Samirul haque

Bitcoin adoption advanced this week as Texas initiated a treasury purchase and US lawmakers proposed tax payments in BTC. On the other hand, global markets saw disruptions from a CME trading outage and heightened security incidents, including an $11 million home invasion theft and an Upbit hack linked to Lazarus Group. Let’s dig deeper. 

Bitcoin

 

Texas has formally become the first US state to initiate a direct Bitcoin purchase for its treasury, marking a significant step in state-level digital asset adoption. 

Crypto ATM operator Crypto Dispensers is considering a $100 million sale after both the company and its founder were charged in an alleged money-laundering scheme. 

An Ohio congressman has proposed the Bitcoin for America bill, which would allow Americans to pay their federal taxes in Bitcoin, with the proceeds then allocated to the United States’ planned Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. 

Business

CME Group temporarily suspended trading across its major derivatives markets after a cooling-system failure at a key CyrusOne data center disrupted its electronic infrastructure.

Tether has emerged as the largest non-sovereign holder of gold, signaling a strategic pivot toward deeper commodity integration as global market volatility intensifies.

Leaked documents indicate Brevan Howard’s Nova Digital fund secured a conditional right to reclaim its $25 million Berachain investment, though the project disputes any suggestion of preferential treatment.

Web3

The long-standing rivalry between former UFC champions Conor McGregor and Khabib Nurmagomedov resurfaced this week following the launch of Nurmagomedov’s latest NFT project.

BTCC, one of the world’s longest-operating cryptocurrency exchanges, has published its November 2025 Proof of Reserve (PoR) report, confirming a total reserve ratio of 146%, marking the seventh consecutive month of maintaining reserves significantly above industry norms.

Security

South Korean authorities are intensifying their investigation into the recent hack targeting Upbit, the country’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, as evidence increasingly suggests involvement by the North Korea-linked Lazarus Group. 

An armed intruder posing as a delivery worker stole approximately $11 million in cryptocurrency from the San Francisco residence of venture capitalist Lachy Groom, a tech investor previously in a relationship with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.

Regulation

The UK government has released new guidelines requiring cryptocurrency exchanges to provide the British Tax Authority with complete customer information on their digital assets.

Japan’s Financial Services Agency (FSA) is preparing a legislative overhaul that will require domestic cryptocurrency exchanges to maintain liability reserves, marking a significant shift toward stronger investor safeguards.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice. 

@Injective
Decentralisation as a marketing buzzword has been circulated heavily in the crypto sector but there are incredibly few projects that bring the nature of community ownership like those found in Injective ($INJ). The technology itself is the speed and the value is the token but it is the governance model that lends the soul of the network. Injective is not operated by a centralised board of directors inside a glass tower but as a worldwide collective of token holders who possess the final decision on the course of the protocol. This decentralised autonomous organisation or DAO acts as the brain of the system with the ideas debated and the decisions made and the future moulded by the quite people who are the users of the platform. It brings a certain degree of transparency and equity which is just unattainable in the normal financial sphere where business is done under closed doors.
The central part of this democratic system is the $INJ token that is more than a currency. It is an online ballot which provides each of the holders with a voice in the governance process. You can have one token or one million tokens it does not matter, you have a right to take part in the decision making that controls the network. This authority stretches almost to all turns of the protocol such as software software innovations and new market entries and amended economic parameters. In either case, a developer intending to add a new derivatives market or the community intends to change the trading fees or simply the validators wish to upgrade the core consensus engine it must all be agreed to by way of a formal governance proposal. This is because the network would be developed in such a manner that it serves the general interests of the community and not individualised interests of a few individuals who have selfish intentions.
The procedure of governance on Injective is to be exact yet convenient. It starts on the phase of proposal where any member of the community may write down an idea and it will be considered. This might be as an uncomplicated text offer to show allegiance towards a new project or a complicated software update offer which alters the coding foundation of the blockchain. There must be at least a minimum deposit of the number of tokens of the currency known as INJ which will stop spamming and only serious propositions will go to the voting stage. This is a skin in the game mechanism of deposit. In case the offer is evil or utterly careless the community may vote to strike out the offer and burn the deposit. This is an uncomplicated economical control designed to maintain the governance forum on the positive dialogue and quality enhancement.
As soon as a proposal enters the voting period the actual power of the DAO is released. The voting period normally takes several days and this allows the community to go through a lot of details and deliberate on the consequences. The system has a delegated proof of stake model that implies that users can vote directly or delegate the vote to the validators they have staked with. This forms representative democracy whereby the professional validators very familiar with the technicalities of the same can represent their constituents. The final authority however is always with the individual user. In the event that a user does not agree with the vote that their validator has cast he/she can vote overruling the vote made by their validator. The latter feature is essential because it makes the system indeed cheque and balances oriented, instead of centralising power into the hands of a handful of node operators.
The brightest example of such a government being put to action was the Volan mainnet upgrade passing. This was not a decision imposed on the users that was imposed on top but rather a community approved evolution called Injective Improvement Proposal 314. The proposal contained giant transformations such as the introduction of Real World Asset module and a huge enhancement of scalability. The community discussed the assets of the upgrade and scrutinised the code and finally voted with majority in favour of the upgrade. The ability to coordinate thousands of dispersed stakeholders to upgrade an existing financial network in a coordinator-free manner is a force of the sophistication and maturity of the maturity of the Injective governance process. It became evident that complex financial system can be efficiently managed by a decentralised gang of individuals.
The next important event in the history of Injective governance was the adoption of INJ 3.0 that changed the tokenomics of the network radically. The proposal was to decrease the inflation rate of the $INJ token with time making it more rare and precious. This was a delicate affair since it had a direct influence on staking incentives and long term provision of the asset. There was buzzing activity in the governance forum as the users were discussing both the merits and demerits of the change. Ultimately it was found to be more important that there should be long term scarcity rather than short term high inflation and the proposal was enacted with solid majority. This self correction and change in economic policy of the protocol is a superpower that can never be possessed by the rigid centralised systems.
The system of governance is also crucial in ensuring the network is secure and intact. The No with Veto vote is a great weapon which enables the community to decline to the proposals which they think are destructive or spam. When a considerable majority of the vote is No with Veto the plan is rejected but the deposit is seized and burned as well. That is a very effective incentive to prevent bad actors that could attempt to inundate the system with malicious offers. It develops a self policing condition in which the community plays a directive role in border guard duty of the protocol. Such a financial network that involves billions of dollars of funds is vital and has to be the backbone of the future global economy and this can only be done through this vigilance.
The other characteristic of the @Injective model of governance is transparency. All the proposals and each and every vote and debate is saved on the blockchain and is publicly available. One can simply visit the Injective Hub or a block explorer and be able to see how the decisions were made. No under-the-table dealings and agreements. In case a big validator decides to switch his vote at the very end this can be observed by others. This extreme openness creates a trust in the participants and guarantees the lack of accountability regarding their actions. It instils an environment of transparency in which the most desirable ideas can receive the best regardless of the person behind the idea.
The will of the DAO also applies to the role of the @Injective Foundation and the teams of core developers. Though they can suggest changes and bring innovation they have no power to instigate anything without the approval of the token holders. They do not own the protocol as their masters do. This effectively changes the balance of power and gives power to the average user. It implies that the community is not merely a crime victim, but they are the ones involved in the process. They are its proprietors and its operators and its controllers.
As @Injective expands and acquires more institutional partners the governance model will get even more necessitated. Bigger financial institutions should be sure that no arbitrary amendments will be made to the rules of the game. The stability is ensured by the predictable and transparent governance process of Injective. They will be able to observe the process of changes first-hand, and they are able to contribute to it personally by engaging into holding the tokens of the currency, which is called $INJ. This has made it possible to align the interests of retail users with institutional giants, which is central to the adoption of the Injective network, and only possible because of the DeFi world.
The future of Injective governance is even more innovative ways of making participation and representation more. There are debates in the context of making voting more incentivized and making sure that different voices of the ecosystem can be taken into consideration. The society is constantly trying out new methods of improving the democratic process. Such readiness to give the process a second and a third time is what secures Injective as the leader in the industry. It is a living democracy experiment in digital format that is proving that decentralised communities are as efficient and effective as centralised corporations.
@Injective is a transition between the traditional finance model of trust me to the model of decentralised finance of verify me. The cockpit enables the community to control the ship, which is the governance dashboard. It is an imposing duty, which the custodians of $INJ bear in mind. They know that they are custodians of a set of protocols that can free billions of individuals of the message of the inefficiencies found in the legacy financial system. With each vote one casts a vote towards a freer and fairer and more open financial future.
Finally the prosperity of Injective is no longer determined by the speed of its transactions or its low prices but the power of its community. This community is held together by the governance model. It transforms passive citizens into active citizens of a new digital nation. It demonstrates that once provided with the means to govern themselves people will create a self-sufficient government that is much bigger than any central authority would have been. The people have the power and the power is in their hands and on Injective they are carrying that power to make the future of finance on a proposal by proposal basis.

@Injective #injective $INJ