hodler

6 May 2026, 00:54

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse goes against XRP maximalist ideology

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said he has never been an XRP maximalist and that he wants Bitcoin to succeed. He added that crypto tribalism is bad for the entire industry. Garlinghouse spoke during an interview at Consensus Miami 2026 , while a new Ripple-backed company, Evernorth, hired Ripple’s top lawyer to its board and announced plans to go public on Nasdaq on the same day. The XRP maximalist and why Garlinghouse is not one An XRP maximalist, or “XRP maxi,” is a person who thinks XRP is the only important crypto in the industry. They want XRP to win and all others to lose, so they treat the market like a competition. Garlinghouse said he thinks differently. “I’ve never been an XRP maxi. It’s not gonna be a one-chain world. It’s gonna be a multi-chain world. I want to see Bitcoin be successful,” he said, adding that crypto tribalism is bad for everyone and the whole industry. In January 2025, Garlinghouse posted on X , saying maximalism is “the enemy of crypto progress” and that he owns XRP, Bitcoin, and Ethereum, because he supports a level playing field. He did make clear that XRP remains Ripple’s “North Star” and that every acquisition and new product aims to make the token more useful for the people. What does Ripple’s survey show about the finance world with digital assets? According to a Ripple survey of more than 1,000 finance leaders worldwide, 72% said companies must now offer digital asset solutions to remain competitive. 74% of the interviewees also said stablecoins are the future treasury tool that companies can use to manage money more efficiently. The survey also showed that 97% of finance leaders prioritize the security of digital assets over all other features, with certifications such as ISO and SOC being highly important. 88% ranked Post-integration technical support second, 80% said Industry experience came third, and 71% said they prefer an all-in-one service provider. The survey also found that 31% of fintechs collect payments in stablecoins on behalf of their customers, and 29% take stablecoin payments directly. 47% of fintech companies are more likely to build their own solutions in-house, compared with 14% of large corporations, which choose to work with established partners. Is Ripple using AI to fire people or to hire more of them? Garlinghouse said Ripple is using AI to grow and employ more people, and not to cut jobs. He said AI tools write or assist with 75% of Ripple’s code, and the company is using that gain to build more products that reach more users. “Painting AI as the boogeyman is a travesty. We’re not thinking about AI as a tool to reduce headcount. We’re thinking about it as an unlock,” Garlinghouse said. That’s contrary to what other companies are doing with AI. Coinbase cut 14% of its workforce in early 2026, blaming an AI shift and unfavorable market conditions. Klarna did the same thing and froze hiring in 2025 , saying its AI system could handle the job of 700 customer service employees. Atlassian wasn’t left behind, as it cut 1,600 jobs in March 2026 as part of an AI-driven restructuring. But according to Garlinghouse, companies using AI as an excuse to justify layoffs may be hiding bigger management issues behind the technology. Why did Garlinghouse say the next two weeks are critical with the CLARITY Act? The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) differ on whether to classify crypto tokens as commodities or securities, and the CLARITY Act would resolve that. According to Congress.gov, the official US legislative record , the bill would keep investment-style tokens under the SEC and give the CFTC exclusive control over spot markets for digital commodities. In other words, it would make it easier for crypto companies like Ripple to know which rules apply to them. In July 2025 , the bill passed the House by a 294-134 vote, but the Senate seems to be taking its time. The biggest delay has been a fight over stablecoins between banks and crypto companies. Banks are against crypto companies offering users rewards for holding stablecoins because it would compete with bank deposits. Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks released a compromise on May 1, 2026, that bans stablecoin yield on deposits but allows it for platform activity. To that, Brad Garlinghouse commented. “Do I think it’s perfect? Hell no! But clarity is better than chaos. If it doesn’t happen in the next two weeks, I think the likelihood is going to drop precipitously.” What is Evernorth, and why is its stock market listing significant for XRP? Evernorth is the world’s largest XRP treasury company, and according to its official press release on May 5, 2026 , it holds more than 473 million XRP, backed by Ripple and SBI Holdings. The company appointed four new board members, including Ripple’s own Chief Legal Officer, Stuart Alderoty. That’s what put Evernorth in the spotlight. Having Ripple’s top lawyer on the board of a publicly listed XRP company ties the two organizations closely together. Evernorth is also building something similar to what Strategy has done for Bitcoin. Investors can participate in Bitcoin’s growth through its shares without buying Bitcoin directly, and Evernorth wants the same thing for XRP. The filing is under SEC review, and the final Nasdaq listing will be completed through a merger with Armada Acquisition Corp. II, a shell company already listed on the exchange. Don’t just read crypto news. Understand it. Subscribe to our newsletter. It's free .

5 May 2026, 23:08

From Miami, Ripple CEO Warns Crypto’s Biggest Bill Is Running Out of Time

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse has said the next two weeks could determine whether broad U.S. crypto legislation has a realistic path to becoming law before the political calendar becomes harder to manage. Speaking at Consensus Miami, Garlinghouse said the Senate Banking Committee needs to move forward with a markup soon. He warned that if the committee does not act in the coming weeks, the chances of passing a market structure bill could fall sharply. The legislation, commonly tied to the CLARITY Act framework, aims to create federal rules for digital assets and divide oversight between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. US Senate Timeline Becomes Critical The House passed its version of the crypto market structure bill last year, but the Senate process has moved more slowly. A bill must advance through both the Senate Agriculture Committee and the Senate Banking Committee before reaching the full Senate. The Agriculture Committee has already moved its version forward. The Banking Committee has faced delays, including disagreements over stablecoin rewards, conflicts of interest, and illicit finance rules. A recent compromise between Sens. Angela Alsobrooks and Thom Tillis on stablecoin rewards could clear one major obstacle. However, Garlinghouse said time remains the main challenge as the November midterm elections approach. He said if the process slips into the campaign season, crypto legislation could become too politically difficult to complete. Ripple Pushes Growth Without IPO Plans Garlinghouse also confirmed that Ripple has no immediate plans for an initial public offering. He said the company is well-funded and does not need public capital to continue expanding. Ripple President Monica Long has also said an IPO is not a current priority. The company is instead focusing on product growth, acquisitions, stablecoin infrastructure, and institutional financial services. Ripple’s treasury infrastructure reportedly processed about $13 trillion in payments over the past year. Garlinghouse said those flows were not initially crypto or stablecoin-based, pointing to a large opportunity to move traditional payment activity onto blockchain rails over time. Ripple has also expanded through acquisitions, including its $1.25 billion purchase of Hidden Road, now known as Ripple Prime. The company has also launched RLUSD, its regulated dollar-backed stablecoin. Regulatory Certainty Remains the Main Issue Even for IPO Garlinghouse said Ripple would only seriously consider an IPO after stronger regulatory certainty in the United States. The company has spent years in litigation with the SEC over XRP. A federal judge previously ruled that XRP itself is not inherently a security, although some direct institutional sales by Ripple were treated as securities transactions. Garlinghouse said that ruling gave clarity to XRP, but the wider industry still needs federal legislation. Regulators have issued guidance and token taxonomies under current leadership, but Garlinghouse said agency policy can change under future administrations. He said codifying crypto rules into law would make the framework more durable. The debate arrives as U.S. crypto firms seek clear rules for exchanges , stablecoins, custody, token issuance, and institutional trading. Garlinghouse said the CLARITY Act remains important because it could define how digital assets are treated beyond XRP. Ripple’s position is that the industry has gained momentum, but the window for passing legislation is narrowing. The next Senate Banking Committee action will show whether the bill can advance before election politics take over.

5 May 2026, 22:37

First Digital CEO piles on as Justin Sun fights World Liberty defamation lawsuit

Vincent Chok, the CEO of First Digital Trust, the Hong Kong-based custodian that Justin Sun, the founder of the Tron network, has been locked in a years-long legal battle with, interjected today as Sun faces a new lawsuit that traces up to the office of the president of the United States. The executive implied that Justin Sun was the troublemaker in both instances of his publicly chronicled legal drama after Sun was hit with a defamation lawsuit by the Trump family’s DeFi project, World Liberty Financial (WLFI). Why is Justin Sun being sued? Justin Sun, the founder of the Tron blockchain (TRX) and advisor to World Liberty Financial (WLFI), is defending himself against defamation claims from the WLFI project. At the same time, he is also pursuing his own allegations against Hong Kong-based custodian First Digital Trust (FDT). Vincent Chok, the CEO of First Digital Trust, has largely remained less vocal in the dispute with Sun for the last twelve months. However, Chok responded to the WLFI lawsuit, which was filed on May 4, asking; “Is this a trend?” Chok claims that for over a year, Justin Sun has made various allegations against FDT but has failed to produce supporting evidence in court. He noted that Sun has offered escalating bounties, rising from $50 million to $100 million, for anyone who can find “internal evidence” against FDT. Twelve months later, no one has publicly come forward. Chok implied through a post on X that Sun’s credibility was dented by his bounties failing to yield results, as that shows that there was no evidence to find. The FDT dispute dates back to 2024 and concerns the reserves of the TrueUSD (TUSD) stablecoin. Documents prepared for the U.S. Department of Justice by Techteryx, TUSD’s issuer, claimed that approximately $456 million was diverted by FDT to a Dubai-based entity, Aria Commodities DMCC. These allegations remain untried in court, but Vincent Chok “categorically denied any wrongdoing” in his recent statements. He maintains that FDT acted strictly as a fiduciary intermediary, executing instructions provided by Techteryx. On the other side, Justin Sun, in a prior statement regarding the TUSD situation, publicly claimed that FDT was “effectively insolvent” and urged users to secure their assets, though those claims have also not been substantiated in a final court ruling. Why did World Liberty Financial sue Justin Sun? As Cryptopolitan reported , World Liberty Financial (WLFI) filed a defamation lawsuit against Justin Sun in a Florida state court to counter a lawsuit Sun filed against it in April 2026. In his lawsuit, Sun alleged the company had illegally frozen his tokens. WLFI is now accusing Sun of launching a “coordinated media smear campaign” against the project. They allege that after purchasing WLFI tokens, Sun engaged in “prohibited transactions,” including transferring tokens to the exchange Binance and short-selling the token. The lawsuit states that not only were Sun’s actions designed to drive the token price “to shit” in order to harm other holders, but that their ability to freeze tokens was fully disclosed in their Terms of Sale, which he agreed to. Justin Sun dismissed the lawsuit immediately, calling it a “meritless PR stunt.” “I stand by my actions and look forward to defeating the case in court,” Sun said. Despite the legal turmoil, WLFI’s token is up nearly 5.5% over the last 24 hours, following the news of the lawsuit. However, CoinMarketCap data shows the token is down roughly 79% since it began public trading in September 2025. Sun reportedly holds a stake of 4 billion tokens, currently worth approximately $264 million. Still letting the bank keep the best part? Watch our free video on being your own bank .

5 May 2026, 21:28

Ripple CEO says next 2 weeks critical for XRP case

🚨 Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse declared the next 2 weeks critical for the $XRP legal case. He stressed collaboration across blockchains and voiced support for Bitcoin’s success. Continue Reading: Ripple CEO says next 2 weeks critical for XRP case The post Ripple CEO says next 2 weeks critical for XRP case appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .

5 May 2026, 21:17

Strategy posts $12.5 billion Q1 loss as execs tout STRC 'big success'

The premier bitcoin treasury company said strong demand for STRC helped it raise $5.58 billion out of a total $11.68 billion so far this year.

5 May 2026, 21:15

White House now wants to review AI models before they are released to the public

The White House is considering a plan to review some of the most powerful artificial intelligence systems before they are released to the public. The proposal, first reported by The New York Times on May 4, would introduce federal scrutiny at a critical point in the AI lifecycle, just before deployment. Officials are increasingly concerned that frontier models are now capable of identifying and exploiting weaknesses in the software that underpins essential infrastructure. An analysis published by The Conversation points to growing evidence that recent AI systems can uncover large numbers of vulnerabilities in operating systems and web browsers. That capability, while valuable for defensive security, also raises the stakes if such tools were to be misused or fall into the wrong hands. Model capabilities prompt policy rethink The policy discussion gained urgency after Anthropic opted to delay wider release of its latest model, Mythos . Internal testing revealed advanced cybersecurity capabilities, including the ability to identify numerous exploitable flaws. In response, the company restricted access to a limited group of organizations responsible for critical infrastructure through its “Project Glasswing” initiative. According to The Conversation , the White House stepped in when Anthropic explored expanding access, signaling a more hands-on approach to AI oversight even as broader tech policy has remained relatively market-driven. Concerns are not limited to a single company or system. The UK AI Safety Institute reported in an April evaluation that OpenAI GPT-5.5 demonstrated comparable performance on advanced cybersecurity tasks. In one test highlighted by the institute, the model reverse-engineered a custom virtual machine and solved a complex challenge in minutes, far quicker than a human expert using professional tools. “A key question was whether this reflected a breakthrough specific to one model, or part of a broader trend,” the institute wrote in its report. “Results from an early checkpoint of GPT-5.5 suggest the latter.” Taken together, the findings suggest these capabilities are becoming a common feature of leading AI systems, rather than an isolated breakthrough. AI security concerns take on a geopolitical dimension The implications extend beyond technology into national security. Researchers cited by The Conversation warn that state-linked groups could use similar tools to carry out cyber operations, potentially targeting infrastructure or economic systems. There are already early signs of this shift. Anthropic has reported suspected state-backed actors using its models in espionage campaigns affecting dozens of organizations. Meanwhile, Microsoft and OpenAI said in 2024 that government-affiliated groups were leveraging AI to enhance cyberattacks. At the same time, researchers are still grappling with how to reliably control these systems. Work cited by The Conversation suggests that safety filters applied after training can be bypassed, while some models may appear compliant without fully eliminating risky capabilities. This has led to a growing view among policymakers that safety measures may need to be embedded during model development rather than added later. Policy outlook: fragmented frameworks, rising pressure The U.S. proposal is taking shape within a broader, still-evolving global regulatory landscape: The EU AI Act sets out a risk-based framework with strict requirements for high-risk applications, though it does not mandate centralized approval for frontier models. The UK has leaned on voluntary cooperation through the UK AI Safety Institute, focusing on testing and evaluation partnerships with developers. The emerging U.S. approach appears to be moving toward direct oversight of the most advanced systems, potentially through pre-release review. Lawmakers have begun examining these issues more closely, with congressional hearings in April on AI safety and governance, though no comprehensive legislation has yet advanced. If implemented, a U.S. pre-release review system would represent a shift toward earlier intervention, placing oversight at the point where risks can be anticipated rather than after they materialize. Such a move could set an informal global standard, particularly given the concentration of leading AI developers in the United States. At the same time, it raises the possibility that companies may shift parts of development or deployment to regions with fewer restrictions. The challenge for policymakers is balancing innovation with risk management in a field where capabilities are advancing quickly, and the consequences of misuse could be far-reaching. For now, the most concrete safeguards remain voluntary. Companies such as Anthropic are limiting access to sensitive systems, while organizations like the UK AI Safety Institute continue to run independent evaluations. Whether the United States formalizes its approach—and whether other countries align with it—will be a key factor in shaping how AI is governed in the years ahead. The smartest crypto minds already read our newsletter. Want in? Join them .