#永续合约交易 I want to sound a warning again about perpetual contracts. Looking at how Infinex's mechanism crashed — from a 93% bullish outlook straight down to 18% — you realize what it means when the rules suddenly change. Retail traders were locked out in a disgusting way, whales were frozen by limits, and in the end, the founders tried to fix the situation by changing the rules temporarily, which ended up damaging trust even more.

This gave me a profound reminder: **wherever there is counterparty risk, mechanism design can become a tool for front-running**. Perpetual contracts are especially true — who are you trading with? How is the platform's risk control set up? Could the funding rate be manipulated? These questions are often much more important than technical advantages.

Over the years, I’ve seen too many Perp DEXs attract users with "innovative interaction experiences" or "decentralized self-custody wallets," only for the entire story to collapse once token mechanisms malfunction or liquidity dries up. Lighter signals buyback, Trove rushes to do an ICO — when looking at these ecosystem activities together, it makes me more cautious.

**The simple advice: in perpetual contracts, don’t be fooled by differentiation advantages first. Ask clearly who your counterparty is, how funds are locked, and whether you or the platform bear the risk**. In the rulebook of on-chain longevity, understanding the risk framework should always come first.