Monday, November 2, 2026

This is How India and Thailand Policies Have Affected Cryptocurrencies Sentiments

Ruchi Gupta

August 21, 2018

Reserve bank of India, Headquarters. Photo by: Soham Banerjee
NEW DELHI (India) - A pronunciation by the Reverse Bank of India barring all banks and financial institutions form dealing in virtual currencies has had an adverse effect on the overall cryptocurrency landscape. The sell-off that has come to be in recent months can be attributed to such actions as centralized authorities continue to crack the whip on decentralized currencies.

India Crypto Ban

The new policy according to blockchain and cryptocurrency analyst Vikram Nikkam does not come as a surprise given that centralized financial institutions will always oppose Bitcoin (BTC) and other de-centralized currency. According to the analyst, such institutions continue to oppose the emerging currencies for fear of losing powers that control the economy. “The RBI….like all others that are pro centralized currency are going to try their best to squash all decentralized currencies. They haven't been successful so far with their press statements and commented so this directive is their new approach to tackling the 'monster' that is lurking in the shadows,” said Mr. Nikkam. The Reserve Bank of India ban has adversely affected the country’s market as people who had started to take a keen interest in the emerging spectacle have already taken a step back. The fact that financial institutions cannot facilitate cryptocurrencies transactions all but makes it impossible to pursue investment opportunities in the sector. India’s crypto market could, however, receive a boost on the government launching a national cryptocurrency. A cryptocurrency backed by fiat cash, in this case, will help underscore the benefits of virtual currencies such as quick transfer speeds which could help change the perception about such currencies.

Thailand Crack on Crypto Firms

India’s legislation is not the only one that has had an adverse effect on the larger crypto market. Thailand another emerging market for crypto assets has blocked a number of firms from servicing the needs of people in the burgeoning sector. Thai Securities and Exchange Commission has only approved seven firms to legally carry out cryptocurrency operations from an initial list of over 20 firms. Five of the firms are crypto exchanges while the other two are cryptocurrency dealers.

In this story · Knowledge Files

What we know · the intelligence behind this page
Live from the substrate
What we're seeing
Agentic AI Goes Operational: Platform Governance, Local Silicon, and the Physical-AI Data Race
In mid-to-late October 2026, enterprise vendors (Cisco, Fortinet, ServiceNow, Intuit, Salesforce/Braze, Adobe) shipped agent governance, AI security and AI-driven customer engagement products, while a parallel hardware wave (NVIDIA RTX Spark laptops, ASUS, Apple's iPad mini, Microsoft's hybrid local/cloud Windows) pushed AI onto local devices. A third strand, physical AI (Encord, Harvest Praxis, Hesai), argues that real-world sensor data and cheaper edge chips are the next bottleneck. The common thread is the shift from AI experimentation to governed, scaled deployment, with Salesforce's Braze acquisition showing consolidation and fintech players like Intuit tying AI to trusted financial data. The facts support a broad industry theme but contain little direct finance or regulatory evidence, so the AI-finance angle is thin.
Our read on the data ›
Signals we're tracking
EPKINLY Regulatory-Clinical Success Cascade
High probability of expanded label indications, additional combination approvals, and competitive positioning strength in follicular lymphoma market. Predicts positive commercial uptake and potential accelerated review for related indications.
Patterns we're watching ›
Where sources disagree
Ford Motor Company
Both facts give cash for Ford Motor Company at the same point in time (2025-12-31; FY 2025 year-end and Q4 2025 year-end are the same date). Both are labelled USD, but the values are 23,356,000,000 and 23.356, which cannot both be true in USD. The two numbers agree once the second is read as billions (23.356 bn = 23,356,000,000), so the economic content is consistent and the conflict is a unit/scale error in the Q4 2025 record. The period is not the reason for the conflict: a Q4 and an FY figure at the same year-end date should match.
We flag conflicts openly ›
Recently verified
✓ Checked against the original source
4,995
facts traced to their source — and we flag the ones that don't hold up.
101 entities tracked4,995 facts checked against source5,533 source documents archived
Query this data → isubstrate.com