two-Week Deadline on Possible U.S. Entry into Israel-Iran War as Iran Threatens to Shut Down Oil Chokepoint

0

President Donald Trump is weighing a critical decision that could shift the trajectory of the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran.

According to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, Trump will make a final call “within the next two weeks” on whether the United States will militarily support Israel’s strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

The president’s decision comes amid mounting fears of a broader regional war and growing global concern over energy security. Trump, known for his “peace through strength” philosophy, has publicly signaled a preference for diplomacy, but his administration has also hinted at readiness to act militarily if necessary.

“Based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,” Leavitt quoted Trump as saying.

However, even as Washington signals openness to diplomacy, its support for Israel’s unilateral attacks, including the June 13 strike on Iran, has sparked speculation that U.S. involvement may be a matter of timing rather than debate. Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, has reportedly held several phone conversations with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi since the bombardment began. The EU has also stepped in, convening talks in Geneva with the foreign ministers of Britain, France, and Germany, in an attempt to cool tensions.

Iran Warns of Retaliation: Strait of Hormuz in the Crosshairs

As U.S. deliberations drag on, Iran is making it clear that American intervention will not go unanswered. A senior member of Iran’s parliament, Behnam Saeedi, said on Thursday that closing the Strait of Hormuz—the world’s most critical oil transit chokepoint—is among the options Tehran is considering in response to its enemies.

“Iran has numerous options to respond to its enemies… Closing the Strait of Hormuz is one of them,” Saeedi told the semi-official Mehr news agency.

While another lawmaker, Ali Yazdikhah, noted that Iran would allow continued shipping in the strait “so long as its vital national interests were not at risk,” he emphasized that U.S. military engagement would cross that line.

“If the United States officially and operationally enters the war… it is the legitimate right of Iran to disrupt the ease of oil transit,” Yazdikhah said.

Iran has issued similar threats in the past, but the current situation marks the first time in years that the strategic passage could realistically be jeopardized. About 20% of global oil consumption—around 18 million barrels per day—passes through the Strait, which is only 33 km wide at its narrowest point. It serves as the primary conduit for crude oil exports from Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, and the UAE.

Commercial ships have already begun avoiding Iranian waters near the strait, according to shipping trackers and maritime analysts, underlining that the threat is being taken seriously.

Oil Prices React Sharply, Markets Brace for Impact

Energy markets are already jittery. Brent crude rose by nearly 3% to hover around $78.85 per barrel, while WTI climbed to $77.20, as traders priced in geopolitical risk.

Analysts warn that a full-blown U.S. attack on Iran—or Iranian retaliation that disrupts oil flows—could send prices skyrocketing. JPMorgan analysts estimate that in a worst-case scenario involving 3 million barrels per day going offline, oil could surge to $120–130 per barrel. Citi forecasts a more moderate rise to $90 if about 1.1 million barrels are disrupted, a scenario already viewed as plausible if Iran takes early action.

Higher oil prices would ripple through the global economy. U.S. gasoline prices could spike to over $4 per gallon, and developing countries would face steeper import bills and slower growth. Insurance costs for shipping in the Gulf are also expected to climb sharply.

Despite clear military signaling, Trump has publicly denied reports suggesting he has already approved a strike on Iran. Responding to a Wall Street Journal article, the president wrote on Truth Social: “The Wall Street Journal has no idea what my thoughts are concerning Iran!”

Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst, Marwan Bishara, suggests that Trump’s ambiguous stance could be deliberate—“a pretext to camouflage whatever his intentions are and attack tomorrow,” he said.

Tehran, meanwhile, remains skeptical of U.S. intentions. Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Doha, Doha Jabbari, noted that “assuming the Israelis have the green light from the Americans… there is going to be very little trust there.”

However, Iran is sending its diplomats to Geneva for EU-led talks, understanding the optics of walking away from diplomacy would paint Tehran as the aggressor.

Global Pressure Mounts

Russia and China have both warned against U.S. entry into the conflict and called for an immediate ceasefire. The Kremlin labeled Israel’s strikes on Iranian nuclear sites “reckless” and urged all parties to de-escalate. Beijing, which imports a significant portion of its energy through the Gulf, has also lobbied for diplomatic channels to remain open.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and UN Secretary-General António Guterres have both expressed concern at the rapid deterioration of regional stability and called for restraint on all sides.

For now, the world watches and waits as Trump weighs one of the most consequential decisions of his presidency. With diplomatic channels still active and European nations scrambling to mediate, there remains a narrow window to avoid direct confrontation.

But if talks collapse or Israel intensifies its military campaign, the calculus in Washington could shift. If the U.S. enters the war, Iran has made it clear that the price may be felt not only in the Middle East—but at gas stations, shipping ports, and stock exchanges across the world.

Writing Essays That Sell: A Content Guide for Education Startups

0

Education startups face a tough challenge. You need to sell services in a crowded market. You must stay credible. You can’t seem too “salesy.” The balance is hard. Push too much, you scare away customers. Sounds too academic, you won’t convert visitors. Content that teaches and sells means knowing how students think.

Understanding Your Educational Market and Audience

First, know who you’re writing for. Are they stressed students with deadlines? Parents worried about grades? Schools seeking resources? Each group needs a different approach.

Many startups create content for “everyone in education.” This makes boring content that reaches no one. Get specific instead. Create profiles based on real users.

For example, EssayWriterCheap.org targets college students with tight budgets. Their content tackles real problems. Short deadlines. Hard assignments. Strict professors. This helps students feel understood.

Student-focused writing strategies should match how students read content. They read fast. They use phones. They have many distractions. Use scannable formats. Use examples they relate to. Use language that challenges you.

Research found specific content gets 3x more engagement than broad content. When content feels made just for the reader, conversion goes up.

Crafting Compelling Educational Content That Converts

Once you know your audience, create content that drives action. Educational content has a special challenge. It needs to show smarts. It must be simple to get. It should push action.

Elements of content that converts include:

  • Clear naming of a specific problem
  • Examples showing you get this problem
  • Brief reasons why it’s hard to fix alone
  • Your solution with clear benefits
  • Proof supporting your claims
  • Simple steps to start

High-converting academic content follows a problem-solution format. First, name a problem. Next, explain why it matters. Last, show your service as the fix.

Don’t write about “Better Essays.” Write about “How Engineering Students Can Impress Professors.” Specific content hits defined groups with real challenges.

EssayWriterCheap.org employs strict privacy measures — customer data is never shared with third parties. Put trust info into your content. Address worries about using your services. Include privacy, quality, and guarantee info naturally.

Building Trust and Authority in Educational Writing

Educational services need clear authority. Education involves deep trust. Students and parents want reliable help.

Trust signals to include:

  1. Writer skills and background
  2. Research and data points
  3. Student success stories
  4. Clear info on your process
  5. Clear rules on privacy and fixes

Educational content marketing tips often push sounding smart. This can backfire. It makes content dry and hard to read. Good marketing keeps authority while using friendly language.

Studies show 70% of people trust user reviews over brand claims. Include real testimonials. Show how you helped real students with similar problems.

Be honest about limits. Don’t claim to work for everyone. Share who benefits most. This builds trust with ideal customers.

Creating Content Formats That Engage Students

Different content types serve different goals. Know which types work best at each marketing stage.

High-performing formats:

  • Big guides for SEO and trust
  • Quick tools for getting leads
  • Comparison charts for decisions
  • FAQs for fixing doubts
  • Success stories for motivation

Essay promotion for edtech brands works best when it follows the student path. Early content should find problems. Middle content should compare fixes. Late content should give proof and ease concerns.

Different platforms need different formats. Long guides work for search. Short posts work for society. Know how people read content on each site.

Khan Academy does this well. They give deep resources for trust. They offer quick tools for fast help and keeping interest.

Measuring Success and Optimizing Results

Creating good content isn’t one-and-done. It needs ongoing checks. Track numbers to see what works.

Key things to watch:

  • How long people read
  • How many leads you get
  • Which content leads to sales
  • What readers say
  • What competitors do

Copywriting for online education tools should keep changing. First versions rarely work best. Plan updates based on data and what users say.

Test headlines, buttons, and content setup. Small changes can bring big results. One site raised sales by 28% by changing “Sign Up” to “Start Learning.”

Good startups see content as part of their teaching mission. When content gives value and fixes real needs, it guides readers to your services.