When everyone is asking, "What will happen if we do this?" has anyone considered another question: What is the cost if we don't do it?
Lately, I've been thinking about a scenario—what if a certain market completely rejects tools like stablecoins and RWA (Real World Assets on-chain)? What will things look like in five years? Let's boldly speculate:
**Divergence of the Capital Ecosystem** Different regions will completely split in how they financially support AI and technological innovation. Some places will rely on flexible on-chain capital tools for rapid iteration, while others may still be slowly approving projects through traditional channels. The gap won't just be minor.
**Fragmentation of Wealth Narratives** As RWA accelerates globally onto the blockchain and stablecoins become investment infrastructure, yields will be clear and transparent. Overseas Chinese communities might build thriving ecosystems around these tools, with new stories emerging constantly—while some people can only watch the excitement from behind a screen.
**Execution-Level Games** Regulators might hold meetings every few days and issue piles of documents, but in some financially strained areas, will they really enforce things strictly? Maybe they'll go through the motions on the surface, but secretly rely on the "underground industry" to support tax revenue.
**Profiteering from Gray Channels** On/off-ramp access becomes a scarce resource, with a few who control the channels quietly making fortunes. Then, every so often, there will be a crackdown—arrests and fines in cycles, repeating over and over.
**Wave of Going Overseas and Offshore Centers** Want to participate in on-chain finance? Then go overseas. Branches in Hong Kong and Singapore will spring up, cross-border financial networks will form independently, and a kind of "on-chain offshore center" will quietly take shape.
History always repeats itself: you can block something for a while, but not the trend. When liquidity is blocked, it either goes underground or finds a way around, and the gap only grows wider.
Do you think this speculation is realistic? If it really happens, how should ordinary people respond? Let’s talk in the comments—should we prioritize risk control, or embrace change as early as possible?
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.
11 Likes
Reward
11
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GamefiHarvester
· 12-06 15:52
As virtue rises one foot, evil rises ten.
View OriginalReply0
MercilessHalal
· 12-06 15:51
A major upheaval is just around the corner
View OriginalReply0
OvertimeSquid
· 12-06 15:50
Understand that if you don’t take action, you’ll fall behind.
When everyone is asking, "What will happen if we do this?" has anyone considered another question: What is the cost if we don't do it?
Lately, I've been thinking about a scenario—what if a certain market completely rejects tools like stablecoins and RWA (Real World Assets on-chain)? What will things look like in five years? Let's boldly speculate:
**Divergence of the Capital Ecosystem**
Different regions will completely split in how they financially support AI and technological innovation. Some places will rely on flexible on-chain capital tools for rapid iteration, while others may still be slowly approving projects through traditional channels. The gap won't just be minor.
**Fragmentation of Wealth Narratives**
As RWA accelerates globally onto the blockchain and stablecoins become investment infrastructure, yields will be clear and transparent. Overseas Chinese communities might build thriving ecosystems around these tools, with new stories emerging constantly—while some people can only watch the excitement from behind a screen.
**Execution-Level Games**
Regulators might hold meetings every few days and issue piles of documents, but in some financially strained areas, will they really enforce things strictly? Maybe they'll go through the motions on the surface, but secretly rely on the "underground industry" to support tax revenue.
**Profiteering from Gray Channels**
On/off-ramp access becomes a scarce resource, with a few who control the channels quietly making fortunes. Then, every so often, there will be a crackdown—arrests and fines in cycles, repeating over and over.
**Wave of Going Overseas and Offshore Centers**
Want to participate in on-chain finance? Then go overseas. Branches in Hong Kong and Singapore will spring up, cross-border financial networks will form independently, and a kind of "on-chain offshore center" will quietly take shape.
History always repeats itself: you can block something for a while, but not the trend. When liquidity is blocked, it either goes underground or finds a way around, and the gap only grows wider.
Do you think this speculation is realistic? If it really happens, how should ordinary people respond? Let’s talk in the comments—should we prioritize risk control, or embrace change as early as possible?