[/quote]
Isn't this the whole point of using BTC, to be our own bank and protect our own funds. Regulate custodial services all you like, and it still wouldn't be a recommended option to store coins.
[/quote]

Absolutely agree. Crypto was built on the idea of self-custody and owning your money—but the truth is, even smart and experienced users often choose centralized platforms for convenience, easier trading, or to stay compliant.

So it’s not just about people lacking technical skills. Sometimes, they know the risks but still use custodians because it’s just simpler or more practical. That’s why these platforms need stricter security rules and regular audits.

We can’t expect every user to be perfectly cautious all the time. As crypto grows, we need to share the responsibility—between users, exchanges, and regulators—to avoid disasters like the Bybit and Cetus losses.

Self-custody is still the goal. But until managing keys becomes easier for everyone, we need better safety nets around the tools people actually use.

Absolutely agree—Bybit and Cetus alone accounted for nearly 70% of the $2.47B lost in H1 2025. It shows how vulnerable centralized platforms still are.

“Not your keys, not your coins” remains true. But the reality is, many users—retail and institutional—still sacrifice security for ease of use. Maybe it’s time these platforms face tighter regulations and mandatory audits.

One possible solution? Introduce a universal smart contract audit registry—where every DeFi or CeFi protocol must pass third-party audits and list results on-chain before launching. Combine that with mandatory protocol-level insurance pools to cover user losses from verified exploits.

We can’t rely on users alone to protect themselves anymore. The next step is shared accountability—from platforms, developers, and regulators alike.

You’ve nailed the cycle. Many investors ignore decentralization red flags in hopes of quick returns, only to end up as exit liquidity. The combination of low due diligence, polished marketing, and centralized backdoors is a recurring blueprint for fraud. We can’t overlook that scammers today are more sophisticated, using social proof, influencer marketing, and false compliance as shields.

As an analyst following crypto crimes throughout 2024 and H1 2025, I can confirm:
🔹 Over $2.5B has already been lost to scams, phishing, and protocol-level exploits in 2025 (CertiK).
🔹 Rug pulls, like Rowan and even high-cap exits like Mantra, are no longer anomalies.
🔹 Wallet hacks and phishing have become more prominent than traditional key leaks.
🔹 Real-world violence ("wrench attacks") is also on the rise, especially in Europe.

Whether regulation stifles innovation or not, the status quo is unsustainable. Even basic measures like liquidity locks, pre-launch audits, and traceable KYC for founding teams could go a long way. If we want mass adoption without mass deception, the space must evolve—technically, legally, and ethically.

In 2025, crypto went completely mainstream! With Trump's return to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, due to the GENIUS Act, stablecoins are getting their runway to regulatory approval, and big names like JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Circle are pushing into the blockchain ecosystem. The stablecoin market cap surpassed $246B, and transactions volumes have surpassed Visa + Mastercard combined. By May, Bitcoin reached $111K.

Another side of the story?
H1 2025: Crypto Crime Resulted in Losses of $2.47 Billion

CertiK reported that throughout the first half of 2025, a total of 344 reported security incidents led to a loss of over $2.47B from the crypto ecosystem.

This is 47% more than the total loss all of 2024 for the ecosystem but involved fewer hacks.

Wallet exploits and phishing scams were the leading cause (with Bybit and Cetus being some of the worst protocols affected).

The hackers are learning, and seem more intelligent. Gone are the days of simple copy/paste rug pulls. Now we are seeing smart contract exploits, wallet drain hacks, deep fake schemes, and real-life wrench attacks. CertiK reported 32 real-life physical wrench attacks throughout 2025, with a third of those in France.

Ethereum remains at the top of the attack list. TRON is the highest illicit financial flow due to its low fees. DeFi tends to be the playground of exploits.

Is regulation catching up?
Chainalysis and TRM indicate that while governments are getting better at tracking tools, the majority of these attacks are happening in plain sight, through centralized exchanges or peer-to-peer.

Well, it is yet another week and yet another exit scam. This episode involved Rowan Energy and their $RWN token, which is now worthless. Rowan Energy claimed to have a green blockchain project that enabled users to earn rewards for energy use and, getting involved with solar energy mining. In fact, they recently sponsored Solar & Storage Live in London, where they touted over £400K payouts to users in May of 2025.

On June 25, Rowan Energy shut down their public blockchain, deleted their entire Telegram channel, wiped all project content off X, and left thousands of $RWN coin holders holding the bag. No refunds, no bridge, no nothing. Their founder David Duckworth completely vanished from the public scape. If this was not a crypto rug pull, I am not sure what is.

Not Just Low-Caps: Even "Legitimate" Tokens Collapse
The thing is, this is no longer restricted to only VERY low cap tokens, there are legitimate-looking altcoins that are also crashing too.

Mantra ($OM token) went from $6.30 to under $0.50. Insiders sold over 44 million $OM across multiple exchanges which wiped out nearly $6 billion in market cap.

$LIBRA, just another Political-meme coin, lost approximately 94% within a couple of weeks. 

$MELANIA had similar value collapse after media celebrities hyped it up.

Upon further inspection, they might all be called celebrity coins, political tokens, or just tokens with hype, nevertheless, its obvious that we are behind crypto investor protection.

Some of the numbers from Cryptorank and CertiK:


2024:   
410+ hacks and DeFi exploits 
$2.01 billion in losses 
58 rug pull tokens like SHARPEI, a zkSync scam, and the normal exit token scam from a token.   

First half of 2025:
290+ crypto related incidents thus far, including: 
Over $2.5 billion dollars lost to breached crypto exchanges, token exploits, and liquidity exits. 

The Bybit hack (associated with the Lazarus group) withdrew just over $1.5 billion alone. 

Both rug pull incidents, Rowan Energy and Mantra show that even "trusted" projects are rug pulls as well.

Should the Government say something, or regulate rug pulls or token scams? 
With Trump on record leaning even further into crypto adoption and Web3 innovation, we should consider, could his administration also focus on regulations or fraud prevention for crypto? 

Possible policy goals: 
Mandatory smart contract audits prior to any token sales (or any token offering) 
Require a liquidity lock mechanism, on all DEX launches 
Criminal Penalties for founders, for pump-and-dump token schemes. 
What could a "global or cooperative approach for detecting crypto hackers, scams, or dishonest DeFi behaviors look like?" Would AML apply with the involvement of a state sponsored regime?

What Do You Think?

• Should we see stronger laws, or will that kill innovation?
  Is regulation going to help—or just push scams elsewhere?
  And what kind of framework could even work in this space?
  

I vote for Pizz #7 #18 #24 #74 #102

Artificial intelligence in crypto is no longer just a narrative. Recent data from Messari shows that agent-based AI frameworks are outperforming other AI sectors, gaining over 86% in the past 90 days. The market is starting to shift its focus toward intelligent, autonomous agents that can act and adapt on-chain.

Below are three AI projects currently building the infrastructure for this evolution.

Virtual Protocol (VIRTUAL)

• Launched in late 2024, already generating $8.3 million in protocol revenue
  
  Hosts modular AI agents like IRIS (smart contract auditor) and TIBBIR (viral meme agent)
  
  Integrated with Ethereum and Base, holding $140 million+ in liquidity
  
  Technicals: Holding 200-day EMA at $1.39. If flipped, $2.80–$3.00 becomes viable
  
  Strong fundamentals and active on-chain traction

Render Network (RNDR)

• Provides GPU infrastructure for real-time AI rendering and avatars
  
  Migrated to Solana for faster and cheaper rendering
  
  Powers AI livestream commerce use cases (e.g. $7.6M in one avatar-hosted stream)
  
  Technicals: Support around $4.00–$4.20. Resistance at $5.80; upside potential $7.50–$8.80
  
  Momentum indicators turning positive (MACD and RSI)

Artificial Superintelligence Alliance (ASI)

• Formed via the merger of Fetch.ai, SingularityNET, and Ocean Protocol
  
  Released ASI‑1 Mini, a lightweight Web3-native language model
  
  Backed by a $50 million token buyback from the Fetch.ai Foundation
  
  Currently reclaiming the 50-day EMA near $0.69; next resistance $0.73, upside target $1.00
  
  Bullish crossover signs building gradually

These projects aren’t just part of the AI trend—they’re helping define the core agent economy infrastructure that may shape the next generation of blockchain applications.

If you're interested in a full breakdown with charts, support zones, and protocol metrics, you can find the original research article here:
coinpedia.org/price-analysis/top-3-ai-crypto-coins-to-watch-in-2025-research-analysis-prediction

Thanks for the honest feedback, both of you. I'm not here to hype Pi, but to genuinely gauge sentiment from people who've seen these cycles play out before.

I get the skepticism — Pi's reputation is mixed, especially with the slow rollout of its mainnet and the early overpromises. That said, the recent community push (like Pi2Day) and talk around potential listings has temporarily brought attention back. Whether that translates into sustainable price action is another story.

@passwordnow — you're right, $0.50 to $2 sounds easy on paper (4x), but the liquidity and volume gaps make it much harder in reality. Unless there's major news or exchange action, it's more likely to drift or even drop further.

@Ambatman — I see where you're coming from too. A lot of holders still treat Pi like it's the next Bitcoin, and that confidence can sometimes border on blind belief. That creates the perfect setup for a pump-and-dump if a whale steps in.

Personally, I’m tracking things like open interest, volume/FDMC ratio, and whether any legit CEXs acknowledge it. If the fundamentals remain vague, I agree — any rally could be short-lived.

Still, it's an interesting watch. I'll share updated metrics if the charts show anything worth noting.

Let me know if you want to:

I agree that $2 is a stretch based on current fundamentals, especially considering the market's skepticism and limited transparency around Pi's mainnet.

That said, some recent traction (exchange rumors, increased wallet activity, and community campaigns like Pi2Day) have sparked short-term momentum. Whether that's sustainable or whale-driven is still questionable.

Recently, this coin has demonstrated significant drive, particularly with community milestones and Pi2Day activities. The project appears to coincide with speculation price discussions around mainnet unlocks and new exchange listings. With our community and technical indicators showing a lot of traction, do you believe PI will reach $2.00 valued before the end of Q3 2025?  Please Vote and Discuss below