📰 【Arbitrum Frozen $71 Million Sparks Controversy: Can Decentralization Still Be "Manually Intervened"?】

BlockBeats reports that on April 24th, following the KelpDAO attack, the Arbitrum Security Council took action to freeze over 30k ETH (about $71 million), successfully preventing some stolen funds from being transferred, but also sparking intense debate about the "boundaries of decentralization." This operation was carried out by a security council composed of 12 members elected by token holders, which used special permissions to transfer funds from the attacker’s address to a "no-owner wallet," effectively freezing the assets. Supporters argue that this move bought the industry crucial time, preventing further laundering of the funds, and is a necessary "security-first" mechanism. Critics point out that this case proves that even in so-called decentralized networks...

Brothers, seeing this news really made my blood pressure rise. Once again, this "pseudo-decentralization" shield is being pulled back. The Security Council? Basically, a few big shots can just press a button in the background to lock up millions of dollars. I told you before not to blindly trust L2, but you argued with me, saying it’s about technical faith. Now do you see clearly? When your coins are "protected," your assets are no longer truly yours. How is this governance model different from traditional finance? Retail investors are always the ones passively accepting rulings. Remember, in the crypto world, a chain that can be "manually intervened" at any time is not truly yours.