Trump accepts the new version of the crypto ethics clause, and the toughest hurdle for CLARITY has finally loosened. But this does not mean the bill is secure yet. The new plan requires the president, members of Congress, and related personnel to handle significant crypto conflicts of interest, possibly requiring them to sell holdings or place them in blind trusts. It touches on an issue the industry has long avoided: can those who make the rules also profit from the assets covered by those rules? I support writing ethical restrictions into the bill. For crypto regulation to gain long-term legitimacy, the public must not feel that the rules are tailored for a few power holders and family projects. No matter how professional other parts of the bill are, if conflicts of interest are unclear, it will ultimately become a target for political attacks. But including the clause is only the first step. Who is responsible for investigation, what counts as a "significant interest," how family and related entities are calculated, and whether there are real penalties for violations—these details determine whether it is a firewall or just decoration. CLARITY needs not only regulatory clarity but also clarity regarding legislators' interests. If the industry only cares about who regulates the tokens but not who profits from the legislation, it will sooner or later pay the price for this selective blindness. #特朗普接受新版伦理条款，CLARITY投票临近

Anthropic chooses Nasdaq, while OpenAI decides to postpone its IPO. The two most watched AI companies are giving the capital market two completely different answers. Anthropic calls for slowing down frontier model development while continuing to push for a 2026 IPO. It seems contradictory, but it is very realistic: safety research, computing power procurement, and talent competition all require huge funds. The more worried about technology getting out of control, the more money is needed to build testing, auditing, and protection systems. But after going public, another kind of pressure will also appear. Quarterly revenue, valuation, and stock price will force the company to continuously release stronger models. When the safety team says "wait," the capital market may ask "why is growth slowing down." What Anthropic needs to prove is not just how much Claude can earn, but whether the public market can accept an AI company that actively puts the brakes on itself. I actually look forward to its IPO. AI companies constantly talk about impacting all humanity, yet for a long time only disclose their operations to a few private equity shareholders, which is unhealthy. The public market is noisy, but auditing, governance, and continuous disclosure at least allow outsiders to see who bears the cost. #Anthropic拟赴纳斯达克IPO

If the market has already priced in a 25 basis point rate hike, the real driver of volatility will no longer be "whether to hike or not," but how far the hikes will go after that. In a Reuters survey, 86 out of 101 economists expect the Federal Reserve to raise rates this week, pushing the rate to 3.75% to 4.00%. Such crowded expectations mean the rate hike itself may only trigger a brief reaction. The market is more concerned about whether the dot plot will continue to shift upward, whether the statement emphasizes energy inflation, and how many more actions might occur before March next year. The ones most likely to lose out are those who only bet on the meeting outcome. Even if the Fed hikes rates, if it signals a "wait and see" approach, U.S. Treasury yields and risk assets could reverse and recover; even if it holds steady, as long as Powell emphasizes continued tightening ahead, the market will still struggle. This meeting is like a movie with a spoiler revealing the ending; the real value lies in the last ten minutes. BTC, gold, and U.S. stocks are not trading on that 25 basis points, but on the entire path of funding costs over the coming months. Don't just focus on the news headlines. At the moment the result lands, the market has often already started trading the next meeting. #本周FOMC揭晓，加息能否落地？

Institutionalization of ZEC has not eliminated volatility; instead, it has equipped volatility with a bigger engine. After the Grayscale spot Zcash ETF started trading, traditional accounts gained easier access to ZEC. Institutional funds, privacy narratives, and short-covering collectively drove the market, with ZEC briefly breaking above $1000. Approximately $36.6 million in leveraged positions were liquidated in a single day, the vast majority of which were shorts. However, after the peak, long leverage also began to be cleared. This indicates that the so-called "institutional entry" never means someone is backing the price floor. Institutions bring not only long-term capital but also arbitrage, hedging, ETF creations and redemptions, and more complex derivative positions. Liquidity deepens, and the liquidation chain also lengthens. Privacy demand, ETF channels, and improved regulatory environment have indeed given ZEC a pricing foundation it lacked before. But when the price rises far faster than real usage growth, it is easily driven by perpetual contracts and liquidations. That kind of rally feels great but most easily misleads people into thinking they understand the fundamentals. Institutionalization means ZEC has entered a bigger casino; it does not mean the house suddenly became a philanthropist. What should be most watched at the top is whether the spot market can absorb the leverage being liquidated. #ZEC机构资金入场，高位杠杆开始出清

SpaceX is increasingly like a super infrastructure company disguised in aerospace clothing. The CFO disclosed a new AI computing power hosting agreement that can bring in about $1.11 billion in monthly revenue starting in December, and reiterated the goal of hitting $100 billion in annual recurring revenue by the end of the year. The market sees growth, but what I see is the company's identity rapidly changing. Rockets, satellite internet, ground data centers, chips, and future orbital computing are all capital-consuming businesses. They can synergize with each other, but may also compete simultaneously for power, equipment, engineering teams, and the balance sheet. AI hosting revenue is tempting, but computing power construction requires continuous investment. If catching up with demand slows down rocket or Starlink projects, the short-term high revenue could instead harm the deepest moat. What makes SpaceX truly powerful is combining launch, communication, and computing into an infrastructure network. What makes it truly dangerous is the ambition so vast that each part requires astronomical funding. $100 billion ARR sounds like the finish line, but it is actually the starting point of another capital consumption battle. What we need to watch next is whether the AI business can provide blood transfusion to the aerospace main business, rather than dragging the main business into endless expansion. #SpaceXCFO称有信心实现1000亿美元ARR

OpenAI has secretly filed for an IPO but decided not to go public in 2026. Sam Altman’s reason is that AI safety work is not yet complete. I am willing to believe that safety issues do indeed exist, but postponing the IPO also has another consequence: the public will continue to be unable to fully see the company’s financial status, related-party transactions, and capital consumption. Going public brings quarterly performance pressure, which may force the company to accelerate the release of immature models for revenue; but going public also means stricter disclosure, auditing, and governance. Staying in the private market allows management to avoid short-term stock price noise and also avoid the most direct scrutiny of the public market. This is exactly the hardest contradiction for OpenAI to handle. It says its technology could impact all humanity, yet development speed is still mainly decided by a few managers and large capital. Safety cannot rely solely on the CEO’s conscience, and commercial oversight cannot rely solely on stock prices. Pausing the IPO may be a responsible brake or it may be a way to buy time when valuation, losses, and market conditions are not ideal. It is too early to draw conclusions now, but since the company proactively cites “safety” as the reason, it should publicly disclose more specific safety goals and verification standards in the future. #OpenAICEO称2026年不会IPO

Chip suppliers are preparing to become anchor investors worth billions of dollars in their customers' IPOs, which is more than just "being optimistic about AI." According to reports, Nvidia is discussing investing up to $10 billion in Anthropic's potential IPO. Anthropic hopes to raise huge funds through the listing while continuously purchasing computing power driven by Nvidia GPUs. Nvidia invests capital, Anthropic gains expansion funds, and the money may then flow back into the Nvidia ecosystem through cloud services and GPU procurement. This arrangement does not necessarily represent false demand, but it does blur the price discovery function that an IPO originally carries. When the largest supplier also becomes a major investor, does the issue price truly reflect independent market demand, or is it a growth expectation jointly maintained by members within the ecosystem? Nvidia certainly has ample reasons to do this. Supporting Anthropic can expand CUDA usage and also prevent the AI model market from being monopolized by a single company. But investors need to see clearly that it is transforming from a chip-selling company into a bank, underwriter, and risk co-bearer of the AI industry. When winning, it can capture profits from the entire industry chain; if the customer's financing ability weakens, the risk will also return along the same chain. #Anthropic拟赴纳斯达克IPO

Robinhood's crypto trading volume increased by 61% month-over-month in August, but the number of funded accounts only grew by about 120,000 during the same period. This combination is quite interesting. Trading volume surged sharply, but the user count did not explode in tandem, indicating that this growth is more likely driven by existing users increasing their trading frequency and institutional and overseas traffic brought in by Bitstamp, rather than a large influx of new retail investors suddenly entering the market. The group's crypto trading volume reached $17.5 billion, with Bitstamp contributing $10.1 billion and the Robinhood App contributing $7.4 billion. Mergers and acquisitions are helping Robinhood scale up, but they also make the "Robinhood trading volume" metric more complex. Going forward, when looking at this company, one cannot just look at a single total figure; it is necessary to distinguish whether growth comes from the App, institutional clients, or consolidated acquired assets. I actually like this change. Relying solely on U.S. retail sentiment means revenue quickly shrinks when the market cools; after integrating Bitstamp, the company now has a broader customer base and liquidity sources. But the real test is just beginning. Trading volume can be rapidly amplified by volatility, but the real challenge is converting these active users into stable assets, subscriptions, and interest income. Buzz is valuable, but retention determines valuation. #Robinhood加密交易量8月环比增61%

When the 10-year US Treasury yield approaches 5%, even if the Federal Reserve does not raise interest rates, the financial environment is already tightening on its own. Corporate loans, mortgages, and asset valuations do not only reference policy rates; a large amount of long-term financing will be repriced around Treasury yields. With US Treasuries near 5%, it means companies wanting to issue bonds for expansion need to pay higher interest; investors buying stocks will also demand higher returns to compensate for risk. This is the most conflicted aspect of the current market. Everyone is watching whether the Fed will raise by 25 basis points, but the bond market may have already completed a larger scale tightening on its behalf. The Treasury's expansion of long-term bond repurchases can only make trading smoother; it cannot eliminate energy inflation, fiscal deficits, or new bond supply. For the crypto market, a near 5% risk-free yield is especially brutal. Funds can just sit in Treasuries to earn interest and will not easily pay for distant stories and high volatility. BTC must prove it offers more than just upside potential, and tech companies must deliver real cash flow. What truly burdens the market may not be a single rate hike, but the inability to lower long-term funding costs. #美债收益率逼近5%，回购难缓长期压力