Home Blog Page 5

Tory Burch vs Michael Kors: Which Brand is Better to Invest?

Tory Burch vs Michael Kors: Which Brand is Better to Invest?





When it comes to low-cost stylish clothes, two names that often appear are Tory Burch and Michael Kors. Both brands are famous worldwide for their nice bags, accessories, shoes and daily wear. Yet many shoppers still wonder if Tory Burch is better than Michael Kors in quality style and long-term value.

The reply rests on what you want. Some buyers enjoy old style and plain luxury, while other folks like big signs and fashionable looks. Both labels have built strong names for themself in the fancy clothes market but they draw different style kinds and shopping aims.  

Tory Burch is often tied to nice grace, easy forms and good craft. The brand focuses on sweet details and soft designs that can change from work clothes to ca͏sual styles. Michael Kors, on the other hand, is known for its chic bold labels and trendy sets that attract a younger group who love fashion. 

In late years, showy shoppers have become more choosy about where they spend their money. Instead of getting just stylish items, lots of shoppers now seek products that give lasting quality, resale worth and classic charm. That is why the talk about Tory Burch better than Michael Kors has grown more popular among bag fans and style lovers. 

In this post we will look at both names in terms of how good they are, costs, skill to make them, how liked they are, value when selling again and total chance for investment. If you are thinking of getting your first fancy bag or want to grow your style collection, this guide will help you pick which brand is really worth it. 

Brand Identity and Style

is tory burch better than michael kors dress image on comparison

Tory Burch is known for its neat and smart look. The brand mixes classic American style with boho-like touches. Most Tory Burch bags have small logos, straight lines and simple colors, making them good for daily g͏race.

Michael Kors, but, goes more for fresh shine and stylish clothes. The name is famous for bags with large signs, shiny bits and bright eye-catching things. Michael Kors styles are often liked by shoppers who enjoy trendy and showy accessories. 

If you like simple, fancy and classic style, Tory Burch might seem more special. If you enjoy neat and bright things, Michael Kors could be a good pick. 

Quality and Craftsmanship

is tory burch better than michael kors two bally shoes of both brand is compared

One of the big things people think about when they ask if a Tory Burch is better than a Michael Kors is the quality of stuff.

Tory Burch staff are often liked for their good leather, nice sewing and strong parts. The bags usually feel more classy and rich to hold. Lots of shoppers enjoy the care put into details and pretty finishing found in the collections.

Michael Kors bags are well crafted, mainly in the brand’s top collections. But, since the brand makes many and often offers discounts some shoppers feel that the overall specialness and skill are a bit less than Tory Burch. 

Tory Burch bags tend to stay in their form and style for a long time, if you look after them well.

Pricing Comparison

Both names are in the cheap luxury group, but there is a difference in price plans. Tory Burch stuff is often a bit more costly than Michael Kors. The brand hardly gives big sales, which keeps the brand looking more fancy. 

Michael Kors is easy to find at outlet shops and often has big sales. While this helps more people get the brand it can sometimes take away some of the special feeling and luxury worth of the items 

For folks who want lasting worth instead of quick trend buys, Tory Burch might have a better investment chance.

Popularity and Brand Reputation

michael kors pink wallet in compare of tory burch beige color comparison

Michael Kors became quite famous in the 2010s due to its simple luxury style and celebrities. The brand still has strong presence around the world and is liked by shoppers who want stylish luxuries without spending too much money,

Tory Burch has made a better name over the years. Lots of style fans feel Tory Burch is a little more fancy and not as usual as Michael Kors. 

While both names are valued, Tory Burch has a better look among buyers who want lasting luxury than quick trends.

Resale Value and Investment Potential

two belt of both brands compared with each other and potential resale value

If your aim is to put money in fancy clothes that keep worth, Tory Burch usually does better. Tory Burch bags often keep better resale prices since the brand stays clear of too much hype and big sales. Timeless Tory Burch designs stay important each season, which helps them last longer in the resale market. 

Michael Kors bags, mostly outlet types, often lose value quicker because of many sales and more access. Though some top Michael Kors sets keep good worth, the general resale market for this brand is not as strong as Tory Burch’s. 

So if you are really asking is Tory Burch better than Michael Kors for an investment, the answer is often yes from a resale and long term value view.

Which Brand Offers Better Variety?

is tory burch better than michael kors two crossbody one of mk black in color and one of tory burch consider beige color

Michael Kors is great at giving many kinds of items at various costs. From bags and clocks to shoes and clothes the brand has something for nearly each buyer. 

Tory Burch looks more at picking fine collections with lasting charm. Though the choice might seem a bit less, the styles often look more high-end and useful. 

If cost and choice of styles are key, Michael Kors is the best. If nice looks and fine design are what you want, Tory Burch is the better pick.

Final Verdict

So, is Tory Burch nicer than Michael Kors? For many buyers wanting classic style, better making and more lasting worth, Tory Burch often wins. The brand gives nice lu͏xury with clever designs that stay in fashion for a long time. 

But, Michael Kors still has a nice charm for buyers who like bright style, easy prices and trendy extras. The name gives stylish fancy things at a more friendly cost making it a well-liked choice for daily wear

At the end, the best buy relies on your own likes and shopping goals. If you want simple luxury with lasting value, Tory Burch is likely a better choice; if you prefer stylish statement pieces and great prices, Michael Kors remains a good option in the easy luxe market. 

FAQs

Is Tory Burch better than Michael Kors?

Tory Burch is often liked for its old-time luxury and nice resale value; while Michael Kors is known for its trendy and low-cost looks.

Which brand is more affordable?

Michael Kors is usually cheaper than a Tory Burch.

Which brand has better quality?

Tory Burch is often seen as a bit better in making and stuff.

Are Michael Kors bags still popular?

Yes, Michael Kors is still liked for daily fancy clothes.

Is Tory Burch worth investing in?

Yes, Tory Burch bags are liked for their simple looks and lasting charm.







Source link

New Ethereum EIP Proposes Burning Issuance as Staking Nears 50% of ETH Supply – NFT Plazas New Ethereum EIP Proposes Burning Issuance as Staking Nears 50% of ETH Supply

0
New Ethereum EIP Proposes Burning Issuance as Staking Nears 50% of ETH Supply – NFT Plazas New Ethereum EIP Proposes Burning Issuance as Staking Nears 50% of ETH Supply


Ethereum is entering a new debate over its ETH issuance policy following the submission of EIP-8363: Tapered Issuance Burn to the Ethereum EIPs repository on August 4, 2026. The proposal targets how Ethereum rewards validators in a context where more than one-third of the ETH supply is already staked, the validator queue remains large, and the community is debating whether the current issuance mechanism continues to over-incentivize staking. If passed, EIP-8363 would cause staking rewards to gradually decline as the staking ratio rises, aiming to eliminate the incentive to stake further around the 50% supply mark.

What EIP-8363 Proposes

EIP-8363, titled “Tapered Issuance Burn“, proposes burning a portion of validator rewards rather than simply reducing issuance rewards directly. According to the proposal, the authors describe this as a Core EIP that calculates a deduction at each epoch based on a validator’s ideal reward, and subsequently burns the deducted ETH.

EIP-8363 proposal.

EIP-8363 proposal. Source: GitHub

The main feature of the proposal is the “taper“: the deduction percentage increases progressively with the staking ratio—that is, the ratio of staked ETH to total supply. As the staking ratio approaches the threshold of approximately 50%, the burn rate on ideal consensus-layer rewards increases to 100%, causing net consensus-layer issuance to no longer create additional economic incentive to stake beyond this threshold.

Jerome de Tychey, president of Ethereum France and an advocate pushing the proposal, stated that the yield reduction mechanism will be phased in over 18 months, with the effective base reward factor decreasing linearly from 128 to 64. Accounting for an estimated 6 months of hard fork preparation, validators and staking providers will have nearly 2 years to adapt.

Why Staking Growth Triggered the Debate

With more than one-third of its supply staked, any change to validate rewards on Ethereum has become a sensitive topic. According to ValidatorQueue, the network currently has approximately 41.6 million ETH staked, representing 34.1% of the supply, with around 895,774 active validators. An additional ~2.5 million ETH remains in the entry queue, showing that staking demand has yet to cool down.

With a total ETH supply of around 121.9 million ETH, the 50% milestone equates to approximately 61 million ETH staked. Thus, Ethereum is not actually “near 50%” if looking strictly at active stake today. However, the growth rate of staking and the size of the validator queue have been sufficient to transform issuance from a theoretical debate into a practical policy issue.

ETH supply staked.ETH supply staked.

ETH supply staked. Source: ValidatorQueue

De Tychey argues that if the entry queue remains saturated at max churn, the amount of staked ETH could increase by approximately 1.75 million ETH per month. In what he calls a conservative scenario, by January 1, 2028, over 70 million ETH could be staked, representing over 55% of the supply. This is a scenario presented by the proposal’s supporters, not a guaranteed forecast, but it illustrates why EIP-8363 is being introduced before the staking ratio nears 50%.

The Case for Burning Issuance

Proponents of EIP-8363 argue that the issue is not just how much ETH Ethereum issues, but that the current staking incentive lacks a clear stopping point. De Tychey, one of the proposal’s main drivers, argues that under the current curve, yield does not drop below roughly 1.5% even if 100% of ETH were staked. If staking is increasingly viewed as a low-risk yield, the current mechanism could continue pulling more ETH into staking, even when the network already has sufficient economic security.

The proposal to burn issuance targets two risks: dilution for non-stakers, and the diminishing role of raw ETH if liquid staking tokens increasingly replace ETH across the ecosystem. Supporters also maintain that a more staked ETH does not equate to a safer Ethereum if new stake becomes concentrated in custodians, staking providers, or ETF issuers.

Under the proposal’s model, issuance under the taper would peak at around 0.5% of total supply per year near a 20% staking ratio, then gradually taper down to 0 at 50%. For proponents, this approach makes the ETH supply more predictable when combined with the EIP-1559 fee burn.

The Pushback From Stakers and DeFi

On Ethereum Magicians, many voices argue that a major monetary policy shift like EIP-8363 should not be rushed into a hard fork process, particularly when the proposal appeared close to discussion deadlines related to Bogotá.

If net rewards drop, solo stakers—faced with higher operational costs, downtime risks, and tax obligations—may exit the market before large institutions do. This runs counter to the goal of preserving decentralization, as custodians or staking providers retain advantages in scale and infrastructure.

For DeFi, the staking yield serves as a reference rate for many ETH-denominated yield markets, ranging from LSTs and lending to fixed-yield products. If yield is sharply dragged down, strategies relying on LST collateral or the spread between staking yield and borrowing costs could be impacted. The proposal has also been questioned for choosing a “mint-then-burn” design over simply “minting less,” a design choice that could create additional tax uncertainty.

What Happens Next

EIP-8363 remains an ongoing proposal under discussion and is not yet an approved change. The GitHub PR is still undergoing review, while Ethereum Magicians serves as the primary hub for feedback from stakers, researchers, and DeFi stakeholders.

The next step is to observe whether the proposal will be scheduled for core developers’ calls or integrated into a specific hard fork process. Should EIP-8363 advance further, the debate will shift from whether issuance should be reduced to more difficult implementation details: how to reduce it, how long to phase it in, whether the 50% threshold is appropriate, and whether burning validator rewards is superior to directly adjusting issuance.

At present, Ethereum has staked over one-third of its supply but is not yet near 50%. Therefore, EIP-8363 should be understood as a preemptive effort to counter a trajectory that supporters view as risky, rather than a response to a threshold that has already been crossed. The debate surrounding this proposal is likely to persist as the staking queue, validator economics, and impacts on LSTs undergo closer scrutiny.





Source link

Mysten Labs CTO Sam Blackshear Leaves for Anthropic Security Role

0
Mysten Labs CTO Sam Blackshear Leaves for Anthropic Security Role


Sam Blackshear, Co-founder and CTO of Mysten Labs and the creator of the Move programming language, announced on Thursday that he will be leaving Mysten Labs to join Anthropic, where he will work in defensive security research.

The move marks a notable leadership transition at Mysten Labs, the company tied to the Layer 1 blockchain Sui, while bringing one of the Move ecosystem’s key engineers to AI security. On Anthropic’s side, Blackshear’s transition to defensive security research comes as the company expands its AI security efforts—an increasingly critical domain as AI models are more widely used in software development and testing.

Sam Blackshear Confirms Move to Anthropic

Blackshear confirmed his transition to Anthropic in a brief post on X, stating that he will work on defensive security research. He has not released further details regarding his official title, team, or starting date for the new role.

Blackshear is one of the most prominent technical figures associated with the Sui ecosystem. Before co-founding Mysten Labs, he worked at Meta on the Diem project, where he created Move—a programming language designed for digital assets and smart contracts.

At Mysten, Blackshear served as Co-founder and CTO, and was one of five founding members alongside Evan Cheng, Adeniyi Abiodun, Kostas Chalkias, and George Danezis. His move to Anthropic is therefore not just an individual career change, but also a shift for a key technical figure deeply tied to the Move and Sui story from the early days.

Evan Cheng Steps Back Into CTO Role

Shortly after Blackshear’s announcement, Evan Cheng stated he would be “returning to my roots” by leading engineering teams and the research-to-engineering-to-product pipeline. Cheng added that, as CTO and CEO, he will be closer to the technical work and directly involved in operations.

This is a notable detail for the Sui community as it helps narrow the information gap following the departure of a founding CTO. Cheng is not only CEO of Mysten Labs but also a veteran engineer who previously served as Director of R&D at Meta’s Novi Financial and earlier worked at Apple, where he contributed to the LLVM compiler infrastructure.

Cheng stepping into the dual role of CTO helps Mysten maintain continuity in technical leadership, at least during the transition period. Instead of appointing a new technical leader from the outside, Mysten currently has Cheng directly overseeing both corporate operations and technical direction.

Mysten’s Founders Signal Continuity

Responses from Mysten’s founding team signal a desire to maintain stability following Blackshear’s announcement. Adeniyi Abiodun, Co-founder and CPO of Mysten Labs, congratulated Blackshear and expressed happiness for his colleague’s next chapter.

Abiodun also noted that he will continue collaborating with Evan Cheng as Cheng steps into the CTO role, while referencing Kostas Chalkias and George Danezis within the team driving the company’s next phase. For Mysten, this emphasizes that the remainder of the founding team remains actively involved in the transition.

Why the Departure Matters for Sui

Blackshear’s role is particularly significant for Sui because Move is a core element of the network’s technical architecture. Sui mainnet launched on May 3, 2023; the SUI token is used for gas fees, staking, and network governance, with a total supply capped at 10 billion tokens.

According to DeFiLlama, Sui currently holds approximately $408 million in total value locked in DeFi, a stablecoin market cap of around $436.4 million, 174,927 active addresses, and 13.31 million transactions in 24 hours. CoinGecko recorded SUI trading around $0.68 on the same day, with a market cap of approximately $2.8 billion and 24-hour volume of around $167 million.

Given Sui’s current scale, the departure of a technical figure tied to Move from the early days is notable news. However, Blackshear’s exit does not imply immediate protocol changes: Move has evolved beyond a single individual, while Sui continues to operate with independent engineering teams, validators, and on-chain applications. Mysten has not yet announced a timeline for Cheng’s tenure as CTO, nor any changes to technical priorities such as Move, Walrus, or DeepBook.

Anthropic Deepens Its AI Security Push

On Anthropic’s side, Blackshear joining defensive security research coincides with the company’s expansion of products and initiatives related to cybersecurity. On April 30, 2026, Anthropic launched Claude Security in public beta for Claude Enterprise customers, enabling code scanning for vulnerabilities and patch recommendations powered by Claude models.

The company is also rolling out Project Glasswing, an initiative using frontier AI to safeguard critical software. In a May 22 update, Anthropic stated that Project Glasswing and around 50 partners had identified over 10,000 high- or critical-severity vulnerabilities; by June 2, the program expanded to approximately 150 organizations across more than 15 countries.

With his background in Move and smart contract security, Blackshear brings to Anthropic experience from an environment where code is typically public, assets hold real-world value, and logic flaws can lead to immediate loss. This contrast makes the transition from blockchain infrastructure to AI security particularly intriguing, rather than a routine personnel change between two tech companies.



Source link

Uniswap Launches Pools on Robinhood Chain With Fairer Token Launch Model – NFT Plazas

    0
    Uniswap Launches Pools on Robinhood Chain With Fairer Token Launch Model – NFT Plazas


    Uniswap has launched Pools, its first native token launchpad built on Robinhood Chain, marking a significant expansion beyond decentralized trading into token creation. The platform enables users to launch, discover, and trade new cryptocurrencies while introducing built-in protections designed to improve fairness and reduce common risks associated with new token launches.

    While developers have used Uniswap as the liquidity layer for token launches for years, Pools is the protocol’s first dedicated issuance platform. It is primarily designed for speculative, high-volatility assets such as meme coins, though Uniswap Labs emphasized that it does not review, endorse, or verify any tokens launched through the platform.

    Uniswap Launches Pools on Robinhood Chain

    Uniswap Launches Pools on Robinhood Chain

    Two Launch Options

    Pools offers two ways to launch a token: Crowd Launch and Instant Launch.

    Crowd Launch is designed to create a fairer distribution process. Instead of opening trading immediately, the launch runs over a four-hour bidding window. Participants submit budgets rather than market orders, and bids are filled gradually using a time-weighted average price (TWAP), reducing the advantage typically enjoyed by bots and bundled transactions.

    If the launch reaches a $10,000 fully diluted valuation (FDV), the token graduates into a live Uniswap v4 liquidity pool. If demand falls short, all bids are refunded.

    Instant Launch follows a more traditional approach. Tokens become tradable immediately after creation through a bonding curve, allowing prices to rise as buying demand increases. Unlike Crowd Launch, there is no minimum valuation requirement before trading begins.

    Regardless of the launch model, every token ultimately transitions into a standard Uniswap v4 liquidity pool.

    Permanently Locked Liquidity

    A key feature of Pools is its permanently locked liquidity.

    Unlike some launchpads where creators can later withdraw liquidity, Pools locks liquidity in a protocol-controlled pool that cannot be removed by the token creator. The design aims to reduce the risk of so-called “rug pulls,” where developers drain liquidity after attracting investors.

    The platform also introduces auto-compounding liquidity. Trading fees are automatically reinvested into the locked liquidity pool, allowing liquidity to grow over time without requiring additional deposits from users.

    According to Uniswap, these features are intended to improve long-term market stability for newly launched tokens.

    Lower Fees Than Many Launchpads

    Pools also differentiates itself through its fee structure.

    The platform charges no additional launchpad fee, collecting only Uniswap’s standard 0.25% liquidity provider fee. This is significantly lower than the roughly 1% trading fee commonly charged by many competing launchpads.

    The LP fee is automatically compounded back into the locked liquidity pool. Creators can optionally enable creator fees, allowing them to receive 0.05% of the 0.25% fee, while the remaining portion continues strengthening liquidity.

    By avoiding extra platform fees, Uniswap says Pools offers a lower-cost launch process while encouraging deeper liquidity over time.

    Anti-Sniping Features

    Pools also introduces mechanisms designed to reduce front-running and bot activity.

    One of its most notable features is sniping mitigation, which allows creators to purchase their own token in the same block the launch occurs. This prevents automated bots from consistently becoming the first buyers and driving sharp price swings within seconds of launch.

    Crowd Launch further limits unfair advantages by spreading purchases across the four-hour bidding period instead of rewarding the fastest transactions.

    Together, these mechanisms are intended to create a more level playing field for retail participants.

    Integrated Across the Uniswap Ecosystem

    Every token launched through Pools is immediately available across Uniswap’s ecosystem.

    New projects become discoverable through the Uniswap Web App, Uniswap Wallet, and Uniswap Launches. They are also routed through the Uniswap API, making them accessible via third-party wallets and decentralized exchange aggregators, including MetaMask and Ledger.

    Launching a token requires only a ticker, image, description, and the selection of either Crowd Launch or Instant Launch. Traders can browse new projects on pools.trade, purchase Instant Launch tokens immediately, or bid on Crowd Launch offerings before claiming tokens after successful graduation.

    Hayden Adams Defends the Model

    Uniswap founder Hayden Adams described Pools as a natural evolution of the protocol.

    People have used Uniswap as both a launchpad and launchpad infrastructure for over eight years,” Adams wrote on X. “We’re excited to be building alongside all the other launchpads to move the space forward.

    Adams also criticized the higher fee structures used by many competing launchpads, arguing that 1% liquidity pool fees effectively create a 2% trading spread that becomes increasingly inefficient as projects mature.

    He further clarified that the 0.25% liquidity provider fee does not go to Uniswap Labs. Instead, it is directed toward the locked liquidity pool, with creators receiving a share only if they choose to enable creator fees.

    Early Demand Before Launch

    Interest in Pools emerged before its official interface went live. According to Adams, traders discovered earlier versions of the platform’s smart contracts and generated more than $150 million in trading volume before the public launch, prompting the team to update its indexing systems to support both the early and final deployments.

    Pools is launching in beta, with additional improvements expected based on community feedback.

    As competition among token launchpads intensifies, Uniswap is betting that lower fees, permanently locked liquidity, built-in anti-sniping protections, and seamless integration with its broader ecosystem will make Pools an attractive option for creators and traders seeking a more transparent token launch experience.



    Source link

    Binance Affiliates Sue RedotPay Founders for $473 Million Over Alleged User Diversion – NFT Plazas

      0
      Binance Affiliates Sue RedotPay Founders for 3 Million Over Alleged User Diversion – NFT Plazas


      Binance-affiliated companies have launched a high-profile legal battle against stablecoin payments provider RedotPay, accusing the firm and its co-founders of improperly diverting nearly half a million Binance users in violation of commercial agreements. The lawsuit, filed in Hong Kong, seeks approximately $472.8 million in damages, marking one of the most significant legal disputes to emerge in the rapidly expanding crypto payments sector.

      The case arrives at a pivotal moment for RedotPay, which has been expanding aggressively in the stablecoin payments market while reportedly preparing for a potential U.S. initial public offering. Although Binance alleges that RedotPay built part of its growth by exploiting access to Binance Pay users, the payments company has firmly denied all accusations and says the litigation will not disrupt its operations.

      Binance Affiliates Sue RedotPay Founders for $473 Million Over User Diversion (Source: X)

      Binance Affiliates Sue RedotPay Founders for $473 Million Over User Diversion (Source: X)

      Binance claims RedotPay breached commercial agreements

      According to court filings cited by Bloomberg, Binance affiliates Nest Trading, DistributedTechnologies, and Chaintecs Consulting Singapore accuse RedotPay of violating contractual restrictions governing the use of Binance Pay.

      The plaintiffs allege that beginning in March 2026, RedotPay enabled and encouraged users to fund RedotPay payment cards directly through Binance Pay in ways explicitly prohibited under their partnership agreements. Binance argues that this practice effectively redirected customers away from Binance’s own ecosystem and toward RedotPay’s competing payment infrastructure.

      The exchange estimates that more than 470,000 Binance customers migrated through this mechanism. Using an estimated lifetime customer value of $925 per user, Binance calculated damages of nearly $473 million.

      In addition to lost customer value, Binance alleges that roughly $304 million in Binance Pay user assets flowed into the RedotPay ecosystem through the disputed funding mechanism, further strengthening its claim that the company benefited financially from the alleged contractual violations.

      Binance has declined to discuss the specifics of the ongoing litigation publicly but stated that it intends to pursue all available legal avenues to protect its commercial interests.

      Parallel lawsuits in Hong Kong and Singapore

      The legal conflict extends beyond Hong Kong.

      Alongside the primary lawsuit, Binance affiliate Chaintecs Consulting Singapore has initiated related legal proceedings in Singapore against entities connected to RedotPay and its co-founders, including Gao Zhangpeng, Chan Wa Choi, and Yao Chao. A hearing in the Singapore case is reportedly scheduled to take place this week.

      The coordinated litigation across multiple jurisdictions underscores how seriously Binance appears to be treating the dispute, particularly given the international nature of both companies’ payment operations.

      RedotPay rejects every allegation

      RedotPay has responded by categorically denying Binance’s claims.

      In an official statement, the company said it is fully aware of the legal proceedings and intends to “vigorously defend” itself against what it describes as unfounded allegations.

      The firm also emphasized that the lawsuits will have no impact on its day-to-day operations, reassuring customers and business partners that services will continue uninterrupted while the courts consider the case.

      Despite the legal challenge, RedotPay highlighted the continued growth of its business. According to the company, its global user base has expanded by more than 33% over the past six months, surpassing 8 million users worldwide. It also reported approximately $180 million in annualized revenue and around $14 billion in annualized payment volume, illustrating its rapid emergence as one of the largest stablecoin payment card providers globally.

      A partnership that unraveled

      The dispute stems from a commercial relationship that began in late 2023, when RedotPay integrated Binance Pay into its crypto payment card platform.

      At the time, the collaboration allowed Binance Pay users to transfer funds directly onto RedotPay-issued payment cards, making it easier for customers to spend cryptocurrencies and stablecoins in everyday transactions.

      However, Binance says the original partnership quickly encountered problems after it concluded that customer funds were being used for activities outside the agreed framework. The initial agreement reportedly collapsed within six months.

      The companies later negotiated a new agreement in March 2025, introducing stricter safeguards requiring Binance Pay assets to remain fully segregated.

      Under the revised arrangement, Binance customers could use Binance Pay on RedotPay only for specific purposes, including converting crypto into fiat currency, making in-app transfers, and purchasing RedotPay-branded products. Direct funding of RedotPay payment cards remained expressly prohibited.

      According to Binance, further violations were discovered during a review of payment partners, ultimately leading the exchange to terminate the partnership in April 2026.

      IPO ambitions raise the stakes

      The lawsuit arrives at a particularly sensitive time for RedotPay.

      The company has reportedly been exploring a U.S. IPO that could raise more than $1 billion and value the business at over $4 billion, with major investment banks including JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Jefferies advising on the potential listing.

      Bloomberg reported that Binance argues the alleged diversion of customers directly contributed to RedotPay’s corporate value as it prepares for public markets. If proven in court, the allegations could become a significant issue for investors evaluating the company’s growth trajectory and customer acquisition practices.

      A closely watched case for crypto payments

      Beyond the financial claims, the dispute highlights growing tensions surrounding partnerships between crypto exchanges and payment providers as stablecoin adoption accelerates worldwide.

      Binance Pay has become an increasingly important component of Binance’s broader ecosystem, while RedotPay has positioned itself as one of the fastest-growing issuers of crypto-linked payment cards. The lawsuit therefore raises broader questions about how customer access, payment integrations, and commercial restrictions should be governed as digital asset payment networks become more interconnected.

      For now, both sides remain firmly committed to defending their positions in court. With proceedings underway in both Hong Kong and Singapore, the outcome could influence not only RedotPay’s expansion plans and prospective IPO, but also how future partnerships between crypto exchanges and payment companies are structured across the industry.



      Source link

      The Matrix 5 Officially Confirmed by Warner Bros. as Development Continues

        0
        The Matrix 5 Officially Confirmed by Warner Bros. as Development Continues


        For nearly two decades, the words Dragon Ball and “live action” have carried a bit of baggage. Ever since Dragonball Evolution hit theaters in 2009, fans have largely pretended it never happened, and honestly, who could blame them? The film was panned by critics, rejected by longtime fans, and even Dragon Ball creator Akira Toriyama later expressed disappointment with the adaptation. Years later, screenwriter Ben Ramsey publicly apologized, admitting he wasn’t approaching the project as a fan but simply as another writing assignment.

        The good news? Hollywood looks a lot different than it did in 2009.

        When Disney completed its acquisition of 21st Century Fox in 2019, it also inherited Fox’s live action Dragon Ball film rights. While Shueisha, Toei Animation, and Bird Studio continue to oversee the franchise itself, Disney controls the live action movie rights that Fox originally secured more than two decades ago. As of today, no new live action Dragon Ballfilm has been officially announced, but the possibility is always there.

        If Disney ever decides to revisit the franchise, it would be walking into a completely different landscape. Anime adaptations have come a long way over the past several years. Projects like One Piece have shown that audiences will embrace live action anime when the people behind it genuinely respect the source material. Studios have also become much more willing to work alongside original creators instead of trying to reinvent beloved franchises for mainstream audiences.

        Technology has also caught up. In 2009, convincing audiences that people could fly through the sky while launching planet-shattering energy blasts was a much taller task. Today, visual effects have reached the point where a live action Kamehameha or Super Saiyan transformation could look spectacular in the hands of the right filmmakers. Disney certainly has access to the talent and resources needed to make that happen.

        It may also already have the right director within its own family of studios. Destin Daniel Cretton, who is currently directing Spider-Man: Brand New Day for Marvel Studios, has been open about his love for Dragon Ball Z. During the development of Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, Cretton cited the anime as one of his inspirations for the film’s martial arts action, and fans even spotted a playful Kamehameha homage in the movie. More importantly, Cretton has shown that he can balance heartfelt character moments with fast-paced, visually stunning action. If Disney ever moves forward with another live action Dragon Ball, he’d certainly deserve to be part of the conversation.

        Of course, none of that matters if the story misses the heart of what made Dragon Ball special in the first place. Fans aren’t asking for a grounded reboot or a complete reimagining of Goku’s journey. They want colorful characters, incredible martial arts, outrageous power levels, and the sense of adventure that has made the franchise one of the biggest in the world for more than 40 years. 

        Perhaps the biggest obstacle isn’t visual effects or casting. It’s trust. Dragonball Evolution burned so much goodwill that many fans would immediately be skeptical of another live action attempt. Disney would have one chance to prove that the franchise deserves another shot, and it would need to earn that trust from day one by staying true to the spirit of Akira Toriyama’s legendary series.

        Then again, maybe that’s exactly why now is the right time.

        Dragonball Evolution proved that simply owning the rights isn’t enough. But with today’s filmmaking technology, a greater appreciation for anime, and directors like Destin Daniel Cretton who genuinely understand the material, Disney has a real opportunity to do something fans never thought possible: make a live action Dragon Ball movie people actually want to watch.



        Source link

        Days of our Lives: Lani Exposes Lexie’s Stunning Secret – Shocking Reveal Ahead!

          0
          Days of our Lives: Lani Exposes Lexie’s Stunning Secret – Shocking Reveal Ahead!


          Days of Our Lives sees that Paulina Price (Jackee Harry) just asked Lani Price (Sal Stowers) if she could help investigate Lexie Carver (Nikki Crawford) and her suspicious solo trip to South Africa.

          So, it could be Lani who finds out that Lexie has been lying to Abe Carver (James Reynolds) and Theo Carver (Tyler Joseph Andrews) and that she never even left town.

          Paulina Suspicious on Days of our Lives

          All right, let’s dive in. This week, Mayor Paulina ran into Lani slinging scones for her sister Chanel Dupree’s (Raven Bowens) bakery, Sweet Bits. And Mama P has already been questioning Lexie’s sudden trip to South Africa. Because the facts just don’t add up to Paulina.

          Ever since Lexie was resurrected and came back into Abe’s life, we have seen that Lexie has been, I’d say, aggressive, protective, possessive, and territorial when it comes to Abe. And now all of a sudden, Lexie decided to just ditch him and go visit her mom in Johannesburg.

          So, it’s natural that she’d want to see her mom, Celeste Perrault (Beverly Todd), after being presumed dead for fifteen years. But it makes no sense for Lexie to take that trip without Theo and Abe.

          Paulina Enlists Lani’s Help on DOOL

          So, Paulina is wondering why Lexie would suddenly decide to run off out of Salem, especially when Abe’s birthday is right around the corner. Why would Lexie, who had been resurrected only four short months ago, take a solo one-way trip halfway across the world?

          None of this adds up for Paulina, but Lani reminded her mom and said, “I thought you were staying out of Abe’s business now that he’s back with Lexie.” And Paulina gave a ridiculous excuse. She said as mayor, she’s concerned about her constituency. I don’t think Lexie was around to vote for her, but okay.

          And Paulina is certain that something is amiss with Lexie traveling so far away on her own. And bottom line, Abe and Theo, neither one like it. So, Lexie was insistent with them and since Lani’s a former cop and her husband Eli Grant (Lamon Archey) is an FBI special agent, surely Lani could help dig into what is going on with Lexie.

          Lani’s Investigation Begins on Days

          Then later when Lani ran into her brother Theo, she saw that he was also really concerned about Lexie just up and taking off on this trip all alone. Seeing Theo’s concern about his mom’s sudden departure and then Paulina’s concern, it was gradually pulling Lani in.

          And she was also surprised when Theo mentioned he didn’t know when Lexie would be back. And Theo said Lexie only bought a one-way ticket. But instead of going to South Africa, as viewers know, Lexie and her sister Kristen DiMera (Stacy Haiduk) decided to take advantage of EJ DiMera’s (Dan Feuerriegel) plan to nab Kristen and send her to one of the family’s remote islands.

          But EJ and Rita Lesley (Maggie Carney) found in the shipping container instead of Kristen, it was Lexie just chilling on the bean bag. So, Rita and EJ might not have even found out about this swap if not for Chad DiMera (Connor Floyd) letting Leo Stark (Greg Rikaart) run off with the family jet. So, they had to go to the container to check on Kristen.

          Days of our Lives: EJ Supports Lexie

          And when Lexie told EJ she just wants to go to the island and die in peace and not put Abe and their son Theo through that, EJ thought about it and was like, “No, you’re not going to the island.” He didn’t want Lexie dying alone. So, EJ insisted that she come home with him. And he promised he would care for Lexie and would be there the whole time so she wouldn’t have to die alone.

          But EJ also warned Lexie that he thinks she’s making a mistake. EJ thinks Lexie should tell Abe and Theo what is happening and you know just go ahead and reveal that she fibbed about going to South Africa. EJ knows Abe and his nephew Theo will be crushed if Lexie dies without them by her side and without them getting a chance to say one final goodbye to her.

          But Lexie asked EJ to keep his lips shut and just send the letters to Abe and Theo that she’s writing to keep the ruse going. And Lexie also begged EJ to please reconsider sending Kristen away forever away from her daughter Rachel Black (Lorelei Olivia Mote), but he’s not going to. So, even though EJ’s torn about hiding his sister Lexie from Abe and Theo, I think he’ll keep on doing what Lexie wants and keep her hidden in the basement, at least for now.

          Red Flags and Discovery on DOOL

          But Paulina has Lani out on the prowl. And Paulina told Lani that even though Abe thought the trip was a bit weird because she never booked a return flight, he’s still not asking the right questions. So Paulina was also wondering if maybe Lexie’s had some change of heart about Abe. And that that’s why Lexie decided to abruptly leave the way she did on Days of our Lives.

          And nothing could be further from the truth. That may be just wishful thinking on Paulina’s part. But Lani told her mom she can’t make any promises, but she will warm up her old detective skills and see what she can do. So, Lani may go question Eli and see if she can get any answers. And of course, Lani knows her brother Theo is worried about this sudden decision to fly off to South Africa.

          And Theo also said he and Abe wanted to fly with Lexie, but she just shut that down immediately. So, there’s a lot of red flags. And of course, the main one she’s been hiding is the fact that she’s dying again and that Dr. Wilhelm Rolf’s (Richard Wharton) miracle serum isn’t quite so miraculous after all.

          Days of Our Lives: Lani Price (Sal Stowers) - Lexie Carver (Nikki Crawford)
          Days of Our Lives: Lani Price – Lexie Carver 

          Days of our Lives: Abe & Theo in the Dark

          Theo and Abe have no idea that Lexie could go any day now. And a very worried Theo told Lani that his mom contacted him, but when she made the call, the service was sketchy. And Theo said it was a don’t call me, I’ll call you situation. So, I wonder if Lani reaches out or, you know, has Abe reach out to talk to Celeste about Lexie’s visit because if she’s not there, that’s a huge red flag. And maybe Eli can check flight logs to see if Lexie got on a plane leaving Salem in the first place.

          And they can just ping the cell phone tower. If they can triangulate the signal from Lexie’s call to Theo, then they may realize, oh, she’s lying. She’s right here in Salem. And I also wonder if Lani will question EJ. She may go over to the mansion since, of course, he’s the one who brought Lexie back from the dead and is her brother. So Lani may be able to tell that EJ is lying and twitchy because of her former career as a Salem PD detective. So if Lani’s asking questions and EJ’s looking all around with not good answers, you know, that may keep Lani poking.

          Lexie Takes a Turn for the Worst on Days

          We know Lexie winds up in the hospital again. There’s a scene in the summer promo. Lexie on her deathbed. Abe yelling at EJ to leave. So, Abe may be furious that EJ was hiding dying Lexie at the mansion. So far, you know, she has had Theo and Abe completely in the dark, and they’re going to be so devastated.

          And Lexie knows it, but I don’t think she’s thinking through how devastated they’d be that she went off to die alone without them. But EJ may have a change of heart and just take Lexie to the hospital himself. Maybe the next time she falls into one of her unconscious spells that she has. If Lani finds Lexie at the mansion, of course, everybody will assume the worst of EJ.

          And by the way, a lot of fans, maybe you, are angry that they bring Lexie back just to kill her off again so soon. But the writers may have something else in mind. Lexie may experience some sort of divine intervention or Dr. Rolf shows up with a Hail Mary cure, but I don’t think that’s going to happen because we know the actress is gone.

          And so it sounds like either Lexie passes away or maybe EJ puts her back in a cryogenic pod after she seems to pass away so they can try again later to bring her back, which seems cruel. But first, Lani or somebody else has to find Lexie or EJ has a crisis of conscience and brings her to the hospital. We’ll see how it goes, but grab your tissues. It’s going to be an emotional roller coaster.



          Source link

          SEC Bought a Billion Airline Records to Track Travelers—Likely Without a Warrant – Decrypt

          0
          SEC Bought a Billion Airline Records to Track Travelers—Likely Without a Warrant – Decrypt



          In brief

          SEC documents obtained by 404 Media show the agency subscribed to Airlines Reporting Corporation’s Travel Intelligence Program, which held over one billion ticket records.
          The data included names, credit card numbers, routes, and an alert system that flagged new bookings by people the agency was monitoring — likely without a warrant.
          ARC, co-owned by Delta, United, and American, sold the data until lawmaker pressure forced a shutdown in 2025.

          The Securities and Exchange Commission bought access to a worldwide airline ticketing database holding more than one billion records, according to SEC documents obtained by 404 Media through a Freedom of Information Act request.

          The data came from Airlines Reporting Corporation, a clearinghouse co-owned by American, Delta, and United that sits between carriers and travel agencies, and resold bookings made through sites like Expedia and Kayak.

          

          The records held passengers’ names, the credit cards used to buy tickets, departure and arrival cities, and flight numbers. More than that, the SEC’s subscription included an alert system that checked new bookings against a list of people it was monitoring, flagging travel from the prior 24 hours, with the agency requesting between one and 25 of these alerts a day.

          No court order was needed; the government simply bought the data, likely without a warrant.

          The SEC is a financial regulator, not a spy agency. Its job is to protect American consumers from insider trading, fraud, and market manipulation. But the same travel and payment trail it purchased is exactly the one crypto holders leave behind: a credit card tied to an exchange account, a flight to a conference, a border crossing. When the state can watch both the chain and the boarding pass, the line between market cop and surveillance arm gets thin.

          A year into the second Donald Trump presidency, the SEC has pulled back from major crypto enforcement while the data-broker workaround lets agencies skip the warrant they’d need if they demanded the records directly.

          The IRS has been expanding its own surveillance of crypto investors through the same playbook. The SEC’s Coinbase probe of a year ago showed the same appetite for user data. The question is less whether the SEC wants the information than how it gets it.

          The loophole, again

          Critics call it the data broker loophole: buy what you can’t subpoena. ARC’s Travel Intelligence Program sold the same post-9/11 surveillance infrastructure to the FBI, IRS, and Homeland Security before pressure from lawmakers forced its shutdown in 2025.

          The newly released documents show its reach was wider than known—foreign-to-foreign journeys sat in the system alongside domestic ones.

          ARC defended the program. The company told 404 Media that TIP “was established after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks” and “has likely contributed to the prevention and apprehension of criminals involved in… money laundering” and terrorism. Money laundering is the charge crypto draws most often.

          Daily Debrief Newsletter

          Start every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.



          Source link

          Preservationist Spent $900 And Strung Together 90 GPUs To Save A Lost Final Fantasy 7 Spinoff – Kotaku

          0
          Preservationist Spent 0 And Strung Together 90 GPUs To Save A Lost Final Fantasy 7 Spinoff – Kotaku



          A piece of Final Fantasy VII lost media has been restored after an expensive and painstaking process. First reported by Wccftech, hacker and game preservationist Yuvi has restored Dirge of Cerberus Lost Episode -Final Fantasy VII- to working order.

          Dirge of Cerberus Lost Episode -Final Fantasy VII- (yup, that’s the full title) was a mobile-only spinoff game for Final Fantasy VII spinoff game Dirge of Cerberus. The game was released in 2006 on the Amp’d Mobile cellphone network and became fully unplayable when Square Enix shut game servers down in 2018.

          However, in 2024, Yuvi acquired all the files for the game on an encrypted SD card and set about trying to decrypt them and restore the game. They wrote on their blog that they spent two years trying to procure the keys necessary to decrypt the files, but to no avail. “So this past week I said enough is enough; I’m going to solve this issue. We have the data; we just need to unencrypt it. Let’s figure out how,” Yuvi wrote.

          According to Yuvi, it took a lot of extremely involved work. And while they were making progress, Yuvi deemed that the process was taking too long. So… “I made a GPU farm,” they wrote. “I spun up well over 90 GPU Servers to crunch these numbers so fast,” with those GPUs including “RTX 4090s, A4000s, A4500s, A5000s, RTX 6000s H200, and more.” They also said they spent over $900 to make this all happen.

          As a result, a job that was projected to take a few months was finished in a couple of days, and we now have a working copy of a game that’s been lost since 2018. Yuvi put up a video of the game on their YouTube channel.

          In addition to Dirge of Cerberus Lost Episode, there are a number of other lost Final Fantasy mobile titles including Before Crisis Final Fantasy VII and Square Enix has itself attempted to revive elements of these lost games. Portions of Dirge of Cerberus‘ story have made it into the Final Fantasy VII remake trilogy, and during a Final Fantasy XIV Fan Fest event in Berlin, director Naoki Hamaguchi said the team is planning to incorporate more lore from these spinoffs into Revelation.



          Source link

          Where you’ve seen Coronation Street newcomer Nathan Sussex before as Tim’s cousin Richie arrives for explosive storyline

            0
            Where you’ve seen Coronation Street newcomer Nathan Sussex before as Tim’s cousin Richie arrives for explosive storyline


            Coronation Street has welcomed Tim Metcalfe’s cousin Richie to Weatherfield, with actor Nathan Sussex making his debut in a major new storyline. But while Richie is new to the cobbles, viewers may already recognise the actor from one of soap’s most memorable villains.

            Richie’s arrival is set to turn Tim and Sally’s lives upside down after he quickly becomes caught up in a murder investigation.

            So, who is Nathan Sussex, and what can Coronation Street fans expect from Richie’s storyline?

            A huge storyline kicks off tonight (Credit: ITV)

            Nathan Sussex makes Coronation Street debut

            Earlier this year, Coronation Street executive producer Kate Brooks teased a “massive story” for Tim and Sally, and it all begins in tonight’s episode.

            Tim is surprised when he meets his cousin Richie while out on a job, having not seen him for years. It isn’t long before Richie is introduced to Tim’s friends and joins them for a lads’ night together.

            Later, Richie opens up to Tim about the difficulties in his marriage, prompting Tim to offer him a place to stay.

            Richie is played by Nathan Sussex, who has appeared in a number of well-known TV dramas throughout his career.

            His previous credits include It’s A Sin, Casualty, Doctors and Doctor Who. However, many soap fans will know him best from his time in Hollyoaks.

            Nathan Sussex British Soap Awards 2019
            Nathan won a British Soap Award for his villainous character (Credit: Shutterstock)

            Who did Nathan Sussex play in Hollyoaks?

            Nathan appeared in Hollyoaks between January 2018 and January 2019 as Buster Smith.

            Buster was first introduced as a respected football coach before being revealed as the groomer and abuser of Ollie Morgan in one of the Channel 4 soap’s biggest storylines.

            Over the course of the storyline, viewers were gripped. But the harrowing scenes proved what an incredible actor Nathan is, and he was rewarded big.

            The performance earned Nathan widespread praise, and he went on to win the British Soap Award for Villain of the Year in 2019.

            With Richie now at the centre of another major storyline, Nathan is no stranger to taking on dramatic roles.

            Richie gets arrested for murder
            Tim finds a murder scene at Richie’s house (Credit: ITV)

            Richie’s upcoming explosive storyline

            Coronation Street spoilers reveal Tim is left horrified when he visits Richie and discovers the aftermath of a murder.

            Richie is soon charged with murder, leaving Tim and Sally to take in his daughter, Lucy.

            The couple quickly struggle to cope as Lucy tries to come to terms with everything that has happened, leaving Tim and Sally facing one of the biggest challenges of their relationship.

            Speaking previously about the storyline, Kate Brooks said: “It’s a bit of a curveball. And it comes from slightly left field. But it absolutely upends their lives. It’s how they navigate that situation going forward.”

            Read more:  ‘She’s definitely dead’: Coronation Street fans predict horrifying Cassie twist after ‘terrible’ final scenes



            Source link

            Popular Posts

            My Favorites