u/hduynam99

Switzerland’s attempt to push Bitcoin into the national reserve just failed.

The campaign wanted the Swiss National Bank to hold Bitcoin as part of its reserves, but it only collected around 50,000 signatures - less than half of the 100,000 needed to trigger a national referendum.

The Swiss National Bank has been against the idea for a while, mostly because of Bitcoin’s volatility and liquidity risk. Basically: “cool asset, too spicy for central bank reserves.”

The campaign founder said even though it failed, it still helped push the conversation forward around Bitcoin’s role in global finance.

Right now, only a few countries actively hold Bitcoin, like El Salvador and Bhutan.

So no, Switzerland is not adding BTC to reserves yet.

But the fact this even reached 50k signatures says something. The idea is not mainstream policy yet, but it is no longer some basement internet theory either.

This look like it gonna take more times, and until then it will be a big news. Keep stacking.

Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn co-founder, thinks crypto and NFTs could become important again, not for JPEG hype, but for identity.

His point is simple:

When AI agents outnumber humans online, the internet gets messy fast.

Who is real?
Who created this content?
Which agent can another agent trust?
Is this transaction coming from a verified source or some deepfake bot farm with a WiFi connection?

That’s where crypto starts to make sense.

NFTs tried to solve digital identity before, but the market turned it into monkey pictures and casino energy. Classic internet behavior.

But the original idea still matters: verifiable ownership, identity, and origin.

In a world full of AI-generated content, bots, fake accounts, and synthetic everything, crypto rails could become useful infrastructure for proving what is real.

Hoffman also said he has been buying Bitcoin since 2014 and sees it as more than just an asset. To him, it’s part of the future design of the internet.

Not saying every NFT project is suddenly back from the dead.

Most are still cooked.

But the identity layer? That might be the part people laughed at too early.

CZ’s focus on Bitcoin and BNB shows his conviction in the long-term strength of these assets.

If Bitcoin enters a real supercycle in 2026, it could shake up the market and break the clean 4-year cycle narrative that everyone loves to repeat.

The 4-year cycle has worked because Bitcoin had predictable halving supply shocks, retail hype waves, and macro liquidity usually lining up at the right time. But markets don’t follow calendars forever.

This cycle is different in a few ways: ETFs, institutional flows, corporate treasury buying, weaker retail mania, and a macro environment that can flip fast depending on rates, liquidity, and risk appetite.

So the better question is not “will the 4-year cycle break?”
It is: how much of the old cycle still matters when the buyer base has changed?

Patterns are useful. Blind faith is not.

Anyone still believe the 4-year cycle will hold perfectly?

Don’t trust anyone on CNBC. Take it as information only.

2026 is a U.S. midterm election year, and BTC is green so far.

Other recent midterm years:

• 2022: -15%
• 2018: -19%
• 2014: +39.5%

June doesn’t look much better historically either.

Maybe this is the part of the cycle where dry powder goes into yield instead of forcing buys into chop.

And yeah, you could say 2014 doesn’t count because the market structure and volatility were totally different back then.

Fair. But still - the pattern is worth watching.

Not a prediction. Just data being annoying again.