【Hyperliquid founder calls on U.S. regulators: Regulate trading platforms, not blockchains! 🔥】
⚖️ 加入X先生的粉丝群聊跟进行情
Hyperliquid co-founder Jeff Yan recently shared a view that could influence the direction of crypto regulation as a whole:
Regulators should focus on overseeing service providers that operate trading markets, rather than regulating the underlying blockchains directly.
Why does he say this?
Put simply, Hyperliquid doesn’t want to be regulated as a traditional exchange. Instead, it hopes to be seen as a blockchain network that provides trading infrastructure.
Jeff Yan drew an analogy with the internet: The internet itself is infrastructure, while the companies that provide specific services should be held responsible for them.
In his view, blockchains provide the underlying technology, while the entities that operate markets and control trading services should bear the corresponding regulatory obligations.
This also ties into Hyperliquid’s plans for the future.
It doesn’t just want to be a crypto trading platform. It also hopes to become trading infrastructure that traditional financial institutions can use, enabling more financial products to operate on-chain.
But here’s the question: If blockchains aren’t directly responsible for complying with the regulations that apply to traditional exchanges, who should be held accountable for market manipulation, user losses, or other violations?
That’s the challenge regulators need to address. The more decentralized a system is, the harder it becomes to define the boundaries of control and responsibility.
📌 What’s really worth watching here isn’t just what Hyperliquid is trying to achieve, but how the U.S. may draw the regulatory line between “blockchain infrastructure” and “financial service providers.”
If the regulatory framework becomes clearer, on-chain derivatives markets could attract more compliant institutions. But how that will play out ultimately depends on regulators.
⚖️ 加入X先生的粉丝群聊跟进行情
Hyperliquid co-founder Jeff Yan recently shared a view that could influence the direction of crypto regulation as a whole:
Regulators should focus on overseeing service providers that operate trading markets, rather than regulating the underlying blockchains directly.
Why does he say this?
Put simply, Hyperliquid doesn’t want to be regulated as a traditional exchange. Instead, it hopes to be seen as a blockchain network that provides trading infrastructure.
Jeff Yan drew an analogy with the internet: The internet itself is infrastructure, while the companies that provide specific services should be held responsible for them.
In his view, blockchains provide the underlying technology, while the entities that operate markets and control trading services should bear the corresponding regulatory obligations.
This also ties into Hyperliquid’s plans for the future.
It doesn’t just want to be a crypto trading platform. It also hopes to become trading infrastructure that traditional financial institutions can use, enabling more financial products to operate on-chain.
But here’s the question: If blockchains aren’t directly responsible for complying with the regulations that apply to traditional exchanges, who should be held accountable for market manipulation, user losses, or other violations?
That’s the challenge regulators need to address. The more decentralized a system is, the harder it becomes to define the boundaries of control and responsibility.
📌 What’s really worth watching here isn’t just what Hyperliquid is trying to achieve, but how the U.S. may draw the regulatory line between “blockchain infrastructure” and “financial service providers.”
If the regulatory framework becomes clearer, on-chain derivatives markets could attract more compliant institutions. But how that will play out ultimately depends on regulators.