There's an intriguing pattern emerging in how different players are positioning themselves. When you look at the landscape—blockchain networks, fintech platforms, institutional players—some act as true infrastructure builders, while others function primarily as gatekeepers. The dynamic here isn't traditional finance versus crypto. It's about who controls distribution. Compliant, neutral infrastructure tends to benefit the entire ecosystem. Exchange gatekeepers? They have different incentives. When infrastructure providers innovate openly but certain dominant exchanges resist it, you get a clear signal about where the real tensions lie.
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.
9 Likes
Reward
9
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
TokenAlchemist
· 3h ago
ngl the gatekeeper vs builder dichotomy is exactly where the real alpha surface lives. exchanges sitting on distribution leverage while protocol devs push open innovation? that's pure asymmetric tension. whoever maps these incentive vectors first wins the arbitrage game here.
Reply0
ImpermanentPhilosopher
· 3h ago
In simple terms, centralized exchanges are holding things hostage, while the true infrastructure providers are engaged in open innovation and carving out their own territory. The difference is significant.
View OriginalReply0
rugged_again
· 3h ago
Basically, it's the exchange creating a monopoly. The real infrastructure should have been decentralized long ago.
View OriginalReply0
ChainWatcher
· 3h ago
The issue of exchanges holding back is really a common topic. To put it simply, it's still a conflict of interest.
View OriginalReply0
PaperHandsCriminal
· 4h ago
Haha, here we go again. Whoever controls distribution controls everything... I’ve already seen through those guys at the exchange.
View OriginalReply0
ChainMemeDealer
· 4h ago
Those people at the exchange are really just holding things back. When their infrastructure team wants to innovate, they block it... and they still have the nerve to call themselves ecosystem participants.
There's an intriguing pattern emerging in how different players are positioning themselves. When you look at the landscape—blockchain networks, fintech platforms, institutional players—some act as true infrastructure builders, while others function primarily as gatekeepers. The dynamic here isn't traditional finance versus crypto. It's about who controls distribution. Compliant, neutral infrastructure tends to benefit the entire ecosystem. Exchange gatekeepers? They have different incentives. When infrastructure providers innovate openly but certain dominant exchanges resist it, you get a clear signal about where the real tensions lie.