Arbitrum freezes hacker 71 million ETH: Justice in action, or a decentralized "betrayal"?

The Arbitrum Security Council, with 12 members, held a meeting, 9 signed off, and directly changed the on-chain state.

The official statement is that this is a mechanism "to respond to catastrophic emergencies." But both sides are arguing fiercely.

Supporters 👆 believe this is "justice in action"—the 71 million is locked, and hackers can't wash it. Netizens say, "In the past, hackers were hunters; now the system is starting to fight back."

Opponents 👇 ask only one question: if they can freeze hackers today, can they freeze you tomorrow? No voting, no public disclosure, no need for your consent. This is not blockchain; it’s a database controlled by 12 people.

In the short term, it’s a positive—demonstrating enforcement, providing users with a sense of security, and making institutions more willing to come in. Large holders prefer assets that are "recoverable."

But in the long term, this is a heavy blow to the decentralization narrative. The so-called narrative of "immutability, permissionless, and third-party control-free" decentralization is being repeatedly slapped in the face by reality.