妍妍Eleven_OKX

^_^OKX official operation ~Fan interaction~ 👀 Read the post every day, and pay attention to ✌🏻 the quality

362Following

1.3Kfollowers

Feed

🌸 A historic rewrite of the crypto derivatives market — the first regulated BTC perpetual contract in the US approved: $86 trillion offshore market, the compliance inflow window is now open. 📰 CFTC Chairman Mike Selig announced a "historic action" — approving KalshiEX to launch BTCPERP, the first regulated Bitcoin perpetual contract in the US officially launched. On the same day, the CFTC issued a no-action letter to Coinbase, authorizing it to offer crypto options and perpetual contract services. SEC Chairman Paul Atkins reiterated at the Reagan National Economic Forum that the SEC will jointly advance the "Project Crypto" plan with the CFTC to promote on-chain capital market reforms. 🔍 To understand this, first clarify two concepts ❶ What is a no-action letter? This is a statement issued by US regulators (SEC or CFTC) to specific institutions, meaning: "The action you intend to take, we will temporarily not take enforcement action against you." It is not an official approval but in practice is equivalent to a regulatory green light — institutions receiving a no-action letter can legally conduct related business without fear of prosecution. For Coinbase, this is a substantive license to enter the crypto derivatives market. ❷ What is "Project Crypto"? This is a crypto market reform plan jointly promoted by the SEC and CFTC, with the core goal of establishing a unified on-chain capital market regulatory framework — including tokenized securities, on-chain derivatives, DeFi compliance pathways, etc. Chairman Atkins' statement means the two major regulators are moving toward rare collaboration rather than past jurisdictional disputes. 🔥 The real impact of this is much greater than the product itself The $86 trillion annual trading volume of global offshore perpetual contracts occurs outside US regulatory boundaries, where US institutions cannot participate and US investors face compliance risks. Once liquidity from the compliant US market is injected, it means BTC prices will be more priced by regulated, traceable trading behaviors rather than offshore market dominance. The liquidity advantage of offshore platforms will be diluted, and compliant market makers will have a historic entry opportunity. Institutions such as pension funds and sovereign wealth funds, previously unable to participate in derivatives markets due to compliance concerns, will gain formal access. This is not just a product launch; it is the beginning of the US reclaiming pricing power in the crypto derivatives market. 💬 Who do you think is the biggest beneficiary of this regulatory opening? A: Compliant exchanges, finally able to offer perpetual contracts domestically B: Institutional investors, smoother large capital entry after compliance channels open C: BTC itself, with a healthier price discovery mechanism and long-term benefits for price stability 👏🏻 Feel free to share your judgment in the comments ⬇️ #CFTC历史性批准BTC永续合约

🔔This Week's Must-Watch｜Binance Suspected to Launch US Stock Access, May Nonfarm Payrolls Incoming, Possible US-Iran Talks Again (6.1-6.7) 📍 A new week brings a dense intersection of macro and crypto events. 🗓️ Key Calendar This Week June 1 (Today) 🔸 Binance announces mysterious new product—teaser image is a "Haystack," pronounced similarly to "Hey Stock," widely speculated by the community to be related to US stock investment channels; if true, it will be a major milestone for CEX expanding into traditional finance 🔹 Yushi Technology's STAR Market IPO review—representative company in humanoid robots, Shanghai Stock Exchange listing review committee to deliberate today 🔸 Japan's stablecoin regulations officially take effect—Japan Financial Services Agency recognizes certain foreign trust-type stablecoins as electronic payment methods, granting legal basis for compliant circulation and clarifying they are not considered securities 🔹 Upbit delists DRIFT token 🔸 Bitcoin inscription browser Ord.io and Meme coin app Zap officially shut down (please export private keys of held assets ASAP) 🔹 JPEX fraud case: 8 defendants (including influencer Lin Zuo) have another hearing June 2 (Tuesday) 🔸 Minneapolis Fed President Kashkari speech (13:50) 🔹 Cleveland Fed President Mester speech on monetary policy (20:30) June 4 (Thursday) 🔸 tea Protocol TGE ($TEA), liquidity launched via Aerodrome Aero Ignition 🔹 Federal Reserve Beige Book release (2:00 Beijing time)—reflects economic conditions across 12 Fed districts, important reference for FOMC decisions June 5 (Friday)⭐ The week's biggest event 🔸 May Nonfarm Payroll data release (20:30 Beijing time)—includes unemployment rate, new nonfarm employment, average hourly wages, directly impacting Fed rate cut expectations 🔹 Possible next round of US-Iran talks—according to Al Arabiya TV, both sides will send chief representatives to negotiate a final agreement 🔸 San Francisco Fed President Daly speech (next day 1:10) Others (time TBD) 🔹 Polymarket to release new version addressing queue congestion, has launched perpetual contract feature (including 5 traditional financial pairs + BTC perpetual contract) 🎯 Two core observations this week Nonfarm Data × Rate Cut Expectations: Last week, the 30-year US Treasury yield approached 2007 highs, with the market debating "whether to raise rates." If May nonfarm exceeds expectations, the rate cut window delays further, putting short-term pressure on risk assets; if data is weak, rate cut narrative revives, giving BTC and others breathing room. US-Iran Talks × Oil Price Trend: If June 5 talks progress smoothly with positive signals, downward pressure on oil prices eases inflation expectations, supporting overall risk appetite; if negotiations stall again, geopolitical premium returns and volatility rises. 💬 Which variable are you most focused on this week? 👏🏻 Feel free to discuss in the comments ⬇️ PS: ㊗️ Happy holidays to all residents of every planet!

#CFTC翻案：Reshaping the Crypto Regulatory Landscape 🔥 May 28th marks a historic day in U.S. crypto regulation. 🗓️ On May 28th, three major events occurred: First: CFTC Admits Mistake The CFTC officially acknowledged that the 2022 lawsuit against Gemini was a wrongful case, stating "this case should not have been filed," listing multiple key issues, and both parties jointly applied to dismiss the judgment. This ends a regulatory lawsuit that lasted nearly four years. Second: CFTC Files Another Lawsuit On the same day, the CFTC filed a civil lawsuit against Google engineer Michele Spagnuolo for insider trading on Polymarket, invoking the Commodity Exchange Act to assert jurisdiction over prediction markets. Third: Trump Includes Crypto in His Governance Achievements Trump posted that "Gary Gensler and the anti-crypto camp nearly destroyed the U.S. crypto industry," and during a cabinet meeting, he listed the crypto industry alongside "the stock market hitting 68 all-time highs" as core governance achievements. 🔍 To understand this day, you need to grasp three backgrounds: ❶ Who is Gary Gensler and why was he named? Gary Gensler is the SEC Chair appointed by the Biden administration, who took a tough stance on the crypto industry during his term, leading lawsuits against Coinbase, Ripple, and many other projects. He was called the "biggest regulatory obstacle" by the crypto community. After Trump took office, Gensler resigned in January 2025. Being named now is a systemic repudiation of the previous regulatory approach and a declaration to the market that that era is over. ❷ Why does the CFTC have jurisdiction over the Polymarket insider trading case? Polymarket is an on-chain prediction market platform where users can bet on various event outcomes (elections, economic data, sports events, etc.) using cryptocurrency. The CFTC invoked the Commodity Exchange Act to claim jurisdiction, with the core logic being that prediction market contracts are "event contracts" under CFTC regulation. This is the first time the CFTC has used judicial means to enforce its jurisdiction over prediction markets, marking the official entry of the regulatory ownership dispute over on-chain prediction markets into the judicial qualification stage. ❸ Is it contradictory to admit a mistake and file a lawsuit on the same day? Not contradictory! This is a typical feature of the transition between old and new regulatory approaches: clearing out past excessive enforcement while establishing new boundaries. The dismissal of the Gemini case says "the previous enforcement approach was wrong"; the lawsuit against Polymarket insider trading says "but regulation will not disappear, it just changes form." Moving from political statements to judicial practice is the real implementation of regulation. 🤔 Questions worth pondering Admitting a mistake and filing a lawsuit on the same day sends the message that "regulation is truly coming." If the Polymarket case establishes the CFTC's jurisdiction over prediction markets, on-chain prediction markets will gain compliance space but will also face stricter insider trading scrutiny and higher compliance thresholds. Is this opening the door or just changing the lock? 💬 What do you think? 👏🏻 Feel free to discuss in the comments below ⬇️

📍 At a critical juncture in the US stablecoin legislation sprint, on May 25, The Wall Street Journal chose this timing to deliver a heavy blow, labeling USDT and USDC as "private money" and questioning the effectiveness of the two major crypto legislative efforts ⚠️ ‼️ WSJ's core argument in one sentence: Stablecoins are not the US dollar; they are private money experiments disguised in dollar clothing. Key points of the article: 🔸 USDT and USDC deviate from the $1 peg in actual operation, and issuers have motives to chase high yields and invest in high-risk assets 🔹 Citing data: Stablecoins account for 84% of crypto-related illegal activities 🔸 Actual payment use is less than 1%, with the main use still being crypto trading 🔹 Comparing stablecoins to the 19th-century US "free banking" era private money experiments 🔸 Questioning the GENIUS Act and CLARITY Act’s inability to resolve the fundamental contradiction between private issuance and the public payment system 🔍 Quick background: What was the 19th-century "free banking" era? From 1837 to 1863, private banks in US states could issue banknotes (equivalent to private money) linked to gold but with uneven actual reserves. Due to lack of unified regulation, many banknotes depreciated or became worthless, eventually triggering a financial crisis that forced the US to establish a national banking system. WSJ uses this history to analogize stablecoins, implying: history will repeat itself. 📌 Three perspectives on this article Q: Is the "84% illegal activity" data cited by WSJ credible? A: This data source needs to be treated cautiously. On-chain analysis firms’ research shows crypto crime accounts for less than 1% of total transaction volume over the long term, far below the 84% claim. The statistical scope and source of WSJ’s cited data deserve scrutiny, but this does not mean stablecoins have no compliance issues. Using extreme figures to characterize the entire industry shows clear narrative bias. Q: Can stablecoins really "depeg"? A: It has happened historically. The 2022 UST algorithmic stablecoin collapse is the most extreme case; USDC also briefly depegged to $0.87 during the 2023 Silicon Valley Bank crisis. But USDT and USDC’s main reserves currently are US Treasuries and cash equivalents, fundamentally different from algorithmic stablecoins. WSJ confuses stablecoins of different risk levels. Q: Does the GENIUS Act really fail to solve the problem? A: This is WSJ’s most debatable point. The GENIUS Act indeed has limitations; it sets reserve requirements and issuance qualifications but chooses to shelve rather than answer the fundamental question of "whether private-issued money should exist within the public payment system." This contradiction is not a technical issue but a political issue of monetary sovereignty, and the legislative framework indeed struggles to fundamentally resolve it. 💬 What do you think about WSJ’s characterization in this report? 👏🏻 Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below ⬇️ #华尔街日报：稳定币是"私人货币"

📍 When regulators begin "selective enforcement," who will protect ordinary investors? 📰 According to reports, several CFTC officials who raised regulatory concerns about Polymarket, Crypto.com, and Gemini have recently been suspended or forced to resign. All three companies have business ties to the Trump family. 🛎️ Key facts at a glance: 🔹 Polymarket, Crypto.com, and Gemini all have business connections with the Trump family 🔸 CFTC officials who raised regulatory concerns about these companies were successively suspended or forced to leave 🔹 The senior advisor to the acting CFTC chairman also serves as the chief legal counsel for Gemini Titan, presenting a clear conflict of interest 🔸 Since the new administration took office, the CFTC has canceled at least five crypto investigations 🔹 The number of enforcement cases has plummeted from over 80 under the previous administration to only 2 🔍 Quick primer: What is the CFTC? The CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) is an independent federal agency in the U.S. responsible for regulating futures, options, and derivatives markets. It is also one of the main regulators in the crypto space (alongside the SEC). Its core duty is to prevent market manipulation, fraud, and abuse. "Independence" is the foundation of its existence—once that independence is compromised, the credibility of the entire enforcement system collapses. 📌 Three questions to understand this incident Q: Is it a violation for the acting CFTC chairman’s advisor to also serve as Gemini’s legal counsel? A: This is a classic "revolving door" conflict of interest. Even if it does not directly violate legal provisions, holding positions simultaneously on the regulator side and the legal team of a regulated entity poses serious ethical and independence issues. This is the latest version of the "revolving door" phenomenon long criticized in Washington, now appearing in the crypto sector. Q: Is the drop in enforcement cases from 80 to 2 a "regulatory easing" or "targeted protection"? A: The sharp decline in numbers does not necessarily mean favoritism—policy shifts can indeed reduce enforcement actions. But combined with officials being dismissed for questioning specific companies, this number no longer reflects mere policy change but rather seems like a targeted purge. Q: Is this good or bad for the crypto industry? A: In the short term, projects linked to the Trump family have indeed gained "regulatory vacuum" protection, which seems beneficial. But in the long run, the collapse of regulatory credibility will deter genuine institutional investors—markets without rules ultimately protect no one. 💬 What do you think about the politicization of regulation? 👏🏻 Feel free to share your views in the comments below ⬇️ #CFTC官员因质疑特朗普关联公司遭清退