ZachXBT accuses Hyperliquid of double standards and questions its Decentralization.

WuSaidBlockchainW · 2025-03-27T03:00:49+00:00

The article discusses on-chain detective ZachXBT's criticism of Hyperliquid's handling of the Jelly market attack incident. He points out that Hyperliquid's forced liquidation and price setting resulted in minimal losses for the attacker, which starkly contrasts with its passive response during the Radiant incident, exposing its centralized governance. He suggests that Hyperliquid should maintain consistent intervention, decentralization, or introduce mechanisms to prevent malicious behavior.

WuSaidBlockchainW

2025-03-27 03:00:49

Abstract generation in progress

Wu said that on-chain detective ZachXBT criticized Hyperliquid for forcibly liquidating and artificially setting the price ($0.0095) during the Jelly market attack incident, causing the attacker a small loss. He questioned why Hyperliquid claimed to be “powerless” when Radiant was attacked by North Korean hackers, involving a large number of victims. Hyperliquid’s decision-making is clearly double-standard, exposing its governance centralization. He proposed three response options: maintain consistency and actively intervene in major events; completely decentralize and not intervene at all; introduce mechanisms to prevent malicious actors from entering from the source (such as Railgun’s PPOI model).

HYPE6,11%

RDNT13,02%

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.