judge

Tin tức từ ChainCatcher, mạng lưới cơ sở hạ tầng AI phi tập trung DGrid AI hôm nay đã công bố nghiên cứu mới nhất "PoQ-Judge", đề xuất một bộ khung đánh giá chất lượng đa kiến trúc không cần tham chiếu câu trả lời. Điều này có nghĩa là trong môi trường triển khai thực tế, thường không có câu trả lời tiêu chuẩn để so sánh, giao thức vẫn có thể đưa ra đánh giá đáng tin cậy về chất lượng câu trả lời của mô hình và dựa vào đó phân bổ động lực. Đây là một mảnh ghép quan trọng lâu nay thiếu trong hệ thống đánh giá chất lượng suy diễn LLM phi tập trung của DGrid.PoQ (Proof of Quality, Chứng minh Chất lượng) là cơ chế đồng thuận tự phát triển của DGrid, được sử dụng để ngăn chặn các nhà cung cấp mô hình cung cấp mô hình kém chất lượng, làm giả dữ liệu hoặc ẩn phí tính toán, từ đó đảm bảo chất lượng dịch vụ và tính minh bạch trong định giá. Nhóm DGrid đã liên tục nghiên cứu sâu về PoQ, đã lần lượt công bố bốn bài nghiên cứu. PoQ-Judge được phát hành lần này đã đào tạo ba mô hình đánh giá bao phủ các tình huống chất lượng và chi phí khác nhau, với độ tương quan cao nhất đạt 0.747 trên tập kiểm tra giữ lại, vượt trội hơn tất cả các bộ đánh giá dựa trên câu trả lời tham chiếu trước đó, đồng thời thông qua đánh giá chuỗi và hiệu chỉnh trọng số trực tuyến đã giảm chi phí đánh giá hơn 72%.Với việc PoQ-Judge được triển khai, toàn bộ quy trình từ đánh giá chất lượng → chấm điểm → phân bổ động lực đã hoàn toàn thoát khỏi sự phụ thuộc vào câu trả lời tham chiếu, khép kín vòng chất lượng của suy diễn LLM phi tập trung.DGrid AI là một mạng lưới AI thông minh phi tập trung, cam kết xây dựng cơ sở hạ tầng AI mở, minh bạch và do cộng đồng điều hành. Xung quanh việc gọi và trải nghiệm ứng dụng mô hình, DGrid đã ra mắt nhiều sản phẩm cốt lõi: AI Gateway tổng hợp các mô hình lớn chính trên toàn cầu, nền tảng triển khai mô hình thông minh một chạm DClaw, nền tảng thi đấu mô hình ẩn danh AI Arena, và trợ lý gợi ý mô hình thông minh Dori, cung cấp dịch vụ một cửa cho các nhà phát triển và người dùng. Được biết, doanh thu của DGrid AI trong nửa năm đã vượt qua 20 triệu đô la Mỹ.

U.S. Judge Margaret M. Garnett in New York postponed the ruling on Aave's emergency application on Wednesday, which aims to unfreeze $71 million in ETH related to the Kelp DAO hacking incident, and requested both parties to submit supplemental briefs before the hearing on June 5. Aave is attempting to reclaim the $71 million in ETH frozen on Arbitrum to assist in the asset recovery efforts from this hacking incident—Kelp DAO suffered losses of up to $293 million from the hack, making it one of the most severe security incidents in the DeFi space this year.However, the U.S. law firm Gerstein Harrow LLP submitted a restraining order to the court in early May, claiming that its client has rights to the aforementioned funds. Aave then filed an emergency motion to lift the freeze, warning that if the funds are not released in a timely manner, it could lead to user liquidations and potentially impact the entire DeFi market. Judge Garnett noted in her ruling that Aave failed to adequately explain how user funds would incur "compound losses" if the restraining order remained in place. She also acknowledged the complexity of the case, the risks faced by the victims, and requested both parties to provide supplemental statements on six key issues, including: whether the hacking transaction is subject to New York state sanctuary principles, the legal distinctions between fraud and theft and what rights the hacker has over the stolen assets, which laws apply to determine the priority of claims for frozen assets, whether constructive trusts are an appropriate remedy, and whether Aave or Arbitrum can identify individual victims and proportionally return assets. Both parties must submit supplemental briefs by May 22.Meanwhile, the overall compensation work for Kelp DAO is progressing. Kelp and Aave announced on Tuesday that the rsETH held by the hacker has been destroyed on Arbitrum, and approximately $278 million in loss tokens will be restored within the next two weeks through the funds of the Aave Recovery Guardian multi-signature wallet. Once the relevant smart contracts are reactivated, all functions of rsETH will return to normal.

U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan denied former FTX CEO SBF's request for a rehearing and harshly criticized the so-called new evidence he presented as baseless and "conspiracy-laden." In a court order issued on Tuesday, the judge pointed out that SBF's claims that FTX was actually solvent, that the Department of Justice was concealing information, and that witnesses were afraid to testify due to government threats were completely contradictory to the record.SBF originally accused former FTX Digital Markets co-CEO Ryan Salame and former data science chief Daniel Chapsky of not appearing in court out of fear, but the judge emphasized that SBF could have summoned or compelled them to testify but took no action. In November 2023, SBF was found guilty on all seven counts of fraud by a New York jury and was subsequently sentenced to 25 years in prison. Last week, he voluntarily withdrew his motion for a new trial, stating that he could not obtain a "fair hearing" from Judge Kaplan, but the appeal is still ongoing.The judge also criticized SBF for creating public opinion through interviews, stating that the so-called new facts had already been raised multiple times. SBF had sought a pardon from Trump, but Trump has also made it clear that there are no such plans.

SBF wrote to New York Judge Lewis Kaplan, announcing the temporary withdrawal of the Rule 33 motion for a retrial. SBF stated that he needed to focus on answering the judge's question about whether his lawyers were involved in drafting the motion, and he believed he could not receive a fair hearing before that judge, so he decided to withdraw the motion. He plans to reserve the right to resubmit the motion after a ruling on the direct appeal and the related request for reassignment of the judge.Previously, SBF was sentenced to 25 years in prison for defrauding clients and investors. In his letter, he confirmed that the motion was primarily completed through his independent legal research and drafting while in Brooklyn prison, with his parents only providing editorial suggestions and assistance with printing.

According to reports from The Paper, the People's Court of Xingqing District in Yinchuan City recently concluded a civil and commercial dispute arising from entrusted investment in virtual currency. In the case, the plaintiff entrusted funds to the defendant for virtual currency investment, and after failing to recover the investment amount, filed a lawsuit in court on the grounds of "unjust enrichment."After reviewing the case, the presiding judge determined that it was indeed a contractual relationship of entrustment and clarified the litigation risks and legal pros and cons to both parties, ultimately facilitating the plaintiff's withdrawal of the lawsuit against some defendants, with another defendant returning the principal investment. The case was successfully resolved through mediation.The judge also reminded that according to the judicial viewpoint of the Supreme People's Court, entrusted investment contracts signed after the central bank and seven other departments issued a risk announcement on virtual currency on September 4, 2017, will be deemed invalid due to illegal agency matters, and investors should carefully assess the relevant legal risks.

According to Cointelegraph, a court in Texas, USA, dismissed a lawsuit filed by crypto developer Michael Lewellen. Lewellen sought a declaratory judgment from the court, stating that his developed software Pharos (used for donating to charitable crowdfunding activities) would not be prosecuted for violating money transmission laws. U.S. Chief District Judge Reed O'Connor dismissed the case on Wednesday, stating that Lewellen failed to demonstrate a credible and imminent threat of prosecution.Lewellen expressed his disappointment on the X platform, saying, "I am disappointed that the court dismissed my lawsuit today." The court's dismissal opinion also referenced a memorandum from the U.S. Department of Justice, which stated that the department would no longer prosecute virtual currency exchanges, mixing services, or offline wallets for actions or inadvertent violations by their end users. Lewellen added, "The non-binding memorandum from the Department of Justice cannot replace true legal certainty."

According to Jinshi News, Michael Pearce, the Chief Economist for the U.S. at Oxford Economics, stated that the market is gradually ruling out the possibility of interest rate cuts in the short term, but this may be a misjudgment. He pointed out that although economic growth is stronger, it has not significantly tightened labor market conditions, which explains why most officials still believe there is a path for interest rate cuts this year. Pearce also mentioned that the market believes this situation leans more towards mild disinflation rather than exacerbating inflation in terms of long-term inflation impact.

According to Jinshi reports, Federal Reserve Chairman Powell stated that rising energy prices will drive up inflation, and it is still too early to judge the extent.

According to The Block, a federal judge in Alabama has dismissed the lawsuit accusing Binance entities and Binance.US operator BAM Trading Services of funding terrorism, ruling that the plaintiff's complaint does not meet the basic standards for a federal complaint.The district judge noted in the order that the plaintiff's amended complaint is flawed both legally and factually, characterizing it as a typical "shotgun complaint"—mixing multiple defendants and plaintiffs without clearly associating specific allegations with particular parties.The lawsuit was filed by victims and families of the attacks by Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, seeking damages under the Anti-Terrorism Act and other laws. The complaint exceeds 100 pages and contains hundreds of allegations but repeatedly groups the defendants together without specifying the particular actions each entity is alleged to have taken. The judge has given the plaintiffs until April 10 to submit a revised complaint and warned that failure to correct the deficiencies would result in the case being dismissed.

The Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Sarah D. Morrison, ruled that there is no historical evidence indicating that Congress intended for federal law to take precedence over state regulation of sports gambling, and thus denied the preliminary injunction request filed by the prediction market platform Kalshi.Kalshi had previously sued the Ohio Casino Control Commission in an attempt to prevent it from taking enforcement action against the platform's event contracts under state gambling laws. Last year, the regulatory agency accused Kalshi of operating illegal sports gambling in Ohio.Kalshi argued that the event contracts it offers are derivatives regulated under the Commodity Exchange Act and should fall under the jurisdiction of the CFTC, thereby asserting that federal regulation should take precedence over state gambling laws.However, the judge stated that there is no evidence from historical and legislative context to suggest that Congress intended for the law to supersede state sports gambling regulations, noting that when the Dodd-Frank Act amended relevant laws in 2010, sports gambling was still widely restricted in the U.S.Kalshi announced that it would appeal the ruling. The case is seen as an important test of the legal status of prediction markets, and its outcome could affect the future compliance prospects of other prediction platforms in the U.S., including Polymarket.

Crypto journalist Eleanor Terrett posted on the X platform, stating that a review of the trial case of Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm revealed that Judge Failla used a self-driving car analogy in the lawsuit against Uniswap by user Nessa Risle, and seemed to show more sympathy towards the developers behind Uniswap, while being stricter with the developers of Tornado Cash.According to related materials shared by Eleanor Terrett, the judge's viewpoint was that holding software developers responsible for the misuse of neutral infrastructure by strangers would be illogical, considering Uniswap as "neutral infrastructure," while Tornado Cash was deemed to have "engaged in illegal financial activities" (continuing operations despite knowing it was being used for money laundering). This statement indicates that U.S. courts may reference whether developers are merely providing neutral tools rather than participating in illegal activities when determining liability related to decentralized finance (DeFi) infrastructure in the future.

U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas in Manhattan previously dismissed a civil lawsuit that sought to hold Binance and its founder CZ accountable, alleging that their trading activities aided terrorist organizations in carrying out global attacks. However, according to the ruling, the judge allowed the plaintiffs to submit an amended complaint within 60 days, supplementing more specific evidence of on-chain transactions and account associations.The plaintiffs had previously failed to demonstrate a direct connection between Binance's trading activities and specific attacks, such as key evidence regarding the flow of funds, wallet ownership, or transaction timing. The judge also criticized the plaintiffs' 891-page complaint as "clearly overly lengthy," thus failing to meet the relevant liability standards under the Anti-Terrorism Act.

According to documents from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, a federal judge in New York has approved the plaintiffs' motion for class certification in the market manipulation lawsuit against Tether and Bitfinex, and has divided the case into two groups of plaintiffs: spot investors and futures traders. It is reported that the case accuses Tether and Bitfinex of manipulating cryptocurrency market prices by issuing USDT from 2017 to 2019, resulting in losses of up to hundreds of billions of dollars for investors who purchased BTC and ETH.

A U.S. federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order against the cryptocurrency lending firm BlockFills, temporarily freezing its disputed assets. Dominion Capital filed a lawsuit on February 27, accusing BlockFills of misappropriating and unlawfully retaining customer crypto assets worth millions of dollars, commingling customer assets, concealing significant losses, and refusing to return funds after suspending withdrawals on the BlockFills platform in February. The frozen amount is 70.6 BTC, and it has prevented BlockFills from transferring assets overseas.The cryptocurrency lending firm BlockFills has been struggling, reporting a loss of $75 million, and suspended user deposits and withdrawals on February 11. The company, headquartered in Chicago, serves approximately 2,000 institutional clients, with a trading volume reaching $60 billion by 2025, and is currently seeking a buyer.

According to Reuters, U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter in Manhattan dismissed Binance's request, rejecting the demand to resolve claims from customers who accused the trading platform of illegally selling unregistered tokens and causing significant losses through arbitration.Judge Andrew Carter of the Manhattan U.S. District Court stated that customers could file lawsuits in court for claims arising up to February 20, 2019, because Binance failed to adequately notify users that it had modified its terms of use, requiring disputes to be resolved through arbitration and waiving the right to sue collectively.A Binance spokesperson, in response to Judge Carter's ruling, stated, "Binance will vigorously defend the remaining limited claims in this case, which are baseless." Customers who suffered losses due to the seven tokens ELF, EOS, FUN, ICX, OMG, QSP, and TRX accused Binance of failing to warn about the "significant risks" associated with purchases as required by federal and state securities laws, and are seeking to recover the amounts paid.

According to DL News, the founding team of Uniswap Labs won a patent infringement lawsuit this week. The case against its decentralized exchange (DEX) was brought by the founders of Bancor, but New York District Judge John Koeltl ruled on Tuesday to dismiss the lawsuit, stating that the plaintiff failed to present a reasonable request for relief. The case involves the code used in Uniswap's original protocol from 2018.Bprotocol Foundation and LocalCoin Ltd. accused the code of belonging to Bancor's patented infrastructure, claiming that Uniswap Labs "profited significantly" without permission. Uniswap's Assistant General Counsel Jolie Yang stated, "This victory is significant for the DeFi community, protecting developers to innovate and improve existing concepts without the worry of patent trolls." The ruling noted that Bancor's patent claims abstract concepts like currency exchange, which are not protected under U.S. patent law. The mechanism (CPAMM) was initially proposed by Bancor in 2017, promoted by Uniswap in 2018, and became a mainstream design for early DEXs; Bancor had previously open-sourced the CPAMM code.

French police have arrested six suspects in connection with the kidnapping of a judge and her mother. According to Agence France-Presse, the 35-year-old judge and her 67-year-old mother were kidnapped overnight from Wednesday to Thursday last week and were later found injured and trapped in a garage in the Drôme region.Prosecutor Thierry Dran stated that the kidnappers sent photos and messages to the judge's partner, threatening to maim the victims if the ransom in cryptocurrency was not paid. The victims ultimately escaped with the intervention of a neighbor, without any ransom being paid. CertiK reported that such cryptocurrency ransomware attacks are evolving into organized crime, with 72 cases globally in 2025, resulting in total losses of $41 million. Currently, six suspects have been detained, including a minor, and the case is still under further investigation.

According to Bloomberg, a judge in Delaware has ruled that a shareholder lawsuit against several directors of Coinbase Global Inc., including venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, can proceed, despite an internal investigation that cleared the defendants of wrongdoing.A shareholder of the cryptocurrency platform filed the lawsuit in 2023, claiming that the directors, including CEO Brian Armstrong, used confidential information to sell more than $2.9 billion in stock during the company's 2021 IPO, thereby avoiding losses of over $1 billion. According to the shareholder's complaint, Brian Armstrong, who has served as CEO since Coinbase's founding in 2012, sold $291.8 million worth of stock.

This week, the High Court of England held a hearing in Manchester regarding the civil recovery case of Qian Zhimin's Bitcoin. However, this was a typical procedural hearing and did not make any rulings on asset ownership, compensation schemes, or substantive legal issues. The core issue of the hearing was who would represent the large number of Chinese victims. Judge Turner expressed concerns about the current situation multiple times, as more and more law firms are representing different groups of Chinese victims and making claims under Section 281 of the POCA. The High Court is facing the real risk of "agent proliferation." Additionally, Judge Turner also mentioned another judicial process being concurrently advanced by the High Court, concerning the UK bankruptcy liquidation process of Blue Sky Grey. It is reported that a subsequent hearing is scheduled for February 16-17, during which further arrangements or guidance may be provided regarding the specific impact of the bankruptcy liquidation process on the civil recovery case.