2026-01-07 05:28:17

In the process of cracking down on Infinex arbitrageurs, I realized an awkward reality — those genuine small retail investors are actually being dragged into it, and their interests are harmed. This situation is indeed unfair. Looking back, sometimes I think, rather than wasting effort to block these arbitrage loopholes, it might be better to let those bots win. This actually reflects an old problem: how to find the balance between strict anti-cheating measures and protecting genuine users? It doesn't seem that easy.

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.

12 Likes

Reward
12
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

Layer2Observer

· 01-07 09:45

This is a typical case of "attacking violations and harming your own people." From the source code analysis, the threshold settings of the anti-cheat mechanism are prone to false positives. It needs to be clarified that the real issue is not whether to crack down on arbitrage, but whether this set of rules is sufficiently precise. Data speaks for itself; most anti-chain gaming platforms' risk control systems have caused excessive damage.

View OriginalReply0

HalfPositionRunner

· 01-07 05:57

Hey, honestly, it's really heartbreaking that small retail investors are being mistakenly hurt... Fighting arbitrage should hurt the innocent? That logic is a bit flawed. Instead of wasting effort plugging loopholes, why not just open it up? Anyway, if robots win, we can't learn from them. Balancing this issue is indeed difficult, but doing it this way both offends retail investors and fails to stop the robots... No, why are small retail investors becoming cannon fodder? Is this reasonable? When anti-cheating measures are too strict, they end up hurting our side. This tactic is really pointless. Really, sometimes I feel it's better to just let it go, to avoid doing more harm than good.

View OriginalReply0

BoredApeResistance

· 01-07 05:50

It's really unbelievable that small retail investors get caught in the crossfire. They initially wanted to crack down on arbitrageurs but ended up harming genuine users.

View OriginalReply0

failed_dev_successful_ape

· 01-07 05:48

Damn, small retail investors are the ones getting hit again. I've seen this trick way too many times.

View OriginalReply0

ZKProofEnthusiast

· 01-07 05:35

Oh no, this is awkward. Did anti-cheating measures end up trapping retail investors? This is a classic dilemma.

View OriginalReply0