This paper examines how cooperative game theory principles, particularly through the ERC-5173 protocol and Untrading platform, are transforming traditional financial markets from zero-sum to positive-sum systems.
Building on Robert Axelrod's seminal work on cooperation, we explore how blockchain technology and smart contracts can implement theoretical insights to create more equitable, efficient, and sustainable financial markets.
Game theory is a mathematical framework used to analyze strategic interactions, where each participant’s outcome depends not only on their own actions but also on the actions of others.
This framework helps explain how individuals and entities make decisions in competitive and cooperative scenarios.
It was formally introduced by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern in their groundbreaking work Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1944) [1].
Over time, game theory has expanded beyond its origins in mathematics and economics to influence fields as diverse as political science, biology, and computer science. It offers profound insights into how rational agents navigate competition and cooperation in complex systems.
Among its most compelling applications is the exploration of cooperative strategies, highlighted by Robert Axelrod's influential experiments on the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD) [2]. The IPD involves repeated interactions between players, where they must choose between cooperation and defection.
It demonstrates how strategies like mutual cooperation, though counterintuitive in single interactions, can yield long-term benefits when trust and reciprocity are established over time.
These experiments demonstrated how cooperation, often counterintuitive in competitive scenarios, can be the most advantageous strategy over the long term.
Axelrod's findings laid the foundation for applying game theory principles to real-world challenges, including the transformation of financial markets.
P(A) + P(B) + V > 0
Where:
Untrading leverages these principles through its ERC-5173 protocol, fostering trust and shared value creation within innovative financial micro-communities known as “Flows.”
By eliminating traditional transaction fees and aligning incentives with collective success, Untrading exemplifies the practical application of cooperative strategies like Tit-for-Tat [3].
Specifically, Untrading integrates the Tit-for-Tat approach by rewarding participants who consistently cooperate within its micro-community reward system, “Flows.” Each participant’s reputation score influences their benefits, encouraging reciprocal behavior.
The protocol also includes mechanisms to penalize defection, such as reduced rewards or exclusion from community benefits, while promoting forgiveness by allowing defectors to rebuild their standing through future cooperation. This strategic alignment ensures that mutual trust and collective success are reinforced over time.
This approach challenges conventional financial models and establishes a new paradigm centered on fairness, transparency, and community-driven growth. Untrading leverages these principles through its ERC-5173 protocol, fostering trust and shared value creation within innovative financial micro-communities known as “Flows.”
By eliminating traditional transaction fees and aligning incentives with collective success, Untrading exemplifies the practical application of cooperative strategies like Tit-for-Tat. Specifically, Untrading integrates the Tit-for-Tat approach by rewarding participants who consistently cooperate within its micro-community reward system, “Flows.” Each participant’s reputation score influences their benefits, encouraging reciprocal behavior.
The protocol also includes mechanisms to penalize defection, such as reduced rewards or exclusion from community benefits, while promoting forgiveness by allowing defectors to rebuild their standing through future cooperation.
This strategic alignment ensures that mutual trust and collective success are reinforced over time. This approach challenges conventional financial models and establishes a new paradigm centered on fairness, transparency, and community-driven growth.
By embracing cooperation and solving the agency problems inherent in fee-based systems, Untrading redefines financial equity and promotes sustainable, shared prosperity. Discover how game theory concepts, such as Nash Equilibrium and reciprocal strategies, are not just theoretical constructs but actionable tools for driving meaningful change in the world of finance.
Game theory analyzes strategic interactions through three key components:
The Nash Equilibrium [4], a cornerstone concept, describes scenarios where no participant can unilaterally improve their position by changing strategy. For strategies si* and utilities ui:
ui(si*, s-i*) ≥ ui(si, s-i*) for all si ∈ Si
Games can be categorized as:
Nash Equilibrium [5]: Proposed by John Nash, it describes a scenario where no player can benefit by changing their strategy while others keep theirs unchanged.
Dominant Strategy [6]: A strategy that results in a better payoff for one player, no matter what the others do.
Backward Induction [7]: Used in sequential games to determine strategies by working backward from the end of the game to the beginning.
Professor Robert Axelrod's experiments on the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma (IPD) [9] have significantly advanced our understanding of cooperative strategies:
A classic scenario where two players must choose between cooperation and defection. The Prisoner's Dilemma represents a fundamental conflict between individual and collective interests. In its canonical form:
Cooperate Defect
Cooperate (R,R) (S,T)
Defect (T,S) (P,P)
Where:
R > T > P > S ensures cooperation is optimal.
For cooperation to be the optimal long-term strategy:
1. Reward > Temptation > Punishment > Sucker
R > T > P > S
2. Mutual cooperation must exceed alternating exploitation
2R > T + S
In an infinitely repeated game with discount factor δ, the expected payoff E(π) for the TFT strategy against itself is [10]:
E(π) = R + δR + δ²R + ... = R/(1-δ)
Where
For a strategy s* to be evolutionarily stable, as defined by Smith and Price:
E(s*, s*) > E(s, s*) for all alternative strategies s
The payoff for strategy i against strategy j over n iterations is [11]:
P(i,j) = Σ(t=1 to n) δ^(t-1) * π(i,j,t)
Where:
E(s*, s*) > E(s, s*) for all alternative strategies s
In the 1980s, Axelrod organized tournaments to test strategies for the IPD. The most successful was:
st = ot-1 where st is strategy at time t
The robustness R of a strategy is measured by [14]:
R(s) = Σ(i=1 to n) wi * P(s,si) / n
Where:
Axelrod’s analysis revealed the conditions under which cooperation emerges and thrives:
Traditional financial markets often operate as zero-sum or negative-sum games, where one participant's gain typically co mes at another's expense. Untrading, through the ERC-5173 protocol, reimagines this paradigm by implementing cooperative game theory principles to create positive-sum outcomes.
Untrading leverages the principles of cooperation to transform the financial market system. By using the ERC-5173 protocol, Untrading empowers communities to eliminate traditional market predictions and prioritize shared value creation.
Participants in Untrading’s micro-community reward system, known as “Flows,” generate and share profits only after realizing gains, fostering mutual trust and alignment of interests.
Unlike traditional financial platforms that rely on transaction fees or commissions, Untrading’s model removes agency problems and focuses on equitable growth for all members.
This approach mirrors the robustness and reciprocity of cooperative strategies like Tit-for-Tat, ensuring that the system’s incentives align with long-term collective success.
From Zero-Sum to Positive-Sum
Traditional trading can be modeled as:
P(A) + P(B) + F ≤ 0
Where:
In contrast, Untrading's cooperative model aims for:
P(A) + P(B) + F + V > 0
Where:
The protocol implements a modified version of Axelrod's Tit-for-Tat strategy [15]:
R(p) = B(c) * M(r) + C(s)
Where:
1. Fee Structure Elimination
Traditional market fees are replaced with:
V(t) = Σ(i=1 to n) (P(i) * C(i))
Where:
Time-Weighted Reputation Score [17]:
Rep(u) = Σ(s=1 to m) (T(s) * W(f(s)))
Where:
Core Components
solidity
contract EnhancedReputationSystem {
struct ReputationData {
uint256 baseScore;
uint256 lastUpdateBlock;
uint256 transactionCount;
uint256 successfulTransactions;
mapping(uint256 => int256) behaviorHistory;
}
mapping(address => ReputationData) private reputationData;
uint256 private constant HISTORY_WINDOW = 1000;
uint256 private constant MAX_REPUTATION = 10000;
uint256 private constant DECAY_RATE = 995; // 99.5% per period
uint256 private constant DECAY_PERIOD = 50400; // ~1 week in blocks
function updateReputation(
address user,
int256 behavior,
uint256 transactionValue
) external onlyAuthorized {
ReputationData storage data = reputationData[user];
// Apply time decay
uint256 elapsed = block.number - data.lastUpdateBlock;
if (elapsed > 0) {
uint256 decayPeriods = elapsed / DECAY_PERIOD;
data.baseScore = data.baseScore *
(DECAY_RATE ** decayPeriods) / (1000 ** decayPeriods);
}
// Update behavior history
uint256 historyIndex = block.number % HISTORY_WINDOW;
data.behaviorHistory[historyIndex] = behavior;
// Calculate variance penalty
uint256 variancePenalty = calculateVariancePenalty(user);
// Update base score
uint256 scoreChange = calculateScoreChange(behavior, transactionValue);
data.baseScore = Math.min(
(data.baseScore + scoreChange) * (1000 - variancePenalty) / 1000,
MAX_REPUTATION
);
data.lastUpdateBlock = block.number;
data.transactionCount++;
if (behavior > 0) data.successfulTransactions++;
emit ReputationUpdated(user, data.baseScore, block.number);
}
function calculateVariancePenalty(
address user
) internal view returns (uint256) {
int256[] memory history = getRecentBehaviorHistory(user);
if (history.length < 2) return 0;
// Calculate variance using standard deviation
int256 sum = 0;
int256 squareSum = 0;
for (uint i = 0; i < history.length; i++) {
sum += history[i];
squareSum += history[i] * history[i];
}
int256 mean = sum / int256(history.length);
int256 variance = (squareSum / int256(history.length)) - (mean * mean);
// Convert variance to penalty (0-200 range)
return uint256(Math.min(variance * 10 / 1000, 200));
}
}
Balancing influence with stake and reputation [18]:
V(p) = min(R(p) * S(t), M(cap))
Where:
The protocol distributes value according to [19]:
D(p) = [V(t) * R(p)] / (Σ(i=1 to n) R(i))
Where:
solidity
contract ValueDistributionV2 {
struct DistributionPeriod {
uint256 totalValue;
uint256 totalWeight;
uint256 startTime;
uint256 endTime;
bool finalized;
mapping(address => bool) claimed;
}
mapping(uint256 => DistributionPeriod) public periods;
uint256 public currentPeriodId;
uint256 public constant PERIOD_DURATION = 86400; // 24 hours
uint256 public constant CLAIM_WINDOW = 604800; // 1 week
function startNewPeriod() external onlyAuthorized {
require(
block.timestamp >=
periods[currentPeriodId].startTime + PERIOD_DURATION,
"Current period not ended"
);
currentPeriodId++;
DistributionPeriod storage newPeriod = periods[currentPeriodId];
newPeriod.startTime = block.timestamp;
newPeriod.endTime = block.timestamp + PERIOD_DURATION;
emit NewPeriodStarted(currentPeriodId, block.timestamp);
}
function calculateUserShare(
address user,
uint256 periodId
) public view returns (uint256) {
DistributionPeriod storage period = periods[periodId];
require(period.finalized, "Period not finalized");
require(!period.claimed[user], "Already claimed");
require(
block.timestamp <= period.endTime + CLAIM_WINDOW,
"Claim window expired"
);
uint256 userWeight = calculateUserWeight(user, periodId);
if (userWeight == 0 || period.totalWeight == 0) return 0;
return period.totalValue * userWeight / period.totalWeight;
}
function calculateUserWeight(
address user,
uint256 periodId
) internal view returns (uint256) {
uint256 reputation = reputationSystem.getScore(user);
uint256 participation = getParticipationMetric(user, periodId);
uint256 stability = getStabilityMetric(user, periodId);
return (reputation * participation * stability) / (1000 * 1000);
}
}
1. Liquidity Provision
Unlike traditional AMMs where liquidity providers compete, Untrading implements cooperative liquidity pools [20]:
LP(r) = B(p) * [1 + C(m)]
Where:
solidity
contract CooperativeLiquidityPool is ReentrancyGuard {
struct Pool {
uint256 totalLiquidity;
mapping(address => uint256) shares;
uint256 lastUpdateBlock;
uint256 utilizationRate;
uint256 rewardRate;
}
struct PoolMetrics {
uint256 depth;
uint256 volatility;
uint256 efficiency;
}
mapping(bytes32 => Pool) public pools;
mapping(bytes32 => PoolMetrics) public poolMetrics;
function provideLiquidity(
bytes32 poolId,
uint256 amount
) external nonReentrant returns (uint256) {
Pool storage pool = pools[poolId];
// Calculate shares based on cooperative mechanism
uint256 shares = calculatePoolShares(poolId, amount);
// Transfer tokens
require(
token.transferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), amount),
"Transfer failed"
);
// Update pool state
pool.totalLiquidity = pool.totalLiquidity.add(amount);
pool.shares[msg.sender] = pool.shares[msg.sender].add(shares);
updatePoolMetrics(poolId);
emit LiquidityProvided(msg.sender, poolId, amount, shares);
return shares;
}
function calculateRewards(
bytes32 poolId,
address provider
) public view returns (uint256) {
Pool storage pool = pools[poolId];
uint256 baseReward = pool.rewardRate *
pool.shares[provider] /
pool.totalLiquidity;
uint256 utilizationBonus = calculateUtilizationBonus(
pool.utilizationRate,
provider
);
uint256 stabilityBonus = calculateStabilityBonus(provider);
return baseReward + utilizationBonus + stabilityBonus;
}
function updatePoolMetrics(bytes32 poolId) internal {
PoolMetrics storage metrics = poolMetrics[poolId];
metrics.depth = calculatePoolDepth(poolId);
metrics.volatility = calculatePoolVolatility(poolId);
metrics.efficiency = calculatePoolEfficiency(poolId);
emit PoolMetricsUpdated(poolId, metrics);
}
}
Cooperative price discovery mechanism [21]:
P(f) = (Σ(i=1 to n) W(i) * P(i)) / (Σ(i=1 to n) W(i))
Where:
solidity
contract CooperativePriceDiscovery {
struct PricePoint {
uint256 timestamp;
uint256 price;
uint256 weight;
uint256 confidence;
address provider;
}
struct TimeWindow {
uint256 totalWeight;
mapping(address => PricePoint) pricePoints;
uint256 weightedPrice;
uint256 confidenceScore;
}
mapping(uint256 => TimeWindow) public windows;
uint256 public constant WINDOW_SIZE = 300; // 5 minutes
function submitPrice(
uint256 price,
uint256 confidence
) external returns (bool) {
require(confidence <= 100, "Invalid confidence score");
uint256 windowId = block.timestamp / WINDOW_SIZE;
TimeWindow storage window = windows[windowId];
// Calculate submission weight based on provider's reputation
uint256 weight = calculateProviderWeight(msg.sender);
// Update window data
window.pricePoints[msg.sender] = PricePoint({
timestamp: block.timestamp,
price: price,
weight: weight,
confidence: confidence,
provider: msg.sender
});
window.totalWeight = window.totalWeight.add(weight);
updateWeightedPrice(windowId);
emit PriceSubmitted(msg.sender, price, weight, confidence);
return true;
}
function getFairPrice() public view returns (
uint256 price,
uint256 confidence
) {
uint256 currentWindow = block.timestamp / WINDOW_SIZE;
TimeWindow storage window = windows[currentWindow];
return (window.weightedPrice, window.confidenceScore);
}
function calculateProviderWeight(
address provider
) internal view returns (uint256) {
uint256 baseWeight = reputationSystem.getScore(provider);
uint256 accuracy = historicalAccuracy[provider];
uint256 participation = participationScore[provider];
return (baseWeight * accuracy * participation) / (100 * 100);
}
}
Nash Equilibrium in Cooperative Trading
The system is designed so that cooperation becomes the dominant strategy:
The protocol ensures that cooperative strategies dominate through:
1. Market Efficiency
2. Community Value
3. Risk Management
solidity
interface IERC5173 {
function cooperativeTransaction(
address partner,
uint256 value,
bytes calldata data
) external returns (bool);
function getReputationScore(address user)
external view returns (uint256);
}
solidity
mapping(address => uint256) private reputationScores;
mapping(address => Transaction[]) private userHistory;
3. Governance Model
The protocol implements a cooperative governance model:
V(p) = min(R(p) * S(t), M(cap))
Where:
V(p) = Voting power of participant p
R(p) = Normalized reputation score (0 ≤ R(p) ≤ 1)
S(t) = Stake time in blocks
M(cap) = Maximum voting power cap (constant)
The min() Function:
Takes the smaller value between:
Ensures no participant can exceed the power cap regardless of their stake or reputation
solidity
contract CooperativeGovernance {
struct Proposal {
bytes32 id;
address proposer;
uint256 startBlock;
uint256 endBlock;
bytes32 ipfsHash;
mapping(address => uint256) votes;
uint256 totalVotes;
bool executed;
mapping(address => bool) hasVoted;
}
mapping(bytes32 => Proposal) public proposals;
struct VotingPower {
uint256 baseVotes;
uint256 reputationBonus;
uint256 stakingBonus;
uint256 participationBonus;
}
function createProposal(
bytes32 ipfsHash,
uint256 votingPeriod
) external returns (bytes32) {
require(
calculateVotingPower(msg.sender).baseVotes >=
minProposalThreshold,
"Insufficient voting power"
);
bytes32 proposalId = keccak256(
abi.encodePacked(
block.timestamp,
msg.sender,
ipfsHash
)
);
Proposal storage newProposal = proposals[proposalId];
newProposal.id = proposalId;
newProposal.proposer = msg.sender;
newProposal.startBlock = block.number;
newProposal.endBlock = block.number.add(votingPeriod);
newProposal.ipfsHash = ipfsHash;
emit ProposalCreated(
proposalId,
msg.sender,
ipfsHash,
block.number,
block.number.add(votingPeriod)
);
return proposalId;
}
function castVote(
bytes32 proposalId,
uint256 amount
) external returns (bool) {
Proposal storage proposal = proposals[proposalId];
require(!proposal.hasVoted[msg.sender], "Already voted");
require(
block.number >= proposal.startBlock &&
block.number <= proposal.endBlock,
"Voting period invalid"
);
VotingPower memory power = calculateVotingPower(msg.sender);
uint256 weightedVotes = amount.mul(
power.baseVotes.add(
power.reputationBonus
).add(
power.stakingBonus
).add(
power.participationBonus
)
).div(10000);
proposal.votes[msg.sender] = weightedVotes;
proposal.totalVotes = proposal.totalVotes.add(weightedVotes);
proposal.hasVoted[msg.sender] = true;
emit VoteCast(proposalId, msg.sender, weightedVotes);
return true;
}
}
solidity
contract CooperativeAnalytics {
struct MetricSnapshot {
uint256 timestamp;
uint256 value;
bytes32 metricType;
}
struct AggregatedMetrics {
uint256 mean;
uint256 median;
uint256 standardDeviation;
uint256 min;
uint256 max;
}
mapping(bytes32 => MetricSnapshot[]) public metricHistory;
mapping(bytes32 => AggregatedMetrics) public aggregatedMetrics;
function recordMetric(
bytes32 metricType,
uint256 value
) external onlyAuthorized {
metricHistory[metricType].push(MetricSnapshot({
timestamp: block.timestamp,
value: value,
metricType: metricType
}));
updateAggregatedMetrics(metricType);
}
function generateReport(
bytes32[] calldata metricTypes,
uint256 startTime,
uint256 endTime
) external view returns (bytes memory) {
// Implement report generation logic
// Return encoded report data
}
function getMetricTrend(
bytes32 metricType,
uint256 timeframe
) public view returns (int256) {
// Calculate trend using linear regression
// Return trend direction and magnitude
}
}
solidity
contract SecureTransactionProcessor is ReentrancyGuard, Pausable {
using SafeMath for uint256;
struct TransactionLimit {
uint256 perTransaction;
uint256 perDay;
uint256 dailyUsed;
uint256 lastReset;
}
mapping(address => TransactionLimit) public limits;
mapping(address => mapping(bytes32 => bool)) public executedTxHashes;
uint256 public constant REPLAY_PROTECTION_DURATION = 86400; // 24 hours
modifier preventReplay(bytes32 txHash) {
require(
!executedTxHashes[msg.sender][txHash],
"Transaction already executed"
);
_;
executedTxHashes[msg.sender][txHash] = true;
}
modifier withinLimits(uint256 amount) {
TransactionLimit storage limit = limits[msg.sender];
// Reset daily limit if needed
if (block.timestamp >= limit.lastReset + 86400) {
limit.dailyUsed = 0;
limit.lastReset = block.timestamp;
}
require(amount <= limit.perTransaction, "Exceeds transaction limit");
require(
limit.dailyUsed.add(amount) <= limit.perDay,
"Exceeds daily limit"
);
_;
limit.dailyUsed = limit.dailyUsed.add(amount);
}
function executeTransaction(
uint256 amount,
bytes32 txHash,
bytes calldata data
) external
nonReentrant
whenNotPaused
preventReplay(txHash)
withinLimits(amount)
{
// Validate inputs
require(amount > 0, "Invalid amount");
require(data.length >= 4, "Invalid data");
// Execute transaction
bool success = _executeTransactionLogic(amount, data);
require(success, "Transaction failed");
emit TransactionExecuted(msg.sender, amount, txHash);
}
}
1. Cross-Chain Cooperation
solidity
contract CrossChainCooperation {
struct ChainData {
uint256 chainId;
bytes32 lastSyncHash;
uint256 lastSyncBlock;
bool active;
}
mapping(uint256 => ChainData) public connectedChains;
struct CrossChainMessage {
uint256 sourceChain;
uint256 targetChain;
bytes32 messageHash;
bytes payload;
uint256 timestamp;
bool executed;
}
mapping(bytes32 => CrossChainMessage) public messages;
function sendCrossChainMessage(
uint256 targetChain,
bytes calldata payload
) external returns (bytes32) {
require(
connectedChains[targetChain].active,
"Target chain not connected"
);
bytes32 messageHash = keccak256(
abi.encodePacked(
block.chainid,
targetChain,
payload,
block.timestamp
)
);
messages[messageHash] = CrossChainMessage({
sourceChain: block.chainid,
targetChain: targetChain,
messageHash: messageHash,
payload: payload,
timestamp: block.timestamp,
executed: false
});
emit MessageSent(messageHash, targetChain, payload);
return messageHash;
}
function receiveCrossChainMessage(
bytes32 messageHash,
bytes calldata proof
) external returns (bool) {
require(
validateMessageProof(messageHash, proof),
"Invalid message proof"
);
CrossChainMessage storage message = messages[messageHash];
require(!message.executed, "Message already executed");
bool success = executeMessage(message.payload);
require(success, "Message execution failed");
message.executed = true;
emit MessageExecuted(messageHash);
return true;
}
}
2. AI Integration
Untrading's implementation of cooperative game theory through the ERC-5173 protocol demonstrates how blockchain technology can transform traditional zero-sum financial markets into positive-sum systems.
By aligning incentives, eliminating unnecessary friction, and fostering cooperation, the protocol creates sustainable value for all participants.
As the protocol evolves, its cooperative principles could serve as a template for redesigning other economic systems to prioritize collective benefit over individual advantage.
Axelrod’s work underscores the long-term benefits of cooperation in repeated interactions. While defection may yield short-term gains, cooperative strategies like Tit-for-Tat promote stability, trust, and mutual benefit over time.
By embracing reciprocity, transparency, and forgiveness, individuals and organizations can navigate competitive environments more effectively, fostering equitable and efficient outcomes.
Untrading’s innovative use of cooperative strategies through the ERC-5173 protocol offers a blueprint for building a new financial market system by aligning its core mechanisms with principles of game theory.
The protocol applies Tit-for-Tat strategies by rewarding participants for mutual cooperation and deterring exploitation through transparent reputation systems.
It also integrates Nash Equilibrium principles, ensuring that cooperative strategies become dominant by balancing rewards and penalties.
By incorporating mathematical frameworks for value distribution and reputation scoring, Untrading creates an ecosystem where cooperation is not only incentivized but becomes the rational choice for long-term success.
This system emphasizes transparency, equitable value distribution, and community-driven growth, addressing the inherent flaws in traditional markets that disproportionately benefit financial elites and institutions.
By eliminating transaction fees and aligning incentives with collective success, Untrading democratizes access to financial opportunities, ensuring that profits and benefits are shared more broadly across all participants.
In a world where trust in financial systems is increasingly eroded, Untrading’s model provides a compelling vision for the future. Its commitment to fostering cooperation, transparency, and shared prosperity positions it as the ideal foundation for a new global financial paradigm.
If a financial market system is to be rebuilt with equity and sustainability at its core, Untrading is leading the charge, proving that a better, cooperative approach is not only possible but essential.
The success of this model suggests potential applications beyond financial markets, including:
For further reading, explore Axelrod’s The Evolution of Cooperation and academic resources on the applications of game theory, including its transformative potential in financial markets.
On-Chain Media articles are for educational purposes only. We strive to provide accurate and timely information. This information should not be construed as financial advice or an endorsement of any particular cryptocurrency, project, or service. The cryptocurrency market is highly volatile and unpredictable.Before making any investment decisions, you are strongly encouraged to conduct your own independent research and due diligence
Tags :
0 Comments
Show More
US-based crypto startups snag nearly half of global venture capital in Q4 2024, signaling investor confidence and a potential boom in 2025 amid an anticipated shift in the regulatory landscape.
Solana-based memecoin launchpad Pump.fun faces a class-action lawsuit alleging securities violations, exploitation of users, and promotion of offensive content.
Ethereum developers target March 2025 for the Pectra mainnet upgrade, following successful testnet forks in February. The upgrade promises significant improvements to user experience, network efficiency, account abstraction and validator stake limits.
Contains the last 12 releases
