Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies made the whole world look at blockchain technology and its immense untapped potential. However, the arrival of a revolutionary technology like blockchain did not happen without some setbacks. The search for answers to “What is green blockchain?” has led to discussions about the environmental impact of blockchain. The term ‘green blockchain’ represents a new wave of innovation that aims to reduce the environmental footprint of blockchain technology.

Many people don’t know that the Proof of Work consensus mechanism used in blockchain networks consumes huge amounts of energy. One of the best examples of such blockchain networks is Bitcoin, which relies on crypto mining to verify and add transactions to its shared ledger. How much energy could the Bitcoin blockchain possibly consume that would cause harm to the environment? Let us find out the answer in a detailed guide on green blockchain. 

Unraveling the Meaning of Green Blockchain

The crypto mining process in Proof of Work consensus is a norm for verifying transactions in many blockchain networks. In this process, miners compete with each other to find solutions to mathematical problems and get the privilege to add transactions to the blockchain. The pursuit of mining rewards often undermines the substantial amounts of computational power required for mining. 

A review of the fundamentals of green blockchain explained for beginners would revolve largely around this issue. With the requirement of more computational power in mining, blockchain networks will consume more energy and impose a bigger carbon footprint. The road to achieve the vision for green blockchain will involve energy-efficient consensus mechanisms, renewable energy sources and layer 2 solutions.

Energy-efficient consensus algorithms can help in reducing energy consumption required to verify transactions in a shared ledger. As a result, the blockchain will be greener as it will consume fewer resources from the environment. The switch to renewable energy sources for traditional blockchain networks will also pave the road to green blockchain. Renewable energy from solar and wind will play a major role in reducing the carbon footprint of blockchain technology.

Accelerate your crypto career with the world’s only accredited Cryptocurrency Certification, and master the skills that set you apart in the fast-evolving digital asset landscape.

Is Crypto Mining Bad for the Environment?

The growing momentum of discussions around green blockchain might have had you thinking about the reasons to talk about it in the first place. Wasn’t blockchain created as a perfect alternative to traditional centralized systems? You can understand the significance of green crypto mining only when you find the setbacks created by traditional cryptocurrency mining.

Blockchain technology gained recognition for its unique design that enabled computers on a distributed peer-to-peer network to reach consensus on updating a shared ledger of transactions. The earliest blockchain networks, Bitcoin and Ethereum, adopted the Proof of Work consensus mechanism that required competition for hashing data. The winner would get the opportunity to update the shared ledger and earn a mining reward, thereby transforming mining into a lucrative earning opportunity.

As the demand for crypto mining continues growing with the arrival of NFTs, new cryptocurrencies and other digital assets, the energy consumption has become a formidable concern. Just like any other business, miners would aim to reduce their costs and they can do the same by using cheaper energy sources like fossil fuels. However, burning fossil fuels creates a lot of greenhouse gases that are harmful for the environment. At the same time, drawing power from green energy sources can also lead to taking away energy from critical facilities.

Advance your career with in-demand Bitcoin expertise—enroll in the Certified Bitcoin Professional (CBP) Certification today.

Road for Transformation to Green Blockchain

The pitfalls for the environment with blockchain networks that consume massive amounts of energy call for immediate green blockchain solutions. Interestingly, the energy consumption problem has been troubling the crypto community for a long time. Some critics have also pointed out that the environmental footprint of blockchain does not make it worth the effort to embrace the technology. However, you can also find solutions that aim to transform blockchain completely into a green technology. 

• Renewable Energy Sources 

Most of the crypto community agrees to the fact that blockchain networks like Bitcoin consume more energy. At the same time, the community also understands how the Proof of Work consensus and mining make Bitcoin unique, valuable and more secure. The urgency for developing renewable energy crypto coins is a direct call to resolve the problem of higher energy consumption in crypto mining. Most of the miners choose cheap energy sources like fossil fuels to earn more profit in mining rewards and end up causing more damage to the environment.

The shift to renewable energy sources for running and maintaining mining rigs will ensure a seamless transition to green blockchain. Members of the Bitcoin community have been looking for green energy sources in East Africa and El Salvador, which indicates the urgency of green blockchain. It is also important to understand that regulations for crypto mining will play a crucial role in fostering the adoption of renewable energy sources in crypto mining. As a matter of fact, the European Union and some other countries have been trying to create guidelines to prevent crypto mining initiatives that consume more energy.

• Energy-Efficient Consensus Mechanisms

Blockchain can achieve the transition into the green technology domain with the help of energy-efficient consensus mechanisms. Why shouldn’t you try other consensus mechanisms that don’t require energy-intensive mining? You can have a green crypto app that will not consume more energy when it has an energy-efficient consensus mechanism. The best example of a consensus mechanism that consumes less energy is Proof of Stake.

The Proof of Stake consensus requires picking validators to maintain the shared ledger on behalf of the entire network. Validators are picked on the basis of the number of tokens they stake in the network, thereby removing competition. As a result, the Proof of Stake consensus can work with a minimal amount of electricity. Ethereum showed the impact of Proof of Stake protocol by switching to the consensus mechanism and reducing energy usage by 99.9%. 

You can also come across examples of other energy-efficient consensus mechanisms that offer the same advantages as Proof of Stake. For instance, the Proof of History consensus mechanism of the Solana network helps in reducing energy consumption by almost 99%. 

The efforts to achieve green blockchain technology also focus on layer 2 solutions. With the help of layer 2 solutions, blockchain networks can reduce network congestion and energy consumption. The examples of green blockchain explained for beginners also include references to Lightning Network for Bitcoin.

Layer 2 solutions help in taking off many transactions from the main blockchain, thereby reducing the load on the network. With a lesser load, the network will consume lesser energy while ensuring faster, secure and transparent transaction processing.

Start learning blockchain with world’s first Blockchain Career Paths with quality resources tailored by industry experts now!

Final Thoughts 

The road to green blockchain is not far away with initiatives to make blockchain networks more energy-efficient being implemented everywhere. You can notice the shift towards green crypto mining in the case of Bitcoin. Members of the Bitcoin community have been exploring opportunities to use renewable energy sources. On top of it, some blockchain networks have changed their consensus mechanisms to reduce energy consumption. Ethereum is the ideal example you should consider to understand how consensus mechanisms can lower energy consumption by over 99%. Learn more about the different ways to leverage blockchain for promoting sustainability in the domain of technology with specialized blockchain certifications now.

Author

Hongji Feng

Author

Hongji Feng

About Author

Hongji is a reporter who covers crypto, finance, and tech. He graduated from Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism with a Bachelor’s and a Master’s. He has previously interned at HTX,…

Share

Last updated: 

August 28, 2025

Unusual stock movements ahead of cryptocurrency announcements at several small-cap companies are prompting scrutiny over potential insider trading, according to a Fortune report published on August 28.

The story cites multiple instances where company shares surged in the days before disclosing large crypto purchases. MEI Pharma, for example, saw its stock nearly double prior to revealing a $100 million Litecoin acquisition. No regulatory filings or public statements were issued ahead of the spike.

Experts and Executives Share Concerns

A similar pattern was observed at firms including SharpLink, Mill City Ventures, and Kindly MD.

“It does look suspicious to me,” said Xu Jiang, a finance professor at Duke University. “This usually happens for a lot of insider trading scenarios that I anecdotally know about.”

SharpLink’s shares more than doubled three days before the company announced a $425 million Ethereum allocation. The company said it has “established policies and procedures” to prevent insider trading, but did not provide specifics.

Mill City Ventures, which has since rebranded as SUI Group Holdings, saw its shares triple ahead of news that it raised $450 million to acquire Sui.

“There was definitely activity in the stock prior to the announcement,” said Stephen Mackintosh, an executive involved in the deal.

Executives and investors who receive material non-public information before a crypto deal are subject to insider trading laws, including those briefed during roadshows, said Elisha Kobre, a partner at Sheppard Mullin.

Insider Trading Looms Over Crypto Industry

Some companies are now withholding ticker symbols from investors until markets close, in an attempt to limit price distortion. CEA Industries and Verb Technology have both adopted this approach in recent weeks.

“It’s really to everyone’s advantage to squash this issue,” said Louis Camhi, founder of RLH Capital.

While insider trading rules are well established in traditional finance, the rise of crypto treasury strategies introduces gray areas in enforcement. Unlike mergers or earnings reports, crypto purchases often involve decentralized assets with volatile pricing and informal communication channels, making it harder for regulators to monitor information flows or trace leaks with precision.

At the same time, the expanding trend of treating crypto holdings as strategic balance sheet assets blurs the line between operational decisions and market signaling. Analysts say the mere expectation of price impact tied to a crypto pivot can invite speculative positioning, even in the absence of formal leaks.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

After navigating significant challenges in the United States regarding money laundering allegations that led to the resignation of its former CEO, Changpeng Zhao (CZ), cryptocurrency exchange Binance finds itself under scrutiny once again, this time in Australia. 

Binance’s AML And CTF Controls Under Fire

The Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC), the nation’s financial intelligence agency, has mandated that Binance’s local arm appoint an external auditor due to “serious concerns” about its anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing (CTF) controls.

AUSTRAC’s concerns emerged following a recent independent review of Binance Australia’s operations, which the agency described as “limited in scope relative to its size, business offerings, and risks.”

The agency highlighted alleged issues from the exchange such as high staff turnover, inadequate local resources, and insufficient oversight from senior management. 

In a statement, AUSTRAC emphasized the need for robust systems that align with local regulatory requirements, particularly given the global nature of the exchange’s operations. 

Brendan Thomas, AUSTRAC’s chief executive, stressed the importance of effective customer identification, due diligence, and transaction monitoring in a high-risk environment. Thomas stated:

This is a global company operating across borders in a high-risk environment. We expect robust customer identification, due diligence and effective transaction monitoring.

Global Regulatory Challenges

Binance has been given a 28-day window to nominate external auditors to address these concerns. In response to the situation, Matt Poblocki, the general manager of Binance Australia and New Zealand, stated that the exchange has been engaging openly and transparently with AUSTRAC throughout recent months. 

The exchange’s executives reassured stakeholders and users in the country about the company’s commitment to maintaining high compliance standards and improving its capabilities.

Founded in 2017, Binance has rapidly ascended to become the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume. However, its journey has not been without difficulties. 

After initially operating in China, Zhao moved the company’s operations internationally due to a crackdown on the crypto sector by Chinese authorities. Despite its growth, Binance has faced accusations in multiple countries of facilitating the laundering of funds for criminal organizations.

Zhao pleaded guilty to violating US anti-money laundering laws in late 2023, resulting in a four-month prison sentence in 2024. However, Bitcoinist has reported that despite being banned from taking charge of the exchange, Zhao might be seeking a pardon from pro-crypto President Donald Trump.

These legal challenges have compounded the scrutiny on Binance with the exchange taking a new direction with its new CEO Richard Teng as regulators worldwide increasingly focus on ensuring compliance.

Despite recent scrutiny from Australia’s Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre, Binance’s native token, BNB, reached an all-time high of $882 on Friday. The cryptocurrency has consistently surged over the past month, even as the broader market struggled.

Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView.com 

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

A massive spike in brute-force attacks targeted Fortinet SSL VPNs earlier this month, followed by a switch to FortiManager, marked a deliberate shift in targeting that has historically preceded new vulnerability disclosures.

The campaign, detected by threat monitoring platform GreyNoise, manifested in two waves, on August 3 and August 5, with the second wave pivoting to FortiManager targeting with a different TCP signature.

As GreyNoise previously reported, such spikes in deliberate scanning and brute-forcing precede the disclosure of new security vulnerabilities 80% of the time.

Often, such scans aim at enumerating exposed endpoints, evaluating their significance, and estimating their exploitation potential, with actual attack waves following shortly after.

“New research shows spikes like this often precede the disclosure of new vulnerabilities affecting the same vendor — most within six weeks,” warned GreyNoise.

“In fact, GreyNoise found that spikes in activity triggering this exact tag are significantly correlated with future disclosed vulnerabilities in Fortinet products.”

Due to this, defenders shouldn’t dismiss those spikes in activity as failed attempts to exploit old, patched flaws, but rather treat them as potential precursors to zero-day disclosure and strengthen security measures to block them.

The Fortinet brute-force attacks

On August 3, 2025, GreyNoise recorded a spike in brute-forcing attempts targeting Fortinet SSL VPN as part of a steady activity it has been monitoring since earlier.

JA4+ fingerprint analysis, a network fingerprinting method for identifying and classifying encrypted traffic, linked the spike to June activity originating from a FortiGate device on a residential IP address associated with Pilot Fiber Inc.

“This overlap doesn’t confirm attribution, but it suggests possible reuse of tooling or network environments,” commented GreyNoise in its bulletin.

Two days later, on August 5, a new brute-force campaign from the same attacker emerged, which switched targeting from FortiOS SSL VPN endpoints to FortiManager’s FGFM service.

“While the August 3 traffic has targeted the FortiOS profile, traffic fingerprinted with TCP and client signatures — a meta signature — from August 5 onward was not hitting FortiOS,” explained GreyNoise.

“Instead, it was consistently targeting our FortiManager – FGFM profile albeit still triggering our Fortinet SSL VPN Bruteforcer tag.”

This shift suggested that either the same attackers or the same toolset/infrastructure moved from trying to brute-force VPN logins to trying to brute-force FortiManager access.

The IP addresses associated with this activity, and which should be placed on blocklists, are:

• 31.206.51.194
• 23.120.100.230
• 96.67.212.83
• 104.129.137.162
• 118.97.151.34
• 180.254.147.16
• 20.207.197.237
• 180.254.155.227
• 185.77.225.174
• 45.227.254.113

GreyNoise notes that the tracked malicious activity is evolving with time and is associated with a specific origin cluster that most likely performs adaptive testing.

In general, this activity is unlikely to be researcher scans, which are typically broader in scope and limited in rate, and wouldn’t involve credential brute-forcing, which is seen as an apparent intrusion attempt.

Hence, defenders should block the listed IPs, increase login protection on Fortinet devices, and harden external access where possible, restricting access only to trusted IP ranges and VPNs.

USDC stablecoin issuer Circle has announced plans to launch Arc, its own enterprise-focused Layer 1 blockchain, according to an Aug. 12 statement.

According to the firm:

“Arc aims to establish itself as foundational infrastructure for regulated money movement, supporting a globally distributed financial system.”

Circle said Arc will integrate fully with its existing platform while maintaining interoperability with dozens of other partner blockchains.

Arc’s public testnet is scheduled for release between September and December 2025.

Circle’s Arc

Arc will serve as a high-performance base for stablecoin payments, foreign exchange (FX), and capital markets applications.

The network will be compatible with the Ethereum Virtual Machine and will use USDC as its default gas token. It also introduces a built-in stablecoin FX engine, sub-second settlement finality, and optional privacy features.

According to the blockchain network’s litepaper, Arc’s performance targets include 3,000 transactions per second (TPS) with under 350 milliseconds finality using 20 validators. Notably, the network could reach 10,000 TPS and under 100 milliseconds of finality with four validators.

Arc will also integrate confidential transfers, enabling hidden amounts with visible addresses, alongside selective disclosure via a “view key.”

Meanwhile, its MEV mitigation roadmap includes encrypted mempools, batch processing, and multi-proposer setups.

Arc will support Circle’s USYC, an interest-bearing stablecoin backed by short-term US Treasury securities. It will also offer fast bridging via Circle’s CCTP and Gateway, a built-in currency trading system for approved institutions, and AI-powered treasury management tools.

Beyond stablecoins, Arc is designed to host regulated real-world assets such as tokenized equities, bonds, private credit, and institutional-grade funds.

Circle plans to partner with licensed asset issuers, custodians, and fund administrators to ensure these assets are legally compliant, fully collateralized, and integrated with traditional financial obligations.

Community pushback

Despite its ambitious design, Arc has faced pushback from crypto community members.

Columbia Business School adjunct professor Omid Malekan argued that launching another Layer 1 is unnecessary, especially for stablecoins, which may struggle without diverse assets or strong DeFi ecosystems.

Adam Cochran, partner at venture capital firm Cinneamhain Ventures, also criticized the characterization of Arc as a Layer 1 blockchain.

According to him, the network is more accurately a consortium chain operated by a set of pre-approved, private validators. These validators, he noted, have the authority to reverse transactions through “dispute protocols.”

Moreover, he also argued that using USDC as the root token removes the economic incentives needed for validators to act independently, making a decentralized Layer 1 model unfeasible. As a result, he said, the design necessitates a closed, consortium-based structure.

Cochran concluded:

“Blockchains exist because exploitative middlemen, like banks and transfer agents, take undue fees and apply undue censorship. This industry was built to fix that in peer-to-peer systems, not by just building new banks.”

Mentioned in this article

Galaxy head of research Alex Thorn criticized the business model of many Ethereum (ETH) layer-2 (L2) blockchains as “ETH extractive.”

In an Aug. 6 social media post, Thorn argued that L2 networks retain most of the fee revenue while contributing relatively little back to the Ethereum L1. 

Thorn added that most L2s are controlled by single companies or foundations, which means “very little value accrues to ETH holders,” and “most L2s don’t even stake back the ETH they collect in fees.” 

Post EIP-4844

Pointing to post-EIP-4844 dynamics, Thorn noted that aggregate L2 blob confirmation costs and L1 gas spend have hovered around $10,000 per day, while L2s earn from $100,000 to $400,000 daily in user fees.

As a result, L2 earnings leave “a nice margin even including running the chain.” Blobs are dedicated spaces offering data storage used by layer-2 blockchains built on top of Ethereum.

He also contrasted payments from Base to the Optimism Collective, since Base uses the OP Stack, versus payments from L2s to Ethereum. Over the last 180 days, Base paid $4.4 million to OP, while all L2s combined paid $3.05 million to Ethereum L1 for blobs and gas.

Thorn further claimed Coinbase made $14.9 million in Base fee revenue in Q2, with $443,000 in L1 data costs and $2.16 million paid to OP, saying “OP is literally making 4.8x more off Base than Ethereum is.” 

The critique culminated in a broader alignment question, to which Thorn responded:

“…They aren’t really ‘eth aligned…’ they look pretty ‘Eth extractive’ to me.”

Long-running debate

Base graduated to Stage 1 in April on data aggregator L2Beat, an intermediate decentralization tier envisioned by Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin. 

Stage 1 indicates improved fault-proofs and governance safeguards, while Stage 2 is defined by an L2 having no group of actors that can post a state root other than the output of the code, even unanimously.

The L2 powered by Coinbase was among other chains that recently updated their security measures to prevent ways to block messages to the mainnet other than compromising at least 75% of the network’s security council. 

Thorn’s argument revives a long-running debate over how much economic value L2s should return to Ethereum versus to their operators or upstream collectives. 

The post-4844 cost structure lowered L2 data costs by introducing blobs, but the balance between user fees retained by L2s and L1 spend and staking remains contested.

Mentioned in this article

One official at a federal consumer protection agency is reportedly raising concerns over JPMorgan Chase’s plan to charge fintech fees for customers’ account data.

An unnamed politically appointed official with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) believes the agency’s efforts to kill in court an open banking rule enacted under former US President Biden may be giving JPMorgan Chase the opportunity to charge the fees, reports Bloomberg.

The same official is discussing the issue with concerned fintech firms, according to multiple sources who asked to remain anonymous to talk about the controversial matter.

The CFPB open banking rule, which was finalized last year, prevents banks from imposing charges on third parties such as Coinbase, Venmo and PayPal to access customers’ deposit and credit card account information as a way to ensure competition.

However, CFPB’s Acting Director Russell Vought is now asking a federal judge to vacate the rule on several grounds, arguing that Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act “does not authorize the Bureau to prohibit banks from charging any fees for maintaining and providing access through the required developer interfaces.”

Critics of JPMorgan Chase’s fee proposal say it could stifle the fintech sector.

Graham Steele, the former assistant Treasury secretary for financial institutions in the Biden administration, says the Trump administration’s efforts to shutter the CFPB and delete Biden-related policies are wreaking havoc in the fintech industry.

“By repealing the rule without fully thinking it through, they have caused a lot of problems in the marketplace and for consumers.”

The CFPB did not respond to the media’s request for comment at time of publication.

Meanwhile, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon defended the fee proposal during the bank’s second-quarter earnings call.

“It just costs a lot of money to set up the APIs and stuff like that to run the system protection.”

Critics of the bank fees include cryptocurrency companies and investors.

Says Alex Rampell, a general partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz,

“Make no mistake: this isn’t about a new revenue stream. It’s about strangling competition. And if they get away with this, every bank will follow.”

Follow us on X, Facebook and Telegram

Don’t Miss a Beat – Subscribe to get email alerts delivered directly to your inbox

Check Price Action

Surf The Daily Hodl Mix

&nbsp

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed at The Daily Hodl are not investment advice. Investors should do their due diligence before making any high-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital assets. Please be advised that your transfers and trades are at your own risk, and any losses you may incur are your responsibility. The Daily Hodl does not recommend the buying or selling of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an investment advisor. Please note that The Daily Hodl participates in affiliate marketing.

Generated Image: Midjourney

Robinhood’s private equity tokens, offering exposure to tech stocks like SpaceX and OpenAI, have triggered regulatory scrutiny in Europe after OpenAI raised concerns and said that the digital assets do not represent equity ownership in the company, CNBC reported on July 7.

The Bank of Lithuania, which serves as Robinhood’s primary regulator in the European Union, confirmed it is seeking detailed clarifications before assessing the products’ legality.

A spokesperson for the central bank told CNBC:

“Only after receiving and evaluating this information will we be able to assess the legality and compliance of these specific instruments.”

The controversy centers on Robinhood’s recent announcement of an expansion into tokenized securities, including plans to issue over 200 tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs for European investors.

The brokerage announced plans to launch its private equity tokens and a new layer-2 blockchain on June 30, positioning itself as a major player in the rapidly growing tokenization sector.

However, OpenAI has distanced itself from the tokens, warning investors that Robinhood’s so-called OpenAI tokens do not provide any equity stake or direct ownership rights in the company.

The scrutiny comes as financial institutions ramp up efforts to capture a slice of the tokenization market, which is valued at over $24 billion as of June 30.

Although tokenized private credit and U.S. Treasury debt currently dominate the sector, accounting for the majority of value, tokenized equities remain a small but potentially fast-growing segment, with just $188 million in current market share.

Major players such as BlackRock and Franklin Templeton have also entered the tokenization space, issuing tokenized money market funds and exploring blockchain-based settlements to improve efficiency and transparency.

However, despite the optimism, legal and regulatory uncertainties remain significant. Regulators and lawyers continue to debate whether tokenized equity instruments require full securities registration or if derivative-like structures are sufficient to meet compliance standards in Europe and the U.S.

For Robinhood, the regulatory probe in Lithuania could set an important precedent as the brokerage seeks to roll out its tokenization framework globally.

Its recent presentation at the EthCC conference in Brussels outlined plans to tokenize a wide range of financial instruments, but the backlash highlights the fine line between innovation and investor protection in the fast-evolving digital asset market.

Mentioned in this article

The president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago says the Fed might have to delay interest rate decisions amid President Donald Trump’s volatile tariff policies.

Chicago Fed leader Austan Goolsbee warns in a new interview with CNBC that Trump’s policy choices could also lead to an unfavorable economic environment known as stagflation, which is dominated by stagnant economic growth, high inflation and high unemployment.

“In the short run, we have to just wait for the dust to come out of the air… Everything’s always on the table, but I feel like the bar, for me, is a little higher for action in any direction while we’re waiting to get some clarity.

And then, over the longer run, if they’re putting in place tariffs that have a stagflationary impact, which is to say a slowed-down output by raising the cost of production, while also raising prices, then that’s the central bank’s worst situation.” 

Goolsbee says the Chicago Fed has been in conversations with business owners in their districts who say they’re hoping for policy consistency.

“The CEO of a construction company said, for them, they’re now in a put-your-pencils-down moment where they just have to wait. If every week or every month or every day, there’s going to be a new major announcement, they just can’t take action until some of those things are resolved.” 

Follow us on X, Facebook and Telegram

Don’t Miss a Beat – Subscribe to get email alerts delivered directly to your inbox

Check Price Action

Surf The Daily Hodl Mix

&nbsp

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed at The Daily Hodl are not investment advice. Investors should do their due diligence before making any high-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital assets. Please be advised that your transfers and trades are at your own risk, and any losses you may incur are your responsibility. The Daily Hodl does not recommend the buying or selling of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an investment advisor. Please note that The Daily Hodl participates in affiliate marketing.

Generated Image: Midjourney