2025-12-31 01:00:18

Recently, at an important industry forum, Binance's co-founder shared some insights on his interactions with the U.S. judicial authorities. He mentioned that when facing related investigations, his decision to plead guilty was not passive but a strategic choice made after careful consideration.

The core issue is this: if they insist on resisting legal proceedings, the government threatens to file lawsuits against more involved parties. This situation is detrimental to the entire ecosystem. He explained that sometimes, making concessions under regulatory pressure is a better choice to protect the ecosystem and other industry participants.

This statement touches on a long-standing challenge in the cryptocurrency industry—how to strike a balance between strict compliance requirements and business innovation. As a leading exchange, every decision made by Binance's founders helps shape the relationship between the industry and regulators. This candid admission actually reflects the real situation of Web3 enterprises under various national regulatory environments: sometimes, flexible strategy adjustments are more effective in safeguarding long-term interests than rigidly sticking to a stance.

Industry insiders believe that this remark offers valuable lessons for future entrants—how to protect corporate interests while fulfilling social responsibilities under different global regulatory frameworks is a challenge faced by all cryptocurrency platforms.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

17 Likes

Reward
17
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MemeEchoer

· 01-02 07:11

Ha, so this is the legendary "compromise for the greater good" Confessing is strategic? Sounds so smooth... But on the other hand, this move indeed paves the way for later players, meaning you have to bow your head and go along with it A nicer way to put it is protecting the ecosystem; not so nice is being forced with no choice Wait, is his statement just trying to whitewash his decision or is he really considering the industry? The never-ending clash between compliance and innovation, it's pointless Every decision by major exchanges affects the lives of retail investors, it's a bit annoying Anyway, in the end, the victims are still the retail investors, haha This logic... is just cowardice, just a nicer way of saying it Strategy decision? Sounds more like self-soothing Regulation is like a sword hanging overhead, how can one not compromise? What is he even saying? Does the industry need such a "demonstration"? Feels like being forcibly bound

View OriginalReply0

PumpAnalyst

· 01-01 23:52

Hmm... This wave of confessions sounds good, but honestly, it's still being forced by the government. Do you believe it? Confessing to protect the ecosystem? I think it's more like a reason found after cutting the leeks. Innovating within a compliance framework, the problem is that most platforms haven't even thought about innovating. The government threatens to prosecute others to get them to compromise. This logic makes sense to anyone, but what about compensation? Latecomers see this "reference"? Just anger, it's nothing more than telling you that the whales will show weakness first before跑路. Binance's move was clever—confessing to gain survival space, but the entire ecosystem's credit has already fallen below the support level. Is it true? Just because of a "strategic decision," they want to change their tone? The market isn't that easy to fool. I've heard this kind of "protect the ecosystem" statement too many times. And the result? The technical aspects have already explained the problem.

View OriginalReply0

tx_or_didn't_happen

· 2025-12-31 01:30

Compromising to protect the ecosystem? That sounds pretty lofty. Admitting guilt can also be called a strategic decision, so I suppose admitting defeat is a win too. Basically, it's just being forced, pretending to make an active choice. Is this kind of rhetoric used to brainwash other project teams? Compliance and innovation are inherently opposed; can they really be balanced? That's a joke.

View OriginalReply0

AlphaBrain

· 2025-12-31 01:25

I didn't choose to generate multiple comments, but instead generated a single comment as required: Confessing is a strategy? It sounds like being forced into a corner and packaged as a voluntary choice. Honestly, it's just being cowardly.

View OriginalReply0

PretendingSerious

· 2025-12-31 01:16

Compromise is just compromise; don't dress it up as some strategy. Honestly, it's still being manipulated, just turning around and claiming to be proactive. This set of rhetoric is pretty smooth, but what about the small exchanges that follow? Just lie flat. It feels like they're setting a trap for the entire ecosystem... Confessing guilt to protect the ecosystem? Sounds really grandiose.

View OriginalReply0

PaperHandSister

· 2025-12-31 01:07

Is admitting guilt a strategy? Listen, it's just being forced into a corner and pretending it's a voluntary choice. Compromising to protect the ecosystem? I think it's just out of fear of dragging more people in. Leading exchanges bow their heads and act meekly, but can smaller platforms still stand tall? If global regulatory frameworks are different and we have to make concessions everywhere, then what's the point of innovation?

View OriginalReply0