Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin has issued a sharp public warning to Elon Musk over how X is being used to direct increasingly aggressive rhetoric at Europe, arguing that the platform is drifting from a free-speech ideal toward orchestrated hostility.

Ethereum Founder Calls Out Elon Musk

In a series of posts on X, Buterin said that “the attacks on Europe I’ve seen here the last couple of days, including from people I’ve generally considered interesting and sophisticated, have been getting unhinged.”

He acknowledged that the European Union has serious shortcomings, listing “GDPR clickthroughs are dumb, Chat Control is awful, they need to be less bureaucratic and supportive toward entrepreneurs,” and criticizing what he called Europe’s selective moral stance, noting that its “kindness toward Ukraine often doesn’t extend well to Gaza or Sudan or other places.” He also described “people saying mean things about criminals getting longer sentences than the criminals” as “just crazy.”

Despite that, the Ethereum founder argued that the way some users on X are talking about Europe has moved well beyond legitimate criticism. He described “the apocalyptic attitude about the issues, evoking imagery of barbarians pillaging Rome etc,” as “really over the top” and said it “feels more like a coordinated attempt to delegitimize than constructive criticism.”

He rejected the idea that the real target is only Brussels-based institutions, writing: “I don’t believe the line that ‘the target is not Europe, it’s the EU’: I’ve seen many instances of London specifically being targeted in the hate session, so no, much of it is an attack on Europe.” This, he argued, does not match his experience from “spending an average of two months every year there for the last decade.”

The central confrontation came in a direct reply to Musk. Addressing the X owner’s self-positioning as a defender of free speech, the Ethereum founder wrote: “I think you should consider that making X a global totem pole for Free Speech, and then turning it into a death star laser for coordinated hate sessions, is actually harmful for the cause of free speech. I’m seriously worried that huge backlashes against values I hold dear are coming in a few years’ time.”

Buterin Hints At Russian Involvement

The thread sparked pushback from some users who argued that his framing underplays European complicity in current conflicts. One critic responded that “’not extending kindness’ is an incredible way to frame funding, arming and politically backing a genocide,” and claimed that it is “hilarious to think the US doesn’t suffer from many of the same things or worse that Americans say about the EU.”

The Ethereum founder replied that Europe is “a genuinely mixed bag,” emphasizing that “different countries in Europe have very different policies,” and pointing out that the continent “also hosts ICC, which is under a lot of pressure (see: judges being financially deplatformed).”

Other replies widened the lens to geopolitics. Commenting on a suggestion that the current discourse looks like “a coordinated campaign due to the Kremlin liking the new US ‘going back to Monroe’ global security policy,” Buterin answered “yeah basically” and added that “a lot of powerful people really like the vision that the world should just be 5–20 adults who have their spheres and sometimes get together in a room to hash out any differences, and everyone else can be shut out because they are annoying and inconvenient.”

At the same time, Buterin restated his support for the European project as an institutional experiment. “I have a lot of respect for the idea of EU, as an experiment in trying to get the benefits of a superstate, without the homogenization, becoming an aggressive ‘great power’, and other downsides,” he wrote, while stressing that “the experiment does need to be adjusted in a lot of ways; eg. we see not enough unity in its external policy and too much unity on top-down bureaucracy and surveillance at the same time.” If improved, he argued, “it’s a model that could set a really good example for the world.”

On the technical side, the Ethereum founder used the debate over “gdpr clickthroughs” to propose a different approach to online control, calling for “more sophisticated user-side software (browsers, local LLMs…) that helps the user navigate the internet and make intelligent decisions about what requires confirmations from the user.” In contrast to the centralized dynamics he criticizes on X, he is effectively pointing back to user-empowering, decentralized tools as the way to reconcile regulation, usability and free expression.

Notably, Musk’s anti-EU outburst comes after the Commission has issued a fine of €120 million to X for breaching its transparency obligations under the Digital Services Act (DSA). Musk wrote via X that “The ‘EU’ imposed this crazy fine not just on @X, but also on me personally, which is even more insane!” and says it would be “appropriate to apply our response not just to the EU, but also to the individuals who took this action against me.”

In subsequent posts he escalated further, declaring that “The EU should be abolished and sovereignty returned to individual countries,” calling to “Dissolve the EU and return power to the people,” and even asserting that “The EU commissars are responsible for the murder of Europe.”

At press time, Ethereum traded at $3,316.

EXPERT PERSPECTIVE — For more than three decades after the Cold War, Europe lived under the illusion that history had settled in its favor. Liberal democracy seemed ascendant, global markets expanded without friction, and American military primacy insulated the continent from hard-power competition. Under those conditions, the European Union could focus on enlargement, regulation, and internal integration rather than geopolitics.

That era is finished.

A new multipolar world, shaped primarily by the United States, China and Russia has taken hold, and Europe’s place within it is increasingly uncertain. The EU now faces a destabilizing combination of external pressures and internal constraints that call into question its long-term strategic relevance. The next decade will determine whether Europe becomes a genuine pole of power or resigns itself to being a geopolitical appendage.

The End of Post-Cold War Certainties

The post-1991 Western order rested on three assumptions: U.S. military dominance, deepening globalization, and the notion that political liberalization would eventually spread worldwide. Each of these pillars has eroded.

U.S. primacy is no longer guaranteed. Washington is now stretched between deterring China in the Indo-Pacific, supporting Ukraine, and managing crises in the Middle East. American policymakers—across both parties—increasingly resent Europe’s reliance on U.S. defense guarantees and expect the EU to realign its China policy with America’s priorities. Europe’s security depends on a partner whose long-term predictability it cannot ensure.

Globalization is fragmenting. The pandemic, geopolitical rivalries, and technological decoupling between Washington and Beijing have shattered faith in frictionless global supply chains. Europe, whose prosperity hinges on exports, advanced manufacturing, and access to global markets, feels the squeeze.

Authoritarian resilience has replaced Western convergence. China’s techno-authoritarian model and Russia’s militarized nationalism offer alternatives to liberal democracy. Across Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia, states increasingly hedge rather than take sides, reducing the EU’s ability to shape norms or export its model. The world is no longer moving toward Europe. It is moving away from it.

The New Power Triangle: Washington, Beijing, Moscow

1. The United States: indispensable, but increasingly impatient

The U.S. remains the only actor capable of deterring Russia on Europe’s behalf, and without American intelligence, logistics, and weaponry, Ukraine’s position would be far more precarious. Yet Washington’s strategic focus is shifting eastward. In every administration, the question recurs: Why should America subsidize European security indefinitely?

Growing U.S. skepticism combined with the possibility of future political shifts exposes Europe’s most dangerous vulnerability: dependence on an ally whose priorities are changing faster than Europe can adapt.

2. China: Europe’s vital economic partner turned systemic rival

China is indispensable to European industries from electric vehicles to renewable energy to pharmaceuticals. Yet Beijing’s industrial subsidies, strategic investments, and political influence operations challenge the EU’s economic model and internal cohesion. As Washington accelerates decoupling, Europe is pressured to follow suit at high cost to its own industry.

China is no longer just a market; it is a shaping force in a global system that Europe struggles to influence.

3. Russia: the security threat that will not disappear

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine shattered Europe’s illusions of a “post-historic” continent. Even after the initial shock, Moscow’s ongoing militarization signals a long-term confrontation. Europe’s sanctions, energy diversification, and support for Kyiv have been substantial but the EU still lacks the military and industrial backbone to sustain a prolonged, high-intensity conflict without the United States.

Russia is not a temporary crisis. It is a structural challenge.

Europe’s Structural Weakness: Power Without Agency

Europe has economic weight, technological capability, and regulatory influence but struggles to convert them into geopolitical power.

1. Fragmented decision-making. EU foreign policy requires unanimity, making coherent action nearly impossible. France pushes for “strategic autonomy,” Germany for economic stability, Poland for deterrence, Italy for flexibility. Diverging priorities fracture the bloc at every major juncture, from China policy to Middle East diplomacy.

2. Military insufficiency. Despite increases in defense spending, Europe remains dependent on the U.S. for intelligence, logistics, command-and-control, missile defense, and advanced weapons. The continent’s defense industry is fragmented into dozens of incompatible national systems that a luxury Europe can no longer afford.

3. Economic vulnerabilities. From semiconductors to critical minerals, Europe relies on external suppliers. In a world defined by technological blocs and industrial rivalry, the EU risks being squeezed between U.S. security demands and Chinese economic dominance.

4. Demographic decline. Aging societies and shrinking workforces reduce the EU’s long-term competitiveness and its ability to project power.

These vulnerabilities do not make Europe irrelevant—but they do make it reactive.

Three Possible Futures

Scenario 1: Strategic Autonomy Becomes Real

Europe could choose to become a coherent geopolitical actor—pooling defense procurement, adopting majority voting on foreign policy, investing heavily in its defense industry, and crafting a unified China strategy. This would give the EU real agency.

But achieving this requires political courage that Europe has rarely demonstrated.

Scenario 2: Renewed Atlantic Dependence

The EU may double down on the U.S. alliance, accepting a secondary role in global geopolitics while focusing on economic and regulatory power. This is the easiest path both politically and financially but it leaves Europe dangerously exposed to America’s domestic turmoil.

Scenario 3: Fragmentation and Decline

If member states continue to pursue conflicting national policies and U.S. attention continues shifting to Asia Europe risks strategic irrelevance. In this scenario, global powers shape Europe’s environment, while Europe merely adapts.

This path is unlikely to be dramatic. Decline rarely is. It is slow, quiet, and comfortable until suddenly it is not.

Europe Must Choose Power Over Comfort

The multipolar world will not wait for Europe to get its act together. The question is no longer whether the EU wishes to become a global actor; it is whether it can afford not to.

Europe’s future is binary:

A genuine geopolitical pole, capable of defending its interests. A subordinate ally, protected but strategically constrained. Or a divided continent, overshadowed by the ambitions of others. For three decades, Europe believed it had escaped history. Now history has returned with force. Whether Europe survives the new multipolar world depends on whether it chooses power over comfort, strategy over complacency, and unity over drift.

The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals.

Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.

Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to Editor@thecipherbrief.com for publication consideration.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief

Brussels has launched a formal antitrust investigation into Google's AI practices, targeting how the tech giant harvests publisher content.

The post European Commission Strikes Google AI Empire appeared first on TechRepublic.

Brussels has launched a formal antitrust investigation into Google's AI practices, targeting how the tech giant harvests publisher content.

The post European Commission Strikes Google AI Empire appeared first on TechRepublic.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Meta has agreed to make changes to its “pay or consent” business model in the EU, seeking to agree to a deal that avoids further regulatory fines at a time when the bloc’s digital rule book is drawing anger from US authorities.

On Tuesday, the European Commission announced that the social media giant had offered users an alternative choice of Facebook and Instagram services that would show them fewer personalized advertisements.

The offer follows an EU investigation into Meta’s policy of requiring users either to consent to data tracking or pay for an ad-free service. The Financial Times reported on optimism that an agreement could be reached between the parties in October.

Read full article

Comments

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

A consortium of major European banks has formed Qivalis, a new entity in Amsterdam to launch a euro-pegged stablecoin in 2026.

A Tenth Bank Has Now Joined The Euro Stablecoin Consortium

Back in September, nine big European banks announced a consortium aimed at developing and launching a euro-based stablecoin, a digital asset that will have its price pegged to the euro (EUR).

Currently, stablecoins are overwhelmingly dominated by the US dollar (USD), with USDT and USDC, the two largest such cryptocurrencies in the space, accounting for 85% of the market. The consortium’s euro stablecoin intends to provide a real alternative to the USD tokens.

The nine banks that initially kickstarted the plan included ING, Banca Sella, KBC, Danske Bank, DekaBank, UniCredit, SEB, CaixaBank, and Raiffeisen Bank International. As announced in a press release, a tenth European bank in France’s BNP Paribas has now joined the effort.

BNP Paribas is the second largest bank in the bloc and eighth largest globally with over $2.8 trillion in assets. The list of banks part of the consortium already included some heavy-hitters, but BNP Paribas now adding its backing further elevates the project.

BNP Paribas is classified as a global systemically important bank (G-SIB) by the Financial Stability Board, meaning that its stability is integral to the world financial order. Netherlands’ ING, another member of the consortium, is also included in a lower bucket of the same category.

In the initial announcement, the banks had noted that they had formed a new company in the Netherlands to handle the issuance of the euro stablecoin. As revealed by the consortium’s CaixaBank, the Amsterdam-based firm has now been incorporated and named Qivalis.

Qivalis is working on obtaining an electronic money institution license from the Dutch Central Bank, seeking to launch the euro-denominated stablecoin in the second half of 2026. This asset will be compliant with Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation (MiCAR), the EU’s framework for digital assets.

Jan-Oliver Sell has been lined up to serve as Qivalis’ CEO. Sell has previously had roles at Coinbase Germany and Binance. “A native Euro stablecoin isn’t just about convenience – it’s about monetary autonomy in the digital age,” noted the CEO.

Caixabank has said that the consortium is open to more banks joining. In October, Bloomberg reported that America’s Citigroup would be joining the group, but so far, the bank’s name hasn’t appeared in any subsequent press release related to the stablecoin project.

In some other news, PayPal’s PYUSD has witnessed some sharp growth since September, as DeFi analytics firm DefiLlama has highlighted in an X post.

As displayed in the above chart, PayPal’s stablecoin had a supply of $1.2 billion in September, but today that figure has sharply gone up to $3.8 billion.

Bitcoin Price

At the time of writing, Bitcoin is trading around $92,800, up more than 7% over the last week.

Companies found guilty of breaching Germany's antitrust rules face fines up to 10% of annual turnover.

The post Germany Tests Apple’s Privacy Fixes in Critical Market Test appeared first on TechRepublic.

Companies found guilty of breaching Germany's antitrust rules face fines up to 10% of annual turnover.

The post Germany Tests Apple’s Privacy Fixes in Critical Market Test appeared first on TechRepublic.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The accord covers two major legislative texts: the Payment Services Regulation (PSR) and the Third Payment Services Directive (PSD3).

The post EU Reaches Landmark Deal to Curb Online Payment Fraud appeared first on TechRepublic.

The accord covers two major legislative texts: the Payment Services Regulation (PSR) and the Third Payment Services Directive (PSD3).

The post EU Reaches Landmark Deal to Curb Online Payment Fraud appeared first on TechRepublic.

• Crypto firms operating in the EU must report transactions and holdings in a standardised format.
• Regulators will gain wider access to user data, raising privacy concerns.
• ESMA may oversee major exchanges, centralising EU crypto supervision.

The European Union has unveiled a new set of rules that will significantly change how crypto-asset service providers operate across the bloc.

These changes are set to take effect on January 1, 2026, marking one of the EU’s most ambitious attempts to tighten control over crypto activities.

The rules will introduce standardised reporting requirements that will give tax authorities deeper visibility into the cryptocurrency market.

Tougher reporting requirements are coming

At the heart of the new framework is the expansion of the Directive on Administrative Cooperation, known as DAC8.

This update requires crypto exchanges, wallet providers, and other digital-asset operators to report customer holdings and transactions in a standardised digital format.

Once submitted, these reports will be automatically shared among EU tax authorities, enabling regulators to monitor crypto flows and trading activity more effectively.

The regulation, formalised under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2263, also mandates the creation of a comprehensive Crypto-Asset Operator register.

Each reporting operator will receive a unique 10-digit identification number, starting with an ISO country code, to simplify cross-border supervision.

Even when an operator is removed from the register, the information must be retained for up to 12 months, ensuring continuity in regulatory oversight.

Member states are expected to submit annual assessments to the European Commission using standardised reporting templates.

Privacy under the microscope

While the regulation is framed as a measure to combat tax fraud, financial crime, and market abuse, it raises significant privacy concerns for crypto users.

The Transfer of Funds Regulation, which extends the so-called “travel rule” to crypto transactions above €1,000, already requires identification of both senders and recipients, including interactions with self-hosted wallets.

Users may also be asked to verify ownership of their private wallets.

Combined with DAC8, these measures give regulators unprecedented insight into individual trading behaviour, wallet flows, and the activities of service providers.

The European Commission’s broader regulatory package works alongside the Markets in Crypto-Assets framework (MiCA) and upcoming anti-money laundering rules.

Large crypto operators will be expected to carry out detailed customer due diligence, report suspicious activities, and disclose energy consumption for their operations.

Supporters of the new rules, including ECB President Christine Lagarde, argue that a unified EU approach will replace fragmented national supervision, which has historically hindered consistent enforcement.

However, the plan to give the European Securities and Markets Authority direct oversight over major cross-border exchanges and clearing houses has drawn criticism from smaller financial hubs, including Luxembourg, Malta, and Ireland.

They warn that consolidating supervisory powers could raise compliance costs and disadvantage operators in smaller jurisdictions.

The Financial Stability Board, the G20’s leading financial watchdog, also recently noted that strict privacy laws worldwide often impede cross-border cooperation.

The post EU introduces new crypto data-sharing rules for crypto-asset service providers appeared first on CoinJournal.