To be honest, discussions about on-chain privacy have flared up again recently, but I think ordinary users’ expectations are actually pretty unclear.

When you make on-chain transfers or interact, every step leaves a trace on-chain—that’s simply a feature of the public ledger. But many people think that using a new wallet and switching to a different address is enough to stay safe. In reality, on-chain behavioral analysis has long been able to link addresses and piece together the flow of funds. Not long ago, a project team was exposed because their addresses were dug up in connection with early cash-out and rug-pull behavior, and the community directly confirmed it. So is this the dark side of on-chain privacy? In any case, I’ve seen plenty of users who, after a single transfer combined with KYC, later had all their related addresses traced back—honestly, they were really wronged.

Privacy isn’t absolute anonymity; it’s about choosing what to expose. What ordinary users should expect is that every step they take will be examined under a microscope—especially big holders or users doing arbitrage. As for the compliance boundary, regulators are watching on-chain fund flows; money laundering, sanctions, taxes—every step could potentially cross the line. When you dig, extract, list, or sell, you might think it’s just a strategy, but the on-chain record is permanent.

My own long-term definition is basically “going through a complete cycle.” Not just a quarter or a season, but seeing the same protocol survive two rounds of bull and bear markets, with the fund flows showing no obvious breaks— or with big holders’ positions not suddenly consolidating. Put simply, only something that can make it through two or three quarters without collapsing counts as truly long-term. Anyway, I’m still waiting—waiting for a project that will let me hold it for more than three months.