The identification of a scientist is my background: A conversation with Long Fan, founder of Conflux

On May 15th, Conflux held a digital finance and ecological development conference in Hong Kong. Conflux Network founder Professor Long Fan reappeared in the public eye. This Tsinghua alumnus, MIT PhD, and current professor at the University of Toronto, has almost faded from public view in recent years, quietly leading his team in advancing Conflux as China's only compliant public blockchain in terms of technological exploration and global expansion.

In the face of the RWA craze, the surge of Memecoins, and the accelerated development of stablecoins, the pace of the blockchain era is faster than ever. How does Conflux maintain its technical focus? As the only compliant Chinese public chain, what is the long-term thinking behind Conflux's compliant identification?

In this exclusive interview, Professor Long Fan shared for the first time his path choices, independent judgments on industry trends, and advice for young developers.

The Original Intention of Entrepreneurship and the Technical Foundation of Conflux

Q: Please briefly introduce yourself. If you were to introduce yourself, what identification would you want everyone to remember first? Why?

Answer: I am a computer science researcher. You can think of it as what everyone commonly refers to as a "scientist"; this may be the simplest identification that encompasses everything I do. Whether it's being the founder of Conflux, studying at MIT before, or teaching at the University of Toronto now, they are all part of this identity, or rather, part of the experience that has shaped this identity.

Q: If you could only use one sentence to introduce Conflux, what would you say?

Answer: Conflux is currently focused on building a high-performance public blockchain based in China or Asia, aiming to become an important infrastructure in the Web 3.0 era. This is what we have always been doing, and it is what we will continue to pursue.

Q: What are the major advantages of Conflux in the stablecoin and payment sector?

Answer: One of the biggest advantages of Conflux in terms of technology is that our overall technical architecture achieves high-performance TPS without sacrificing decentralization and security. Our network can support 3000-6000 TPS, and the confirmation time is also very fast. All of this is achieved without sacrificing the number of nodes and without compromising security.

This is a significant technological advantage for us, and it has been validated over the long term. For example, since the launch of the Conflux mainnet, it has maintained a zero-security incident record, demonstrating the stability and credibility of the architecture. What we are doing is based on our unique market or industry position, focusing on what we are better at doing, or what we should be doing. Everyone has seen our active promotion of offshore RMB, stablecoins, and other directions, and we are also focusing on cooperation with China Telecom on BSIM cards.

Compliance is not something "earned", but rather a "long-term belief + path choice"

Q: Conflux has signed a strategic cooperation agreement with partners for the Belt and Road cross-border trade scenario. What do you think can be implemented quickly?

Answer: I think there are two aspects worth paying attention to. For example, the offshore RMB stablecoin that is currently being promoted, our ecosystem partners are already fully prepared in terms of compliance and other aspects. The main aspect still under negotiation is: in what way to release the offshore RMB stablecoin in a better manner, so that more people can access it and apply it to these scenarios. Therefore, soon there will be a compliant offshore RMB stablecoin running on our chain, and we will also launch a series of ecological solutions to help this project expand its influence.

The second is the BSIM card, the entire technology development process has basically been completed, and we expect to launch one or several BSIM cards in certain overseas markets in the coming months, allowing users to truly use the BSIM card. If the results meet expectations, more promotions can be anticipated, and there may even be potential collaborations with other operators for promotion.

Q: Conflux is one of the few public chain projects that currently has significant advantages in compliance. Do you think that such a path can convey a positive signal for the entire industry?

Answer: The route we have always adhered to is such that the signal being conveyed is telling everyone that compliance is possible and that we can persist in this.

Now we have become the only compliant public chain in China, which actually has its historical causes. This is not to say that we fought for it, but rather that many teams actively gave up on this matter during a previous wave of regulations and policies. Many did so out of short-term strategic considerations, such as the high communication costs with regulators when trying to be compliant in China, leading them to migrate to Singapore, which was the choice of many teams. Because we insist on a path of compliant development, the compliance costs we bear are actually very high. This also means that we must be more restrained in many decisions.

We have always believed that this matter is of great value. At the same time, our thoughts are quite natural. Most members of our core team graduated from Tsinghua University, and there are also some researchers who have studied abroad. We are all engaged in a very technology-oriented, serious endeavor. We wonder, why do we have to go into exile abroad? It is possible to persist in a path of normal development. We have always believed that in terms of compliance, it is not completely impossible to communicate with regulators.

Q: Conflux has been actively expanding in Hong Kong recently. What role do you think Hong Kong plays in this process?

Answer: First of all, Hong Kong can now be understood as a "special zone" for blockchain. We can understand it this way: when China faces a brand new thing that presents both visible opportunities and significant risks, it often chooses to first establish a special zone for piloting. Blockchain is a typical example of this, and Hong Kong happens to play this role. You can think that for quite some time, all kinds of applications can be legal in Hong Kong without worrying about various policy risks. This environment has directly resulted in a noticeable outcome: compared to the mainland, the compliance costs in Hong Kong are much lower.

In fact, we view this matter from the characteristics of the industry. The industry is currently in a window period. Not just in China, but the vast majority of blockchain projects globally are operating in a distributed manner. In this case, "where people are" and "where the project is registered" are often two separate matters. You will see that recently many projects, regardless of where their team members are located, choose to register the project in Hong Kong. The reason is simple: once it becomes a "Hong Kong project," it is much easier to promote compliance and less likely to encounter unnecessary troubles. From this perspective, Hong Kong is in a natural policy dividend period, which is a very important opportunity window.

Of course, recently I have been chatting with people in the industry, and there is now a certain sense of urgency in Hong Kong, which mainly comes from the United States and other overseas regions. Other places are making rapid strides in blockchain. Although Hong Kong's policies are relatively open, the local area is also reflecting: Is the current policy still too conservative? If the current pace is maintained, there may still be a risk of missing some key opportunities in the future. This may also be a direction in which Hong Kong needs to further adjust and speed up its policies in the future.

RWA is evolution, Memecoin is humanity: The dual survival laws of the blockchain world

Q: What is your view on the recently focused RWA sector and the market frenzy caused by Memecoins earlier?

Answer: First of all, I have always viewed it this way: RWA is not a bubble, and stablecoins are not a bubble either. They essentially represent the entire industry’s ongoing search for new narratives in the process of breaking through regulatory barriers and existing framework limitations, in order to optimize their development paths. This matter itself is meaningful and is an important step forward for humanity in better utilizing blockchain technology.

In the past, we talked about "stablecoins", and now we talk more about "RWA", but essentially they are the same thing, just the concepts are continuously expanding and the narratives are evolving. It can be understood that people within the industry are constantly correcting and upgrading the narrative, reinterpreting how blockchain should be applied in a way that is easier for the outside world to understand and accept. Therefore, I believe this is a good thing, not a bubble.

I think Memecoin is an ancient human need. It's actually quite simple; gambling is an ancient demand of humanity. If gambling were always a bubble, then Las Vegas casinos should have closed down a long time ago.

When it comes to Memecoin, my view is that humans have a primal need to "take a gamble," and Memecoin is essentially a manifestation of this need, a form of "gambling in the cryptocurrency era."

Memecoins and gambling both have their dealers, and even the President of the United States can be the dealer at this table. In Las Vegas casinos, there are also dealers, as the casino itself is the dealer. So if you ask whether such things are a "bubble," I think the answer to that question depends on your attitude towards "gambling."

If you believe that the demand for gambling should not exist at all, you might see it as a bubble; but if you acknowledge that there is an inherent human nature that craves risk, excitement, and uncertainty, then it is merely another form of expression, another card table.

Question: The Conflux team has consistently adhered to the "Asian high-performance public chain" technical route, staying true to its original intention from 2018 until now. If we extend the timeline to five years or even a bit longer, do you hope that what Conflux is doing remains the same as it is now?

Answer: I believe that we will continue to persist in this direction. Of course, if I have any hopes, it would be that the things we are committed to making significant progress, even if what we are doing and the methods we use are different from many other teams.

Many teams operate in a way that once a hot trend emerges, they quickly follow the market rhythm and launch a new project within two weeks. However, our team is relatively more restrained and stable in strategy. The initiatives we pursue often have a slower pace, partly because the direction itself requires time to mature, and partly because it indeed requires our long-term efforts to promote. But we always believe that there are opportunities in this direction. Especially against the backdrop of ongoing changes in the international situation, the direction we adhere to is gradually revealing its value and significance. This value may not be so prominent in the short term, but in the long run, it is solid and clear.

So if I were to talk about my expectations for the future, it would be this: four or five years from now, what we are doing will definitely achieve greater progress than it does now. I am willing to believe that this continuous investment will eventually yield returns.

Q: If new developers want to enter the industry now, would you advise them to work on infrastructure, application layer, or some other direction?

Answer: I think this actually depends on the personal situation of the developer or possibly the team.

In fact, there are mainly two styles of doing things in the blockchain industry in China right now. The first style is good at seizing short-term opportunities, quickly iterating and experimenting. There are indeed many trends in this industry, as well as many attention-grabbing scenarios that can be rapidly amplified. If you are part of a team with strong execution and a good sense of rhythm, and you are willing to actively chase hotspots and trends, then I think you can try more application-layer directions. Such opportunities do exist. But the premise is, are you really suited to this rhythm? Adapting to this rhythm may mean that you need to continually chase various hotspots and try various related products or methods.

Another approach is to choose a direction that can be invested in for the long term, whether it is infrastructure, a specific type of niche application, or a technical gap at the Infra layer. As long as you confirm that there is a real, unmet demand in this direction, you can choose to focus on cultivating it. The challenge of this approach is that it requires a genuine belief in long-termism. Because the entire industry