区块链合规

Bitget CEO Warns: Could Hyperliquid Become "FTX 2.0"? Decentralized Exchange Faces Trust Crisis

Cryptocurrency exchange Hyperliquid recently caused a stir in the industry due to its handling of market manipulation incidents involving the JELLY token. Bitget CEO Gracy Chen bluntly warned that the platform could become the "next FTX", pointing out serious flaws in its operating model.

The incident originated on March 26, when Hyperliquid suddenly decided to delist the JELLY futures contract after discovering suspicious trading. Although it promised to compensate users, the decision-making process was completed by a few validators, raising doubts about its commitment to "decentralization".

Even more concerning is that this is the second similar crisis the platform has faced in a short period. On March 12, Hyperliquid suffered a loss of $4 million when a whale manipulated and cashed out a $340 million ETH long position, leading to significant losses for the exchange during the liquidation.

Chen sharply pointed out: "Hyperliquid claims to be decentralized, but in reality operates like an offshore centralized exchange without KYC/AML." She specifically criticized its hybrid vault design, arguing that it exposes all users to collective risk. BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes also joined the criticism, calling for the industry to face this issue.

According to analysts, in this incident, a trader utilized three accounts to manipulate the JELLY price, first driving it up by 400%, then profiting from a system loophole. Although Hyperliquid eventually restricted account operations, the damage had already been done.

This inevitably brings to mind the warning from former SEC Chairman Gary Gensler: "Many so-called decentralized platforms actually require more regulation than traditional exchanges." When exchanges operate without KYC/AML mechanisms, when key decisions are controlled by a few individuals, and when investor protection mechanisms are nominal rather than real-time, these self-proclaimed "decentralized" protocols have clearly deviated from the original intent of blockchain.

Conclusion:

After the FTX incident, institutional investors' preference for licensed exchanges has significantly increased. Similar incidents like Hyperliquid's could further exacerbate this trend. After all, in the face of real monetary investment, idealism must ultimately yield to risk control.

This recent occurrence raises questions about whether DeFi platforms are truly ready to meet the regulatory requirements of the mainstream financial world. How do you think DeFi platforms should balance innovation and regulation?

#DeFi监管 #加密货币风险 #区块链合规

Wall Street tycoon blasts NYAG: Calls Galaxy Digital's $2 billion fine an "abuse of law"

Anthony Scaramucci, a Wall Street tycoon, recently publicly blasted the New York Attorney General's Office (NYAG) to defend Galaxy Digital, founded by his friend Mike Novogratz.

The dispute stems from the $2 billion fine issued by New York State to Galaxy Digital, accusing it of violations in promoting the collapsed Luna coin.

Scaramucci bluntly stated on social media X that the penalty was a pure "abuse of law" and the real culprit should be Terra founder Do Kwon, who has absconded.

The cause of the incident dates back to March 28, when the New York Attorney General accused Galaxy Digital of vigorously promoting the token without fully disclosing its holdings to investors after purchasing 18.5 million Luna coins at a low price of $0.31 in 2020.

It is worth noting that Novogratz himself was an avid supporter of Luna coin, and even tattooed the relevant pattern on his body when the price of Luna exceeded $100 in December 2021. But with the collapse of the Terra ecosystem, this tattoo has now become "evidence" in the eyes of regulators.

According to the settlement agreement, Galaxy Digital needs to pay a $2 billion fine in installments over the next three years, and the first installment of $40 million will be received within 15 days.

Scaramucci was strongly dissatisfied with this. He believed that the Martin Act gave regulators too much power because it allowed convictions without proving the defendant's intent.

He also pointed out that the New York State's punishment was in serious contradiction with the regulatory actions at the federal level. He also added that the SEC and the Department of Justice should have been pursuing Do Kwon and Terraform Labs.

The impact of this case in the crypto industry is not only due to the huge fine, but also deeply touches on the core controversy of industry regulation:

That is, when a token project collapses, especially in the current situation where there is no clear regulatory framework, the differences in enforcement standards between state and federal regulators have brought huge compliance uncertainty to industry participants.

And this phenomenon of "over-regulation" may have a suppressive effect on financial innovation and make institutions timid when promoting new projects.

Do you think institutions that promote collapsed projects should be "jointly punished"?Leave a message in the comment section to discuss!

#加密货币监管 #法律争议 #区块链合规

I recently went to the hospital for three days and I want to complain about the current situation in a prefecture-level city in the central region:



Seeing a doctor: I can get reimbursement in the first week, but in the second week, our hospital held a meeting and I can’t get reimbursement. No matter what medicine I buy, as long as the diagnosis results are relevant or not, I can’t get reimbursed. Regarding registration, I paid the registration fee on the weekend and I was clearly told to come tomorrow, but today I was told to hurry up and take an X-ray and then I can’t get reimbursed. Two weeks ago, I had a headache and the registration fee was 10 yuan, but the same doctor was 20 yuan today, three weeks later.



Housing: Call a certain bureau in a prefecture-level city in the central region, whether it is under your jurisdiction or not, you wait and see, we have already made arrangements. It’s useless to contact me. It’s like a lackey, smiling but not doing anything.



Going to school: Reviewing the school district location, we didn’t promise to be assigned to the nearest school, right? (mmp, when promoting, the mouth must be long below)



In a word, it’s a mouth-selling, a lackey. You must stay away from this kind of thing if you can’t afford to offend it, and even if you are innocent, it’s as disgusting as dog skin. Of course, you can't blame the environment for your failure. If you can't afford it, don't put it up? If you can't afford to buy a pre-sale house, why don't you buy a ready-made house? Who asked you to come together to defend your rights? How can the lower class contact the upper class?

#Telegram创始人被捕 #区块链合规 #经济不确定性