Decentralization has never been a "simple three words" A very interesting topic is that every time a hacker attacks a platform, if there is a "centralized operation" on the platform, it will be attacked. We always discuss the discussion of "centralization and decentralization". Little do they know, ultimately it's a matter of 'the butt determines the head'. Just like @ HyperliquidX's last centralized operation, a group of people left disappointed and Fud HYPE went to 0, but instead of falling, it went up to ATH. Just like how after the massive theft of @ CetuSProtocol, @ SuiNetwork directly shut down its chain, and people began to question its "decentralization"; It's like @ BNBCHAIN pledging a huge increase in BNB to @ VenusProtocol, and everyone is discussing the issue of "single machine chain" when the operation is stopped. There will be a question, who can solve the 'hacker' problem? Can decentralization solve it? How to use decentralization to sanction hackers? This inevitably raises questions. Is there a way for everyone to vote together on sanctions or is there any other way? The final result of the discussion is that the only way to sanction hackers is through centralized methods, and ultimately we need to return to the essence and use centralized means to deal with it. It's not feasible to reason with others when they all pull out knives at you. As the ancient saying goes, it is difficult to explain why a scholar encounters a soldier. So most of the time, just like human nature, don't always stand and speak without feeling back pain. Victims want to roll back their data and want @ CetuSProtocol to lose money. It's best if @ SuiNetwork also takes responsibility. 😮 ‍ 💨