Regulation
OpenAI CEO Apologizes for Equity Cancellation Clause
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3b37f/3b37f7aa3fd1d0fdebe89f7077861701b8187843" alt=""
Amid recent resignations at OpenAI, CEO Sam Altman has addressed concerns regarding a controversial clause in the company’s exit agreements that suggested the potential for equity cancellation.
Altman emphasized that OpenAI has never used this clause and guaranteed the vested equity will not be affected by any separation agreements or non-disparagement agreements..
OpenAI Clarification on Vested Equity
Altman stressed that the clause, which was in previous exit documents, was a wrong thing to do and should not have been there.
“I take the full responsibility for this and it is one of the very few times I have been really embarrassed running OpenAI; I did not know that this was happening, and I should have,” Altman said.
He told the ex-employees that any worries they had over this clause could be dealt with him directly for their correction.
The equity cancellation provision was the cause of many doubts regarding its purpose and possible misuse. Altman admitted the mistake and said that the company had been changing its standard exit paperwork for a month already in order to avoid such problems in future.
Employee Resignations and Safety Concerns
The clarification from Altman comes after a number of resignations, among which is the resignation of Jan Leike, who was in charge of alignment at OpenAI. Leike, who announced his resignation on May 17th, mentioned the OpenAI’s focus on product development rather than AI safety as one of his main reasons.
in regards to recent stuff about how openai handles equity:
we have never clawed back anyone’s vested equity, nor will we do that if people do not sign a separation agreement (or don’t agree to a non-disparagement agreement). vested equity is vested equity, full stop.
there was…
— Sam Altman (@sama) May 18, 2024
His resignation was preceded by the exit of Ilya Sutskever who is one of OpenAI’s co-founders and a leading figure in AI research
The departures have made the OpenAI’s internal strategies and priorities to be a great focus of attention. The organization has been accused by the critics of not being enough focused on the issues related to advanced AI systems. Moreover, OpenAI had ealier dissolved the ‘Superalignment’ team and combined its functions into other research projects of the company.
OpenAI’s Commitment to AI Safety
Despite the restructuring, OpenAI maintains its commitment to AI safety. Altman and President Greg Brockman have reiterated the importance of ongoing safety research. In a recent statement, Brockman expressed gratitude to departing employees and reassured that the company would continue to address safety concerns rigorously.
Brockman highlighted OpenAI’s efforts to raise awareness about the risks and opportunities of AGI (artificial general intelligence), advocate for international governance, and pioneer AI safety research.
We’re really grateful to Jan for everything he’s done for OpenAI, and we know he’ll continue to contribute to the mission from outside. In light of the questions his departure has raised, we wanted to explain a bit about how we think about our overall strategy.
First, we have… https://t.co/djlcqEiLLN
— Greg Brockman (@gdb) May 18, 2024
He acknowledged that the path to safely developing and deploying AGI involves complex and unprecedented challenges, requiring continuous improvement in safety measures and oversight.
Read Also: Venezuela Acts Tough on Crypto Mining Amid Energy Squeeze
The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
Regulation
Utah Moves Closer To Bitcoin Reserve As Bill Advances To Senate Standing Committee
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7ed81/7ed81610dabdeda00996d89224002e99f79885bd" alt=""
Utah continues to make strides in its quest to create a strategic Bitcoin (BTC) reserve, as the state’s Blockchain and Digital Innovation Amendments bill – also known as H.B. 230 – cleared its first reading in the Senate yesterday, and has now moved to the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee for further consideration.
Utah Bitcoin Reserve Bill Passes First Reading In Senate
In a major development that could strengthen Bitcoin’s position as a mainstream store of value, Utah’s H.B. 230 bill has successfully cleared its first reading in the state Senate. According to the official bill tracker, the proposal has now advanced to the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee, where it will undergo further review before potentially moving to the next stage of the legislative process.
To recall, Utah Representative Jordan Teuscher introduced H.B. 230 on January 21. The bill passed the House in the same month with an 8-1 vote before proceeding to the Senate for its first reading on February 7.
If enacted, the bill would authorize the state treasurer to allocate up to 5% of public funds for investment in “qualifying digital assets.” According to the bill’s criteria, these assets must have maintained a market capitalization of more than $500 billion over the past 12 months and must not be a stablecoin.
Under these strict requirements, Bitcoin is currently the only asset that qualifies. The leading cryptocurrency commands a total market cap of over $1.9 trillion, whereas Ethereum (ETH), the second-largest digital asset by market capitalization, stands at approximately $327 billion, falling short of the proposed $500 billion threshold.
If the bill is enacted, it is expected to go into effect on May 7. Commenting on the legislation’s development, Teuscher wrote in a recent X post:
Thrilled to join with @Dennis_Porter_ to announce HB230 which will allow the state to invest in digital assets. While Utah is the 11th state to introduce similar legislation, we will be the first to pass it. Utah continues to lead the nation in blockchain and digital innovation!
Various States Working Toward BTC Adoption
Teuscher’s statement reflects the broader movement among several US states to incorporate Bitcoin into their financial strategies. Utah is not alone in considering Bitcoin reserves, as more than 25 different states have introduced similar legislative measures aimed at creating a strategic Bitcoin reserve.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b1b4a/b1b4a5c2fa956bc79ced846f24551dd308bacd6f" alt="Utah"
In May 2024, New Hampshire State Representative Keith Ammon proposed diversifying the state’s financial reserves by investing in Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Later in October, Florida’s Chief Financial Officer, Jimmy Patronis, urged the state’s pension fund managers to explore Bitcoin investments as part of a broader strategy to strengthen financial resilience.
Similar bills have been introduced in other states, including Alabama, Massachusetts, South Dakota, Ohio, and Oklahoma. At press time, BTC trades at $96,075, up 0.6% in the past 24 hours.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/25bba/25bbaa7a99104b37fc3f6c5d2f4c70b7b46d5d14" alt="bitcoin"
Featured Image from Unsplash.com, Charts from Bitcoinlaws and TradingView.com
Regulation
US SEC Faces Backlash as Bybit Hack Highlights Lack of Oversight
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b73bd/b73bd9820616032d39da6df5fe444376e3c39ec2" alt=""
John Reed Stark has pointed out that one of the causes of a rising risk in crypto security is the US SEC cutting back on enforcement activities. This includes a latest attack on crypto trading platform Bybit which compromised and stole $1.5 billion belonging to customers.
The attack, which analysts describe as the largest crypto heist in history, has raised concerns about the lack of regulatory safeguards protecting investors.
US SEC Criticized as Bybit Hack Highlights Security Gaps
According to a recent post on X, Stark criticized the US SEC’s decision to roll back enforcement actions against cryptocurrency platforms. He pointed out that Bybit’s security breach is a direct consequence of weak regulatory oversight, leaving investors unprotected against sophisticated cyberattacks.
The attack on Bybit has been linked to North Korea’s Lazarus Group, a state-sponsored hacking collective known for targeting cryptocurrency exchanges. Analysts at blockchain forensics firm Elliptic reported that the group has stolen billions in crypto over the years, using complex laundering methods to fund North Korea’s missile programs. Without strict cybersecurity requirements enforced by the US SEC, exchanges remain vulnerable to such threats.
EX SEC John Reed Stark added,
“For crypto-exchanges, there’s no regulatory oversight; no consumer protections; no net capital requirements; no licensure of individuals; no US audits, inspections or examinations; no segregation of customer funds; no insurance, no cybersecurity requirements; no transparency; no accountability; no SEC/FDIC/OCC/etc. engagement and the list goes on”
Bybit’s $1.5 Billion Hack Exposes Risks
The Bybit hack has sparked concerns about the broader security risks in the crypto industry. Crypto exchanges lack oversight, unlike traditional financial institutions. They have no mandatory audits, capital reserves, or customer asset protection.
Bybit has responded by securing bridge loans to cover losses and working to recover the stolen assets. However, experts remain skeptical about the likelihood of successful recovery. This incident underscores how the absence of SEC enforcement leaves crypto investors exposed to large-scale losses with no regulatory safeguards.
With the US SEC pulling back from crypto-related investigations and enforcement, investors are left without key protections. The lack of insurance, consumer safeguards, and oversight mechanisms means that customers impacted by breaches like the Bybit hack have limited options for recovering their funds.
As the US SEC changes its regulatory stance, critics raise concerns. They argue that offshore crypto exchanges may still operate with weak security. This regulatory gap increases the risk of further large-scale hacks, placing investors at continued financial risk.
The US SEC decision to halt enforcement actions has sparked debates on crypto regulation. Ongoing cases against major exchanges are now on hold. Some industry participants see reduced oversight as a way to promote innovation. Others warn it increases risks of fraud, security breaches, and financial instability.
Following the recent crypto hack, Bybit has launched a $140 million recovery bounty to track and reclaim stolen funds. The exchange is offering rewards to individuals or organizations that provide information leading to the identification of hackers.
Disclaimer: The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
Regulation
Ripple Vs SEC Lawsuit May Take Longer To Settle Than Coinbase, Expert Warns
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e4207/e4207720545f594599b64ea1d0c520d8d121a48c" alt=""
Ripple vs SEC lawsuit: The legal battle between Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) may take more time to resolve than the ongoing case involving Coinbase, legal experts suggest.
With a ruling already in place and other procedural complexities, experts believe that Ripple’s case faces a different set of challenges compared to Coinbase’s recent settlement.
Ripple Vs SEC Lawsuit May Take Longer To Settle
After the US SEC disclosed plans to drop the Coinbase lawsuit, speculations and debate have taken a turn on the potential of the Ripple vs SEC lawsuit outcome and when. However, legal experts have noted the Ripple lawsuit may not be as smooth as Coinbase case. One major factor making the Ripple vs SEC lawsuit more complicated is the ruling already handed down by Judge Torres. According to the filings, Ripple had been ordered to pay a $125 million penalty as part of the settlement with the SEC.
Subsequently, according to experts, the firm’s options now include the possibility of requesting a penalty reduction, which would require both parties to reach an agreement. Legal expert Sherrie, in a recent conversation on X, noted that while a settlement may be reached, it is unlikely that the separation of sales, as stipulated by Judge Torres, would be altered.
Any request to reduce the penalty, she said, would need to be carefully considered by both Ripple and the SEC. Additionally, a request to dismiss the appeal would mean that the original ruling by Judge Torres remains in effect.
“It’s more complicated for Ripple, given the existing ruling. The penalty would still stand unless both parties agree to a reduction,” Sherrie stated.
Ripple Cross-Appeal and Timing Considerations
Ripple vs SEC lawsuit involves more layers due to its cross-appeal, which must also be taken into account. Legal analysts suggest that the timing of Ripple’s upcoming filing—scheduled for April—may be pivotal in determining the case’s trajectory.
Ripple’s request to extend the filing deadline to April 16, 2025, gives further credence to the idea that a resolution may take longer than anticipated. As Ripple’s legal team moves forward with the appeal, both Ripple and the SEC will have to consider how to approach the next steps. As Ripple works toward securing an agreement or a potential settlement, it may continue to assess the possibility of lowering the penalty.
“Ripple’s next filing deadline is in April, which gives both parties more time to negotiate,” said legal expert Bill Morgan.
Ripple lawsuit Appellate Court’s Role
The involvement of the Appellate Court could also extend the timeline for resolving the Ripple vs SEC lawsuit. The court has a panel of three judges who will review and hear the case, a process that takes additional time compared to the procedures of a District Court. This contrasts with the process seen in the Coinbase case, where a settlement was reached more quickly, possibly due to the absence of such complications.
Eleanor Terrett, a FOX journalist, noted that the SEC may also choose to seek an agreement with Ripple at the district court level. The judge overseeing the case, Torres, retains jurisdiction until August 2025, and any changes to the terms of the ruling would require her approval.
“There’s a lot of uncertainty with the Ripple case. The SEC’s next steps are unclear, and any decisions may need Torres’s approval,” said Terrett.
Jeremy Hogan also suggested that Ripple vs SEC lawsuit might take longer to resolve due to the multiple steps involved in the appeal process.
“This isn’t just a straightforward case of settlement or dismissal,” Hogan remarked
Disclaimer: The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
-
Ethereum23 hours ago
Grayscale’s Ethereum ETF On The Brink Of Major Change With NYSE’s Staking Proposal
-
Ethereum19 hours ago
Bitcoin Pepe set to reap big from its virality, fundamentals, and timing
-
Altcoin21 hours ago
Will Pi Coin Surpass XRP Price After Binance Listing?
-
Market20 hours ago
Bybit Assures Stability Amid $5.2 Billion Asset Outflow After Hack
-
Market19 hours ago
Mantle (MNT) Falls 10% as Bybit Hack Rattles Investors
-
Altcoin19 hours ago
Lawyer Estimates Maximum Timeframe for Ripple vs SEC Case Dismissal
-
Altcoin18 hours ago
Litecoin Whales On Buying Spree Sack 930K Coins Amid LTC ETF Buzz, What’s Next?
-
Market17 hours ago
Kanye West is Launching His Token Despite Past Criticism
✓ Share: