Let's make a sarcastic statement: Many times, users on the chain curse 'why not decentralize', but in fact, what they want is centralization Especially for on chain wealth management users, their interaction time with on chain infrastructure is very long (including the entire period of saving money), and what they care about is the safety of their money, rather than the narrative of decentralization Hyperliquid's performance clearly took off precisely after JellyJelly unplugged the network cable Last year's Sui security incident, there was no disagreement within the entire ecosystem regarding the chain level freezing of stolen assets If Drift were a distributed server centralized exchange like Hyperliquid, the outcome would likely be different There's nothing wrong with this, because the target audience you want to serve is users, not narratives. Show financial users your determination to unplug the internet cable to protect their assets, and only then will these users follow you But for projects in the sinking market, it's different: the biggest risk for users is not theft, but the game with the project team. So almost all the new generation of plates are starting to follow the path of verified pure clean contracts and true decentralization Improving security is the right thing to do, but the problem lies in how to improve it, which requires understanding the context