2026-01-18 11:23:15

Recent events in the crypto world are not just about wild price swings. What truly causes unease is the ongoing pressure from regulators. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been active lately, repeatedly filing lawsuits against multiple DeFi projects and trading platforms, imposing hefty fines, with accusations mainly focused on unregistered securities and investor misguidance.

It may seem complicated, but the SEC's logic is quite straightforward: eliminate opaque entities and protect retail investors. Most targeted projects share a common trait — information black boxes.

For example, teams play word games with tokenomics. You have no idea how many tokens are locked in their wallets, when they might unlock, or if they might suddenly dump their holdings and cause a crash. This uncertainty itself is a minefield. Digging deeper, the project's financial health is also a mystery. How much does the protocol earn each month? Where does the revenue go? How much is left in the treasury? All of this depends on the project team’s word; investors can only choose to believe or not.

There's an even more painful issue: centralized power. A multi-signature wallet can control all fund flows, and the team can upgrade smart contracts at any time to change the rules of the game. In such cases, investors lack real security.

In contrast, projects that have prioritized transparency and compliance from the start may become winners in the regulatory wave. Clear token release schedules, regular financial disclosures, and decentralized governance structures are not just perks but basic survival conditions. In an era where regulatory fists are tightening, such projects are not only more likely to survive but also to thrive.

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.

9 Likes

Reward
9
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

CrossChainMessenger

· 2h ago

Honestly, projects with black box information deserve to be smashed. I'm tired of it already. The unlock schedule is vague, and anyone can make up the vault numbers. Transparency is the hard currency; otherwise, there's no confidence in how to make money. Multi-signature wallets with centralized power are ticking time bombs, waiting to explode. Although SEC's crackdown is aggressive, it hits the core issues that need to be addressed, and it should be done. Projects that established transparent frameworks from the beginning tend to survive longer, which is survival of the fittest. Any team can upgrade contracts and change rules at will, making investors feel like they have no rights. Who can accept that?

View OriginalReply0

GasBandit

· 2h ago

To be honest, this wave of regulation is really a big purge. Black-box projects deserve to die. I can't stand the concentration of power. Multi-signature wallets can change rules at will, and investors are just pawns in the game. Transparency is the way to go. The projects that succeed are all playing by these rules. It was about time someone took action against those teams that play word games. So annoying.

View OriginalReply0

NotFinancialAdvice

· 2h ago

Here comes the excuse to cut leeks again, that's how the SEC operates. Projects with high transparency have already run away, stop talking nonsense. If the team doesn't lock the coins, you should run, that's common sense. Sounds nice, but isn't it just to get retail investors to take over compliant projects?

View OriginalReply0

SeeYouInFourYears

· 2h ago

Basically, it's time for a reshuffle. Black-box projects deserve to be taken down. This wave of regulation is actually a disguised way of benefiting compliant projects. Those with concentrated power will eventually run into trouble. The team doesn't even dare to reveal the ledger, how can people feel confident to invest? Instead of worrying about the coin price, it's better to understand the true nature of the project. Truly capable projects are not afraid of transparency. Those who play information games to the end will eventually be pressed to the ground and rubbed. It's actually a reversal of the phenomenon where bad money drives out good money—that's what should happen. Compliance should have been standard from the beginning, not an added bonus.

View OriginalReply0

0xSunnyDay

· 2h ago

Really, projects that play word games will eventually suffer consequences --- Centralized multi-signature wallets, investors are really just sitting ducks --- Wait, do projects with high transparency really resist drops better? I don’t see it --- To put it nicely, projects operating as black boxes deserve to be investigated --- I believe compliant projects can survive, but get rich overnight? Haha --- Sudden dumps by teams are common; regulators should indeed step in --- Over the past few years, I’ve heard a lot about decentralized governance. How many have truly achieved it? --- Now, doing a project means either being fully transparent or waiting to be penalized—there’s no middle ground --- Failing to even do basic financial disclosures regularly, who do you think you’re fooling? --- The regulatory iron fist is coming; those projects with black-box information should tremble

View OriginalReply0