The pattern is getting old: policy swings, platform interruptions, and you're always waiting for someone's permission to protect your own capital. Self-custody shouldn't be a luxury—it's table stakes. Transparent liquidation mechanics and markets that don't just vanish when volatility spikes? These need to be non-negotiable.
There's movement happening though. Some teams are actually building the infrastructure traders are asking for instead of just talking about it. Real-time funding rate comparisons against spot prices, for instance. The kind of tools that let you see actual carry opportunities without the guesswork. Even in early phases, you can see where this heads: platforms that prioritize uptime and clarity over extracting every cent from user uncertainty.
The infrastructure game is shifting. Traders are voting with their capital, and the projects that keep shipping functionality—not just promises—are the ones gaining traction.
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.
16 Likes
Reward
16
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ImpermanentPhilosopher
· 5h ago
Honestly, self-custody should have been standard long ago. Now we still have to negotiate with platforms to protect our coins. It's really quite ironic.
View OriginalReply0
DegenWhisperer
· 01-13 12:57
Wait, does self-custody still require approval from others? This should have been settled long ago, really. Those platforms that suddenly "maintain" are the most annoying.
That said, there are indeed people seriously working on infrastructure, not just talking big. Real-time funding rate tools that benchmark spot markets should have existed long ago.
Voting with your feet—projects with products naturally attract users. This wave is indeed different.
View OriginalReply0
Gm_Gn_Merchant
· 01-13 12:51
Ha, finally someone pointed out this flaw. Self-custody should have been standard all along. Now it's being sold as a luxury? That's hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
MevHunter
· 01-13 12:51
After all these years of saying that self-custody is the future, most people are still getting chopped up in centralized exchanges. Isn't that ironic?
View OriginalReply0
PumpingCroissant
· 01-13 12:37
Honestly, these platforms really need to wake up now. Self-custody has become a luxury? That's outrageous.
The pattern is getting old: policy swings, platform interruptions, and you're always waiting for someone's permission to protect your own capital. Self-custody shouldn't be a luxury—it's table stakes. Transparent liquidation mechanics and markets that don't just vanish when volatility spikes? These need to be non-negotiable.
There's movement happening though. Some teams are actually building the infrastructure traders are asking for instead of just talking about it. Real-time funding rate comparisons against spot prices, for instance. The kind of tools that let you see actual carry opportunities without the guesswork. Even in early phases, you can see where this heads: platforms that prioritize uptime and clarity over extracting every cent from user uncertainty.
The infrastructure game is shifting. Traders are voting with their capital, and the projects that keep shipping functionality—not just promises—are the ones gaining traction.