Connect with us

Press Release

Following Fall of FTX & Silvergate, The Crypto Market Needs Sensible Regulation

Published

3 years ago

on

The FTX collapse guarantees that crypto regulation will be on the US legislative agenda for 2023 — at long last. In total, six bills were introduced in 2022, focusing on a mix of aspects connected to the crypto industry for investor protection or compliance. 

As the SEC and the CFTC are jockeying for positions, the number of voices in the room is going to increase. Some don’t want any sort of regulation to exist, but others people in the industry and anti-crypto lawmakers think regulating crypto will legitimize its existence. 

The time is right for crypto custody and all other types of platforms to be supervised with certain regulations. The US has the strongest financial market in the world, and that is due in large part to regulation. Regulation will make crypto markets stronger.

No regulatory regime administering traditional finance is created in one fell swoop. Along with the system, the regime also evolves to become better, inclusive, and stronger according to the needs. Disasters like FTX become a teaching lesson for the rulemakers to improve the regulatory system. 

The digital asset industry is still in its infancy, but problems like FTX are familiar. There have been previous such events at QuadrigaCX and at Mt. Gox. To prevent these types of massive losses that also deteriorate the market trust, regulatory oversight must begin. Here are five modest, sensible steps that could be taken now that don’t even require much crypto knowledge.

  • Stablecoin Reserves

As stablecoins are intended to be less volatile, they play an important role in the digital asset ecosystem. Moreover, they are more practical for everyday transactions. However, these stablecoins have not always been so stable.

These stablecoins are intended to be exchangeable for the underlying asset at a 1:1 ratio. However, stablecoin issuers are not required by law to maintain reserves that are equivalent to the available supply. There is a chance that holders will rush to redeem their coins when a stablecoin loses its peg, creating a situation that resembles a bank run.

That’s exactly what happened with TerraUSD in May of 2022. Recently, the US SEC has found another strong point of concern against the platform, making the former stronger. It relied on trading based on a mint and burn algorithm linked to the supply of LUNA, a cryptocurrency issued by Terra. Ironically, Sam Bankman-Fried is now under investigation for manipulating the market for TerraUSD, whose collapse touched off the industry crisis that ultimately exposed his other misdeeds at FTX.

Yet, none of that is necessary to know in order to determine whether a stablecoin is backed by a dollar. The quantity of circulating stablecoins is equal to the number of dollars in reserve. Stablecoin issuers should be required to keep 1:1 reserves at FDIC-insured banks.

The birth of FDIC insurance came after the bank failures during the early 1800s. Quarterly audits of reserves and real-time reporting on mint and burn activity should be mandatory. We also need to implement safety and soundness controls with a diversity of banks proportional to reserve size.

  • Separate Trading And Custody

Customers’ requirement to maintain their money with the exchange under the current market structure is fundamentally wrong. It is not necessary to be an expert in cryptography to understand why that is a bad idea. Imagine that the Nasdaq asked the SEC to serve as its own custodian, is it possible?

The issue with counterparty risk persists even after being entirely honest. Many of these crypto custody platforms and exchanges also engage in different kinds of lending. They engage in market-making and arbitrage. As they continue to trade and hedge on other exchanges, identifying the counterparty risk on the exchange is impossible. The reason being it’s the sum of the exchange’s risk plus the risk of whatever other markets they’re participating in that plays an important role in risk assessment. 

If there’s anything one should learn from the FTX collapse, it’s that assets should be stored until required for trading by external, qualified, regulated, and insured custodians. This creates a check-and-balance for verifying reserve assets under any exchange’s control.

The public may have learned sooner that FTX was in a crisis in a fractional reserve position if trading and custody had been kept separate. After the bankruptcy, it would have been simpler to stop asset theft and hacking.

  • Require Digital Asset Exchanges To Be 100% Digital

Discontinuing direct trading of digital assets with fiat or off-chain assets will make all exchanges on-chain auditable. As a result, it will enable Proof-of-Reserves that actually work. At present, Proof of Reserves does bring some level of transparency, but they are not a foolproof solution for separating who’s solvent and who’s not, for two reasons.

  1. No one can practice it for reserves on fiat because they cannot be represented in a digital way. 
  2. It’s not possible to give proof of non-liabilities, which is really the thing that matters most. FTX combined fiat, and digital reserve components and their liabilities far outstripped their reserves. 

With pure digital exchanges representing fiat digitally as a regulated stablecoin, Proof of Reserves for everything can become a reality. The last thing to be solved is the liabilities component. 

A reasonably solid and effective system with compliance can be built by fixing settlement and clearing to be entirely digital. Exchanges are currently attempting to establish a business in a hybrid world because they have no other option. So, as a transition, it is preferable to package fiat and securities in digital form. The ability to work in a digital environment will be significantly improved after the archaic wrappers have been removed.

  • Regulate Digital Asset Exchanges’ Use Of Omnibus Wallets

In an omnibus wallet, the funds of multiple clients are stored under a single address. The benefit is that it makes key management easier for the custodian and also makes it easier to enable efficient off-chain transactions.

However, one of the main limitations is that individual customers no longer have visibility into the transactions. Neither do they have any information on the counterparty risk. It’s also unclear what happens to each customer’s funds in the event of bankruptcy.

Omnibus wallets are only acceptable when the qualified crypto custody platform is aware of each of the exchange’s clients in the omnibus pool and assets are segregated in such a way as to provide bankruptcy protection to each client. The custodian must also participate in AML/KYC compliance of exchange clients.

  • Define Securities For The Digital Era

The SEC is still using an ancient definition of securities which was developed in the 1940s. The result is it leads to underpinning their enforcement efforts. Builders in crypto have honest questions about how the rule applies to them, and they deserve answers.

Can the SEC not update their definition and upgrade the meaning of securities while taking into account the crypto era? How hard would it be for the SEC to provide an updated definition, detailed guidance, and sensible grandfathering policies? Having that clarity would go a long way toward providing protection to innovators and investors alike.

They should listen more to Commissioner @HesterPeirce, who has an open opinion that the agency should not be leading with enforcement. Enforcement is clearly in their purview, but there’s an opportunity to make the enforcement load a lot lighter by providing appropriate guidance, to begin with.

What occurred at FTX was a common form of financial fraud that has been practiced for ages. The sole connection between cryptocurrency and blockchain technology is that a lack of regulation created a level playing field for dishonest players.

Conclusion

At present, the crypto community understands SEC’s Custody Rule. These rules are meant to safeguard the crypto industry. As per this rule, the crypto custody and other types of platforms are required to separate custody from trading. This move is hailed as a positive aspect of the crypto industry. 

The crypto industry is in dire need of regulatory administration aimed at preventing catastrophic investor losses. Designers and builders are more than capable of architecting a better system to meet the requirements of regulators. Once people can’t be rug pulled or defrauded, the next discussion will be about more nuanced issues and building something more comprehensive.

It will take a collective effort to get through this phase. FTX isn’t the first exchange to run into trouble; it’s just the biggest. It is easy to compartmentalize it as one guy who was a charlatan and go back to business as usual. However, doing so will be like setting the industry up for the next failure. To come out stronger and better, it is essential to use this opportunity to take a few simple steps in the direction to lead the industry into a new direction in order to thrive.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Blockchain

Mira Network (MIRA) Searches for a Floor as AI Verification Infrastructure Battles Relentless Supply Pressure

Published

19 hours ago

on

July 22, 2026

By

Mira Network launched on September 26, 2025, with a genuinely differentiated mission — building a decentralized verification layer for AI outputs, solving the hallucination and reliability problem that prevents truly autonomous AI deployment at scale. MIRA’s debut proved well received, starting at $1.25 before quickly doubling to around $1.40. Ten months later, the token is trading around $0.039 — down 97% from its launch price — with a market cap of approximately $7.53 million against a total supply of 1 billion tokens.

MIRA traded down 4% in the most recent 24-hour period with approximately $4.03 million in 24-hour volume — a volume-to-market-cap ratio that reflects still-active trading despite the dramatic price decline. The July 4 surge of 31.2% in a single day on $58 million volume showed the token retains the capacity for sharp moves when sentiment shifts — volume that day was five times the market cap, reflecting intense speculative activity on a thin float.

What Mira Network Actually Solves

Current AI systems produce hallucinations and unreliable outputs, requiring constant human oversight that prevents their deployment as truly autonomous agents. Mira’s verification layer addresses this at the infrastructure level — providing cryptographic verification of AI-generated outputs that allows applications to trust AI results without requiring a human to double-check every response.

The practical implication is significant. Every AI agent deployment in DeFi, enterprise workflows, or autonomous systems today requires a trust assumption about the AI’s output accuracy. Mira’s network creates a decentralized verification mechanism where multiple nodes independently validate AI outputs, enabling applications to deploy AI agents with mathematical confidence in their reliability rather than probabilistic hope.

The platform also allows apps built on its infrastructure to issue their own tokens, using MIRA to unify and convert liquidity — a tokenomics design that creates ecosystem demand for MIRA as the base liquidity layer for all applications built on the network.

The Backing That Validates the Thesis

Prior to launch, Mira Network raised about $10 million. Early angel investors included Balaji Srinivasan, Sandeep Nailwal, and Alex Svanevik, later joined by Framework Ventures, Bitkraft Ventures, and others. That investor roster is notable — Balaji Srinivasan and Sandeep Nailwal are two of the most respected technical investors in the crypto space, and Framework Ventures has a track record of backing protocols that achieve genuine adoption rather than pure speculation.

The Kaito AI Season 2 community campaign distributing $600,000 in MIRA tokens for completing tasks reflects the team’s continued investment in community building — though as CoinMarketCap’s analysis notes, the campaign introduces additional sellable tokens into a market where demand is already weak, making it a short-term supply headwind even as a long-term community growth initiative.

The Supply Structure Governing Everything

The tokenomics model includes a total supply of 1 billion tokens, with more than 191 million currently in circulation. Over the coming years, vested tokens held by early investors, the team, contributors, node operators, and others will gradually be released. Meanwhile, more than 40% of tokens are reserved by the DAO for ecosystem development, partner incentives, governance initiatives, and research efforts.

With only 19% to 28% of tokens currently circulating depending on the data source, MIRA faces one of the most challenging supply dynamics in the AI infrastructure category. Recurring monthly unlocks landing into a market with $4 million in daily volume creates structural downward pressure that product development alone struggles to offset at this stage.

MIRA formed a technical double bottom at $0.041 at the end of June, with trading volume increasing significantly and bullish momentum strengthening. That technical structure was the foundation for the July 4 surge before giving back gains in subsequent sessions. The Nigeria ecosystem expansion and enhanced developer SDK planned for 2026 represent the geographic and technical growth levers the team is pulling to drive organic demand — but adoption in emerging markets moves at a different pace than the unlock schedule.

The AI verification infrastructure thesis that Mira is built on is arguably more relevant in July 2026 than it was at the September 2025 launch — autonomous AI agents are now a mainstream topic rather than a niche discussion. Whether MIRA can attract enough developer adoption to generate genuine network activity before the remaining 80% of supply enters circulation is the question that will define the protocol’s trajectory through the rest of the year.

Continue Reading

Crypto

Radiant Capital Shuts Down After 18-Month Struggle to Recover From $50M Lazarus Group Hack

Published

1 month ago

on

June 17, 2026

By

This one doesn’t have a silver lining. On June 1, 2026, the Radiant Capital DAO announced it was winding down operations — ceasing all active development after failing to recover stolen funds or secure new capital following the October 2024 exploit that drained roughly $50 million from the protocol. The shutdown marks the end of what was once one of the more ambitious cross-chain lending projects in DeFi.

RDNT is currently trading at approximately $0.00168, down 3.45% in the past 24 hours — a shadow of its former self. The token peaked near $0.50 in 2023. The collapse from there to effectively zero is one of the starkest examples of what a single catastrophic exploit can do to a protocol’s trajectory.

How the Attack Unfolded

In October 2024, attackers compromised Radiant Capital through a highly advanced malware injection that breached multiple developers’ hardware wallets simultaneously — a sophisticated supply-chain style attack that bypassed the protocol’s multisig security assumptions.

The hack was later attributed to North Korea’s Lazarus Group, and on-chain analysis revealed the group had turned the stolen $53 million into over $102 million by the time the shutdown was announced — a grim detail that underscores both the sophistication of state-sponsored crypto theft and the near-impossibility of recovering from it through legal or on-chain means.

The tactics used in the attack subsequently appeared in other major crypto incidents. In April 2026, Drift Protocol said it had medium-high confidence that the same actors behind the Radiant breach were responsible for a separate exploit against its platform — with the group spending months building trust with contributors through conference meetings and professional contacts before deploying malicious tools.

18 Months of Failed Recovery

What makes Radiant’s story particularly difficult is that the team genuinely tried. For a year and a half after the exploit, the DAO explored paths to recovery — new capital raises, restructuring options, community governance mechanisms. None of it worked.

The protocol had once ranked among the largest cross-chain lending platforms in DeFi, with TVL reaching $386.8 million in December 2023. By early June 2026, TVL had fallen to approximately $1.4 million across chains, with active loans near $866,000 — effectively an empty shell of what the protocol had been.

The DAO’s announcement confirmed there was no viable path forward. Borrowing and incentives have been stopped, and the protocol has entered a maintenance state rather than a full decommission — meaning users can still withdraw funds and manage existing positions, but no new activity is possible.

What Existing Users Need to Do

Radiant Capital has stated it will continue attempts to recover the funds stolen in the 2024 exploit, and affected users can access a remediation portal to seek those funds. That process is likely to be slow and uncertain, but it represents the only remaining avenue for users who suffered losses in the original attack.

For anyone still holding positions in the protocol, the priority is straightforward: existing positions can still be managed, but withdrawal conditions depend on current utilization and market dynamics — and with liquidity declining and yields at zero, waiting carries its own risks. Getting out now rather than hoping for improved conditions is the more prudent approach.

The Radiant shutdown is a case study in what the DeFi industry has been grappling with since the Lazarus Group began targeting protocols systematically — that technical security alone isn’t enough when attackers are willing to spend months infiltrating teams at the human level. Hardware wallet compromises across multiple developers simultaneously suggest an operational security failure that no smart contract audit could have prevented.

RDNT’s price tells the rest of the story.

Continue Reading

Crypto Currency

Why Stablecoin Payments Are Emerging as the Future of Cross-Border Transactions

Published

1 month ago

on

June 11, 2026

By

As global commerce becomes increasingly digital, businesses are searching for faster, more efficient ways to move money across borders. Traditional international payment systems, while reliable, often involve multiple intermediaries, lengthy settlement times, and significant transaction costs.

In response, stablecoins are emerging as one of the most important innovations in modern financial infrastructure, offering businesses a new approach to global payments, liquidity management, and settlement.

The Challenges of Traditional Cross-Border Payments

For decades, international transactions have relied heavily on correspondent banking networks. While these systems have enabled global trade at scale, businesses frequently encounter challenges such as:

  • Multi-day settlement times
  • High foreign exchange and wire transfer costs
  • Limited operating hours
  • Multiple intermediary banks
  • Reduced transparency throughout the payment process

For companies operating across multiple markets, these inefficiencies can create unnecessary delays and working capital constraints.

Why Stablecoins Are Gaining Momentum

Stablecoins are digital assets designed to maintain a stable value, typically by being pegged to a fiat currency such as the US Dollar.

Unlike traditional international transfers, stablecoin transactions can be settled on blockchain networks within minutes, operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

This combination of speed, accessibility, and efficiency has attracted growing interest from payment providers, fintech companies, exporters, importers, and businesses engaged in international trade.

Major financial institutions and payment companies, including Visa, Mastercard, Stripe and PayPal, have all explored or expanded initiatives involving stablecoin settlement and blockchain-based payments, highlighting the growing relevance of digital asset infrastructure within the broader financial ecosystem.

Stablecoins and Business Treasury Management

Beyond payments, stablecoins are increasingly being incorporated into corporate treasury strategies.

Organizations operating across multiple jurisdictions often face challenges related to liquidity management, foreign exchange exposure, and capital deployment.

Stablecoins offer businesses an additional tool for managing value transfer, facilitating faster settlements, and improving operational flexibility when interacting with international partners and service providers.

As adoption increases, many organizations are beginning to view digital assets not simply as investment products, but as practical financial infrastructure.

The Evolution of Financial Infrastructure

The financial industry has undergone significant transformation over the past decade.

Cloud computing changed how businesses access software. Mobile technology changed how consumers access financial services. Today, blockchain technology is creating new possibilities for how value moves around the world.

The next phase of financial innovation is likely to be driven by infrastructure that prioritizes speed, transparency, accessibility, and interoperability.

Stablecoins are increasingly positioned at the center of this evolution.

Andrew Cruz, Chief Executive Officer of MoonExe, believes the industry is entering a period where utility will drive adoption.

“The conversation around digital assets is shifting. Businesses are increasingly focused on practical applications such as payments, settlements, and liquidity management rather than speculation alone,” said Cruz.

“Stablecoins have demonstrated that blockchain technology can solve real-world challenges by enabling faster and more efficient movement of value across borders. We believe this trend will continue as businesses seek alternatives that better match the pace of today’s global economy.”

“The future of finance will not be defined by a single technology, but by how different systems work together to create more efficient financial networks. Digital assets and stablecoins will play an important role in that transition.”

Looking Ahead

As regulatory frameworks continue to mature and institutional participation increases, stablecoin adoption is expected to accelerate across multiple industries.

Businesses seeking greater efficiency, improved liquidity access, and faster settlement capabilities are increasingly evaluating digital asset-powered solutions as part of their long-term financial strategy.

The growing role of stablecoins represents more than a technological innovation—it reflects a broader evolution in how value is exchanged within the global economy.

About MoonExe

MoonExe is a financial technology company focused on digital asset infrastructure, blockchain-powered financial solutions, and global digital economy initiatives. Through its commitment to innovation, accessibility, and technological advancement, MoonExe seeks to support the evolution of modern financial services and the next generation of global value exchange.

Continue Reading

Trending