 |
|
|
|||||
Stablecoins might not send your digital wallet to the moon, but the less speculative side of cryptocurrency is definitely enjoying its moment in the sun. According to a new report from Fortune, credit card stalwart Mastercard wants to make a massive bet on infrastructure that links digital currencies to the normal financial world. Mastercard is in advanced talks to buy the stablecoin startup Zerohash for between $1.5 and $2 billion, Fortune reports. Zerohash, founded in 2017, provides banking companies a toolkit for providing their own cryptocurrency and stablecoin products. If the deal goes through, it would represent a major investment in cryptocurrency infrastructure from a traditional banking company. When reached by Fast Company, Mastercard and Zerohash declined to comment. The report comes weeks after Mastercard was reportedly competing to buy BVNK, a startup that helps businesses integrate transactions using stablecoins, which are digital currencies pegged to the value of traditional currencies. According to the same report by Fortune, Coinbase made it further in those acquisition talks, hence Mastercard turning to Zerohash for a parallel deal. BVNK didnt immediately respond to Fast Companys request for comment. Cryptos unsexy side Stablecoins serve as a bridge between the volatile world of cryptocurrencies, where massive price swings are the norm, and stable national currencies like the U.S. dollar. Because they arent really used for speculation or investment, stablecoins provide many of the perks promised by the crypto revolution like instant transactions and a digital ledger without the downside of assets that tend to spike and plunge. The less flashy side of crypto has come into the spotlight lately. Circles flashy IPO in June saw the stablecoin companys share price almost triple overnight. Earlier this year, fintech giant Stripe bought the crypto payments platform Bridge, paying $1.1 billion to build out its own stablecoin infrastructure. Chase also recently announced its own stablecoin play, connecting its credit card rewards program with the stablecoin USDC through Coinbase. Mastercard has signaled its interest in crypto, and specifically stablecoins, previously. Over the summer, it joined the Global Dollar Network, a consortium of companies boosting stablecoin adoption, alongside Robinhood and other companies from the crypto side of things. In 2021, Mastercard acquired the crypto analytics company CipherTrace, though it later shuttered most of the products it obtained through the deal. Traditional financial giants arent the only ones getting in on the stablecoin frenzy. Walmart and Amazon are both exploring the possibility of issuing or otherwise leaning on stablecoins, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal. Enabling payments through stable cryptocurrencies could allow retail giants to duck the billions they pay in transaction fees an existential threat to banks and credit card companies that make a sliver of every sale. Era of deregulation The explosion of stablecoin deals and soaring crypto values arent happening in a vacuum. Trumps second term has ushered in an era of dramatic deregulation in the U.S., and buzzy crypto startups and normie finance giants alike are racing to cash in. The president himself is pouring gasoline on the crypto wildfire, as his media company bets big on Bitcoin and his policies boost the Trump familys latest crypto venture strokes of self dealing that would have been a historic scandal in any other presidency. If 2025s spate of deals connecting the traditional finance world and stablecoin startups pans out, the least sexy side of cryptocurrency might have the most staying power and an actual everyday use case beyond sending your bank account to the moon.
Category:
E-Commerce
Mark Walter is the majority owner of the Los Angeles Lakers after the NBA Board of Governors approved his purchase of a controlling stake from the Buss family. The Lakers and the league confirmed the next step Thursday in a transaction that is expected to close shortly. The sale of the NBAs most valuable franchise was initially announced in June. Jeanie Buss will remain the Lakers governor under the deal for at least the next five years, and she will oversee day-to-day operations for the foreseeable future, the team said. Her father, Jerry Buss, bought the Lakers in 1979. But the Lakers are now primarily owned by Walter, the billionaire whose TWG Global investment group owns the Los Angeles Dodgers and the WNBAs Los Angeles Sparks. The group is also the majority owner of the new Cadillac Formula 1 team, which begins competition next year. The Lakers sale was completed with a franchise valuation of $10 billion, the highest ever set for a pro sports team. The Los Angeles Lakers are one of the most iconic franchises in all of sports, defined by a history of excellence and the relentless pursuit of greatness, Walter said in a statement. Few teams carry the legacy and global influence of the Lakers, and its a privilege to work alongside Jeanie Buss as we maintain that excellence and set the standard for success in this new era, both on and off the court. The Lakers have won 17 NBA championships and built a worldwide fan base through decades of consistent winning with many of the most famous players in basketball history, from George Mikan to LeBron James. Jerry Buss bought the Lakers, the NHLs Los Angeles Kings and the Forum arena from Jack Kent Cooke for $67.5 million. Over the past decade, I have come to know Mark well first as a businessman, then as a friend, and now as a colleague, Jeanie Buss said. He has demonstrated time and time again his commitment to bringing championships to Los Angeles, and on behalf of Lakers fans everywhere, I am beyond excited about what our future has in store. Greg Beacham, AP sports writer
Category:
E-Commerce
U.S. lawmakers have tried four times since September last year to close what they called a glaring loophole: China is getting around export bans on the sale of powerful American AI chips by renting them through U.S. cloud services instead. But the proposals prompted a flurry of activity from more than 100 lobbyists from tech companies and their trade associations trying to weigh in, according to disclosure reports. The result: All four times, the proposal failed, including just last month. Following a long-heralded meeting between leaders Donald Trump and Xi Jinping, the sale of U.S. technology to China remains among the thorniest issues the U.S. faces, with billions of dollars and the future of tech dominance at stake. But the tough talk about China obscures a deeper story: Even while warning about national security and human rights abuse, the U.S. government across five Republican and Democratic administrations has repeatedly allowed and even actively helped American firms to sell technology to Chinese police, government agencies, and surveillance companies, an Associated Press investigation has found. And time after time, despite bipartisan attempts, Congress has turned a blind eye to loopholes that allow China to work around its own rules, such as cloud services, third-party resellers, and holes in sanctions passed after the Tiananmen massacre. For example, despite U.S. export rules around advanced chips, China bought $20.7 billion worth of chipmaking equipment from U.S. companies in 2024 to bolster its homegrown industry, a report from a congressional committee this month warned. This reluctance to act reflects the tremendous wealth and power of the tech industry, which is more visible than ever under the Trump administration. And in recent months, the president himself has struck grand deals with Silicon Valley firms that even more closely tie the U.S. economy to tech exports to China, giving taxpayers a direct stake in the profits for the first time. In August, Trump announced a deal with chipmakers Nvidia and AMD to lift export controls on sales of advanced chips to China in exchange for a 15% cut of the revenue, despite concerns from national security experts that such chips will end up in the hands of Chinese military and intelligence services. Trump said after Thursdays meeting with Xi that China would follow up with Nvidia on the sales of chips but did not announce any resolution. Trump also has announced that the U.S. government has taken a 10 percent stake in Intel worth around $11 billion. Longtime Chinese activist Zhou Fengsuo said the U.S. government is letting American companies set the agenda and ignoring how they help Beijing surveil and censor its own people. In 1989, Zhou was a student leader during the Tiananmen protests, where hundreds and possibly thousands were shot and killed by the Chinese government. Zhou was arrested and imprisoned. Now a U.S. citizen, Zhou testified before Congress in 2024, calling on Washington to investigate the involvement of American tech companies in Chinese surveillance. An AP investigation in September found that American companies to a large degree designed and built Chinas surveillance state, playing a far greater role in enabling human rights abuses than previously known. Its driven by profit, and thats why these strategic discussions have been silenced or delayed, Zhou said. Im extremely disappointed. this is a strategic failure by the United States. Hundreds of millions in lobbying The sale of technology to China is contentious among both Republicans and Democrats, with some arguing for a harder stance. They are fighting a powerful opponent. An AP analysis of lobbying filings showed U.S. tech and telecom companies, as well as their trade associations, spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the past two decades on lobbyists who listed key bills impacting China-related trade on their quarterly disclosure reports, among other issues. Tech companies argue that further export restrictions will push China to develop its own domestic supply and strengthen its position in the global race for leadership in artificial intelligence. Continuing to ban U.S. computing from commercial markets only benefits foreign competition and undercuts President Trumps efforts to create jobs, reduce the trade deficit, and grow the economy, Nvidia said in a statement. Nvidia has also said that it does not make surveillance systems or software, does not work with police in China, and has not designed its H20 AI chip for police surveillance. Intel, which partnered with a Chinese fingerprinting company as recently as last year, has said the company follows export control policies, and did not address details of its deal with the U.S. government. The U.S. governments investment is a passive ownership, with no board representation, governance or information rights, Intel said in a statement. AMD did not respond. The White House and the Commerce and State departments also did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The AP investigation was based on dozens of open record requests, hundreds of pages of congressional testimony, lobbying disclosures, and dozens of interviews with current and former Chinese and American executives, politicians, and former federal officials. Under the cloud services loophole, Chinese companies barred from accessing cutting-edge chips can use Microsoft Azure or Amazon Web Services overseas instead to train their AI models. Microsoft and AWS also both advertise the capacity to store video surveillance footage on their cloud services for Chinese customers. For example, SDIC Contech, a state-owned tech company that works with AI, sought access to AWS and Microsoft Azure big data analytics services, procurement bids show. And Shanghai Qi Zhi Institute, a government-backed research institute working on sensitive technologies such as encryption, sought access to $280,000 worth of Azure OpenAI cloud services from Microsoft. Even sanctioned Chinese companies can use AWS and Microsoft Azure to offer surveillance abilities to customers overseas. For example, despite U.S. sanctions over human rights abuses in Xinjiang in 201, Dahua and Hikvision, Chinas two largest surveillance companies, use AWS to offer networked surveillance abroad, according to marketing material on the company websites. Hikvision markets a video surveillance platform called HikCentral to private companies overseas, which can be also deployed on Azure, according to a post on Hikvisions website this year. Microsoft denied providing services to Hikvision or partnering with them to provide services to others. OpenAI, which provides its advanced AI models through Microsofts Azure cloud platform, said it was subject to Microsofts policies and doesnt support China’s access to its services. AWS did not respond on the record to questions about the cloud services loophole. Another enduring loophole is in the restrictions passed after the Tiananmen massacre that didnt include newer policing technologies, such as security cameras, surveillance drives, or facial recognition systems. In 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2013, lawmakers introduced bills to try and close the loophole. All failed. The U.S. government under both Republican and Democratic presidents has made other attempts to regulate tech surveillance exports to China. In 2008, the Department of Commerce asked for comment on whether to include biometric devices and integrated security systems under controlled exports, but ran out of time before the next administration came in. In 2014 and 2015, it tried to tighten controls on surveillance products, but most fell through. In 2024, it sought to restrict exports of face-recognition systems and bar many more military, police, and intelligence end users from receiving U.S. goods, with no success. Some politicians on both sides of the aisle blame the failures in part on the money and political influence of tech companies. I think weve been naive or complicit in the extreme, said New Jersey GOP Rep. Chris Smith. The U.S., he said, has been selling and conveying to a malevolent power the ability to destroy us and destroy like-minded Western democracies. What do all those companies all have in common? A big wallet, said Ron Wyden, a Democratic senator from Oregon. That is as much as anything is whats behind the fact we havent made as much progress. A history of failures to close loopholes The first round of U.S. prohibitions on Chinese police came after the Tiananmen massacre and applied to crime control and detection equipment. They largely stopped U.S. companies from exporting goods to Chinese entities such as restraints, helmets, shields and batons. But the controls were narrowly confined to largely low-tech goods, leaving out advanced technologies that could be used by police and leading at times to puzzling priorities. U.S. regulators warned sex shops against shipping novelty gold handcuffs to China. At the same time, they broadly permitted Silicon Valley companies to sell routers, servers, software, and, more recently, AI-powered surveillance systems to Chinese police. For example, despite explicit restrictions on fingerprint recognition systems, U.S. companies still were able to sell gear to process, store and compare fingerprints. In 2006, with bipartisan support, Smith introduced the Global Online Freedom Act to curtail the involvement of American tech companies in Chinese surveillance. Smith drew parallels with IBMs sale of computing gear to Nazi Germany, which has been well documented by historians. IBM told AP in a follow-up statement that the claim that IBM knowingly collaborated with Nazi Germany was false and has been rejected by credible historians. Associations representing the tech and telecommunications industries and dozens of companies stepped up their lobbying against Smiths proposal, disclosures show. The companies argued the computers, servers and routers they sold in China were no different from what they sold to other countries. Industry groups and individual companies also submitted hundreds of comments to regulators, hoping to influence China-related export regulations. Smiths bill went nowhere. Money talks When they flood certain members on strategic committees with the money, PAC money and the like, how much easier it is to listen to their narrative that somehow theyre part of the reform? said Smith. Tech sales to China continued, sometimes with direct government support. Numerous archived webpages show that the U.S. Commercial Service, the export-promoting arm of the Commerce Department, played a crucial role for more than a decade in connecting U.S. vendors to Chinese security agencies and key government officials, including through its marquee Gold Key Matching service. In 2004, the Commercial Service invited American companies selling security technologies and equipment to show off their products at a Chinese security exposition. Two years later, it advertised opportunities for American firms in the safety and security market, followed by another publication later describing market opportunities for foreign security products such as inspection control and guard communication systems. Archived webpages also show that under both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations, the Commercial Service steadily promoted U.S. participation in policing trade shows, even those that showcased biological identification technologies or were initiated by the Chinese Communist Party. Under Bush, the Commerce Department in 2007 hosted a webinar about how to sell to the Chinese security market and promote surveillance tools to Chinas public sector. For just $35, the federal agency could offer attendees market entry-strategies and long-term market penetration plans, an archived webpage shows. Jeanette Chu, who then worked at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and helped give the 2007 webinar, recalled sometimes having concerns. I used to ask myself all the time, what is the scary potential of each item? said Chu, now a national security and trade expert advising industry. Despite promises to nail shut Washingtons revolving door, President Barack Obama like presidents before and after him gave former industry lobbyists and allies top jobs, including Eric Hirschhorn in the Commerce Department, who represented a trade group that lobbied for tech companies exporting abroad. Hirschhorn wrote that Beijings surveillance abilities were nothing compared to the half-illion surveillance cameras blanketing London. He was put in charge of the office that administers U.S. export controls. In an interview, Hirschhorn said export controls alone were an inefficient way to defend human rights. You can use a computer to type an order or type a love note, he told AP. Are you not going to sell computers to China because one out of every 10,000 of them will be used to store data about a dissident? In 2010, the U.S. State Departments human rights report warned of police surveillance, harassment and detentions of activists. Yet U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman led a mission to promote American business interests in the far-west region of Xinjiang, where authorities had arrested thousands of ethnic Uyghurs and cut internet access after deadly unrest the year before. Huntsman did not respond to requests for comment. That same year, the Commercial Service spotlighted opportunities for U.S. companies to sell equipment directly to Chinas central government to install a city-wide infrastructure of security, surveillance, and alarm systems” on its website. A 2015 State Department draft plan for smart city cooperation obtained by AP proposed that China and the U.S. collaborate on joint research, such as on crime and urban security, and include private sector players such IBM. Additional documents AP obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request show the U.S. government also sought active counter-terrorism cooperation with China, which gave tech companies a chance for closer contact with Chinese authorities even as Beijing broadly labelled protest or dissent among Uyghurs as terrorism. Kevin Wolf, then an assistant secretary in charge of export controls at Commerce, said as news about human rights abuses inside China kept surfacing, he worried about U.S. innovations falling into the wrong hands. Wolf said he began drafting a rule to regulate certain surveillance gear sales in early 2016. The problem I was struggling with was, mass surveillance can involve everyday ordinary common items: its cameras, its software, its facial recognition stuff and 99 percent of all of those applications are perfectly benign, said Wolf, now a compliance attorney for industry. So if you were to say, ban cameras that can read someones face, you blow up international trade. Wolfs colleagues told him the draft rule was too complicated, Wolf said, and it foundered. In 2018, Congress passed the Export Control Reform Act, giving Commerce authority to make export control rules about advanced technologies. In 2019 and 2020, the Trump administration sanctioned some Chinese officials and surveillance firms over atrocities in Xinjiang. But sales of surveillance equipment continued, albeit at a slower pace though references to working with the Chinese police would disappear from annual Commerce Department reports for U.S. industry. In 2021, Joe Biden put out an executive order describing Chinese surveillance tech companies as unusual and extraordinary threats that enabled serious human rights abuses. In his final months in office, Bidens administration drew up sprawling rules for exporting advanced computer chips used to develop AI systems. Commerce also floated an updated version of Wolfs draft rule to keep facial recognition and other mass surveillance tools from reaching military and intelligence agencies and companies, including in China. But once again, Washington lobbyists, lawyers and politicians pushed back. The result would slow business considerably and likely result in the loss of customers that do not present any national security or human rights concerns, said a Chamber of Commerce filing from late last year. The proposed rule, in the end, stalled out. Gulbahar Haitiwaji, an ethnic Uyghur living in France, says little has changed since she testified to Congress in 2023 urging the U.S. government to stop American companies from continuing to be complicit in surveilling our people”. Haitiwaji was arrested and detained in internment camps in Xinjiang for more than two years, after policing systems based on U.S. technology led Chinese officers to identify her as a terrorist. She was under constant, excruciating surveillance, with cameras watching her even in the toilet. After she was released in 2019, she still found herself living in what she calls an open-air prison, with every move monitored, until she finally left Xinjiang later that year. She said U.S. tech companies show little accountability. It’s truly disappointing that the United States, one of the most powerful countries in the world, would sell such technology to China despite knowing the potential for serious consequences,” Haitiwaji said. By Garance Burke, Dake Kang, and Byron Tau, Associated Press Former AP journalist Trenton Daniel contributed to this report.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||