Hyproliquid（Hype）令牌從Bitmex聯合創始人Arthur Hayes獲得了提升，後者將其作為“ David vs. Goliath”戰鬥的鬥爭構成了鬥爭

據稱，據稱對果凍代幣價格操縱導致短暫擠壓後，Hyplliquid的問題開始了。該活動導致潛在的損失接近1000萬美元

Hyperliquid’s HYPE token drew support from BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes, who framed the platform’s struggles as a “David vs. Goliath” battle.

Hyperliquid的Hype代幣獲得了Bitmex聯合創始人Arthur Hayes的支持，他將平台的鬥爭構成了“ David vs. Goliath”之戰。

Referencing potential Hyperliquid rivals, Hayes said on X (formerly Twitter): “Humans like to see an underdog, like in a David vs. Goliath story, and they humans like to support the underdog vs. a perceived unstoppable opponent. $HYPE for the win!”

海斯在X（以前稱為Twitter）上說，引用潛在的超流動競爭對手：“人類喜歡看到弱者，就像大衛對巨人的故事一樣，他們喜歡支持弱者與可感知的不可阻擋的對手。

The post sparked discussion among crypto traders, with one user commenting on the narrative of rooting for the underdog. In response, Hayes added, “Exactly! Like when a small-time hustler is taking on a large, well-known and funded entity, people will rally around the underdog.”

該帖子引發了加密交易者之間的討論，其中一位用戶評論了為弱者生根的敘述。作為回應，海耶斯補充說：“就像一個小型騙子正在接管一個大型，知名和資助的實體時，人們將在失敗者周圍集會。”

This observation ties into the recent controversy surrounding Hyperliquid, which began with a whale-led manipulation of the JELLY token, reportedly leading to a short squeeze and potential losses nearing $10 million for the exchange’s liquidity providers (LPs).

這一觀察與最近有關超流動的爭議息息相關，該爭議始於以鯨魚為主導的果凍代幣的操縱，據報導，該交易所的流動性提供者（LPS）造成了短暫的擠壓和接近1000萬美元的潛在損失。

However, despite the significant potential LP losses from the manipulated trades, Hyperliquid's liquidity pool (HLP) vault itself reportedly still secured an overall profit of $700K.

但是，儘管操縱交易造成了巨大的LP損失，但據報導，Hyplliquid的流動性池（HLP）保險庫本身仍然獲得了70萬美元的總利潤。

Moreover, Hyperliquid’s validator team voted to delist JELLY perpetual contracts and forcibly settle open positions at a predetermined price.

此外，Hyperliquid的驗證者團隊投票贊成Delist Jelly永久合同，並以預定的價格強行解決了開放職位。

While Hyperliquid has stated it intends to fully refund affected LPs (excluding the alleged manipulators), the decision to intervene and force-settle trades drew significant backlash online.

儘管Hyperliquid表示打算完全退款受影響的LP（不包括所謂的操縱者），但乾預和強制交易的決定在線上引起了強烈的反彈。

Critics accused the DEX team of unprofessionalism and centralization, with some drawing comparisons to the arbitrary actions seen during FTX’s collapse.

批評家指責DEX團隊非專業和集中化，並與FTX崩潰期間看到的任意行動進行了一些繪畫比較。

Echoing these concerns, Bitget CEO Gracy Chen argued that the move—closing a market and dictating a settlement price—set a “dangerous precedent” for decentralized platform interventions.

Bitget首席執行官Gracy Chen回應了這些擔憂，認為這一舉動是市場並決定定居價格的，為分散平台干預措施設定了“危險的先例”。

Adding complexity to the situation, on-chain analyst ZachXBT pointed to potential involvement of Binance-linked wallets in the manipulation scheme.

鍊鍊分析師ZachXBT增加了複雜性，指出了雙鏈接錢包在操縱方案中的潛在參與。

His findings publicly identified two specific wallet addresses as key players purportedly initiating the JELLY incident, which further sparked speculation about coordinated market manipulation involving larger entities or their associates.

他的發現公開確定了兩個特定的錢包地址是主要參與者啟動了果凍事件，這進一步引發了人們對涉及大型實體或其同事的協調市場操作的猜測。

This eventuality, and the potential implications for broader crypto market stability, are among the key discussion points as Hyperliquid navigates the complexities of decentralized exchange management.

這種情況以及對更廣泛的加密貨幣市場穩定的潛在影響是關鍵的討論點之一，因為超流動性導航了分散交易管理的複雜性。