Charles Hoskinson: XRP, Cardano Doing What Others Are Doing at 100x Scale

Memecoins are trading near year-end lows, marking a sharp reversal from the speculative peak reached in Christmas 2024.

Memecoins fell 65% over the year to a market capitalization of $35 billion on Dec. 19, their lowest level of 2025, according to CoinMarketCap data. They retraced some losses on Friday, rising to about $36 billion.

Last year, memecoins thrived on Christmas Day, recording about $100 billion in valuation, according to CoinMarketCap data.

The memecoin sector’s trading volume fell alongside its value, dropping 72% over the year to $3.05 trillion, as crypto’s retail investing trends moved away from highly speculative assets.

Memecoins have historically acted as a temperature check for retail traders’ risk appetite. The collapse of the sector’s market cap signals a more cautious market environment where capital is harder to attract. 

Crypto.com is building an internal market-making team with the stated goal of profiting from trading on its own prediction market, Bloomberg reports.

This move might raise significant conflict-of-interest questions for the CFTC-regulated platform and challenge the industry's core promise of having "no house."

The company is actively hiring a "quant trader" to join a team. According to the job listing, the person will "maximize profits while carefully managing risks" by trading on the firm's own sports-related contracts.

This practice strikes at the heart of how prediction markets have distinguished themselves from traditional sportsbooks. While sportsbooks set odds and profit when bettors lose, prediction markets have argued to regulators that they are neutral venues where users simply trade against each other.

When Prediction Markets Start Acting Like the House

By creating an internal desk designed to profit from user activity, Crypto.com is effectively building its own "house." The practice raises concerns over whether it is in line with the principles of a CFTC-regulated derivatives market.

The potential for conflict is amplified by an alledged Crypto.com rule granting market makers a three-second head start over retail traders placing wagers. This policy could allow the internal desk to see incoming retail interest and adjust its own prices before smaller traders can act.

This is not an isolated incident but a growing industry trend. Competitor platform Kalshi already operates a similar internal unit, which is the subject of a class-action lawsuit alleging it disadvantages customers. Rival Polymarket, after settling its own case with the CFTC, is also reportedly recruiting for its own trading team.

A spokesperson for Crypto.com defended the practice, stating that its internal market maker "does not have access to proprietary data or customer order flow" before other participants and that the ultimate result is beneficial for users.

"The bottom line for customers is more competition and liquidity on the platform creates a better overall experience," they added. However, as prediction markets push for mainstream acceptance in the U.S., they face a fundamental identity crisis.

The move to create internal, profit-seeking trading desks puts them on a potential collision course with the very regulatory framework they sought for legitimacy, forcing regulators and users to ask a simple question: are these neutral exchanges, or are they just sportsbooks in disguise?

February: The Bybit theft recenters the market on operational risk

On Feb. 24, the crypto industry faced a renewed security reckoning after about $1.4 billion was stolen from Bybit, making it one of the largest exchange-related thefts on record.

US authorities publicly attributed the attack to actors linked to North Korea and warned that the stolen assets would likely be laundered through a network of addresses and intermediaries.

For operator-led businesses, the takeaway was not “don’t use crypto.” It was that counterparty exposure and custody decisions, including exchange risk, wallet providers, signing flows and withdrawal assumptions, can become severe operational risks overnight, even when the underlying blockchain continues to operate normally.

April: Tariffs hit risk appetite, and crypto trades like a macro asset

In early April, crypto-linked equities fell, and Bitcoin () reached a new low for the year amid escalating tariff tensions and broader risk-off sentiment across global markets.

The drawdown underscored a pattern that became increasingly clear in 2025. For large pools of capital, crypto behaved less like a standalone alternative asset and more like a liquid, high-beta macro trade during periods of headline-driven stress.

The move reinforced that crypto is increasingly exposed to global macro shocks. As more institutional capital flows in, prices increasingly react to trade policy, risk sentiment and liquidity conditions, meaning crypto volatility can be driven by non-crypto headlines just as quickly as by onchain events.

July: The US GENIUS Act puts stablecoins into a federal framework

On July 18, US President Donald Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law, establishing a federal regulatory framework for “payment stablecoins.”

The statute set baseline requirements for issuance, reserves and oversight, formally bringing qualifying dollar-pegged tokens under a federal supervisory framework.

For issuers, a federal framework creates clearer rules around reserves, disclosures and oversight, reducing regulatory uncertainty while increasing compliance obligations. For users, it strengthens confidence that dollar-pegged tokens are backed, supervised and treated as legitimate payment instruments, improving trust, reliability and long-term usability across platforms and borders.

Summer into fall: Stablecoins move toward the center

In August, Circle, the issuer of USDC (USDC), announced the pricing of its public offering, marking one of the most prominent stablecoin-related entries into public markets to date.

The milestone reflected how stablecoins were increasingly treated not just as crypto trading instruments but as regulated payments infrastructure with institutional relevance.

Regardless of views on individual issuers, the broader direction was clear throughout 2025. Stablecoins were no longer peripheral tools; they were increasingly positioned as core components of financial systems, policy discussions and fintech roadmaps.

Did you know? Swedish fintech firm Klarna launched its own dollar-backed stablecoin, KlarnaUSD, built on the Tempo blockchain and designed to support faster and cheaper cross-border payments.

September: The SEC opens a faster lane for spot crypto ETP listings

In September, US regulators approved “generic listing standards” for commodity-based trust shares, including crypto-backed exchange-traded products (ETPs).

The change allowed qualifying products to list under standardized criteria rather than requiring bespoke approvals for each new offering.

In practical terms, this marked a shift in US market structure. Crypto exposure moved closer to the way traditional commodities are packaged and distributed, with long-term implications for liquidity, access and how digital assets are incorporated into mainstream portfolios.

October: Peak euphoria, record inflows, then a liquidation cascade

Bitcoin reached record highs in early October, briefly trading above $125,000 as institutional positioning and ETP inflows accelerated; however, the rally proved short-lived.

Global crypto funds recorded their largest weekly inflows on record, driven primarily by US-listed products.

The rally was short-lived. Within days, the market sharply de-risked. A rapid price decline triggered more than $19 billion in liquidations across leveraged positions, making it one of the largest liquidation events in crypto history.

If the first half of 2025 was about access and integration, October exposed the system’s reflexivity. Leverage, automated liquidations and exchange-traded-fund-driven flows amplified both upside momentum and downside stress.

Did you know? Longtime Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff remained one of the most vocal skeptics in 2025, continuing to argue publicly that Bitcoin lacks intrinsic value while maintaining a strong public presence in crypto market debates.

December: Integration accelerates and so do the rules

By year-end, crypto’s integration into traditional finance deepened alongside tighter oversight.

In the United States, several crypto-native firms, including Circle and Ripple, received preliminary or conditional approval to establish national trust banks or convert existing state charters, signaling a push toward federally regulated crypto banking infrastructure.

In the United Kingdom, regulators launched a consultation proposing comprehensive rules for crypto markets, with feedback extending into early 2026 and implementation targeted for later years.

In Hong Kong, licensed exchanges continued to signal institutional demand, including a major public offering that highlighted the region’s ambition to position itself as a regulated crypto hub. HashKey debuted on Hong Kong’s HKEX following a $206-million oversubscribed initial public offering.

On the enforcement front, the long-running TerraUSD and LUNA collapse reached a major legal milestone. Terraform Labs founder Do Kwon was sentenced to 15 years in prison after pleading guilty to fraud-related charges, closing one of the most consequential cases of the previous cycle.

What crypto investors and enthusiasts should remember about 2025

The crypto industry did not have a standout crypto story that dominated headlines in 2025; instead, it delivered a sequence of events, including hacks, policy shifts, market-structure upgrades and deeper convergence between traditional finance and onchain systems that reshaped who participates in crypto markets, how risk travels and what “mainstream adoption” looks like in practice.

• Operational risk became unavoidable: Crypto exposure now includes custody, counterparties, access controls and infrastructure design as core risks. Asset safety depends not only on protocols but also on how platforms, wallets and institutions operate under stress.

• Crypto fully joined the macro risk cycle: Price action increasingly moved with global liquidity, policy expectations and risk sentiment. Crypto behaved less like a standalone alternative and more like a high-beta component of broader capital markets.

• Stablecoins crossed into financial infrastructure: Dollar-linked tokens shifted from optional tools to regulated rails. Their role in payments, settlements and platform economics made compliance, issuer structure and transparency central to their adoption.

• Market access expanded faster than risk discipline: Distribution improved and participation widened, but leverage and reflexive positioning remained powerful forces. Structural maturity did not remove volatility; it amplified the speed and scale at which markets can move.

These four dynamics define how crypto changed in 2025 and set an important reference point for how the market may behave going forward in 2026 and beyond.

Ripple Chief Technology Officer (CTO) David Schwartz recently commented on a critical security update directed at crypto wallet manufacturers. Schwartz believes updates should prioritize better UX security and protect against urgency.

Ripple CTO's message

In an X post, Schwartz urged crypto wallets to release software and firmware updates only when necessary. The Ripple CTO claims updating firmware or software in a hurry is dangerous to the user.

This is because users might skip verifying some authentications, making them vulnerable to phishing or fake updates. Additionally, rushed processes increase the chance of errors, which could permanently damage the device.

As a result, Schwartz thinks it is better to let users choose when to update during a calm, unpressured moment.

"Tell me there's an update, then let me do the update when I have time to do some research and check things carefully," Schwartz wrote in a follow-up post.

This advice reflects a broader philosophy in crypto security to prioritize user control and minimize friction in critical operations. It is a user-centric plea for best practices for firmware updates from wallet makers.

The comment from Schwartz also came shortly after hardware wallet provider Trezor issued a warning about a potential scam.

Importance of crypto wallet updates 

Hardware wallets frequently release software or firmware updates to fix bugs, add features or patch security vulnerabilities.

Some manufacturers make these updates mandatory. This means the wallet refuses to function until the user installs the latest version.

However, Schwartz argues this is a bad practice unless the update addresses a truly critical, immediate threat.

Note that the Ripple CTO frequently comments on broader crypto topics, including security best practices and ecosystem issues.

In a recent U.Today report, Schwartz clarified that the establishment of escrow prevented Ripple from selling as much XRP as it wanted. His comment is in response to a user, who said Schwartz established the Ripple escrow system to dump one billion XRP onto the market.

He also reacted to the recently introduced prediction markets by the Coinbase exchange.

Uniswap has entered a new chapter after its community overwhelmingly approved the long-awaited UNIfication proposal. The vote passed with near-unanimous backing, showing strong confidence in reshaping how value flows through the protocol. More than a governance tweak, the decision marks a shift toward tying Uniswap’s growth more directly to the UNI token itself.

At its core, the proposal reflects a belief that Uniswap has matured enough to move beyond experimentation and into a more sustainable, value-driven phase.

Fee Switch Goes Live, UNI Burn Begins

The biggest change under UNIfication is the activation of Uniswap’s long-discussed protocol fee switch. Until now, trading fees on Uniswap flowed entirely to liquidity providers. Going forward, a portion of those fees will be routed to the protocol and used to burn UNI tokens.

This means Uniswap activity will now directly reduce UNI supply. As trading volume grows, more tokens are removed from circulation, reinforcing a long-term scarcity model. Net sequencer fees from Unichain will also be added to this burn mechanism, strengthening the link between protocol usage and token economics.

After a mandatory two-day timelock, Uniswap will execute a one-time burn of 100 million UNI, an estimate of what could have been burned if the fee switch had existed from the start.

Internal Restructuring Under Uniswap Labs

Beyond token economics, UNIfication also simplifies Uniswap’s operations. Responsibilities previously split between the Uniswap Foundation and Uniswap Labs will now sit under a single roof. As part of the shift, Uniswap Labs will remove interface, wallet, and API fees, aiming to reduce friction for users and developers.

A recurring UNI-funded growth budget has also been created to support long-term development rather than short-term incentives, signaling a more structured approach to protocol expansion.

Community Reactions Are Split but Engaged

Reaction across crypto has been lively. Crypto user Alexander described the move as a major moment for DeFi, arguing it creates a more level playing field. He noted that liquidity providers unwilling to share a portion of yields now have alternatives like Velodrome and Aerodrome, increasing competition across DeFi.

Others were more skeptical. Another user pushed back on the excitement around token burns, arguing that uncirculated tokens have no real market value and burning them doesn’t meaningfully reduce dilution. In his view, the fee switch is the real story, not the burn headline.

Meanwhile, guto.eth welcomed the change, calling it a defining test for DeFi. He argued that if protocols like Uniswap and Aave can’t turn major upgrades into real value reflected in token prices, the sector risks losing credibility.

FAQs

UNIfication is a governance upgrade that activates Uniswap’s fee switch, links protocol revenue to UNI burns, and aligns growth more closely with the UNI token.

A portion of trading fees now goes to the protocol instead of solely to liquidity providers, and those funds are used to permanently burn and reduce the circulating supply of UNI tokens.

It tests whether major DeFi protocols can convert real usage into sustainable token value, a key step for long-term credibility and growth.

Charles Hoskinson’s latest update on Midnight suggests something bigger is taking shape behind the scenes.

In a tweet posted today, the Cardano founder said he is currently “writing between 80–100 pages a day of technical documents for Midnight” as the team prepares for internal workshops scheduled for January. He described the work pace as intense and made it clear this isn’t a casual effort.

Why Hoskinson Is Raising the Stakes on Midnight

Midnight has often been described as Cardano’s privacy-focused extension, but Hoskinson’s wording signals a shift in how the project is being positioned.

Instead of marketing privacy as a rebellious feature, Midnight is being framed around privacy-enhancing technology (PET) that works alongside smart compliance and chain abstraction. That’s a notable distinction in a sector where many privacy projects struggle with regulatory acceptance.

The reference to January workshops suggests the project is moving into a more structured phase, where internal alignment and technical direction take priority.

“Nobody Sleeping”: Community Reaction Sets the Tone

The replies to Hoskinson’s tweet added another layer to the update. When one community member urged him to rest, Hoskinson responded plainly: “Nobody sleeping. We working. We are going to win.”

In another reply, he confirmed he is also working on a non-technical book titled “The Land of PET: A non-technical guide to privacy enhancing technology,” aimed at Midnight Ambassadors and the broader community.

Community members reacted with optimism, with one noting that “2026 really isn’t ready for this level of revolution.”

Midnight and ADA: Clearing the Air

Midnight’s rapid rise has sparked questions within the Cardano community, especially as the NIGHT token has seen strong activity. Hoskinson has already addressed these concerns, stating that Midnight is not an ADA replacement, but a privacy extension designed to strengthen Cardano’s ecosystem.

For now, the message is clear. Midnight is past the idea stage. The documentation is underway, January is the next milestone, and Cardano’s privacy push is entering a more serious chapter.

FAQs

By integrating privacy-enhancing technology (PET) with smart compliance, Midnight could make Cardano more attractive to institutions and regulators. This approach aims to balance user privacy with legal obligations, potentially easing adoption in jurisdictions with strict crypto regulations.

Midnight is designed as a privacy extension, so current ADA holders and developers may benefit from enhanced privacy features without needing to switch tokens. Developers could also gain new tools for building privacy-focused applications that comply with regulatory standards.

Hoskinson’s technical documents and the non-technical book could help standardize understanding of privacy-enhancing technology across the Cardano community. This may accelerate developer engagement, community advocacy, and informed adoption of Midnight’s features over time.