Traditional finance and the crypto world have always been separated by an invisible wall. Different technical standards, conflicting legal frameworks, and a lack of mutual trust mechanisms—these obstacles have kept hundreds of trillions of mainstream capital on the sidelines, only able to observe from outside. But this divide can actually be bridged; the key lies in finding the right "intermediary."



Many believe that blockchain will conquer traditional finance through superior technology and faster speeds. But the real issue is more practical: traditional financial institutions simply don’t understand the language of crypto. They need compliance frameworks, audit trails, and risk control mechanisms—things that must appear on-chain in a form they can comprehend.

Some projects are working on this. Their approach is: don’t make the traditional world adapt to crypto, but embed familiar traditional financial elements directly on the chain in advance. Requirements like KYC, AML, and securities regulations are modularized during design, allowing institutions to call upon them as needed. Audit trails are no longer paper reports but immutable on-chain records, which can actually be more efficient. In this way, traditional finance no longer sees a "Westworld," but a trustworthy operational environment they can rely on.

Conversely, crypto projects also gain opportunities. Once a DeFi protocol integrates these compliance modules, it can more confidently open its doors to institutional investors. NFT projects can even evolve into forms of legally binding warrants. The cleverness of this design lies in the fact that it doesn’t force one side to compromise; instead, it enables the genes of two parallel worlds to recombine—combining the efficiency and programmability of the crypto world with the order and asset sedimentation of the traditional world, creating a whole new species.

This is not a simple migration from the old world, but the definition of a more inclusive new rule set.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 10
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
DeFiAlchemistvip
· 01-15 19:29
*adjusts alchemical instruments* the true transmutation happens when compliance becomes composable... yield optimization meets regulatory equilibrium. this is the philosopher's stone we've been seeking
Reply0
SingleForYearsvip
· 01-14 22:31
Damn, this idea is truly brilliant... Finally, someone explained it clearly.
View OriginalReply0
ImpermanentPhilosophervip
· 01-14 00:38
It sounds good, but will institutions really believe it? I'm still a bit skeptical.
View OriginalReply0
OffchainOraclevip
· 01-12 20:50
Basically, it's about being a translator, making sure both sides understand each other's words.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityLarryvip
· 01-12 20:49
To be honest, I am optimistic about the modularization approach to compliance, but there are very few projects that can truly be implemented.
View OriginalReply0
MetaverseMigrantvip
· 01-12 20:48
Sounds good, but will institutions really pay? I doubt it.
View OriginalReply0
PuzzledScholarvip
· 01-12 20:48
It sounds good, but the key question is who will set this "new rule"? In the end, isn't it the big institutions that have the final say?
View OriginalReply0
ForkTonguevip
· 01-12 20:46
To be honest, this intermediary logic is indeed clever, but it still depends on whether there are projects that can truly be implemented.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityWizardvip
· 01-12 20:40
theoretically speaking, the "modularized compliance" angle here is statistically significant—but tbh, the real correlation we should track is whether institutions actually *use* these on-chain audit trails or just... stick with their own risk-adjusted frameworks. historically speaking, legacy finance has a 94% rejection rate on "trust the code" arguments, so 🤔
Reply0
AlwaysQuestioningvip
· 01-12 20:37
Basically, you need to learn to speak both sides, or you'll never see eye to eye. This idea is okay, but the key is who can actually make it happen? Hey, can this kind of "compliance module" really stand the test of regulation? It sounds good, but whether traditional finance folks believe it or not is the real issue. The intermediary role is easily turned into a target caught between both sides... Why do I always feel like this is just giving ourselves a legal cover? When institutions really come in, will it still be crypto?
View OriginalReply0
View More
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)