Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
There are no sellers left in crypto.
* 3.7% inflation print >> Doesn't matter
* AI bubble bursting >> Doesn't matter
* Binance hack >> Doesn't matter
* Election tsunami >> Doesn't matter
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Primeira vitória da equipe @bicharaemotta! E é só o começo
#Justiça 🎰 Justiça de SP autoriza Stake a voltar a operar até 25 de outubro
⚖️ Decisão da juíza federal Cristiane Farias Rodrigues dos Santos também suspende o bloqueio da plataforma
⬇️ Leia no Poder360: poder360.com.br/poder-justic…
Primeira batalha dessa guerra foi vencida. Seguimos!
#Justiça 🎰 Justiça de SP autoriza Stake a voltar a operar até 25 de outubro
⚖️ Decisão da juíza federal Cristiane Farias Rodrigues dos Santos também suspende o bloqueio da plataforma
⬇️ Leia no Poder360: poder360.com.br/poder-justic…
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Game theory teaches: never enter a game you haven’t studied, never reveal your strategy until the incentives are locked, and never play to be liked, play to make the rules irrelevant by building leverage.
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Congratulations on the new podcast!
@HesterPeirce: “The beauty of the technology is that it allows you to disintermediate so that peers can transact with one another directly or through the intermediation of technology. And that's really powerful in our markets because intermediaries have sometimes been the source of problems, right?” 👏
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Udo Seckelmann, Pedro Heitor e Raphael Cvaigman publicam artigo sobre Prediction Markets no Brazil Journal.
No artigo, os autores exploram como os Prediction Markets estão movimentando uma nova indústria multibilionária e impulsionando importantes debates regulatórios, com foco na discussão sobre o enquadramento jurídico desses mercados como derivativos.
Leia o artigo na íntegra:
braziljournal.com/opiniao-pr…
#bicharaemotta #gamblinglaw #PredictionMarkets
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
if you are even slightly bullish on something like canton, you don't know the bare minimum of blockchain 101 'basics'
watch this @aantonop video, it couldn't be explained more clearly
I have never heard a single person who is bullish on these types of fake-decentralized models intelligently refute a single one of the points @aantonop makes here
youtube.com/watch?v=SMEOKDVX…
I have not read the specific section of the CLARITY Act that addresses this issue, but, based on the summary provided, it appears that lawmakers drew inspiration from the concept of independent control articulated by FinCEN in its well-known Guidance, subsequently refined by the industry itself — as illustrated, for example, in @RebeccaRettig1 article on AML/CFT in DeFi.
The international literature converges in the same direction (FATF, OECD, Shär, Schuler, among others), which, in my view, is methodologically sound.
I have been advocating a similar approach for the regulation of DeFi in Brazil: where there is independent control over users’ funds — understood as the unilateral ability to move, block, or suspend assets — the parties involved in the protocol should be treated as VASPs. Conversely, in the absence of such control, the protocol should be regarded as sufficiently decentralised for regulatory purposes.
In addition, I propose the adoption of a safe harbour mechanism aimed at fostering the progressive decentralisation of early-stage projects.
Should this dividing line be adopted as set out in the proposed text, the outcome would be highly beneficial, providing a clear and functional criterion to guide Brazilian legislators and regulators, drawing on the precedent established in the United States. Great work.
The new Senate Banking draft of market structure just was published and here is where ChatGPT says it draws the regulatory perimeter when it comes to self custody interfaces (This is quick - a deep dive is required):
This is the crux of this bill — and the answer is yes, it really does protect non-custodial web interfaces, but only up to a very sharp line.
Here’s the clean way to understand it.
⸻
The bill creates a three-layer stack
The bill doesn’t say “wallets good, websites bad.”
It says:
There are three legally different things:
1.Protocol layer
Smart contracts, blockchains, bridges, DEX contracts
2.Control layer
Who can stop, change, route, or custody transactions?
3.Interface layer
The website or app users click on
Regulation attaches only if control exists.
⸻
When a web interface is PROTECTED
A web interface is legally treated as mere software if:
•It does not hold user funds
•It does not control private keys
•It does not have authority to approve, block, reorder, or reroute transactions
•It does not have discretion over execution
•It does not act as an agent for the user
In that case, even if the website:
•Shows prices
•Builds transactions
•Suggests routes
•Broadcasts transactions
•Charges UI fees
…it is legally a non-custodial publisher of software, not a broker or exchange.
That covers:
•Uniswap web UI
•1inch
•MetaMask swap UI
•Non-custodial bridges
•Wallet-embedded DEXs
They are statutorily carved out of financial regulation.
⸻
When a web interface becomes REGULATED
The moment the operator has control, it flips.
If the website operator can:
•Hold assets
•Move funds without user signature
•Batch or net trades
•Route orders through proprietary liquidity
•Pause, censor, or reverse transactions
•Decide whether a transaction executes
then the interface becomes a:
Broker / dealer / exchange
even if it still uses blockchains underneath.
That captures:
•Coinbase
•Binance
•Robinhood Crypto
•Custodial bridges
•Hosted wallets
•CeFi yield platforms
⸻
The key test CLARITY uses
The bill’s rule is basically:
Who has the power to make the transaction happen?
If the user’s private key is the only thing that can move funds → protected
If the website operator can move or stop funds → regulated
The web UI is irrelevant by itself.
Control is everything.
⸻
Why this is a real safe harbor
CLARITY doesn’t just say “we won’t regulate you.”
It says agencies may not re-classify non-custodial interfaces as intermediaries just because they:
•Are popular
•Earn fees
•Look like an exchange
•Are easy to use
This blocks the SEC/FinCEN theory that:
“If users trade through your website, you’re an exchange.”
Under CLARITY:
“If users trade through their own keys, you’re software.”
⸻
Bottom line
Yes — the bill really does protect non-custodial trading interfaces.
But it mercilessly regulates anything that:
•Touches custody
•Touches execution
•Touches control
That bright-line is what makes the bill powerful.
Zcash replicates, in digital form, the core properties of cash — fungibility, privacy, transferability, and security — combined with programmed scarcity, in line with Bitcoin. The result is genuinely private internet-native money.
The open question is whether adding privacy-preserving programmability should be the next step. If so, its impact could mirror HTTPS on the web: a trust layer unlocking new use cases and scale.
If HTTPS unlocked e-commerce, what could programmability unlock for Zcash?
Bullish.
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
We need more rugged individualism, not less.
Build on the frontier. Be independent. Decentralize power. Accelerate civilizational progress. Celebrate economic freedom.
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
“Study microeconomics, game theory, psychology, persuasion, mathematics, and computers.”
- @naval
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Possibly the best paragraph in any regulatory speech, ever. Thank you @HesterPeirce 🫡🇺🇸
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
SEC chair: "Crypto could become the most powerful financial surveillance architecture ever invented"
he is correct. it is concerning how many of us are OK with this.
you have 1,000 days while trump is president to change this.
encrypt the money
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
this take is itself symptomatic of financial nihilism
instead, be early to a movement
be high conviction because even if it doesn't work out in money it pays in lulz, friends, connections, interesting work
this is how every crypto OG made it, how almost everyone in every industry really made it
you have to have genuine interest and passion
still plenty of opportunity in crypto and everywhere else if you do
extractOOOOrs ngmi
I think it's extremely over for retail.
Not even talking prices here, just generally.
If I were starting in 2025 with <50k USD, my best bet would be:
- Develop stuff if you know how to code, fleece either VCs or retail (or both)
- Be funny on X and become a KOL/BD/marketer
That's literally it.
There's nothing else.
It's so -EV to be retail these days because not only are people out of money, but they know the jig is up and there's basically just one thing that's investable in (long-term) and that's HL, and even that has its risks.
Yield farming is too risky (needs capital too) for the most part, airdrops are very rough and require you to be online to sign egregiously short claim terms and be online to dump the tokens on hour 0 minute 1 too for the best price.
It's never been this bad.
Even launching scams makes little sense because people are just out of money and they know how the game is played.
You know it's dire when even scammers can't scam "normally" but instead have to evolve.
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Golpistas estão se passando por advogados ou representantes de instituições via WhatsApp e ligações. Eles informam sobre supostos ganhos judiciais ou pendências com o INSS e induzem a vítima a fazer transferências para liberar valores ou isentar cobranças.
Afirmam que há uma causa ganha e pedem para a pessoa verificar se o valor foi creditado no banco. Como isso é falso, não há crédito. Em seguida, convencem a vítima a realizar um Pix, pagar um boleto ou tributo, alegando que isso é necessário para liberar o dinheiro.
Também costumam enviar documentos falsos com aparência oficial, como decisões judiciais, contratos e guias de pagamento.
Veja como se proteger:
1- Desconfie de contatos de advogados que prometem retornos rápidos de decisões judiciais que estão em trâmite há anos.
2- Não confie em solicitações de pagamento antecipado ou transferências bancárias para receber indenizações ou evitar cobranças.
3- Jamais faça pagamentos com a expectativa de que isso liberará valores de ações judiciais supostamente ganhas.
4- Verifique sempre as informações diretamente pelos canais oficiais do seu advogado ou escritório.
Em caso de dúvidas, entre em contato com nosso escritório pelos canais oficiais.
#bicharaemotta #golpefalsoadvogado
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Mais uma vez, temos o orgulho de compartilhar que fomos reconhecidos como líderes (Band 1) pelo Chambers and Partners - Brazil 2025 na categoria Sports Law, além de sermos destacados também na categoria Gambling and Betting. Nossos sócios Bichara Neto @bicharaneto e Marcos Motta @mottamarcos foram destaque em ambas as áreas (Sports Law e Gambling and Betting), enquanto Udo Seckelmann @USeckelmann foi reconhecido como referência em Gambling and Betting.
No Leaders League - Brazil 2025, o escritório foi classificado como “Leading” na área de Sports Law e “Excellent” na área de Sports Betting & Online Gambling. Os sócios Bichara Neto @bicharaneto e Marcos Motta @mottamarcos foram mais uma vez reconhecidos pelo trabalho de destaque em Sports Law e Sports Betting & Online Gambling, e Udo Seckelmann @USeckelmann reafirmou sua relevância na área de Sports Betting & Online Gambling.
Essas conquistas refletem nossa expertise e liderança no mercado jurídico. Seguimos comprometidos em entregar soluções jurídicas com excelência e inovação.
Bichara e Motta Advogados @bicharaemotta é o primeiro escritório full service líder nas áreas de Esportes e Entretenimento da América Latina.
Mais informações sobre as publicações:
Chambers and Partners:
chambers.com/legal-rankings/…
Leaders League:
leadersleague.com/en/firm/bi…
#bicharaemotta #sportslaw #direitodesportivo #sportsbetting #gambling #LeadersLeague #ChambersandPartners #Band1
Blockchains são livros-razão vivos que expressam fenômenos socioeconômicos.
O que dá valor a uma rede não é o espaço no bloco nem o custo de liquidar transações — mas o que está sendo liquidado, por quem, com que finalidade e sob qual dinâmica.
Usuários, produtos, contratos inteligentes, liquidez.
Essas são as variáveis que tornam o conteúdo do livro-razão infungível.
A infungibilidade é o que diferencia uma rede da outra.
É possível copiar o código.
Mas não se copia a história.
Nem os efeitos de rede.
É por isso que blockchains não são commodities.
O valor reside no conteúdo do livro-razão.
O código apenas o administra.
Pedro Heitor de Araújo retweeted
Securities are allowed to trade peer to peer and once this was their normal modality. It is only because paper certificates could not trade at scale that we got the current heavily intermediated market structure. The opportunity of crypto to transform securities markets lies in disintermediation.