Release Date: December 22, 2025
Author: BlockBeats Editorial Team

In the past 24 hours, the cryptocurrency market has shown a parallel evolution across multiple dimensions. Mainstream topics focus on the tension between DeFi governance and privacy compliance: ongoing community discussions about the revenue distribution controversy surrounding Aave and the wallet blacklist risks triggered by Tornado Cash continue to explore the boundaries of power and real-world constraints. In terms of ecological development, Solana's annual revenue has surpassed Ethereum for the first time, reinforcing its advantages in high-frequency usage and productization; in the Perp DEX track, the price fluctuations of Hyperliquid have raised concerns about the resilience of the perpetual contract ecosystem.

I. Mainstream Topics

1. Aave Revenue Distribution and Governance Boundary Dispute

The Aave community has recently engaged in heated debates over the revenue distribution mechanism and brand ownership.

Stani Kulechov has clearly stated that he will vote against the proposal titled [ARFC] $AAVE Token Alignment, Phase 1 – Ownership Governance.

In his post, Stani emphasized that this is not a "veto statement," but rather a desire to initiate a more open discussion to recalibrate Aave's shared mission. He recalled that Aave Labs has been advancing around the initial vision of ETHLend for the past eight years, aiming to make Aave a key part of a future multi-trillion-dollar global asset infrastructure. He also acknowledged that the community's concerns regarding brand ownership and the relationship between the protocol and DAO are not unfounded, and that previous communications have been insufficient, promising to improve in the future.

However, on specific positions, Stani believes there are fundamental issues with the direction of the proposal: it overly simplifies the complex legal, brand, and operational structures, which could slow down the progress of core products like Aave V4, Aave App, and Horizon, ultimately harming the protocol itself, the DAO, and AAVE token holders. He advocates that similar topics should be advanced through multiple rounds of temperature checks and more actionable proposals rather than a one-time institutional adjustment.

Community reactions are clearly divided. Some members criticize Stani for having a "double standard" in governance criteria, pointing out that he did not take the same cautious process regarding the CowSwap revenue distribution issue, even accusing him of "usurping protocol revenue"; others support his decision to slow down the pace of decision-making, believing that multiple rounds of discussion contribute to the long-term health of the ecosystem.

Overall, this controversy once again exposes a long-standing structural tension in DeFi projects: the boundary between the ideal of DAO governance and the actual power of core developers/founders still lacks clear consensus.

2. "Crypto Existentialism": A Retrospective on Empowerment Narratives

Vitalik Buterin recently posted to re-discuss "the core philosophy of cryptocurrency" from a more abstract level. He quoted a user's perspective stating, "Crypto has always been built towards human empowerment."

Vitalik pointed out that "empowerment" is not a concept unique to cryptocurrency; before the emergence of Bitcoin and Ethereum, the German Pirate Party had already established information freedom, privacy protection, and power decentralization as core political ideals. He illustrated this with the Pirate Party's "Pirate Wheel" model, where values like "empowerment, transparency, and privacy" form a mutually supportive system.

Community responses further extended the discussion. Some viewpoints emphasized that true empowerment must be irreversible; otherwise, it is merely a superficial commitment. Others traced cryptocurrency back to cyberpunk and early privacy movements, arguing that the significance of blockchain lies in providing sustainable incentive mechanisms and global execution tools for these ideals for the first time. Meanwhile, there were also more technical or emotional responses, ranging from BlockDAG and privacy tools to meme-like "Dino powerment," continuously broadening the discussion boundaries.

This topic has not formed a unified conclusion but clearly reflects a fact: on issues of privacy, decentralization, and personal freedom, the crypto community is still constantly questioning its "existential meaning," and this philosophical uncertainty continues to influence specific technical and institutional choices.

3. Tornado Cash Blacklist Effect: The Real Cost of Privacy

The risks associated with using Tornado Cash have once again drawn attention. User milian warned that once a wallet interacts with Tornado Cash, the address may be flagged by hundreds of applications and protocols, thus being excluded from the mainstream chain's economic system.

The blacklist screenshot he presented even included popular platforms like Hyperliquid. This means that although Tornado Cash's anonymity is technically valid, in the real world, it easily triggers compliance and risk control mechanisms.

Community reactions are notably divided. Some criticize these "decentralized applications" for effectively taking on roles similar to regulators, questioning the authenticity of the decentralization narrative; others propose compromise solutions, such as using zero-knowledge proofs (e.g., on 0xbow.io) to demonstrate that funds are not related to sanctioned entities like North Korea (DPRK), or simply turning to more thorough privacy coins like Monero.

The discussion quickly escalated to more fundamental questions: Is the high transparency of blockchain a bug or its most important feature? If dusting attacks can trigger blacklists, are ordinary users inadvertently bearing compliance risks as well?

This controversy highlights the long-standing conflict between privacy and compliance, making the widespread impact of "blacklist mechanisms" in the on-chain economy more concrete, and prompting the community to call for more refined and anti-collateral damage privacy infrastructure (such as Arcium and other solutions).

4. Robinhood Accelerates Tokenization: TradFi Officially Enters L2

Robinhood has been found to have newly deployed about 500 tokenized stocks on Arbitrum, bringing its total on-chain stocks to 1,993. This move is seen as a clear signal of the accelerating integration between TradFi and DeFi.

Related Dune dashboard data shows that the speed of expanding from 1,000 to 2,000 stocks is significantly faster than in previous phases. In community discussions, some pointed out that the average daily trading volume of the U.S. stock market exceeds $500 billion, and even a partial migration to the chain would bring considerable fee revenue and ETH burning effects to the Ethereum ecosystem.

Overall sentiment is optimistic. Some view it as an early form of the "DeFi / TradFi singularity," believing that the composability and immutability of blockchain are gradually attracting traditional institutions; others emphasize that stock tokenization and the 24/7 trading mechanism could significantly enhance liquidity and inject new use cases into the Arbitrum ecosystem.

From a broader perspective, this development is not an isolated event but a continuation of the tokenization trend: traditional assets are entering the financial infrastructure network formed by Ethereum and its L2 at an accelerating pace.

II. Mainstream Ecological Dynamics

1. Solana's Annual Revenue Surpasses Ethereum for the First Time

Solana has achieved annual revenue surpassing Ethereum for the first time in 2025, marking an important milestone in its ecosystem's maturation.

Data charts circulating in the community show that Solana's protocol revenue is approximately $250 million YTD in 2025, while Ethereum's is about $140 million. Looking at a longer time frame, Solana's revenue has grown from about $28 million in 2021 to $480 million in 2024; during the same period, Ethereum's revenue has decreased from about $510 million in 2021 to $142 million in 2024.

Related discussions generally interpret this change as Solana's phased victory in user adoption, on-chain activity, and DeFi usage frequency. Community sentiment is notably bullish, with many viewpoints suggesting that Solana is now equipped to support the next round of "normie onboarding" and positioning itself as the preferred high-performance public chain.

Overall, this data change reinforces Solana's competitive narrative in fee generation capability and actual network activity, which may further attract developers and capital to tilt towards its ecosystem.

2. "Creator ETF": New Imagination for Financial Products on Solana

The Solana community has recently engaged in discussions around "Creator ETFs." This concept refers to asset baskets constructed by researchers or influential figures (such as SOL, BTC, ZEC, etc.) that are opened to followers in a tokenized form, with creators collecting management fees based on AUM.

Related posts quote Akshay BD's perspective, suggesting that this could be a more sustainable evolutionary path for "creator coins"—no longer relying solely on narratives or emotions, but building trust through verifiable portfolio performance. For example, the hypothetical "mert ETF" could hold assets like SOL, BTC, ZEC, and HYPE simultaneously, allowing users to purchase shares to test their asset allocation abilities.

Mechanically, such ETFs could achieve share minting, portfolio transparency, and on-chain settlement through protocols (like Symmetry.fi), seen as a new tool balancing investment advice among friends with globally verifiable funds.

Community feedback is generally positive: some view it as a natural extension of the creator economy in DeFi, while others see it as a new go-to-market strategy. Although discussions about cross-chain and asset coverage remain, there is consensus that Solana's low costs and high throughput provide a realistic soil for such financial experiments.

3. Perp DEX: HYPE Falls Below Assistance Fund Cost Price

In the perpetual contract track, Hyperliquid's native token $HYPE has shown a critical price signal. Its price has fallen below the average buy-in cost of the Assistance Fund (approximately $13.24) for the first time in eight months, currently retreating to the $20 range.

Many discussions liken this situation to the "jelly incident" in April of this year: at that time, $HYPE briefly fell below a key cost level before quickly rebounding and reaching new highs in the following two months. Based on this historical experience, the community generally views the current range as a potential long-term positioning window, with some users publicly stating they are increasing their positions.

Overall, this round of adjustment has not significantly weakened market confidence in the Perp DEX track; rather, it highlights the psychological role of the assistance fund mechanism in stabilizing expectations. Related discussions suggest that if macro and liquidity conditions align, the perpetual contract ecosystem may still attract new capital inflows.

4. Others: Bitcoin "Wrench Attack" Shifts from Warning to Normalization

On security issues, Bitcoin security researcher Jameson Lopp announced that he will gradually reduce the maintenance efforts for the "Bitcoin Wrench Attack" archive. This archive has long documented real-world violent incidents against Bitcoin holders (commonly referred to as "$5 wrench attacks").

Lopp stated that related incidents have evolved from early "extreme cases" to "a reality that occurs almost every few days," and continuing to maintain it item by item no longer holds news significance. He has transferred maintenance permissions to @beausecurity and called for community collaboration to update, with related materials still retained on GitHub.

Community responses are generally rational. On one hand, they affirm the long-term educational value of the archive; on the other hand, they discuss the distribution differences of attacks in different countries, as well as the importance of personal protection, privacy management, and real-world safety.

This change is seen as a signal: the physical security risks for Bitcoin holders are becoming normalized, and the community's focus is shifting from "warnings" to the systematic construction of "response and protection tools."

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。