Today I want to discuss the recent matter of SUI recovering stolen funds.

Many people view it as a 'decentralized collapse'; at first, I thought so too, but after careful consideration, I believe it is not the case.

I think this is actually a complete demonstration of decentralized governance logic. It exposes the actual operating logic of the consensus mechanism and reminds us that decentralization is never the dictatorship of code, but rather the autonomy of consensus.

In the past, influenced by the founders of the early Crypto industry, we have been accustomed to 'Code is law', always treating 'technological neutrality' as a sense of security. But a decentralized network is essentially a process in which a group of nodes jointly maintains a ledger; its order does not come from the absolute authority of code but from the consensus of participants.

When a significant anomaly occurs at a certain moment: code errors, asset risks, systemic crises... those logics that were once regarded as 'immutable' will be discussed again, and the result of this discussion is called consensus.

Blockchain is not a dystopian paradise, but a continuation of the power structures of the real world. In this world, every node, every vote, every proposal can leave a record on the chain, no longer a black box.

Governance is politics; it is a game of humans. You cannot want compensation, emergency responses, and repair capabilities on one hand while expecting 'Code is law' on the other.

As mentioned earlier, I initially thought this was a decentralized collapse, but now I prefer to see it as a mirror.

It reflects the complex nature of decentralization and forces us to confront: the power of governance, the power of technology, and who we are willing to entrust our trust to. I will likely devote more energy to focus on and participate in the SUI ecosystem because this incident shows that SUI actually aligns more with my expectations and vision.