Hyproliquid（Hype）令牌从Bitmex联合创始人Arthur Hayes获得了提升，后者将其作为“ David vs. Goliath”战斗的斗争构成了斗争

据称，据称对果冻代币价格操纵导致短暂挤压后，Hyplliquid的问题开始了。该活动导致潜在的损失接近1000万美元

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代币获得了Bitmex联合创始人Arthur Hayes的支持，他将平台的斗争构成了“ David vs. Goliath”之战。

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（以前称为Twitter）上说，引用潜在的超流动竞争对手：“人类喜欢看到弱者，就像大卫对巨人的故事一样，他们喜欢支持弱者与可感知的不可阻挡的对手。

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.”

该帖子引发了加密交易者之间的讨论，其中一位用户评论了为弱者生根的叙述。作为回应，海耶斯补充说：“就像一个小型骗子正在接管一个大型，知名和资助的实体时，人们将在失败者周围集会。”

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).

这一观察与最近有关超流动的争议息息相关，该争议始于以鲸鱼为主导的果冻代币的操纵，据报道，该交易所的流动性提供者（LPS）造成了短暂的挤压和接近1000万美元的潜在损失。

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，尽管操纵交易造成了巨大的LP损失，但据报道，Hyplliquid的流动性池（HLP）保险库本身仍然获得了70万美元的总利润。

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

此外，Hyperliquid的验证者团队投票赞成Delist Jelly永久合同，并以预定的价格强行解决了开放职位。

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.

尽管Hyperliquid表示打算完全退款受影响的LP（不包括所谓的操纵者），但干预和强制交易的决定在线上引起了强烈的反弹。

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

批评家指责DEX团队非专业和集中化，并与FTX崩溃期间看到的任意行动进行了一些绘画比较。

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首席执行官Gracy Chen回应了这些担忧，认为这一举动是市场并决定定居价格的，为分散平台干预措施设定了“危险的先例”。

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

链链分析师ZachXBT增加了复杂性，指出了双链接钱包在操纵方案中的潜在参与。

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.

他的发现公开确定了两个特定的钱包地址是主要参与者启动了果冻事件，这进一步引发了人们对涉及大型实体或其同事的协调市场操作的猜测。

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.

这种情况以及对更广泛的加密货币市场稳定的潜在影响是关键的讨论点之一，因为超流动性导航了分散交易管理的复杂性。