🎉 Share Your 2025 Year-End Summary & Win $10,000 Sharing Rewards!
Reflect on your year with Gate and share your report on Square for a chance to win $10,000!
👇 How to Join:
1️⃣ Click to check your Year-End Summary: https://www.gate.com/competition/your-year-in-review-2025
2️⃣ After viewing, share it on social media or Gate Square using the "Share" button
3️⃣ Invite friends to like, comment, and share. More interactions, higher chances of winning!
🎁 Generous Prizes:
1️⃣ Daily Lucky Winner: 1 winner per day gets $30 GT, a branded hoodie, and a Gate × Red Bull tumbler
2️⃣ Lucky Share Draw: 10
ElizaOS token skyrockets by 150% after its X account was restored
Source: CryptoNewsNet Original Title: ElizaOS token skyrockets by 150% after its X account was restored Original Link: After a six-month ban, X restored the accounts of Shaw Walters and that of his agentic AI platform, ElizaOS, and it has set off a chain reaction in the token price, which has risen by over 150% within the past 24 hours.
The account of Walters, who operates under the handle @shawmakesmagic, was restored alongside growing questions about platform power over emerging technology companies. The token’s market capitalization has hit $48 million following the news, though it remains significantly below its November peak, when it traded at nearly $0.039.
ElizaOS is an open-source framework for building autonomous AI agents that operate across blockchains.
Why is ElizaOS surging?
ElizaOS went through major restructuring in November 2025, migrating from the AI16Z token at a one-to-six ratio and increasing total supply to 11 billion tokens.
Upon return, Walters posted on X, “SO MUCH HAPPENED. We finished Eliza framework and migrated from ai16z to elizaOS. It was really really hard without X. We almost died. But now we’re back, and we’ve got some things built that I think people will be excited by. Can’t wait to show you.”
However, the recent token surge, which was around 175%, has failed to match that November high. The token currently trades at around $0.0064, which is an 83.17% decline from that all-time high.
Does this set a precedent for AI regulation?
While some industry participants call for stricter regulation of AI-generated content to maintain platform integrity, others view aggressive enforcement actions as potentially anticompetitive behavior that could stifle innovation.
The clash between ElizaOS and X touches on the application of AI on the social media platform, which also has its own agentic AI platform, Grok, embedded on it, raising eyebrows about fair play and antitrust violations.
The restoration of Walters’ account may also mean that the legal tussle between both parties has been resolved; however, neither Walters nor X has made any announcement that hints at that. It could also mean that X’s approach may have relaxed regarding some applications of AI on its platform.
The ban of Walters’ and ElizaOS accounts, for what X called a violation of its terms of service, brought to light ongoing tensions in the AI race and the usage of a social media platform to ward off competition.
ElizaOS and X have a history
In an August filing at a federal court in San Francisco, Eliza Labs and its founder, Shaw Walters, accused X of launching copycat AI products after being exposed to key technical information from Eliza. The lawsuit also claims that X removed the company from its platform.
“This case involves X Corp wielding its incredible monopoly power with perceived immunity from suit to deplatform users with the intent to restrain competition for launching AI Agents on the X Corp platform,” the lawsuit documents read.
In their argument, the plaintiffs said that X suspended Eliza Labs’ account and removed Walters without warning or legitimate justification.
This came after X reached out to Eliza to discuss AI agents operating on X’s platform. During those meetings, Shaw Walters said they shared extensive details about the company’s development roadmap and vision for AI agents.
Eliza claims that X said it would need up to $50,000 per month for an enterprise license to continue operating on the platform. The lawsuit suggested X was forcing developers to pay “exorbitant” prices if they wanted to remain on the site, but Eliza claims it had declined to pay for such services.