US derivatives exchange CME Group and index provider Silicon Data have teamed up to create a futures market for computing power, a key source driving the AI boom. Bloomberg reports that the futures will help traders, financial firms, AI builders and cloud providers manage volatility and price swings. Indexes from market-intelligence firm Silicon Data will help underpin the products. The project is still pending regulatory review.

“As the backbone of the digital economy, compute is the new oil of the 21st century,” CME CEO Terry Duffy said in the statement. “Every AI model trained, every transaction cleared and every byte of data processed runs on compute, which is becoming a fast-emerging asset class in its own right.”

CME’s addition of compute futures signals a broader shift to make the asset tradable like other commodities. Creating a futures market can help make the costs more transparent and raise overall market efficiency. 

Computing power, better known as “compute”, has seen soaring demand as AI companies use it to power their systems. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink said last week that a new asset class will likely be buying futures of compute given the shortage and high demand.

Futures contracts, which give investors the ability to bet on the future value of a commodity such as oil or metals at a certain date, are traded on exchanges such as Chicago-based CME’s, and require a brokerage account that’s approved to trade futures.

The need for compute power has been growing as AI technologies have scaled. But until now, it’s been difficult to hedge against price swings and other costs.

The index from Silicon Data, which is backed by trading firm DRW Holdings, provides a benchmark for traders and others to follow, giving insight into the cost of goods for those building AI products or in need of graphics processing unit computing power.

Silicon Data, founded by former DRW trader Carmen Li, created daily GPU benchmarks for on-demand rental rates, giving customers insight into the cost of goods for those building AI products or in need of GPU computing power.

The company’s Silicon Data H100 Rental Index tracks the hourly cost of renting a GPU, which is the workhorse for training AI models.

A data center typically uses hundreds or even thousands of processors, which can cost thousands of dollars.

Authored by Micah Zimmerman via Bitcoin Magazine,

Five of the nation’s largest labor organizations are urging the Senate to vote against a pending cryptocurrency market structure bill, warning that the legislation would expose retirement accounts to digital asset volatility ahead of a key committee vote Thursday.

The AFL-CIO, Service Employees International Union, American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees sent letters and emails to Senate Banking Committee members, according to CNBC, which obtained the correspondence first.

The crypto industry takes ‘risks’

The groups wrote that the bill “jeopardizes the stability of workers’ retirement plans, including public pensions, and introduces significant volatility to retirement savings accounts.”

“This legislation invites the cryptocurrency industry to take outsized risks, knowing that if those risky bets do not pay off, it is working people and retirees, not crypto billionaires, who will pay the price,” the unions wrote in a joint letter to all senators.

The AFL-CIO, in a separate email to Banking Committee members, warned that “absent sufficient regulation, embedding cryptocurrencies and other digital assets into the real economy will have a destabilizing effect, while benefiting issuers and platforms at the expense of working people.”

The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to mark up and vote on the bill Thursday. Despite months of bipartisan talks, it remains unclear whether any Democrats on the committee will vote in favor of the measure. Several lawmakers say the bill needs more work on ethics, conflict-of-interest, and security provisions.

Labor groups are not the sole source of opposition. The American Bankers Association has also pushed back on updated language in the bill concerning stablecoin holdings. ABA CEO Rob Nichols wrote to bank executives on May 10 that a provision barring cryptocurrency firms from paying yield on payment stablecoins remains a threat to traditional bank deposits, arguing it would “unnecessarily incentivize the flight of bank deposits.” 

The crypto industry, in contrast, has backed the revised language, with Coinbase voicing support for the restriction.

Michael Saylor chimes in

Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor took a position in favor of the legislation. In a post on X, Saylor wrote that the bill “would unlock the next wave of Digital Capital, Digital Credit, and Digital Equity in the U.S. and globally,” calling it a framework for “STRC-powered digital yield markets” and a signal of “institutional validation for BTC.”

The key language: the bill recognizes activity-based rewards tied to payment stablecoins and distributed ledger participation as “critical to enabling innovation, competition, and consumer adoption.” That is the path to responsible digital yield markets. https://t.co/PTpjmmkqO1

— Michael Saylor (@saylor) May 12, 2026

The crypto industry has identified the bill as its top legislative priority this session. Whether that momentum carries through committee — and into a full Senate vote — now depends on resolving opposition from organized labor, traditional banks, and a block of Senate Democrats who have yet to commit their support.

Looks like NYC’s communist mayor has had second thoughts about extracting more taxes by raising New Yorkers’ property taxes – something he vowed to do to help close a two-year deficit.

According to Bloomberg, the decision to drop the tax hike will be included in Mamdani’s executive budget released today, which will mark the latest version of his spending plan for the fiscal year beginning July 1. 

This is separate from a tax on second homes (the so-called pied-à-terre) that was initiated by Governor Kathy Hochul – which is still under consideration as part of state budget negotiations. 

Earlier this year, Mamdani threatened to raise property taxes by nearly 10% as a way to lobby Hochul for more funding. He had little support for an across-the-board increase, with City Council members including Speaker Julie Menin opposing the plan. Any increase would have needed to be passed by that chamber. -Bloomberg

Mamdani’s preliminary budget proposal earned the city a credit rating downgrade to negative, citing the city’s long-term structural problems. He also proposed raiding the city’s emergency savings account for $1 billion to help close the gap. 

On Tuesday, Hochul and Mamdani announced that the state would slide NYC an additional $4 billion to help close the budget gap that Mamdani has called a “generational fiscal crisis” rivaling the Great Recession. To fix this, his only solution has been higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations – because heaven forbid they slash spending to a meaningful degree (or at all). 

This reversal comes amid a great exodus of wealth from New York State.

The decision to drop the across-the-board property tax hike unfolds against the backdrop of a sustained and accelerating departure of high earners, businesses, and capital from New York City and the state. New York has already lost tens of billions in tax revenue as residents and employers relocate to lower-tax states.

NYC has recorded a net loss of roughly 220,000 residents since 2021. In the past two years alone, approximately 6,000 businesses have closed or moved out. The damage is concentrated among the taxpayers who fund the majority of city services: the top 1 percent of earners contribute more than 40 percent of income tax revenue, and that group is leaving in disproportionate numbers. More than 125,000 New Yorkers have relocated to Florida in recent years, taking nearly $14 billion in adjusted gross income with them.

A May 2026 analysis noted that repeated tax increases intended to offset lost revenue have only driven more departures, with the city suffering significant wealth decline as a direct result. An April 2026 piece warned that Mamdani’s broader tax agenda – including hikes on high earners and the pied-à-terre tax still advancing at the state level – risks accelerating the migration of wealth and businesses to states like Florida, Texas, and the Carolinas. Even Governor Hochul has publicly implored wealthy taxpayers to stop leaving, underscoring how severe the fiscal pressure has become.

New York Gov Kathy Hochul is begging wealthy people who have moved to Florida and Texas to come back to New York and pay taxes. 🤣

“I need people who are high net worth to support the generous social programs that we want to have in our state. Now, there are some patriotic… pic.twitter.com/B4ql1ktcq6

— Based Jessica (@RealJessica) March 18, 2026

By walking back the property tax increase, Mamdani is confronting the hard limit of his strategy: the very people and companies needed to fund expansive spending are already voting with their feet. Yet the state continues to push additional taxes on second homes and corporations, meaning the underlying incentives fueling the exodus remain firmly in place. The wealthy are not waiting for further experiments – they are leaving.

Shares of Wendy’s jumped in premarket trading after the Financial Times reported that Nelson Peltz’s Trian Fund Management is considering taking the hamburger chain private and is seeking investors to back the deal.

FT noted:

Trian in recent weeks has held discussions with outside investors, including in the Middle East, about financing a potential takeover of Wendy’s, according to people familiar with the matter.

Earlier this year, Trian stated in a regulatory filing that Wendy’s is “currently undervalued,” fueling speculation that Peltz would push for significant changes.

FT’s report continued:

Trian has not made a formal approach to buy Wendy’s and there is no guarantee that the financing discussions will result in a takeover bid, the people said. Peltz pushed for Wendy’s to consider strategic options in 2022 before backing down a year later.

Trian’s possible take-private bid comes as Wendy’s stock remains locked in a 72% bear market since its 2020 peak near $25 per share. The chain has faced sluggish traffic, higher beef costs, and intensified competition from McDonald’s, Burger King, and Chipotle.

Wendy’s shares track USDA retail beef prices (inverted) …

Wendy’s is currently executing a “Fresh Start” turnaround plan to boost U.S. sales, update its menu, and shutter underperforming restaurants.

For Peltz, Wendy’s current valuation appears to be ‘price is right’…

With 30Y yields trading on the wrong side of 5% today, all eyes were on today’s 10Y refunding auction to see if it would be ugly enough to push yields to 4.50% or higher. Here is what happened.

Just after 1pm, the Treasury announced that the high yield on today’s sale of $42 billion in 10Y paper was 4.468%, the highest yield since Jan 2025, and a 0.4bps tail to the When Issued 4.464%, the 4th consecutive tail for benchmark 10Y auctions.

The bid to cover was 2.402, down from 4.249 and the lowest since February (below the six auction average of 2.47).

Internals were also weaker, with foreign bidders awarded just 63.95%, down from 65.32% a month ago and the lowest since Jan 2025, and a far worse than the recent average of 68.5%. And with Directs taking 24.1%, the highest since Jan 26, Dealers were left holding 12.0%, slightly higher than the 10.3% recent average.

Overall, this was a very poor, tailing auction, and the only reason bonds yields are not much higher is because they were already very high to begin with, highest since July 2025 to be precise. However, the lack of demand suggests that the next move in yields is likely to be even higher, the only question being where will it stop…

A day after initial allegations were first widely reported, Pakistan’s government has issued a public rejection of claims that it hosted Iranian military aircraft in order to shield them from coming under US-Israeli attack during the opening weeks of Operation Epic Fury.

However, Islamabad in the statement did acknowledged the presence of some Iranian planes at its airports – but described these as legitimate escorts related to high level diplomatic visits and contacts.

Iranian jets targeted by US military during Epic Fury

“Following the ceasefire and during the initial round of the Islamabad Talks, a number of aircraft from Iran and the United States arrived in Pakistan to facilitate the movement of diplomatic personnel, security teams and administrative staff associated with the talks process,” a Tuesday statement by Pakistan said. “Some aircraft and support personnel remained temporarily in Pakistan in anticipation of subsequent rounds of engagement.”

The initial Monday headlines suggesting Pakistan sought to protect Iranian military assets resulted in some outrage in D.C. and among the pundit class.

A late in the day Monday CBS News report alleged that US-ally Pakistan allowed Iran to park military aircraft at its airfields, and thus outside the US-Israeli strike zone during Operation Epic Fury:

As Pakistan positioned itself as a diplomatic conduit between Tehran and Washington, it quietly allowed Iranian military aircraft to park on its airfields, potentially shielding them from American airstrikes, according to U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter. 

Iran also sent civilian aircraft to park in neighboring Afghanistan. It was not clear if military aircraft were among those flights, two of the officials told CBS News. 

President Trump and admin officials have repeatedly declared the utter and total destruction of Iran’s air force and navy, but apparently some planes were missed.

According to more from CBS: 

Together, the movements reflected an apparent effort to insulate some of Iran’s remaining military and aviation assets from the expanding conflict, even as officials publicly served as brokers for de-escalation. 

The U.S. officials, who all spoke only under condition of anonymity to discuss national security issues, told CBS News that days after President Trump announced the ceasefire with Iran in early April, Tehran sent multiple aircraft to Pakistan Air Force Base Nur Khan, a strategically important military installation located just outside the Pakistani garrison city of Rawalpindi. 

One well-known war correspondent who spends time in Pakistan appeared to back Pakistan’s account:

As someone who was also in Pakistan for weeks after the Islamabad talks waiting in hope of round two, this checks out:

“Following the ceasefire and during the initial round of the Islamabad Talks, a number of aircraft from Iran and the United States arrived in Pakistan to… https://t.co/eLyANnlUMG

— Caitlin Doornbos (@CaitlinDoornbos) May 12, 2026

Islamabad is further framing the CBS story as one which seeks to dampen confidence in its role as a neutral mediator, as the warring sides still seek to hammer out a basis for future talks and a peace deal.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

California gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer has run on the slogan of “actions speak louder than words.”

It may now be time for him to prove it and bring a defamation action against opponent Katie Porter for her accusations that he engaged in dirty politics.

Porter used a CNN interview to accuse Steyer of finding and leaking the infamous video of her abusing a staffer and yelling “Get out of my f**king shot.”

Katie Porter’s campaign for governor has languished at around ten percent, even after the implosion of Eric Swalwell as the frontrunner among Democratic candidates. At times, she appears to be seeking to win by profanity rather than policies, holding up signs reading “F**k Trump” and other insults.

On CNN’s Inside Politics, however, Porter may have gone too far with her rhetoric. She told Dana Bash that it was Steyer who stabbed her in the back with the video:

“Well, given that Tom Steyer is the person who leaked the video with me and the staffer from five years ago, he pretty clearly wanted to be governor bad enough to knock me down to do it.”

Steyer’s campaign immediately denied the allegation, insisting (through spokesperson Sepi Esfahlani) “Tom has nothing to do with that video. This is an attempt from Katie Porter to deflect from her past mistakes. Katie Porter only has one person to blame for her standing in the race, and it’s herself.”

As for Bash, the host clearly wanted to set the network apart from Porter’s claims, stating at the end of the interview “I should note that we don’t have evidence that Steyer leaked that video of you. If you have it, please bring it.”

That evidence has not been forthcoming.

The question is whether Porter has produced a more viable defamation case than a political campaign.

At the outset, Steyer would face the higher burden as a public figure.

In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court crafted the actual malice standard, requiring public officials to shoulder the higher burden of proving defamation. Under that standard, an official would have to show either actual knowledge of its falsity or a reckless disregard of the truth.

The standard was later extended to public figures.  The Supreme Court has held that public figure status applies when  someone “thrust[s] himself into the vortex of [the] public issue [and] engage[s] the public’s attention in an attempt to influence its outcome.” A limited-purpose public figure status applies if someone voluntarily “draw[s] attention to himself” or allows himself to become part of a controversy “as a fulcrum to create public discussion.” Wolston v. Reader’s Digest Association, 443 U.S. 157, 168 (1979).

Steyer is a full public figure.

Yet, if Porter has no evidence of his connection to the videotape, this could satisfy either the actual malice or the reckless disregard elements.

However, is it defamatory to accuse a fellow politician of playing dirty?

The release of the videotape was not a criminal act and Porter does not suggest such a violation in her accusation. She is simply saying that Steyer will do most anything to win, including dirty tricks.

Richard Nixon, Hillary Clinton, and others have been accused of dirty tricks in politics. It is a standard accusation in politics.

Yet, Steyer has denied the allegation, so Porter is also effectively calling him a liar.

This is not a matter of opinion alone.

Certainly, Porter’s view of Steyer’s character and ambition is an opinion. However, whether he was the one who released the video is either true or it is not.

The Porter claim is meant to lower Steyer’s reputation with the public, though she can claim that all political battles are ultimately an attack on character, capability, or both.

The controversy touches on a sometimes subtle point of fact v. opinion.

The case reminds one of Mr. Chow of New York v. Ste. Jour Azur, 759 F.2d 219, (2d Cir. 1985), where a Chinese restaurant sued a food critic for a negative review. The reviewer made the following allegedly libelous comments:

(1) “It is impossible to have the basic condiments … on the table.”

(2) “The sweet and sour pork contained more dough … than meat.”

(3) “The green peppers … remained still frozen on the plate.”

(4) The rice was “soaking … in oil.”

(5) The Peking Duck “was made up of only one dish (instead of the traditional three).”

(6) The pancakes were “the thickness of a finger.”

The jury found for the restaurant and awarded $20,000 in compensatory and $5 in punitive damages. However, the court of appeals reversed, holding that the statements were protected as “opinion.” Notably, the statement about the Peking Duck came closest in the court’s view since it was a factual statement, but the court still found that it would not support the verdict due to the absence of malice:

Because of the absence of evidence showing either that Bridault or Millau knew that Peking Duck was not traditionally served as three dishes or that they subjectively entertained serious doubts about the accuracy of the statement that it is traditionally served in three dishes, we cannot say that the existence of malice has been established by clear and convincing evidence. Thus, this statement cannot support the judgment entered below.

Here, Porter claims that Steyer was the culprit behind the video release despite Steyer’s denials.

Generally, broadcast statements on the news are treated as libel as opposed to slander.

Steyer could even attempt to argue that this is a per se category of defamation by impugning his integrity. It is not necessary in California to allege an actual criminal act so long as the statement attacks the person’s integrity as to bring him into disrepute. Maher v. Devlin (1928) 203 Cal. 270, 275. This includes falsely charging a person with “a violation of confidence reposed in him or with treachery to his associates.” Dethlefsen v. Stull (1948) 86 Cal.App.2d 499, 502.

It is admittedly a close case and Porter could argue opinion defenses. Truth also remains a defense if Porter can do as Bash requested and bring the receipts for the allegation.

In the end, Steyer may not consider the powder worth the prize when it comes to Porter. It would, however, make for a more interesting case than the campaign of either candidate.

Authored by Bryan Hyde via American Greatness,

Virginia Democrats, along with their state Attorney General, have asked the US Supreme Court to override the Virginia Supreme Court’s decision last week that struck down a partisan redistricting plan.

ABC News reports Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones wrote in the emergency application filed on Monday that the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” when it invalidated a ballot measure to amend the state constitution that would have netted Democrats as many as four new congressional seats.

The state Supreme Court had ruled last Friday, in a 4–3 decision, that Democrats had violated the state Constitution, by failing to follow proper procedures, while racing to get the measure on the ballot before the midterm elections.

According to SCOTUSblog, Virginia’s General Assembly adopted a new map in February that would have favored Democrats in 10 of the state’s 11 seats in the US House—a potential increase of four seats from the current balance between Democrats and Republicans in Virginia.

The new map hinged on obtaining approval for an amendment to the Virginia constitution that would give the state legislature the power to draw a new congressional map outside of the normal cycle following the decennial census.

In a referendum held in April, Virginia voters approved that amendment by a margin of three percentage points.

The Virginia Supreme Court ruled that the referendum was not valid because the General Assembly had not followed proper procedures when it put the new amendment on the ballot.

In Monday’s 24-page filing, Jones argued:

“The irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia’s decision is profound and immediate. By forcing the Commonwealth to conduct its congressional elections using districts different from those adopted by the General Assembly pursuant to a constitutional amendment the people just ratified, the Supreme Court of Virginia has deprived voters, candidates, and the Commonwealth of their right to the lawfully enacted congressional districts.”

Legal experts told ABC News last week that they believe Democrats have little chance of a successful appeal at the US Supreme Court because the state Supreme Court would be the highest authority dealing with state constitutional issues and no federal issues are at stake.

According to former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, “The Virginia Supreme Court is the final authority on Virginia constitutional questions. This is the end, folks. You will have the same map in 2026 that existed in 2024. That is now unchangeable and immutable.”

Politico reports that Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversees emergency appeals arising from Virginia, instructed the Republicans who challenged the Virginia referendum to respond to Jones’ appeal by Thursday at 5 p.m.

🚨 JUST IN: It’s now being speculated the US Supreme Court will LAUGH Virginia Democrats OUT OF THE ROOM after they just filed with SCOTUS to reinstate their draconian 10D-1R gerrymandered House map

Dems want the federal court to NULLIFY their own State Supreme Court and… pic.twitter.com/5Q0KtVULKH

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 11, 2026

Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via Oilprice.com,

Global coal shipments and imports surged in March and April as buyers scrambled for fuel amid massively disrupted oil and gas supply from the Middle East.

The trend has been accelerating in recent weeks, and global coal imports are on track to reach their third-highest monthly level on record, according to estimates by analytics platform Kpler cited by the Financial Times.

In the wake of the worst oil and gas supply disruption in history, coal is back in demand, so much so that even countries and regions that believed coal use was in an irreversible terminal decline have boosted imports.

For example, last month coal shipments to South Korea, Japan, and the European Union surged by 27% from a year earlier, data from BIMCO, the world’s biggest shipowners’ association, said last week.  

The Asian importers and the European bloc are scrambling for alternatives to gas supply from the Middle East, currently trapped behind the Strait of Hormuz or not produced at all in Qatar, which halted LNG production as early as on March 2 and two weeks later sustained damages to the world’s largest LNG complex, Ras Laffan, from Iranian missile strikes.

“The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has disrupted LNG shipments out of the Persian Gulf and has contributed to an 8% y/y drop in global seaborne LNG shipments in April,” BIMCO said.

South Korea has pushed back the retirement of coal-fired power generation capacity amid the oil and gas shock caused by the Middle East war.

Europe, for its part, is currently losing the competition with Asia for spot LNG supply, at a time when it needs to fill gas storage sites ahead of the next winter.

Energy security concerns are shifting policy responses, accelerating coal usage across key Asian and European markets, and delaying coal plant retirements, analysts at Wood Mackenzie say.

A total of 11 hantavirus cases have been confirmed as of Tuesday morning, with global health officials warning that the number could rise.

The risk to the public from an illness called the hantavirus is low, a U.S. official said on May 11.

“Let me be crystal clear: the risk of hantavirus to the general public remains very, very low,” Dr. Brian Christine, assistant secretary for health and head of the U.S. Public Health Service, told reporters during a briefing in Omaha, Nebraska.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had said in a May 8 health alert to doctors and health departments that doctors should be aware that imported hantavirus cases were possible but that “the risk of broad spread to the United States is considered extremely unlikely at this time.”

As Zachary Stieber reports for The Epoch Times, multiple people on board the M.V. Hondius, which departed from Argentina on April 1 and traveled to remote locations, including Antarctica, contracted a variant of the hantavirus called the Andes variant.

Three have died.

Christine said on Monday that “the Andes variant of this virus does not spread easily, and it requires prolonged close contact with someone who is already symptomatic.”

An American cruise ship passenger who tested positive on one test and negative on another was transported early Monday to the biocontainment unit at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, officials said. That individual is doing well and has no symptoms, Dr. Angela Hewlett, director of the unit, said at the briefing. That person will be tested again at some point.

Fifteen other Americans, including a British American, who were on the Hondius were admitted around the same time into a separate area called the quarantine unit. They have not displayed symptoms. They may be tested, based on conversations between physicians and those individuals, officials said.

Two additional Americans who were aboard the ship were transported to a biocontainment unit at Emory University in Atlanta. One of those Americans has shown symptoms of hantavirus; the other is that person’s partner.

The people being cared for at the facilities in Nebraska and Georgia can leave after they have been symptom-free for at least a few days, according to Dr. Brendan Jackson, acting director of the CDC’s Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology.

Other Americans who previously left the Hondius are in contact with state officials and have been told that if they develop symptoms, they should alert their doctors and those officials, Jackson said.

Symptoms of the hantavirus include fever, fatigue, and shortness of breath.

The virus typically spreads from contact with infected rodents, but officials say it may have been transmitted from person-to-person on the cruise ship.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, acting CDC director, said over the weekend that hantavirus is “not COVID” because it does not transmit as easily.

“I can assure you that the CDC has been absolutely on top of this outbreak,” he said.

“There’s not a great wealth of information,” said WHO epidemiologist Olivier le Polain during a public briefing Monday.

“We don’t know how much it might spread just before people develop symptoms.”

Decades of experience in South America have shown the virus to be associated with “rare human-to-human transmission after close and prolonged contact with a sick, infected person,” Erica Pan, California’s public health officer, told reporters Monday.

But the available evidence is limited.

No indications of a larger outbreak of the deadly hantavirus have appeared so far, a World Health Organization official said on May 12.

“At the moment, there is no sign that we are seeing the start of a larger outbreak,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the organization’s director-general, told reporters in Madrid, Spain, during a press conference with Spain’s prime minister.

“But, of course, the situation could change, and given the long incubation period of the virus, it’s possible we might see more cases in the coming weeks.”

The incubation period for the Andes variant of the virus is up to 42 days.