#加密货币监管 Seeing Peirce's draft proposal, what flashes through my mind is the regulatory upheaval of 2017. Back then, everyone was still debating whether Bitcoin was a security, and the SEC once wanted to ban crypto trading altogether. Fast forward to 2024, and the same SEC’s attitude has shifted to "we are ready to cooperate to promote compliant trading"—this transformation hides eight years of industry struggle and compromise behind it.

The questions Peirce raises are actually old hat, but this time, she is re-examining them in a way we are very familiar with. From lowering entry barriers to avoiding "disproportionate compliance costs," from on-chain data traceability to the legality of decentralized trading—these were once seen as "black boxes beyond regulation," but are now considered key factors in policy making.

History teaches us a pattern: every upgrade to the regulatory framework marks the beginning of a new elimination race. After 2017, projects that couldn't adapt to policy changes disappeared, while compliant exchanges became the winners. This time is no different. The true beneficiaries won't be those trying to bypass regulations, but those willing to operate within the regulated system and capable of bearing compliance costs.

Interestingly, this open attitude in the draft proposal actually indicates that regulators are acknowledging: their previous framework was indeed lagging. But admitting a problem doesn't mean it will be fully solved. In the coming months, the real game is just beginning. I will continue to follow this process—because how the rules are written will directly determine who survives the next cycle.