2026-01-17 08:22:29

Even if I were a malicious actor, ultimately, the most profitable approach is to comply with laws and regulations, attract many users, and continuously implement value-enhancing measures.

This is the wonderful aspect of Web3. The pursuit of individual利益 and the overall利益 improvement align, and that trust becomes visible. In other words, the system itself rewards legitimate operations more than cheating.

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.

9 Likes

Reward
9
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

BrokenDAO

· 1h ago

Game theory sounds perfect, but in reality? Aren't there still many cases of incentive distortion... No matter how beautiful the mechanism is, it can't withstand human nature.

View OriginalReply0

BloodInStreets

· 1h ago

It sounds good, but I've seen too many "long-term" projects go to zero directly in a bear market. No matter how perfect the mechanism design is, it can't withstand human greed.

View OriginalReply0

GasWrangler

· 1h ago

nah tbh this assumes bad actors actually *do* the math. empirically speaking, most exploit vectors print money faster than playing by the rules—at least in the short term. the incentive alignment argument only works if the blockchain's security model is demonstrably robust enough to punish defection, which... let's just say layer 1 throughput constraints kinda break that promise rn

Reply0

LiquidatedDreams

· 1h ago

That's right, the incentive mechanism of Web3 is indeed powerful; doing evil actually results in losses... Bad actors ultimately have to follow the rules, otherwise they won't make money. This logic makes perfect sense. Trust visualization is truly awesome, far better than the opaque operations of traditional finance. This is true self-regulation; there's no need for supervision, as the system itself punishes bad actors.

View OriginalReply0

ZKProofster

· 1h ago

honestly the "alignment of incentives" argument is elegant in theory, but let's be real—it assumes actors behave rationally under scrutiny. the visibility part though? that's where the actual cryptographic guarantee lives. you can't hand-wave away implementation details with philosophy alone.

Reply0