In this interview, Professor Longfan systematically shared his path choices, independent judgments on industry trends, and advice for young developers for the first time.
Article author: Lesley, MetaEra
On May 15, at the 'Strengthening the Bridge, Tides Rising in Hong Kong' Digital Finance and Ecological Development Conference held at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Center, Professor Longfan, founder of Conflux Network, reappeared in the public eye. This alumnus of Tsinghua's 'Yao Class', MIT PhD, and current professor at the University of Toronto has almost faded from public view over the past few years, not accepting media interviews and quietly leading the team to advance Conflux as China’s only compliant blockchain technology exploration and global expansion.
In the face of the #RWA craze, #Memecoin frenzy, and the accelerated development of stablecoins, the rhythm of the blockchain era is faster than ever before. How does Conflux maintain technical stability within this context? As the only compliant Chinese public chain, what long-term thinking supports Conflux's compliant identity?
In this interview, Professor Longfan systematically shared his path choices, independent judgments on industry trends, and advice for young developers for the first time.
The entrepreneurial original intention and the technical foundation of Conflux
MetaEra: Please briefly introduce yourself. You are a PhD from MIT, an alumnus of Tsinghua’s Yao Class, the founder of Conflux, and also hold many other identities. If you were to introduce yourself, which identity would you want people to remember first? Why?
Professor Longfan: I am a researcher in computer science, that is, I study computer science. You can think of it as what everyone commonly refers to as a 'scientist'; this may be the simplest identity that encompasses everything I do. Whether as the founder of Conflux or previously studying at MIT and now teaching at the University of Toronto, it is all part of this identity or the experience of growing into this identity.
MetaEra: If you could only use one sentence to introduce Conflux, how would you say it? Is there a sentence that can make ordinary users immediately remember what Conflux is doing now?
Professor Longfan: I believe what Conflux is doing now is to persist in being a high-performance public chain based in China or Asia, aspiring to become an important infrastructure for the Web 3.0 era. This is what we have always been doing and will continue to do.
MetaEra: Is this definition something we started determining in 2018, or is it a result that the team has gradually explored over the last seven or eight years?
Professor Longfan: Our team has been thinking this way since 2018. In trendy terms, this is called 'staying true to our original intention', and we have consistently adhered to this approach.
MetaEra: Currently, the Twitter profile of Conflux defines the project in relation to 'stablecoins' and 'payments', so compared to Ethereum, Solana, and other public chains, what significant advantages does Conflux have in the area of stablecoins and payments?
Professor Longfan: I think Conflux's greatest technological advantage is that our overall architecture achieves high-performance TPS without sacrificing decentralization and security. Our network can support 3000-6000 TPS, and the confirmation time is also very fast. All of this is achieved without sacrificing the number of nodes or compromising security.
This is a significant advantage for us in technology and has been long proven. For example, since the launch of the Conflux mainnet, we have maintained zero security incidents, reflecting the stability and credibility of the architecture. Our work is based on our unique market or industry position, focusing on what we are better at doing, or what we should be doing. You can see that we are actively promoting offshore RMB, stablecoins, and we are also focusing on cooperating with China Telecom on BSIM cards. You can think of BSIM cards as an entry point into the blockchain world; they are the key channel connecting us to real application scenarios.
In fact, these all illustrate what we, as the only compliant public chain platform originating from China, can do relative to other public chains, and what unique advantages we possess in this position, which indeed brings different advantages and changes to our on-chain ecosystem. This is why we focus on these matters.
Compliance is not 'fought for', but rather 'long-term belief + path choice'
MetaEra: Recently, Conflux signed a strategic cooperation agreement with partners aimed at cross-border trade scenarios along the Belt and Road. I would like to know which of the many landing scenarios mentioned at the meeting you think could land quickly?
Professor Longfan: I think there are two aspects worth paying attention to. In fact, the content released at the conference refers to projects that will have clear progress in the next month or few months, with predictable implementation paths.
For example, the offshore RMB stablecoin currently being promoted, our ecosystem partner AnchorX is already ready in terms of compliance and other aspects. The main aspect still under discussion is: in what manner can we launch the offshore RMB stablecoin in a better way to allow more people to access it and apply it to these scenarios? So soon there will be compliant offshore RMB stablecoins operating on our chain, and we will also launch a series of ecosystem solutions to help this project expand its influence. This will be a priority direction for our upcoming public chain development strategy.
The second is the BSIM card, and the entire technical R&D process—not just the software level R&D, but also the overall coordination with telecom operators and card suppliers—has been beyond our control for a long time. But we are pleased that the recent R&D and coordination work for these technologies is basically complete. We expect to launch one or more BSIM cards in some overseas markets of China Telecom in the coming months, allowing users to truly use BSIM cards. If the results meet expectations, we can anticipate further promotion, and there may even be cooperation with other operators for promotion.
MetaEra: In fact, Conflux is currently one of the few public chain projects with significant compliance advantages. Not only is it actively promoting its implementation in mainland China, but it has also achieved good development results in Hong Kong and even international markets. This identity and positioning are quite special. Do you think this path can send a positive signal to the entire industry—that Chinese blockchain projects can indeed find a development path that balances internationalization and localization within a compliant framework?
Professor Longfan: We have always adhered to this route, conveying the message that compliance is possible, and it is worth persisting.
Now that we have become the only compliant public chain in China, it actually has historical reasons. This is not something we fought for, but rather a result of the previous wave of regulations and policies where most teams voluntarily abandoned this matter. Many did so due to short-term strategic considerations, such as finding compliance in China too costly in terms of communication with regulators, leading them to migrate to Singapore. It is precisely because we insisted on a path of compliant development that the compliance costs we bear are very high. This also means that in many decisions, we must be more restrained. For example, we cannot issue new tokens at will.
Another aspect is that many people were previously reluctant to try this because they generally thought it was impossible, or that there was no need to try. But we have always believed that this is achievable and are willing to work for it, even if it means sacrificing some short-term interests along the way. We firmly believe that in the long run, this endeavor holds significant value.
At the same time, our thoughts are quite natural. Most members of our core team graduated from Tsinghua University, and there are also some researchers who studied abroad. We are engaged in a highly technical, serious endeavor. We think, why must we exile overseas? It is possible to persist and carve out a normal development path. We always believe that when it comes to compliance, communication with regulators is not completely impossible. We are willing to explore what can be done. In fact, during the communication process, we have also found that regulation is not entirely unable to communicate. Everyone has their starting points, and regulatory agencies have their positions and considerations. But as long as both parties are willing to communicate, the logic and reasons can gradually be clarified, ultimately finding a mutually understandable solution that can continue to advance.
MetaEra: In fact, Conflux has recently been actively laying out in Hong Kong. In this process, what role do you think Hong Kong is playing? For example, will policies support more strongly? Will the environment be a bit more relaxed?
Professor Longfan: Firstly, Hong Kong can now be understood as a 'special zone' for blockchain. We can understand it this way: when China faces a brand new thing that has visible opportunities but also carries significant risks, it often chooses to first establish a special zone for pilot projects. Blockchain is a typical example, and Hong Kong happens to play this role. Because blockchain brings some financial risks, such as capital flow and cross-border regulatory issues. For the country, piloting in Hong Kong, a place that is already open to capital, may be less pressured, which is the current positioning of Hong Kong. You can think that for quite some time, various applications can be legal in Hong Kong without worrying about various policy risks. This environment directly leads to a noticeable result: compared to the mainland, compliance costs in Hong Kong are much lower.
In fact, we are looking at this issue from the characteristics of the industry. The industry is currently in a window period. Not only in China, but most blockchain projects globally operate in a distributed manner. In this case, 'where the people are' and 'where the project is registered' are often two separate matters. You will see that many projects, regardless of where team members are located, choose to register their projects in Hong Kong. The reason is simple: once it becomes a 'Hong Kong project', advancing compliance becomes much easier and less prone to unnecessary trouble. From this perspective, Hong Kong is currently in a natural policy dividend period, which is a significant opportunity window.
Of course, recently when I spoke with industry people, there is also a certain sense of urgency in Hong Kong, mainly stemming from the United States and other overseas regions. Other places are moving quickly on blockchain. Although Hong Kong's policies are relatively open, the local authorities are also reflecting: is the current policy still too conservative? If we continue to maintain the current pace, we may still miss some key opportunities in the future. This may also be a direction that Hong Kong needs to adjust and accelerate in its policies.
RWA is evolution, Memecoin is humanity: the two polar survival rules in the blockchain world
MetaEra: We noticed that you haven't accepted interviews for a while. Therefore, we particularly hope to take this opportunity to hear you talk about the changes the entire industry has experienced in recent years. For example, how do you view the recently popular RWA sector and the market boom caused by Memecoin? How do you and the Conflux team determine whether a track is a 'trend' or a 'bubble'? Moreover, in the face of constantly shifting trends, will Conflux choose to actively chase certain market hotspots, or will it stick to its established technology and strategic path?
Professor Longfan: First of all, I have always viewed RWA as not a bubble, nor is stablecoin a bubble. They essentially represent the entire industry breaking through regulatory barriers and existing framework restrictions while constantly seeking new narrative methods to optimize their development paths. This endeavor is meaningful; it is an important step forward as humanity makes better use of blockchain technology.
Previously we talked about 'stablecoins', and now we discuss 'RWA' more, but essentially they are the same; the concept is continuously expanding, and the narrative is continuously evolving. It can be understood that those within the industry are constantly correcting and upgrading the narrative, using more easily understood and accepted ways to reinterpret how blockchain should be applied. Therefore, I believe this is a good thing, not a bubble.
In fact, the acceptance of these concepts by the outside world changes over time and social context, so-called 'this moment is different from that moment'. Take stablecoins as an example; initially, no one believed in stablecoins, thinking they were just a means for traders to cash out. But now, no one says that anymore. When you discover that stablecoins are already among the top ten buyers of U.S. Treasury bonds, it indicates that their usage scenarios and influence have far exceeded cryptocurrency trading itself. The main application scenarios for current stablecoins are no longer speculation, but are reflected in payments, transfers, especially in cross-border trade. Of course, exchange scenarios still exist, but that is no longer mainstream. Things are constantly evolving, and RWA is no exception.
Initially, people's impression of stablecoins was as 'speculative tools', which many Chinese viewed as speculative, improper, or even a bubble. But now we see that through RWA, certain real assets can be digitally packaged, thus providing new liquidity sources for assets lacking liquidity in the real economy. Suddenly, people realize that RWA can serve the real economy and has real value. But in essence, this could have been done before; it's just being pushed forward under a new name and narrative.
Ultimately, this represents a shift in the entire blockchain industry to convey the same core message externally: blockchain technology is valuable and has real application space. Therefore, I believe RWA is definitely not a bubble; it is merely an upgrade in our industry's narrative, a way to engage in dialogue with the times.
MetaEra: So you think Memecoin is a bubble.
Professor Longfan: I think Memecoin is an ancient human need. It’s quite simple; the gambling nature is an ancient need of humanity. If gambling were inherently a bubble, then Las Vegas casinos should have closed long ago.
When it comes to Memecoin, my view is that humans have an inherent primal desire to 'take a gamble', and Memecoin is essentially a manifestation of this need, a form of 'gambling in the crypto era'.
Memecoin, like gambling, has its dealers, and even the President of the United States can be a dealer at this table. In Las Vegas casinos, there are also dealers; the casino itself is the dealer. So if you ask whether this is a 'bubble', I think the answer depends on your attitude towards 'gambling'.
If you believe that the need for gambling should not exist, you may view it as a bubble; but if you acknowledge that there is an inherent human yearning for risk, excitement, and uncertainty, then it is merely another way of expression, another table of cards.
At the Memecoin table, people bet, chase prices up and down; ultimately, it's just participating in a game. Once we see the essence of this mechanism, there’s no need to overly criticize or attack it. After all, everyone is just playing a round in this 'casino', and that's it.
MetaEra: The Conflux team has consistently adhered to the technical route of 'high-performance public chains in Asia' since 2018, remaining true to its original intention. If we extend the timeline to five years or even longer, do you hope that what Conflux is doing will still be the same as now?
Professor Longfan: I believe we will continue to insist on working in this direction. Of course, if I have any hopes, it is that I hope the things we are committed to making significant progress, even if the things and methods we employ differ from those of many teams.
Many teams tend to follow market rhythms closely, quickly launching new projects within two weeks once a hot topic arises. However, our team is relatively more restrained and steady in strategy. The things we promote often have a slower pace, partly because the direction itself needs time to settle, and partly because it truly requires our long-term efforts to drive forward. But we always believe that opportunities in this direction exist. Especially against the backdrop of ongoing changes in the international situation, the direction we adhere to is gradually revealing its value and significance. This value may not be so apparent in the short term, but in the long run, it is solid and clear.
So if I were to talk about my expectations for the future, it would be: four or five years from now, the things we are doing will definitely achieve greater progress than now. I am willing to believe that this continued investment will eventually yield returns.
MetaEra: In fact, we see that many developers are continuously entering Web 3.0, so if new developers want to enter the industry now, would you recommend they work on underlying infrastructure, application layers, or some other directions?
Professor Longfan: I think it depends on the individual developer's situation or the team’s situation.
In fact, in the current Chinese blockchain industry, there are mainly two styles of working. The first is adept at seizing short-term opportunities, rapidly iterating and experimenting. This industry indeed has many hotspots and many attention scenarios that can be quickly amplified. If you are a team with strong execution and rhythm, willing to actively chase hotspots and trends, then I think you can try more application-layer directions. Such opportunities do exist. But the premise is, are you really suited to such a rhythm? Adapting to this rhythm may mean that you need to continuously chase various hotspots and try various related products or play styles.
Another approach is to choose a direction that can be invested in for the long term, whether it is infrastructure, a specific type of niche application, or a technical gap at the Infra layer. As long as you confirm that there is a true, unmet need in this direction, you can choose to focus on cultivating it. The challenge of this approach is that it requires a genuine belief in long-termism. The entire industry is filled with short-term temptations and distractions, with funding, users, and resources highly volatile. Sticking it out in such an environment is not easy. However, the benefit of this path is that there are not many people truly willing to do long-term things, so the 'real competition' faced is not that intense. The biggest challenge may not be others, but yourself—can you continue to invest, withstand cycles, and do you have enough faith and endurance to truly solidify resources?
Therefore, I believe every team ultimately needs to return to its own endowment and rhythm, finding the path that suits them best.
MetaEra: At this conference, we also saw many projects being built on the Conflux ecosystem. I would like to ask, does Conflux still have relevant resources or platforms to support young developers in their continued growth and exploration? Will there be incentive mechanisms in the future to help more developers join the ecosystem and participate deeply in its construction?
Professor Longfan: Our ecosystem has always had various ways to incentivize developers, and we are continually adjusting and optimizing these incentive methods. In fact, we have tried many different paths and models. Our goal is to find projects that are willing to establish long-term cooperative relationships with us, not just short-term collaborations.
In fact, there are many 'migrant' developers in this industry—they often flow between different public chains following short-term incentives. However, for Conflux, we focus more on long-term development, so these types of developers provide relatively limited help to the sustainable construction of the ecosystem. From our perspective, we prefer to support those who are genuinely willing to land, invest, and have clear long-term plans. We hope to establish solid cooperation with them and jointly promote the growth of the ecosystem.
As for another situation, for example, some developers may have already created similar products in other ecosystems, thinking they can directly 'Copy & Paste' the code, deploy it, and then apply for a grant, expecting to receive funding of twenty or thirty thousand, or even fifty thousand dollars. Our support for this model will be relatively limited.
