Connect with us

Published

on

Scene from “Squid Game” by Netflix
Source: Netflix

When Bernard heard about a token named after the popular South Korean Netflix series “Squid Game,” which chronicles the lives of cash-strapped adults who play in a deadly tournament for a big jackpot, he did a quick scan on Google to see if the coin was legit.

After catching headlines – but before reading the full articles, many of which warned of some red flags around the project – he decided to invest his entire life savings of $28,000 into SQUID, a coin that billed itself as a “play-to-earn” cryptocurrency. On Monday, the token hit a high of just over $2,860, before plummeting to nearly zero, according to CoinMarketCap.

“My rush to buy this token is for a single idea that went into my brain that ‘Squid Game’ is very, very popular now, and its token must be popular now,” said Bernard, who lives in Shanghai, and asked to be identified only by his English first name because trading in cryptocurrency is of questionable legality in China. “It’s a tragedy. I don’t know how to recover my loss.”

Bernard tells CNBC that he supports his family and is now worried about how to pay his bills.

Transaction records from BscScan appear to show the token’s anonymous creators collected least $3.4 million in investor funds. The crypto ecosystem is rife with so-called “rug pull” schemes wherein token founders abruptly abandon their project and take investor funds with them by swapping the project coin for cash.

“Squid Game Dev does not want to continue running the project as we are depressed from the scammers and is overwhelmed with stress,” Squid developers posted Monday in their Telegram channel, which now has more than 89,000 members.

The token’s white paper and website have since disappeared, though archived copies of its official landing page and white paper are still online. Twitter has temporarily restricted its account due to “suspicious activity.” The creators did not respond to multiple emails that CNBC sent to the addresses listed on the web site.

Bernard says he has reached out to the FBI and the SEC about his lost investment.

He has also reached out to the team behind the token, as well as Binance-owned CoinMarketCap, which listed the coin on its website, both of whom “did not take responsibility” for his loss.

Bernard, who says he has a lot of experience in crypto and computers, blames media outlets for his investment in SQUID as well.

He isn’t alone. Others have taken to Twitter to say that giving any oxygen to meme coins like this one functions as an implicit endorsement.

“In this trading space, everyone will rush,” said Bernard, “and sometimes you feel FOMO.” That sense of FOMO, or the fear of missing out, is a common sentiment among crypto traders who invest in early-stage altcoins, eager for a chance at big and quick returns on their investment.

‘Some have a shot at going nuts’

Saurabh Dubey has been interested in cryptocurrencies since 2016. He now works for an accounting firm in the U.S., and in his free time, he regularly day trades new altcoins.

Just past midnight each day, Dubey looks at new coins being listed on CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko, trying to identify trends based on the charts. He typically places bets of around $100 on coins that he thinks show promise in their initial price movements.

“Some have a shot at going nuts,” he said.

Dubey says that he used the proceeds from a recent successful bet on another meme coin to invest $250 into SQUID.

“I thought I’ll play with house money,” said Dubey.

This was when SQUID was trading at about 4 cents – well before all the media hype began.

Dubey says he invested in SQUID because it was the second-ranked token on CoinMarketCap’s list of the most recently listed coins.

“I picked it up because it already had some amount of volume and already had some amount of gain, and if you look at the chart, you will see that the chart mimics the start of how SafeMoon got started,” said Dubey, referring to an altcoin launched in March that appreciated quickly and is still being traded.

He noted that his investment was a gut move more than anything else. “It wasn’t scientific.”

But then Dubey started to notice all the red flags, many of which he hoped were not that big a deal.

“The biggest flag was that it never had a dip,” explained Dubey. “Every coin has to have a dip. There is no way a coin goes up constantly for five days…The only thing that looked like a dip was when it stayed at the same level.”

The level of price appreciation was another big concern. “When it hit $1, I was like, ‘Okay, 20x is reasonable. That can happen.’ When it got to $10, that’s when I started thinking there’s something off,” he said.

“Most coins that actually have a product behind them are barely able to reach that point,” continued Dubey.

Another red flag: None of the token’s founders could be found on LinkedIn, plus its website and white paper were filled with grammatical and spelling errors.

Ultimately, Dubey’s exposure was limited, but investors like Bernard who gambled all their savings on this coin want the creators behind the project to be held accountable.

Bernard, who has been proactive in reaching out to U.S. authorities, says that his hands are tied to take any further action, because he can’t file a report with local police.

“In China, it’s not so legal to trade cryptocurrencies,” Bernard shared with CNBC.

Continue Reading

Technology

23andMe bankruptcy under congressional investigation for customer data

Published

on

By

23andMe bankruptcy under congressional investigation for customer data

Signage at 23andMe headquarters in Sunnyvale, California, U.S., on Wednesday, Jan. 27, 2021.

David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images

The House Committee on Energy and Commerce is investigating 23andMe‘s decision to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and has expressed concern that its sensitive genetic data is “at risk of being compromised,” CNBC has learned.

Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., and Rep. Gary Palmer, R.-Ala., sent a letter to 23andMe’s interim CEO Joe Selsavage on Thursday requesting answers to a series of questions about its data and privacy practices by May 1.

The congressmen are the latest government officials to raise concerns about 23andMe’s commitment to data security, as the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Federal Trade Commission have sent the company similar letters in recent weeks.

23andMe exploded into the mainstream with its at-home DNA testing kits that gave customers insight into their family histories and genetic profiles. The company was once valued at a peak of $6 billion, but has since struggled to generate recurring revenue and establish a lucrative research and therapeutics businesses.

After filing for bankruptcy in in Missouri federal court in March, 23andMe’s assets, including its vast genetic database, are up for sale.

“With the lack of a federal comprehensive data privacy and security law, we write to express our great concern about the safety of Americans’ most sensitive personal information,” Guthrie, Bilirakis and Palmer wrote in the letter.

23andMe did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

More CNBC health coverage

23andMe has been inundated with privacy concerns in recent years after hackers accessed the information of nearly 7 million customers in 2023. 

DNA data is particularly sensitive because each person’s sequence is unique, meaning it can never be fully anonymized, according to the National Human Genome Research Institute. If genetic data falls into the hands of bad actors, it could be used to facilitate identity theft, insurance fraud and other crimes.

The House Committee on Energy and Commerce has jurisdiction over issues involving data privacy. Guthrie serves as the chairman of the committee, Palmer serves as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations and Bilirakis serves as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade.

The congressmen said that while Americans’ health information is protected under legislation like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, direct-to-consumer companies like 23andMe are typically not covered under that law. They said they feel “great concern” about the safety of the company’s customer data, especially given the uncertainty around the sale process.

23andMe has repeatedly said it will not change how it manages or protects consumer data throughout the transaction. Similarly, in a March release, the company said all potential buyers must agree to comply with its privacy policy and applicable law. 

“To constitute a qualified bid, potential buyers must, among other requirements, agree to comply with 23andMe’s consumer privacy policy and all applicable laws with respect to the treatment of customer data,” 23andMe said in the release.

23andMe customers can still delete their account and accompanying data through the company’s website. But Guthrie, Bilirakis and Palmer said there are reports that some users have had trouble doing so.

“Regardless of whether the company changes ownership, we want to ensure that customer access and deletion requests are being honored by 23andMe,” the congressmen wrote.

WATCH: The rise and fall of 23andMe

The rise and fall of 23andMe

Continue Reading

Technology

TSMC denies it’s talking to Intel about chipmaking joint venture

Published

on

By

TSMC denies it's talking to Intel about chipmaking joint venture

A motorcycle is seen near a building of the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), which is a Taiwanese multinational semiconductor contract manufacturing and design company, in Hsinchu, Taiwan, on April 16, 2025.

Daniel Ceng | Anadolu | Getty Images

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company denied reports that the semiconductor giant was in active discussions with Intel regarding a chipmaking joint venture.

“TSMC is not engaged in any discussion with other companies regarding any joint venture, technology licensing or technology,” CEO C.C. Wei said on the company’s first-quarter earnings call on Wednesday, dispelling rumors about a collaboration with Intel.

Intel and TSMC were said to have been looking to form a JV as recently as this month. On April 3, The Information reported that the two firms discussed a preliminary agreement to form a tie-up to operate Intel’s chip factories with TSMC owning a 21% stake.

Intel was not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNBC on Wei’s comments on Thursday. The company previously said it doesn’t comment on rumors, when asked by CNBC about the reported discussions.

Once the dominant chipmaker in the U.S., Intel has faced numerous challenges in recent years, losing ground to players like Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm and Apple. Last year, Intel suffered its worst ever performance as a public company, with shares shedding 61% of their value.

TSMC’s denial of tie-up talks with Intel comes as President Donald Trump is pushing to address global trade imbalances and reshore manufacturing in the U.S. through tariffs. The Department of Commerce recently kicked off an investigation into semiconductor imports — a move that could result in new tariffs for the chip industry.

TSMC reported a profit beat for the first quarter thanks to a continued surge in demand for AI chips. However, the company contends with potential headwinds from Trump’s tariffs — which target Taiwan — and stricter export controls on TSMC clients Nvidia and AMD.

– CNBC’s Dylan Butts contributed to this report

Continue Reading

Technology

TSMC first-quarter profit tops estimates, rising 60%, but Trump trade policy threatens growth

Published

on

By

TSMC first-quarter profit tops estimates, rising 60%, but Trump trade policy threatens growth

A motorcycle is seen near a building of the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), which is a Taiwanese multinational semiconductor contract manufacturing and design company, in Hsinchu, Taiwan, on April 16, 2025.

Daniel Ceng | Anadolu | Getty Images

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company on Thursday beat profit expectations for the first quarter, thanks to a continued surge in demand for AI chips.

Here are TSMC’s first-quarter results versus LSEG consensus estimates:

  • Revenue: $839.25 billion New Taiwan dollars, vs. NT$835.13 billion expected
  • Net income: NT$361.56 billion, vs. NT$354.14 billion 

TSMC’s reported net income increased 60.3% from a year ago to NT$361.56 billion, while net revenue in the March quarter rose 41.6% from a year earlier to NT$839.25 billion.

The world’s largest contract chip manufacturer has benefited from the AI boom as it produces advanced processors for clients such American chip designer Nvidia.

However, the company faces headwinds from the trade policy of U.S. President Donald Trump, who has placed broad trade tariffs on Taiwan and stricter export controls on TSMC clients Nvidia and AMD.

Semiconductor export controls could also be expanded next month under the “AI diffusion rules” first proposed by the Biden administration, further restricting the sales of chipmakers that use TSMC foundries.

Taiwan currently faces a blanket 10% tariff from the Trump administration and that could rise to 32% after the President’s 90-day pause of his “reciprocal tariffs” ends unless it reaches a deal with the U.S.

As part of efforts to diversify its supply chains, TSMC has been investing billions in overseas facilities, though the lion’s share of its manufacturing remains in Taiwan.

In an apparent response to Trump’s trade policy, TSMC last month announced plans to invest an additional $100 billion in the U.S. on top of the $65 billion it has committed to three plants in the U.S.

On Monday, AMD said it would soon manufacture processor chips at one of the new Arizona-based TSMC facilities, marking the first time that its chips will be manufactured in the U.S.

The same day, Nvidia announced that it has already started production of its Blackwell chips at TSMC’s Arizona plants. It plans to produce up to half a trillion dollars of AI infrastructure in the U.S. over the next four years through partners, including TSMC.

Taiwan-listed shares of TSMC were down about 0.4%. Shares have lost about 20% so far this year.

Continue Reading

Trending