Recently, I have been increasingly understanding why a project is so eye-catching — it doesn't create a track out of thin air, but genuinely tackles real-world problems. For example, in the area of securities issuance, the traditional approach makes people love and hate it: a bunch of intermediaries, lawyer fees, custody costs, burning money to an absurd level. Blockchain inherently has the opportunity to revolutionize this system; the key is how to do it. I particularly agree with a project's approach, which is to eliminate all these links — technically ensuring that regulators can understand the transaction logic, while also protecting sensitive data on the privacy layer. This is the so-called "pragmatism" approach, not blowing bubbles, but directly targeting the industry's real pain points. This down-to-earth working style is much better than superficial concepts.

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
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
ImpermanentSagevip
· 14h ago
Exactly right. Bitcoin came about the same way—solve the problem first, then tell the story.
View OriginalReply0
CascadingDipBuyervip
· 19h ago
Hmm, this is the proper way to get things done. Truly, projects that don't show off are indeed rare.
View OriginalReply0
BearMarketBardvip
· 19h ago
Honestly, this is the project I want to see. No more of those empty gimmicks, just hitting the core issues directly. --- The intermediary fee part is indeed outrageous; cutting it in half could save a lot of projects. --- Regulators understand + data protection, achieving both is true skill; otherwise, it's just empty talk. --- Finally, someone used the term "pragmatism" correctly. Other projects should really reflect on themselves. --- The traditional securities approach definitely needs to change; it all depends on who can truly pull it off. --- Compared to those concept kings, this practical approach is indeed more noticeable. --- The problem is, after cutting out the middlemen, who will take on this responsibility? That's the real pitfall. --- I just want to know how they communicate with regulatory authorities; this step is often the most bottlenecked. --- The traditional path, which is loved and hated, needs to be replaced. Blockchain indeed has this opportunity. --- Staying grounded and doing things thoroughly often gets caught up in details, but at least the direction is right.
View OriginalReply0
MagicBeanvip
· 19h ago
Honestly, I really like this approach. Don't focus on those superficial things; truly cutting out the middlemen is the right way.
View OriginalReply0
SerumSurfervip
· 19h ago
Someone finally understands—reliable projects are like this—cut out the middlemen directly, and don't bother with all those empty concepts. Exactly, being regulatory-friendly while protecting privacy—that's real skill. Decentralization should have been the domain of blockchain long ago; traditional finance methods are indeed ridiculous. But to be honest, how many of these can actually be implemented? Most are just hype. Alright, it's good to see someone finally getting down to earth and actually doing the work.
View OriginalReply0
ImpermanentTherapistvip
· 20h ago
Hey, wait a minute. This logic of mine sounds like it's just prolonging traditional finance.
View OriginalReply0
SmartContractWorkervip
· 20h ago
Hey, this is the real deal, unlike some projects that just talk trash every day. --- The intermediary fee is indeed outrageous; I buy into this idea. --- Wait, can regulators really understand this? That's the key. --- Finally, someone is doing real work, not just hyping concepts. --- How to balance privacy and transparency, what are the details? --- This is what we call solving the problem; everything else is just storytelling.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 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)