SUI Group、VARA、Kraken 談跨境加密貨幣監管

0:00跨境監管夢幻陣容登場

0:00各位，歡迎、歡迎、歡迎。今天早上我們會很有趣，聊聊全球監管的精彩世界以及目前的發展。我們會從亞洲談到中東再到美國。我保證這場討論會很有意思、很精彩，也希望能帶給大家很多洞見。我的目標是讓你們在幾分鐘後離開這個會場時，至少能獲得足夠的資訊，讓你們對未來監管和政策的走向有自己的看法。為了達成這個目標，我們請來了夢幻陣容，正如 Andrew 一一介紹我們。我真的很興奮能主持這場討論。順帶一提，Brian 除了在 SUI Group Holdings 的角色外，你們可能不知道他其實是高爾夫球高手。昨晚我們有 Lando Norris 在場，Brian，也許你該跟他一起去打幾桿。我沒把球桿帶來新加坡，不過這裡的球場真的很棒。還有來自 Hyperliquid Policy Center 的 Jake，你們可能不知道，Jake 在不忙於政策時，其實是園藝高手，想問櫻桃番茄的事找他就對了。Jake，很高興你來參加。Deepa，今天稍晚我還會和她一對一，會聊聊她在 VARA 做的所有精彩工作。對了，想看監管者的投入嗎？她真的住在辦公室旁邊，沒開玩笑，她的公寓就在辦公大樓裡。這是全球監管者的典範。最後還有 Arjun Sethi，來自 Payward，也就是 Kraken 的母公司。他不忙於 Kraken 和 Payward 時，週末都陪小孩。你看，大家在加密圈都是一家人。Guys, welcome, welcome, welcome. We're gonna have lots of fun this morning, talk about the exciting world of regulations and what's happening across the world. We're gonna go from Asia to the Middle East to the U.S. All I promise you, it's going to be interesting, exciting, and hopefully very, very insightful. My goal is you leave this room in a couple minutes, and at least you have the information needed to try to make your own view on where we're going from a regulation perspective, policy perspective. And to do this, we have the dream team with us, as Andrew introduced us all one by one. I'm really excited to do this. Brian, by the way, Andrew mentioned his role that he has with Sui, but one thing you may not know about him, he's a big golfer. Yes, last night we had Lando Norris, and Brian, maybe it's time to go hit some balls with him. I didn't bring my clubs with me all the way over here. Great courses in Singapore, by the way. Jake as well from Hyperliquid, the Policy Center. One thing you may not know about Jake, in his spare time, when he's not busy with policy, he's a big gardener. You want to ask him about cherry tomatoes? He's the expert. Jake, great to have you with us as well. Great to be here. Deepa, with whom I have a one-on-one later on today as well, we'll talk about all the great work she's done at VARA as well. Deepa, by the way, you want commitment from a regulator? She literally lives next to the office. Literally, I'm not kidding. Like her house, her apartment is in the same building as the office. Hey, that's a role model for a lot of other regulators we should have around the world. And of course, last but not least, Arjun Sethi from Payward, the company that owns the whole company of Kraken. And when he's not busy with Kraken and Payward, he spends time with his kids on the weekend. See, everybody in crypto, we're a great family.

1:52VARA 監管經驗與生態系建立

1:52那麼，Deepa，我就先從你開始。來談談全球監管框架的現況。我很榮幸從 VARA 創立初期就見證它的成長。你在監管政策制定、以及實際建立加密公司所需生態系方面學到了什麼？能不能和大家分享 VARA 經驗，以及 VARA 作為加密監管機構有什麼獨特之處？首先，非常感謝邀請我來。Henri，你從我們創立就認識我們了，我們大約四年前成立。大概是全球唯一專注於虛擬資產的監管機構，因此我們相對於全球其他地方來說算是蠻獨特的。既然我們還算年輕，Henri 說我們有學到東西，這點很好，是個很好的起點。從我們的角度來看，作為新創監管機構和成長型監管機構，和你們在加密世界創業沒什麼不同。隨著我們逐漸成熟、規模擴大，你會發現規則和適應市場變化的能力必須跟上市場腳步，否則就會被淘汰。我們一開始打基礎、建立框架，和現在已經很不一樣。現在進入市場的業者更成熟、專業更深、類型更多元，而且他們也更願意和監管機構合作，推動產業升級。這對我們理解市場來說是很大的啟發，也很革命性。我想這是多數產業很難有的經驗，因為其他產業進場時通常已經有很高的穩定性。而在這裡，至少在杜拜市場，是一個互相尊重的環境。Man, on that perspective, Deepa, I'm going to kick it off with you. You know, let's talk about the regulatory framework, what we're seeing globally. I've been privileged to see the growth of VARA from the early days. What have you learned when it comes to regulatory policymaking and actually setting up the ecosystem that crypto companies need? What have we learned with the VARA experience? And can you share with the audience as well about what makes VARA unique? As a regulator for crypto. Look, first and foremost, thanks for having me here. And Henri, you've known us since our birth. We've been born about four years ago. We're probably the world's only regulator that's a specialist in virtual assets, and as a consequence, we're relatively unique compared to the rest of the world, right? And given that we are relatively young in the game, One of the things that I'm glad that Henri first says we've learned something, which is good. It's a good starting point. What I will say is, from our perspective, being a startup regulator versus being a scale-up is no different from most of you in the world of crypto. And as you come to a little bit more of a maturity and scale-up environment, you also find that your rules and your... Your ability to adapt to the changing environment needs to keep pace with the market, if not you're going to be left behind, right? So what we started with, laying the foundations, laying a framework, is very different from where we are today, where the kind of maturity of players that come into the market, how diversified they are, how deep they are in their expertise, and also how willing they are. To participate with the regulator to take the industry to the next level, that's been extremely revealing and revolutionary from our own understanding of the market. And I would say that's something that most industries probably don't offer because they come in with a great deal of stability already set up. And in this, it's a very— Mutually respectful environment, at least as far as the Dubai market is concerned.

3:55美國監管現況與 SEC、CFTC 角色

3:55你剛剛提到穩定性。我們當然需要加密監管，也需要全球明確的政策制定。其中一個很重要的市場就是美國。Brian，我想先請你談談這一點。很明顯，今年 Clarity 法案沒有通過，現在我們看到 SEC 和 CFTC 試圖彌補這個缺口。你認為 SEC 和 CFTC 有多大能力彌補這個缺口？他們現有的規則制定權限，能否補足 Clarity 法案沒能實現的部分？You know, you mentioned the stability side. We need, obviously, crypto regulations. We need clear policy making around the world. And one market that matters a lot is, I think, is obviously what's happening in the U.S., right? Maybe I'll start with you, Brian, on this. Obviously, clarity didn't work this year. It didn't pass. And now we're trying, we're seeing the SEC and the CFTC try to close that gap. To what extent do you believe that the SEC and the CFTC can close this gap, and actually the rulemaking authority that the regulators have, they will be able to actually compensate for what we're not able to achieve with the CLARITY Act?

4:32我認為首先，回顧過去兩年，甚至四年，從 FIT21 法案開始，一直到現在，很多人會覺得，哇，這段時間好像白費了，投入這麼多努力，最後在參議院失敗。但我認為這種想法不對，因為這段期間投入的工作，已經讓監管機構更了解這些細節，知道哪些加密和區塊鏈的面向需要被納入考量，哪些規則其實不需要再適用，因為這個產業沒有傳統的控制權或消費者風險。現在我們看到 SEC 和 CFTC 開始利用現有權限發布自己的規則，他們有很大的豁免權，可以在沒有立法的情況下，創造新的監管架構來容納這些新商業模式。這些規則的持久性還是個開放問題，關鍵在於這些規則何時定案，以及有多少商業活動是在這些規則下進行。因為一旦有大量活動在這個法律架構下運作，要全部推翻就會變得很困難。所以我認為，其實我們現在有很大機會能獲得和立法一樣多的明確性。Yeah, so I think the first, it's— It's easy to look back on the last two, maybe even four years, starting with the FIT21 bill, and find ourselves where we are now and say, gosh, what a waste of time. You know, we put all this effort in only for this to fail in the Senate. But I think that's the wrong perspective, because the work that was put into this product over that period of time. has now really informed the regulators about how to think about some of these nuanced issues, about what kind of aspects of crypto and blockchain are important for them to consider in thinking about what kind of rules and regulations no longer need to apply to this space because there aren't aspects of control or there aren't the same risks to the consumers. And so what we're seeing now is we're seeing the SEC and the CFTC start to issue their own rules under their existing authorities, because they have very broad exemptive powers to create new architecture that can accommodate these business models in the absence of a piece of legislation. The question of how durable it is, you know, I think will be an open question. I think it's going to depend on how soon we see those rules finalized and how much business activity gets conducted under them, because the more activity there is under a legal framework, the harder it is to reverse ultimately and make all of that activity illegal. So I think that there's actually a very good chance we could get the same amount of clarity now as we could have with the law.

6:10美國監管回滾風險與政策制定挑戰

6:10我昨天在這個舞台上訪問了前州長 Cuomo，他的看法是，因為監管議題變得高度政治化，很有可能會被回滾。Jake，你怎麼看？你同意 Brian 的觀點嗎？你覺得這些規則很難被推翻嗎？You know, I interviewed the—I'll get your view on this, Jake, in a second. Like, I interviewed the Governor Cuomo yesterday exactly on the stage, and his view was, and obviously he comes from a different perspective, but that there's a high chance that things get rolled back, you know, because it's become so partisan. What's your view on that, Jake? Do you agree with Brian that you think that it's difficult to roll them back?

6:31我完全同意 Brian 的看法。首先要認識到，這個努力投入了很多年，不只是四年前的 FIT21 法案，還有更早的 DCA、DCCPA、DCEA、Token Tax 等等，這是一場長期的努力，也凝聚了很大的共識。雖然還沒能在參議院過關，但兩黨對這個產業該如何監管其實有很多共識。我也完全同意，監管機構不只擁有豁免權，還有解釋權和新規則制定權，可以在沒有立法的情況下建立市場結構，讓市場真正需要的產品能夠運作。如果未來兩年這些市場能夠強勁發展，我認為要把這些市場一筆抹煞，政治上會非常困難。重點是我們能不能走到那一步。我對 SEC 和 CFTC 現任主席都很有信心，所以我很樂觀我們會達到這個目標。I couldn't agree more with Brian, and I'll start by saying I think— It's important to recognize, as he did, how many years went into this effort, and not just the 21 four years ago, but before that the DCA, and before that the DCCPA, and before that the DCEA, and before that the Token Tax. Right. So on and on and on. This is a labor of love, and one that has yielded a great deal of consensus. Perhaps not enough to get it across the finish line in the Senate, but a lot of agreement on both sides of the aisle about how this industry should be regulated. And I do agree entirely that the agencies have all the authority that they need, not just through exemptive authority, but also interpretive authority and new rulemaking authority. To establish a market structure under regulation rather than legislation that will work for products that are genuinely in demand by the market, and also couldn't agree more that provided we see those markets come online in a robust fashion over the course of the next two years, I think it will be very difficult and very politically unpalatable. To just wipe out a market that is actually trading in a way that consumers and institutions actually want. The question is if we can get there, and I think that we have great leaders of both the SEC and the CFTC in Chair Atkins and Chairman Selig, and so I'm optimistic that we will get there.

7:58產業自律與全球監管適應

7:58所以你認為，如果大家都在用加密貨幣，就像 Uber 一樣，規模大到已經無法回頭，還是我們已經到了這個階段？很期待看到這方面的發展。Arjun，你在加密圈很久，也很熟悉創投圈。你覺得我們有什麼地方可以做得更好，讓監管明確化法案通過，或是讓政策制定和規則制定更成功？So, in a way, do you believe, and I'll pass it to you, Arjun, but like that if it becomes a bit like Uber. If everybody is using crypto, it's too big then to put the genie back in the bottle, or are we already in that situation, like you said, to roll it back, you know? It'll be very interesting to see how it evolves on that side. Arjan, from your side, you've been in the crypto community for a long time. You've, you know, the VC world very well as well. What do you think we could have all done better to have either clarity pass? Or even done a better job to ensure the success of the policy making and rulemaking around crypto.

8:34我認為我們常常有近因偏誤，覺得 Clarity 沒過就是失敗，但其實全球很多公司都有商品、證券等各種執照。我舉我們自己的例子：我們在澳洲有金流、銀行、放款執照，美國也一樣，在懷俄明有 SPDI，每個州都有金流執照，加拿大也有同類型執照。英國我們有 MTF、金流執照、EMI 執照、銀行和存款業務。我們也宣布正在立陶宛收購銀行，這是歐盟成員國。同時我們也符合 MiCA 規範，也有 MiFID 執照，希望很快能拿到 VARA 執照。香港我們有發卡業務。像我們這種公司，全球各地都受監管，才能服務客戶。過去一家公司只做一種業務，像券商、證券、交易、銀行、存款等。全世界都習慣於二戰後的磚頭水泥式金流基礎建設，人們移動、取得資本。數位資產不是 NFT 或投機，而是你代表客戶持有資本和抵押品，他們想用這些資產做各種事，越無縫越好。無論是交易、賺取收益、放貸、跨境移轉、消費，這些需求都在加速發生。現在加上加密和 AI 代理也能動用這些抵押品，世界變化更快。即使在美國，這些事也一直在發生。市場一直在演進。我們有 GENIUS Act，讓這類抵押品的用途和流動更穩定。我其實很樂觀，不太擔心監管機構不知道怎麼做。重點是我們過去不只兩年，而是十五年都在教育監管機構，尤其最近兩年，讓他們看到世界變化加速、新興市場創新速度有多快，有時甚至我們自己都被追趕。某個時點，監管機構、國會、甚至全球都必須轉彎。現在即使我去歐洲，跟他們談讓本地公司能在我們的資本市場上市，這很快就會發生。這對他們自己的發展很重要，他們必須快速理解。最終你必須做出改變。Yeah, I think one thing that we tend to forget is we have like a recency bias around clarity didn't work, but not just us, but, you know, a lot of other companies all over the world. They either have commodities licenses, securities licenses, and so I'll kind of walk you through, like, what we do. So we're registered to move money and banking and lending in Australia. Same in the United States. We have an SPDI in Wyoming. We have money transmitter licenses in each state. And then we have the same types of licenses in Canada. And let's move over to the UK. We have an MTF. Money transmitter licenses, EMI licenses, and then, so banking, money movement, deposits again. We'd announced, or I had announced that we're, you know, in the process of acquiring a bank in Lithuania, and so that's in a one-member state. At the same time, we're compliant with MiCA. We also have our MiFID license, you know, hopefully, you know, knock on wood, soon to be in VARA. We have our card issuance through Hong Kong. Like, the list just goes on, the types of companies just like us, where we're regulated all over the world to be able to support our customers. And I think in the past, you just had one company do one specific use case, you know, a broker-dealer or securities licenses or trading, you know, banking, deposits, so on and so forth. And so. The whole world has been used to what I call, you know, the brick and mortar money movement and, you know, post-World War II sort of infrastructure of, like, people moving around and getting access to their capital. And digital assets is not about something that's, you know, NFTs or something that's speculative. It's just you have capital and collateral on behalf of your customers. And they want to do something with it, and they want to do something that's as seamless as possible. And so if they want to trade, if they want to get yield, if they want to lend it out, if they want to move across borders, if they want to spend against it, all of these things are happening at speed. And then now when you add, you know, crypto and AI agents getting access to that same collateral, the world is moving at a faster and faster pace. And so. Even in the United States, it's not like this hasn't been happening. It has been happening. The market's been continuing to evolve. We did have GENIUS Act, and so creates a stability around, like, what this type of collateral can do and where it moves. And so I'm actually generally pretty optimistic, where I'm not really worried about the regulators figuring out what to do. It's more about, you know, we've spent the last, you know, not just two years, but 15 years. Educating them along the way, and more so over the last two years around like, okay, well, here's what the world is starting to look like at a faster pace. Here's where they're innovating in these emerging markets, and frankly, in some cases, here's how fast they're innovating where we're being left behind. And so at some point, I think the regulators, you know, as well as the House and the Senate in the United States, or even worldwide. I think the tone has changed a lot, where even when I go to Europe and we start talking about, look, we want to be able to give access to companies in your own jurisdiction to go public on our capital markets, which will happen soon. This is something that they have to grasp very quickly because it helps with their forward mobility of, you know, even their own constituents. And at some point, you got to turn the corner.

11:50監管溝通與自我教育的重要性

11:50你剛剛提到花了很多年教育監管機構。Brian 和 Jake，我想問你們，花時間和政策制定者互動真的有效嗎？Jake，這其實就是你在 Hyperliquid Policy Center 做的事，花時間教育監管機構 DeFi 等相關議題。你怎麼看？我也想聽聽前監管官 Quintenz 的看法，當你站在被教育的一方時感受如何？不過我想說，Brian 一直是我的榜樣，他在 CFTC 時，是最早真正理解公有區塊鏈和去中心化金融基礎設施潛力的監管者之一。我很好奇他的看法，因為他當時主動自學這些新技術，當時產業其實很少主動找監管機構溝通。You mentioned that you spent all these years educating the regulators and— Brian and Jake, I'll bring it to you. Like, do you believe this law being and spending time with policymakers actually works? I mean, maybe Jake, from your side, I mean, that's what you do, right? I mean, that was the strategy Hyperliquid was setting up and actually spending time educating about DeFi and everything around. Well, I do. I'll be curious what former Commissioner Quintenz— Yeah, exactly. I want to hear the other side of that role, when you're on the receiving side. But no, look, I will say that Brian was an inspiration to me because he was one of the first regulators, when he was at the CFTC, who genuinely understood the benefits of public blockchains and the promise of decentralized financial infrastructure. And I think, although I'll be curious what his perspective is, that's because he took it upon himself to educate himself about these different issues and new technologies at a time when there was not a lot of engagement from the industry trying to talk to regulators about what

12:49產業溝通與監管參與的演變

12:49這個產業的承諾本來就是如此。我們作為社群，過去沒有多溝通，這是個錯誤。我不確定這是不是錯誤，我記得以前聽 Brian 的 podcast，可能是 2019 或 2020 年，那時候這產業還很早期。你要記得，比特幣創立後的前十年，幾乎沒有人想跟政府互動。這個圈子大多是自由意志主義者，認為政府根本不該管這個產業。直到我們開始打造新工具、新產品、新服務，這些東西真的需要某種程度的監管，才開始有意義去跟政府互動。我覺得這很重要，而且現在還有很大的教育落差，身為政策制定者，我們有責任確保我們清楚溝通我們在建構什麼，以及我們如何看待金融的未來。The promise of this space really was. That was a mistake we did as a community, not talking enough. I don't know that it was a mistake. I mean, you know, I remember listening to Brian. On a podcast, it might have been, you know, back in 2019 or 2020. That's pretty early in the history of this industry. And you have to remember, for the first 10 years or so after the creation of Bitcoin, there weren't a lot of folks who wanted to engage with government in the first place. The space was largely comprised of libertarians who thought that government had no place regulating the industry at all. And it wasn't really until we started building new tools and products and services that were broadly appealing that really did deserve regulation in some form or fashion, that it made sense to begin engaging. And I think it is so important, and there is still such an education gap that is an obligation of those of us working on policy to make sure. We're communicating clearly about what it is we're building and how we view the future of finance.

13:49Brian，你身為前 CFTC 委員，怎麼看這件事？首先，Jake，謝謝你的評論，對我來說很有意義。沒有 Jake 在各種角色中的領導，我們在美國不會有現在監管機構和政策制定者這麼正面的看法。這一切都是第一印象的問題。不管你在什麼角色，時間都很有限。當新科技或新創新出現時，很難把它當作全新事物，而不是舊東西包裝，因為時間壓力。你要強迫自己調整，就是要跟懂這個領域的人互動，讓他們來找你，告訴你為什麼這不一樣，為什麼要用不同角度思考，為什麼有些規則不適用，這沒關係。身為監管者，你不想因為放任什麼出事而丟臉，但同時你也要尊重大家有自由承擔自己行為的責任，只要監管結構沒有因那些風險被破壞。參與一直很關鍵，我自己也受益良多。我是自己主動學習，但不可能靠自己閉門造車，需要大家的興趣和參與。So, Brian, as a former CFTC commissioner, what do you think of that? Well, first of all, Jake, thank you for your comments. That's very, very meaningful to me to hear. We would not be anywhere close to where we are in the United States with the positive views of regulators and the positive perspective of many policymakers without Jake's leadership. In those discussions throughout many different roles that he has had, so I thank you for that. I mean, everything is a matter of first impressions. There's always a limited amount of time, no matter what kind of roles you have. And when new technology or new innovations or something different comes along, it's really hard. To try to think about it as something new, as opposed to something old that's repackaged, just because of those time constraints. And the way that you can force yourself to do that and to make that adjustment is by engaging with people that understand it and having them come to you and want to speak to you about why this is different, why you need to think about it differently, why some of the rules may not fit, and why that's okay. You know, as a regulator, you don't want to be embarrassed. You don't want to be embarrassed by allowing something to happen that ends up with a bad outcome. But at the same time, you also have to embrace people's freedoms. You have to embrace people's freedoms to take responsibility for their own actions, as long as, you know, the regulatory structure isn't compromised for the risks that those do present to people that can be controlled. And so the engagement has been key. It's been key all along. I certainly benefited from it a lot. I took it upon myself to learn about it, but I couldn't have done that, you know, by myself in isolation. You needed interest. Absolutely, absolutely.

15:30監管者學習與數位資產體驗

15:30你覺得監管機構應該怎麼做，才能讓內部更了解這個領域？你自己是主動學習，也善用現有資源。那你覺得監管者還能做什麼，才能跟上數位資產的發展？我覺得他們應該能實際使用這些產品。現在基本上政府裡只要是監管職位，幾乎都被禁止持有或交易加密貨幣。這樣你怎麼可能熟悉這項技術的好處或運作方式？我理解，確實有利益衝突的疑慮，也要確保你不會利用公職謀取私利，這些都很合理。但現在這種狀況其實有點荒謬，大家應該能夠透過實際使用來熟悉這些東西。What do you think should be done if, you know, what do you think regulators should do more to educate internally on this? I mean, you did it. You took it upon yourself. To basically learn about the topic, and you were able to leverage the resources that were available. But what do you think regulators should do more to get up to speed on digital assets? I mean, I think they should be able to use these products. I mean, I think right now there's basically a blanket prohibition on anyone owning or trading crypto if you're in a regulatory position in the government. And, like, how can you even familiarize yourself with the benefits of the technology or how it works if you can't use it? And look, I get it. There are very legitimate concerns around conflicts of interest and making sure that you're not enriching yourself in your government service, and those are very appropriate. But where we are now is kind of absurd and ludicrous, and people need to be able to familiarize themselves by using these things.

16:24說到實際使用工具，這其實是學習加密貨幣最好的方式。你一定要親自用過，才知道它怎麼運作。接下來我想聊聊新產品、新金融工具，特別是衍生性商品。Deepa，從 VARA 的角度，你們怎麼面對這些新型態的金融工具？我等下也會問其他人對於衍生品和永續合約的看法。你怎麼看？VARA 在理解和監管新產品方面有什麼做法？So talking about using tools, I think that's the best way to learn about crypto, right? You got to use it and to understand how it works. One of them, I want to talk about new products, new instruments. Let's talk about derivatives in particular. Actually, Deepa, I'll move it to you because from a VARA perspective, how are you guys dealing with these new instruments? And then I'm going to bring it to you guys on the derivative and perps aspects as well. What's your view? What's been VARA's approach to understanding and regulating new instruments are coming into the crypto world.

16:53VARA 監管新產品的實務經驗

16:53我先呼應 Brian 和 Jake 剛剛說的話。除非你願意和產業互動，了解他們的想法，否則你永遠無法掌握身為監管者該做什麼來協助產業發展。這是最基本的道理。我想這桌上的每個人、甚至在場的大家，不只熟悉這個領域，也都親身經歷過這個過程。當然，身為監管同業，Brian 對這個環境更熟悉。以我們 VARA 的情境來說，前兩年我們訂了一套規則，最近這兩年則更著重和已經取得執照的市場互動。我們現在有大約 58 家持牌、完全受監管的業者。每一家都會用不同方式發展他們的產品和服務。正如 Arjun 剛才說的，沒有人只做純加密貨幣、只做交易所或券商業務，大家都想跨鏈發展，你的規則也要跟著進化。I'm firstly going to resonate with both Brian and Jake have just said, right? Unless you're willing to engage with the industry and see where their head is at, you're simply never going to be on top of what you require to do as a regulator in order to enable them. It's as fundamental as that. I think all people at this table and in this forum are not only familiar with it, but have gone through the process themselves. Of course, as a fellow regulator, you would also, brands more familiar with that environment anyway. In our context, we would say there's a set of rules that VARA has obviously set up in the first two years of our existence, and in the last couple of years. It's been more about engaging with the market that we already license. We've got a reasonably significant number of licensees, right? We've got about, I think, 58 as of this morning, a number of licensed, fully regulated entities. And each one of them will have a different way in which they want to evolve their product and service to market. And Arjun just said this a little while ago. No one is still only dealing with, I'm a native crypto person, I want to stick with crypto and I want to do only exchange activity or broker-dealer activity or what have you. They want to spread across the chain and you need to evolve. In terms of setting up your own rules to facilitate that.

18:19在 VARA，唯一不能由其他服務業者做的就是託管業務，這必須專屬經營，其他幾乎都可以互通。你剛提到新產品、新工具，像衍生性商品。我們通常會用 MVP 計畫（最小可行產品計畫）來處理。大家常說 sandbox（沙盒），但我們認為沙盒只是很有限的實驗場，這應該是一個完整的市場演練，否則你根本看不到規模化後的風險。MVP 通常只開放給機構和合格投資人，不開放給散戶。這樣你才能觀察規模和速度對產業的影響。衍生品就是其中一個案例，我們有四家業者參與 MVP，最後都通過了，我們也根據實際運作制定了規則。去年三月公布規則後，五月就有人拿到執照，六月、七月就開始營運。舉個例子，去年六月到十二月，光是開放受監管的衍生品，交易量就比前一年成長七倍。In terms of setting up your own rules to facilitate that. So the only thing in VARA that is not permitted to be done by the rest of the service providers is custody activity. So that's got to be exclusive. But other than that, pretty much everything is fungible. You mentioned the things about new products, new tools that are coming to market, derivatives being one of them. We typically engage in what we call an MVP program, a minimum viable product program. People like to talk about it as a sandbox. We kind of think of sandboxes as where you just go and never get out of. Sandboxes are for very, very limited types of practices. This needs to be a full market exercise, because if you don't see something operating at scale. You simply don't know where the risk is. So typically an MVP is for institutional and qualified investors. No retail is permitted. But at that point, you're able to see also what scale can do or rapidity of process can do to kill it in industry, right? So derivatives was one such client. We had about four entities working with us through the MVP. And they all kind of got through. We developed rulebooks around them. We observed them in practice. We created the rules thereafter. And once we launched the rules in March of last year, you then had people licensed by May, and they were operational by about June or July. So just as a context, from June of last year to December, The amount of trading activity that happened just because you enabled regulated derivatives was about 7x what had happened the year before.

19:55監管落後與資本外流風險

19:55在衍生品這一塊，Arjun，我想問你，隨著傳統金融和加密的融合，你們平台上有很多證券型代幣，成績很亮眼。你覺得監管機構有跟上市場腳步嗎？我想說，身為非監管者（前監管者），我覺得最大問題是我們常討論如何保護，但如果我是任何國家的政府或地方，資本市場是經濟和國家存活的核心。你要思考經濟的心臟、你的選民和客戶。我認為多數監管者和立法者常常失焦。如果你回顧 1980 年代到 2010 年代，美國一直遠遠領先全球，這情況還在持續。當你有一頭大象變成猛瑪象，你就要想想，自己做了什麼讓市場流失。很多時候我們在白宮、國會、參議院的討論，看似混亂，其實重點是美國如何持續創新、打造最好的產品和服務給美國和全球使用者。這需要心態上的轉變，你可以保護，但也可能管到讓產業死掉。就像你說的，衍生品市場可以成長七倍，但全球衍生品和永續合約其實佔了大多數交易量，這也是為什麼創新都發生在 DeFi。你可以說這不安全，但人們會用，是因為他們選擇退出受監管體系，選擇不用那些糟糕的產品。最糟的是客戶離開你的地區。我們看到很多資金流動，尤其是大戶離開英國、歐洲，轉到杜拜。對杜拜、阿聯酋、新加坡、香港來說，最大的風險就是未來客戶也會離開。如果你想要經濟活力，你的規則就要跟上市場和客戶需求。But before on derivatives, Arjun, I'm just going to, on that point, right, as we're seeing even more convergence even between TradFi and crypto as well. I mean, you guys have had tremendous success with all these security tokens on the platform, right, which I think is quite impressive. Are you seeing this being a problem? Are you seeing that the regulators are not catching up with where the market is heading? I think the— I'm trying to tone down how I think about the world with regulators and lawyers here. I'm not a regulator. The former, former. I think the biggest issue is we talk about rules around how to protect. And the biggest, if I was in any government or locale, you know, capital markets is a large part of your economy and your country surviving. And so when you think about the heartbeat of an economy, you think about, like, your constituents and your customers. I actually think, like, most regulators and rulemakers kind of lose the plot. And so if you just take a look at what the world used to look like from You know, the 1980s and the 2000s, 2010s, where we are today, U.S. has just continued to far exceed any other market in the world, and that's continuing to happen. And so when you've got an elephant in the room that's actually just becoming bigger and is becoming the woolly mammoth, you have to sort of sit back and think, like, well, what are you doing to continue to lose this market? That's one. And I think, like, most of the conversations that we have. And at, you know, at the White House or even at the House and the Senate, so it may look chaotic on the side. It's really about how does the U.S. win, continue to innovate, and then build the best products and service for its U.S. base, as well as people all over the world. How does that continue to happen? And so I think, again, there has to be a sort of— mental mindframe switch to say, okay, yes, you can protect, but you can also regulate to death where it's just not going to happen. And so, to your point, yes, it could grow 7x, but, like, you know, worldwide derivatives and perpetual markets, like, that's the majority of volume in the world. And there's a reason why it's happening in DeFi. There's a reason why innovation is happening outside of these regulated markets. And so you can make an argument to say, Hey, that's unsafe. But if you take a look at, okay, well, why do people use it? Well, they're opting out of the regulated system. They're opting out of the products and services that are regulated. They're opting out of really, really bad products where you're reading disclaimers, where you're about to commit suicide before you say accept. And so I think, like, there's a large dichotomy to that. And so, you know, part of what we try to do and educate is like, Look, this is ideally good for your economy, your customer, because they're already going to do it anyways. And the worst thing that can happen is them leaving a region, your customers. And so we have a lot of flow, and we see our customers, again, we do a lot of banking. And so, you know, what we try to tell a lot of the European regulators is we just see a lot of capital flight and movement of our largest VIP customers leaving the UK. Leaving Europe and coming to Dubai, the biggest risk to Dubai or, you know, UAE at some point is them doing the same thing, Singapore doing the same thing, Hong Kong doing the same thing. And so if you want economic viability, your rules and regulations have to catch up with what's happening, with what the customer demands and the markets are.

23:12衍生品市場規模與監管挑戰

23:12我可以分享，像我在杜拜的避險基金，走路一分鐘就能見到所有交易對手，基礎設施和交易量都很方便。你剛剛提到衍生品，在傳統市場，衍生品規模是現貨的五、六倍，加密貨幣也是如此。很多人不了解這個規模，加密貨幣衍生品佔了 95% 的交易量，真的非常大。現在我們在新加坡，昨天金融時報有篇大篇幅報導，特別提到 HYPErnative，以及在美國和新加坡這類產品都很敏感。你怎麼看？你覺得像 Hyperliquid 這種產品未來有機會在美國上線嗎？And on that point, I can see it. I mean, I can always say with my hedge fund in Dubai, I'm one minute walk away from all my counterparties. One minute walk. And obviously we consider the infra with the volumes as well. You mentioned about derivatives, right? I mean, in traditional markets, the derivatives are 5, 6x spot markets, and it's the same in crypto. Crypto is, I think that people don't understand the scale. It's 95% of all crypto derivatives. Yeah, absolutely huge. Here, obviously, we're in Singapore. There was a big article in the FT yesterday at the time. This is October 8th for those listening to the recording afterwards. Very, you know, talking about Hypernative and the fact that obviously in the U.S. it's sensitive, in Singapore as well, ironically. What's your view? How do you think we're going to be able to have derivatives, in particular products like Hyperliquid, available in the U.S.?

23:59我有幾個想法。首先，任何產品要在某個司法管轄區上線，都必須遵守當地法律。這句話很簡單，但值得一再強調，因為有些人以為把產品放到區塊鏈上就能規避當地法規，這絕對不是事實。還有一點，大家對 Hyperliquid 有很大的誤解。Hyperliquid 是基礎設施，不是交易所本身。Hyperliquid 是一種技術，讓任何想提供產品和服務的人，可以更有效率、更有韌性、更安全、更透明地服務客戶，比傳統金融系統那種封閉後台好太多。問題在於，有客戶或使用者的業者，該怎麼在像 Hyperliquid 這樣的公鏈上提供市場、清算和結算？Yeah, well, I think a couple of thoughts on this. One is whatever product is offered in any given jurisdiction has to comply with the laws of that jurisdiction. A very simple thing to say, but I think worth repeating for those who think that putting a product on a blockchain somehow circumvents the laws or regulations in a given jurisdiction. That is absolutely not the case. I think also that there is a broad misunderstanding about what Hyperliquid is. Hyperliquid is infrastructure. It is not itself an exchange. Hyperliquid is technology that allows any other person who wants to offer a product and service to their customer or some user to do that in a more efficient, more resilient, more secure, more transparent way than they would. If they were using legacy technology such as a centralized proprietary backend, as the traditional financial system has been doing for decades and decades. And the question becomes, how does an entity that has a customer or user base offer a market that trades, clears, and settles on a public blockchain like Hyperliquid?

25:06美國監管與 Hyperliquid 範例

25:06必須遵守該司法管轄區的法律與規範。我們在 Hyperliquid Policy Center 主要專注於與美國監管機構互動，所以這代表我們會和 CFTC 討論這些事情該如何運作。我不會透露任何你們無法直接從主席 Seelig 在 Podcast 或公開演講中聽到的內容。美國要有鏈上市場，CFTC 必須根據《商品交易法》執行其監管架構。這套架構包含註冊人，必須遵守核心原則並確保符合法律所有義務。這是一個很複雜、某種程度上甚至有點無聊的任務，要思考這些機構如何將現有技術換成下一代技術。但我認為這就是我們正前進的方向。In compliance with the laws and regulations of that jurisdiction. Now, we at Hyperliquid Policy Center are mostly focused on engaging with U.S. regulators, so that means talking to the CFTC about how this could work. And I won't be telling anyone anything you wouldn't hear directly from Chairman Seelig when he goes on podcasts or gives, you know, talks about. What it means to have on-chain markets in the United States, the CFTC has a regulatory framework that it is required to administer under the Commodity Exchange Act. That regulatory framework includes registrants that have to comply with core principles and ensure that they're satisfying all of the obligations under law. And it's, it's a very— Complicated, although also in some ways a little bit boring, mission to figure out how does one of those entities swap out the technology that it's been using for this next generation of technology. But I do think that's the direction that we're heading.

26:06提醒一下，我們宣布要以合規的方式將 Hyperliquid 帶進美國，HIP 3 已經啟動。正如他剛才說的，現有執照下真的非常複雜。但在美國，即使沒有完全明確的規範，你還是可以完成清算。像 DCM、DCO、FCM 等多種角色，都可以把像 Hyperliquid 這種基礎設施和產品帶進美國。談到跨境監管明確性的議題，這正是一個很好的例子。Just as a reminder, we announced that we're bringing Hyperliquid to the United States in a compliant format, so HIP 3 start and so. To his point, yes, it's extremely complicated with the existing license. But to the point in the United States is that, you know, even without clarity, you can still clear. So a DCM, a DCO, and an FCM, there's multiple folks in which they can bring, you know, infrastructure like Hyperliquid and that type of product to the United States. Talking about finding clarity cross borders, perfect example of that, Arjan.

26:36CFTC 觀點與空投文化

26:36Brian，你怎麼看？以你在 CFTC 的經驗，對於 Arjun 和 Jake 剛才的說法有什麼看法？我很喜歡 Jake 剛才的分享。事實上，我希望生態系裡有更多像 Hyperliquid 這樣的專案。你想想他們的空投，和現在很多專案相反，現在很多專案只是把空投當作誘餌，讓使用者刷量，最後只是為了從 VC 那邊拿到更高估值，讓自己受益。有些是剝削社群，有些則是回饋社群。我對 Hyperliquid 團隊非常敬重，他們以身作則，為產業樹立典範。Brian, what do you think as a former... You know, from all your experience in the CFTC, to what Arjun and Jake said on this. Yeah, well, I really like what Jake was talking about. In fact, I mean, I wish more projects in the ecosystem were like Hyperliquid. You know, you just think about the airdrop that they did and how we're seeing a lot of the opposite of that in the space where... Projects are dangling airdrops in front of their users to farm them for volume to basically extract higher valuations from VCs that enrich themselves. You know, one of those is an extraction of a community, and one of those rewards a community. And, I mean, I just have, I just have a very, very high regard for the Hyperliquid team. For taking that and showing the example of that across the industry.

27:26回到 Jake 剛才提到 CFTC 的觀點，以及主席最近在公開演講中談到鏈上金融時，委員會正在思考如何界定對衍生品產品的某些環節有控制權，像是產品的發行、上架、執行、結算，還有客戶資金的託管。這些都是可能觸發 CFTC 規則的重點。但如果沒有控制權，或是監管機關定義上缺乏控制權，或許就不需要依照註冊人導向的細節規則來要求技術方。這會是監管思維上的重大轉變，未來如何將現有規則套用到新技術，會非常值得觀察。這需要很多努力，我預期他們一開始會比較保守，然後逐步推進。雖然可能比大家預期還慢，但一定很精彩。And I think, to Jake's point around what the CFTC has been describing and what the chairman has been saying in the recent speech that he gave earlier this week and talking about on-chain finance, you know, he was noting that the commission is looking at how to think about. You know, areas where there is control over certain aspects of derivative offerings, what it means to control the offering and listing of a derivative, what it means to control the execution of a derivative, the settlement of a derivative, you know, the custody of customer funds. Those are very important things that might invoke the CFTC's rulebook. But if there is no control, or if there's a lack of control in how the agency defines that, then maybe you absolve, you know, the technology of needing to comply with very specific registrant-focused rules. That is going to be a complete, you know, landscape shift in terms of how a regulator thinks about. Applying its rule sets to this new technology, it's going to be very exciting to watch. It's going to take a lot of hard work. I'd expect them to be conservative early and then build on that. But, you know, we're in for kind of a treat. It might take a little longer than people want, but it's going to be exciting.

28:47預測市場與監管挑戰

28:47說到令人興奮的事，你現在也在 Kalshi 董事會，你怎麼看目前預測市場的發展？如果我能在 Kalshi 上下注，我會說這案子會打到最高法院。我覺得這是個好交易。可惜 Kalshi 不能上架這種合約，因為他們有能力影響該合約的結算，反而不能參與。但我同意，現在有很多討論和法律挑戰，因為大家第一印象會覺得這看起來像賭博，像是在賭場看到的東西。但我認為，大家在區分投機和賭博時，應該更誠實、更細緻，思考界線在哪裡、為什麼這樣劃分，是產品本身、標的，還是使用者意圖或交易場所？Talking about the excitement, I know you sit on the board of Calci. What's your view on where we are right now on prediction markets? If I could put a bet on Kalshi, I would say that it's going to the Supreme Court. I think that's a good trade. Good trade, yeah. A good trade. Should see if it's available on the markets. Yeah, yeah. You know, Kalshi can't list that because they have some kind of, you know, ability to affect the settlement of that contract. Exactly. So ironically, they can't be involved with that. But I agree. I mean, right now. I think there's a discussion and legal challenges that are happening because I think people's first impression is that, well, this looks like some of these, some of the aspects of this look like gambling. It looks like things that we would normally see in a casino. But I think, number one, people need to be a lot more intellectually honest and thorough when they try to differentiate. Speculation from gambling, and where you draw those lines and why, and is it really about what the product is or what the product is on, or is it about someone's intent, or is it about the venue?

29:53另外，大家也常誤解讓 CFTC 擁有衍生品交易所的聯邦優先權，會否定各州對自己賭場和商業的管轄權。其實這是不同的商業模式、不同的風險、不同的目的。所以我認為這案子會進最高法院，但也有可能出現中間路線的結果，讓兩邊都能繼續發展。我覺得預測市場生態系就像幾年前的加密貨幣，還有很多事情要做。Further, I also think there's a misunderstanding that allowing the CFTC and reaffirming federal preemption. Of the CFTC's rules over derivatives exchanges and the products listed there in any way negates state authority over their own businesses and casinos. They're different business models. They have different risks. They offer different purposes. So I think this is going to the Supreme Court, but I think there's a middle-of-the-road outcome that can, you know, allow each to continue. I think it'll be very, very interesting to see. I think the prediction market ecosystem is where crypto was a couple of years ago. There's a lot to be done on that side.

30:30美國與國際市場創業環境

30:30我們只剩幾分鐘了，你們三位對美國市場都很樂觀，這很難得。我自己對國際市場也一樣樂觀。Arjun，你怎麼看？我會說現在美國其實是創辦加密公司很好的地方。但實際上，像我們現在在新加坡，很多人會跟我說，Henri，這很棒，但我可以設公司，卻拿不到簽證或稅務很複雜。反觀杜拜，規範、簽證、生活都很方便。你覺得美國怎麼克服這些障礙？還是其實沒差？We really have a couple of minutes left, and I just, you guys are, you know, both Brian, Jake, and Arjun, you guys are very bullish from a U.S. perspective, actually, which is very refreshing to hear, actually. I'm also just as bullish on international markets. International as well. So on that point, Arjun, like how do you make sure to, I would argue right now the U.S. is a great place to launch a crypto business. In practice, I mean, we're in Singapore. People will tell me, yeah, Henri, that's great, but I can set up my business, but then I cannot get a visa or the tax situation, right? Whereas one thing that Dubai has done very well, there's all these regulations, visas and... Lifestyle, everything is very easy. How do you think we can overcome that hurdle from a U.S. perspective? Or it doesn't matter.

31:10我不是移民政策專家，我本身在美國出生，藍色護照很好用。其實美國歷史上移民政策一直在擺盪，這些東西通常會自我調整。以我自己身為跨多國創投的經驗，到現在美國還是做生意最容易的地方，最快可以實驗、最快找到客戶。美國有法治、合約制度，尤其聯邦層級，不用太擔心加州和紐約的差異（除了最近加密託管法例外）。你在加州開公司、賣產品，很多時候都能延伸到其他西方市場。我希望這種情況能持續發生並擴散。監管機構其實很會彼此溝通，像跨大西洋、跨太平洋貿易，規則怎麼延伸。更重要的是，像預測市場、加密金融服務，怎麼讓你在杜拜、新加坡、香港創新時，能最快把產品和服務帶進美國。Yeah, I'm not a policy immigration expert. I was born in the United States, so, you know, my blue passport works. Look, look, I think it just really comes down to, well, you know, historically, if you take a look at the United States, there's always been oscillation with immigration. So I think these things have a general tendency to recalibrate. Look, I think one of the things that works really well, and I'm a venture capitalist across multiple companies in multiple jurisdictions. You know, till this date, regardless of what happens, the U.S. is still the easiest place to do business. It's the fastest way to be able to experiment, fastest place to be able to get customers. It's also, you know, one of the key markets outside of what we've seen recently, where the speed and adoption and distribution, because you've got rule of law, you've got, you know, I'd say like, you know, contract law, especially at a federal level. You know, I'm not thinking about. A California perspective versus a New York perspective. Until recently, with crypto, with, like, custody laws. But, you know, outside of that, like, you open up your business in California, like, and, you know, sell a product in the United States, and in many cases it extends to other places and Western markets. My hope is that it just continues to happen and cascades. And so I think a part of what regulators actually do pretty well is Talk to each other around, like, what does transatlantic trade look like? What does it look like between the Pacific? How do these regulatory rules extend? And I think what's more important when we're talking about prediction markets, crypto financial services, is that actually, how does that extend so that if you want to innovate in Dubai, if you want to innovate in Singapore or Hong Kong, how can you extend those products and services into the United States as fast as possible?

32:54杜拜生態系與人才吸引力

32:54Deepa，你覺得杜拜本身的優勢，像生活型態、地理位置，是否促成 VARA 生態系的成功？你剛剛提到天氣，這絕對不是優勢，尤其夏天（笑）。但其他方面確實如此。我是從美國搬到杜拜的，很熟悉美國的創業環境。杜拜的特點是政府願意和市場、產業合作，這不是例外。我們並不是一個以石化產業為主的城市，反而很重視新興產業的發展，會思考如何打造、協助這些產業，讓專業人士和他們的家庭都能適應。像孩子的教育資源，當你讓一個地方對人才有黏著力，要離開就很難了。Do you think, Deepa, on your side, the inherent benefits of Dubai, lifestyle, weather, location, contributed to make the success you've had with VARA in building the ecosystem? You mentioned weather. That's definitely not one of them. Yeah, weather, yeah. Definitely not in the summer, yeah. But everything else. Yeah. I will say that, look. I moved to Dubai from the U.S., right? So I'm very familiar with the kind of environment and a very entrepreneurial setup that the U.S. offers. What I will say about Dubai, though, is the fact that the government is willing to work with the market, is willing to work in collaboration with any industry that comes up, and this is not an exception. So we aren't a very hydrocarbon-based environment, even though people may think so. It's very much about what new industries are coming up and how do we create around them, enable them in a way in which it's not just right for the professional, but also right for their families. Is education available for the children? Once you make it sticky enough, For a population, exiting a country becomes extremely difficult, right? You know yourself.

34:06有興趣的朋友，下午我會和 Deepa 一對一深入聊這些議題。生態系黏著度確實很關鍵。我們只剩兩分鐘了，我的好朋友「鈴聲」也來了，接下來我要快問快答，每人只能用一兩個字回答，準備好了嗎？沒準備好也要開始了。We'll talk about that. For those interested, I'm doing a one-on-one with Deepa later this afternoon to go more in depth on those topics. So I think very, very interesting point on the stickiness of the ecosystem. Guys, we literally have two minutes left. My best friend, the bell, is here with me. I'm going to ask you guys quick questions, and I need one- or two-word answers. Hope you guys are ready. Well, even if you're not, we're going anyways. So, like, we can kick.

34:30快問快答：趨勢、風險與人生選擇

34:30Brian，現在加密生態最讓你興奮的是什麼？其實是「代幣化收益型產品」。同一題。永續合約。Deepa，妳呢？傳統金融與 DeFi 的融合。AI 代理人、機器對機器、可程式化資本。那最讓你擔心、大家卻沒注意到的風險是什麼？沒什麼好怕的，人生很美好。Deepa？我會說是預測市場。計時器響了，時間不多。我會說是那些覺得自己不用守規則、短期內僥倖過關，但最終會傷害生態的人。很有智慧的話。I'm going to start with you, Brian, here. Let's start where, what is the one thing that is exciting you the most in the crypto ecosystem right now? Actually, tokenized yield-based products. Yeah, lots of stuff, yeah. Oh, same question. Perpetual futures. Perpetual futures. Oh, here you go. Deepa, what's exciting you the most about crypto ecosystem right now? The coming together of TradFi and DeFi. Yeah. AI agents, machine to machine, programmable capital. Opposite question: what's the one thing that's scaring you the most right now in crypto that we're not paying enough attention to? Nothing really scary right now. Life is good. Deepa. I would say prediction markets. Yeah, prediction market, interesting. The ticking clock. Time is short and we have a lot to do. Yeah, that's a good point. I would say people that don't think they have to follow the rules and, you know, maybe get away with it in the short term, but ultimately it's going to harm the ecosystem. Very, very, very wise words.

35:36Brian，如果你現在能重回大學，會選什麼科系？考慮到金融未來，你覺得每個學生都該學什麼？電腦科學和公共政策。很好。我還是會選我原本念的心理學。Deepa？我本來念建築，雖然和現在工作無關，但我還是會選建築。Arjun？我覺得大學和教育是我人生最浪費時間的事。現場很多人可能同意。When I'm starting with you this one, Brian, if you could go back to university today, what would you study, knowing what you know about the future of finance, that you think every student in the room should study? Computer science and public policy. Very good. The same thing I did study, which is psychology. Psychology. Here we go, Deepa. I actually studied architecture, so it has nothing to do with what I do today, but I would probably do the same. Okay, Arjun. That university and education was the biggest waste of time in my life. I think many would argue, I agree with that in the room. Interesting one.

36:20來一題新加坡：你最喜歡新加坡什麼？食物。Deepa？我很喜歡這裡人口的多元性。早餐吃叻沙。景觀。你是不是也開始喜歡園藝了？Actually, let's do one for Singapore. What's your favorite thing about being in Singapore? The food. Food, Deepa. Wow, a really good answer, that coming from Dubai. I actually do like the diversity of the population. Yeah, very nice one. Yeah, having laksa for breakfast. The, here we go. The landscaping. Landscape. Wow, here we go. I thought you were in gardening as well now with Jake.

36:47壓軸問題：夢想共餐對象

36:47最後一題，每次上台或上我的節目都會問：如果你能和任何一位已故或在世的人共進午餐或晚餐，你會選誰？Arjun？Albert Einstein。我想知道大家引用的那些名言，他到底有沒有真的說過。Deepa？我會選 Isaac Newton。天啊。Jake？George Washington。Brian，最後一棒，這場 Token 跨境監管明確性的壓軸。我要代表大家說：Satoshi。很棒的結尾。謝謝大家，給我們的講者一個熱烈掌聲。交還給主持人，謝謝各位。Guys, to finish it off, my traditional question, whoever comes on stage or on my show, I'm going to start with you, Arjan, on this. If you could have a lunch or dinner with one person dead or alive, lunch or dinner with one person dead or alive, who would you have lunch with? Albert Einstein. Albert Einstein. I just want to know if the quotes that everyone quotes, if he ever fucking said it. I don't know. Deepa. I would have actually picked Newton. Newton, here we go. My God. Einstein, Newton, Jake. George Washington. Wow, here we go. Here we go. And to finish off the panel, Brian, on the regulation, finding clarity across borders at Token. I think I'll speak for all of us and say Satoshi. Satoshi, here we go. Great way to end it. Guys, thank you very much. A big hand of applause for our panel. I'll pass it back to our MC. Thank you, everybody.