2026-01-23 06:00:09

Why do most privacy coin projects struggle to gain mainstream recognition? The key lies in the compliance hurdle.

Those projects that claim to be completely anonymous may seem radical, but in reality, they actually block their own entry into the formal financial system. In contrast, some privacy ecosystems have found an alternative path through technological innovation—by internalizing compliance into automated protocol mechanisms.

The interesting aspect of this approach is that it makes adhering to rules and system operation one and the same. Users and institutions no longer need to make a difficult choice between "privacy" and "compliance"; instead, they can enjoy both simultaneously. This directly reduces the psychological barrier for large institutions to enter and also saves countless legal negotiations.

In new sectors like RWA, truly competitive projects are never those that ignore regulation, but those that design compliance as a core product feature. Being able to communicate in technical language and financial logic is the key to long-term survival.

RWA-2,28%

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.

7 Likes

Reward
7
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MidnightSnapHunter

· 4h ago

Internalizing compliance into the protocol layer? Sounds good, but will it still be scrutinized by the regulatory authorities?

View OriginalReply0

SilentObserver

· 4h ago

That's true, but from what I see... these projects are shouting about compliance on one hand while secretly doing shady things on the other, mostly just to deceive retail investors. Making compliance into an agreement layer? Sounds great, but I don't know when it will actually be implemented. I'll wait and see. Honestly, it's still driven by interests—who really wants to be tied down forever?

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunter

· 4h ago

Really, those projects that stubbornly cling to "absolute anonymity" should have woken up long ago; this path is simply not feasible... Compliance is indeed troublesome, but compared to being delisted by exchanges or facing cold wars with institutions, we still have to compromise. I respect the idea of built-in compliance at the protocol layer—wanting both privacy and security, the technology truly needs to be solid. As for RWA, it probably depends on who can pull off this approach; having technology alone is useless if you can't tell a good story. At the end of the day, we still have to survive; many radicals have already been eliminated.

View OriginalReply0

RetiredMiner

· 4h ago

Oh, now I see what a sensible person is saying. The completely anonymous approach is outdated, and those still stubbornly sticking to it are out of touch. Complying by integrating into the protocol layer is a brilliant idea; institutions have no reason to refuse.

View OriginalReply0

airdrop_huntress

· 4h ago

That's reasonable, but I think it still depends on how the project is executed. Otherwise, it's all just empty talk.

View OriginalReply0