News 
Coin Information 
About us 
Customer Service 
Ripple's CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, expressed concerns over the current landscape for cryptocurrency businesses in the United States. Speaking at Token 2049 in Singapore on September 12, he indicated that America is perhaps the least attractive location to launch a cryptocurrency venture at this moment.
Garlinghouse's comments stem from Ripple's ongoing legal dispute with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). He believes the regulatory body is embroiled in a political struggle against the cryptocurrency sector, evidenced by their legal actions. However, Garlinghouse also noted a potential change in judicial sentiment, citing Ripple and Grayscale's recent legal victories over the SEC. Although these verdicts aren't binding, they offer some clarity for crypto firms operating in the U.S.
Instead of adopting a combative stance, Garlinghouse wishes the U.S. would emulate countries like Singapore, the United Kingdom, the UAE, and Switzerland. These nations have managed to foster a positive environment for cryptocurrency innovation while ensuring consumer safety.
While the U.S. remains a significant market for Ripple, Garlinghouse mentioned that the company is exploring opportunities in nations that appear to be more forward-thinking regarding blockchain technology's advantages.
During the same event, OKX president, Hong Fang, highlighted the importance of focusing on product development, technology advancement, and supporting sensible regulations. Fang also shared insights on the readiness of the industry for innovations like a spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund. He emphasized that while such an ETF might attract institutional money, the broader industry might not be fully prepared to deal with Bitcoin's inherent volatility or the responsibility of expanding the Bitcoin-based application ecosystem.
Fang's observations reflect a sentiment that the cryptocurrency world is still evolving. As it stands, building on Bitcoin or other platforms necessitates a balance between innovation and infrastructure stability.
Comment 0