Honestly, recently there are always people treating "on-chain privacy" as a万能护身符 (all-purpose protective charm), and some people think that once they hear "compliance," they are about to be drained. My expectations are quite simple: on-chain is not an anonymous playground, more like a glass house; wallet addresses don't have names, but behaviors are recorded. The more frequently you act, the easier it is to be pieced together. I’m also not sure how the boundaries will be drawn in the future, but it’s likely: you can have a need for privacy tools (don’t expose yourself completely online), but you also have to accept that some entry/exit points will be required to explain sources and conduct screening.

The recent hype around RWA (Real-World Assets), comparing U.S. Treasury yields with on-chain yield products, makes me feel a bit uncomfortable: one is "yield within the system," and the other is "yield generated by protocols," with completely different risks. Anyway, I personally interpret "privacy" as reducing unnecessary exposure, not for doing things you shouldn’t do; I see "compliance" as not clashing head-on with the real-world system, not treating positions as a matter of pride, leaving some room to retreat. That’s all for now.