My identity as a scientist is my foundation: A conversation with Long Fan, the founder of Conflux - from Tsinghua Yao Class to the technical commitment of the high-performance public chain Conflux.

In this exclusive interview, Professor Long Fan systematically shared for the first time his path choices, independent judgments on industry trends, and advice for young developers. Article Author: Lesley, MetaEra On May 15th, at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre, the "Strengthening the World · Tidal Waves in Hong Kong" #Conflux 数字金融与生态发展大会上，Conflux Network 创始人龙凡教授，再次出现在公众视野。这位清华「姚班」校友、MIT 博士、现任多伦多大学教授，过去几年几乎淡出公众视野，不曾接受媒体专访，默默地带领团队推进 Conflux 作为中国唯一 # compliance #public chain technology exploration and global expansion. In the face of the explosive growth of #RWA 热潮、# Memecoin and the accelerated development of stablecoins, the pace of the blockchain era is faster than ever. How does Conflux maintain its technical focus in this environment? As the only compliant Chinese public chain, what long-term thinking underlies Conflux's compliant identity? In this interview, Professor Long Fan systematically shared for the first time his path choices, independent judgments on industry trends, and advice for young developers.

The original intention of entrepreneurship and the technological foundation of Conflux MetaEra: Please briefly introduce yourself. You are a PhD from MIT, an alumnus of Tsinghua University's Yao Class, the founder of Conflux, and you hold many other identities. If you were to introduce yourself, which identity would you like people to remember first? Why?

Professor Long Fan: I am a researcher in computer science, which means I study computer science. You can think of it as the "scientist" that everyone often talks about; this might be the simplest identity that encompasses everything I do. Whether I am the founder of Conflux, or I studied at MIT before and now teach at the University of Toronto, all of these are part of this identity, or rather, part of the experience that has shaped this identity.

MetaEra: If you could only introduce Conflux in one sentence, how would you say it? Is there a sentence that would make it easy for ordinary users to remember what Conflux is doing right now?

Professor Longfan: I believe that what Conflux is currently doing is to persist in developing a high-performance public chain based in China or Asia, aspiring to become an important infrastructure in the Web 3.0 era. This is what we have always been doing, and it is also what we will continue to do.

MetaEra: Is this definition something we started to define 18 years ago? Or is it the result of our team gradually exploring over the past seven or eight years?

Professor Longfan: Our team has been thinking this way since 2018. In trendy terms, it's called "staying true to our original intention," and we have been insisting on doing this.

MetaEra: Currently, Conflux's Twitter bio defines the project in relation to "stablecoins" and "payments." Compared to Ethereum, Solana, and other public chains, what significant advantages does Conflux have in the areas of stablecoins and payments?

Professor Long Fan: I believe the biggest advantage of Conflux technology is that our overall technical architecture achieves high-performance TPS without sacrificing decentralization and security. Our network can support 3000-6000 TPS, and the confirmation time is also very fast. All of this is achieved without sacrificing the number of nodes or compromising security.

This is a significant technical advantage for us, and it has been validated over a long period. For example, since the launch of the Conflux mainnet, we have maintained zero security incidents, reflecting the stability and credibility of our architecture. What we are doing is based on our unique market or industry position, focusing on what we are better at doing, or rather, what we should be doing. Everyone has seen our active promotion of offshore RMB, stablecoins, and other directions, and we are also focusing on the partnership with China Telecom on the BSIM card. You can understand the BSIM card as an entry point into the blockchain world; it is a key channel connecting us to real-world application scenarios.

In fact, all of this explains what we can do as a blockchain platform originating from China and currently the only compliant public chain in the country, compared to other public chains, as well as our unique advantages in this position. This indeed brings different advantages and changes to our on-chain ecosystem, which is why we focus on these matters. Compliance is not something that is "earned," but rather a "long-term belief + path selection." MetaEra: Recently, Conflux signed a strategic cooperation agreement with partners for cross-border trade scenarios related to the Belt and Road Initiative. I'm now quite interested to know, among the many implementation scenarios mentioned at the meeting, which ones do you think can be implemented relatively quickly?

Professor Long Fan: I believe there are two aspects worth focusing on. In fact, the content released at the conference consists of projects that will have clear progress in the coming month or several months, with a predictable implementation path.

For example, the offshore RMB stablecoin that is currently being promoted, our ecosystem partner AnchorX is already fully prepared in terms of compliance and other aspects. The main aspect still under negotiation is: in what way to release the offshore RMB stablecoin in a better manner, allowing more people to access it and applying it to these scenarios. So soon there will be a compliant offshore RMB stablecoin operating on our chain, and we will also launch a series of ecological solutions to help this project expand its influence. This will be a priority direction for our public chain development strategy.

The second is the BSIM card, and the entire R&D process of this technology - not only the software development but also the overall coordination with telecom operators and card suppliers. In fact, for a long time, some matters were not entirely within our control. However, we are pleased to say that the R&D and coordination work for these technologies has basically concluded recently. We expect to launch one or more BSIM cards in some overseas markets of China Telecom in the coming months, allowing users to truly use BSIM cards. If the results meet expectations, we can anticipate more promotions and even potential collaborations with other operators for promotion.

MetaEra: In fact, Conflux is currently one of the few public chain projects with significant advantages in compliance. Not only is it actively promoting its implementation in mainland China, but it has also achieved good development results in Hong Kong and even in international markets. This identity and positioning are quite unique. Do you think this path can convey a positive signal to the entire industry—that Chinese blockchain projects can potentially develop a path that combines both internationalization and localization within a compliance framework?

Professor Long Fan: What we have always insisted on is such a route, and the signal conveyed is telling everyone that compliance is possible and that we can persist in this way.

Now we have become the only compliant public chain in China, which actually has its historical causes. This is not something we have fought for, but rather that, during a previous wave of regulation and policies, most teams proactively gave up on this matter. Many did so out of short-term strategic considerations, such as the high communication costs with regulators when trying to be compliant in China, leading them to migrate to Singapore, which was the choice for many teams. Precisely because we adhere to the path of compliant development, the compliance costs we bear are actually very high. This also means that in many decisions, we must be more restrained. For example, we cannot issue new tokens at will.

Another aspect is that many people were previously unwilling to try this because it was generally believed to be impossible or unnecessary to attempt. However, we have always believed that this is achievable and are willing to put in the effort, even if it means sacrificing some short-term benefits in the process. We firmly believe that, in the long run, this endeavor holds great value.

At the same time, our thinking is more natural. Most of the members of our core team graduated from Tsinghua University, and there are also some researchers who have studied abroad. You're doing a very technical, serious thing. We wonder, why do we have to go into exile? It is possible to persist in a path of normal development. We have always believed that when it comes to compliance, it is not completely impossible to communicate with regulators. We are willing to try to communicate and explore what can be done. In fact, in the process of communication, we also found that regulation is not completely uncommunicable. Everyone has their own starting point, and regulators have their positions and considerations. However, as long as each other is willing to communicate, it is possible for the logic and reasons of both parties to be clarified gradually, and finally find a solution that understands each other and can continue to move forward.

MetaEra: Actually, Conflux has been actively laying out in Hong Kong recently. In this process, what role do you think Hong Kong plays? For example, will the policies be more supportive? Will the environment be a bit more relaxed?

Prof. Fan Long: First of all, Hong Kong can now be understood as a "special zone" of blockchain. We can understand it this way: when China is faced with something completely new that has both opportunities and huge risks, it often chooses to set up a special zone to pilot first. Blockchain is a prime example of this, and Hong Kong happens to take on this role. Because of blockchain, it brings some financial risks, such as capital flows, cross-border supervision and other issues. For the country, it may be that in Hong Kong, a place where capital is already open, there will be no pressure to pilot it, and this is the current positioning of Hong Kong. You can think that for quite some time, in Hong Kong, all kinds of applications can be legal, and you don't have to worry about various policy risks. As a direct result of this environment, the cost of compliance in Hong Kong is much lower than in the mainland.

In fact, we are looking at this matter from the characteristics of the industry. The industry is currently in a window period. Not just in China, but the vast majority of blockchain projects globally are operating in a distributed manner. In this context, "where the people are" and "where the project is registered" are often two separate matters. You will see that many projects recently, regardless of where the team members are located, choose to register their projects in Hong Kong. The reason is simple: once labeled as a "Hong Kong project," it becomes much easier to promote compliance and less likely to encounter unnecessary troubles. From this perspective, Hong Kong is in a naturally favorable policy period, which is a very important opportunity window.

Of course, recently I've been chatting with people in the industry, and there is now a certain sense of urgency in Hong Kong, mainly driven by the United States and other overseas regions. Other places are making rapid strides in blockchain. Although Hong Kong's policies are relatively open, there is also reflection locally: Is the current policy still too conservative? If the current pace continues, there may still be some key opportunities missed in the future. This may also be a direction where Hong Kong needs to further adjust and accelerate its policies in the future. RWA is evolution, Memecoin is humanity: the dual survival laws of the blockchain world. MetaEra: We noticed that you haven't given an interview for a while. Therefore, we especially hope to take this opportunity to hear you talk about the changes the entire industry has gone through in the past few years. For example, how do you view the recently highly-discussed RWA sector and the market frenzy caused by Memecoins earlier? How do you and the Conflux team determine whether a sector is a "trend" or a "bubble"? Additionally, in the face of constantly shifting hotspots, will Conflux choose to actively chase certain market trends, or will it stick to its established technology and strategic path?

Professor Long Fan: First of all, I have always viewed it this way: RWA is not a bubble, and stablecoins are not a bubble either. They essentially represent the entire industry in the process of breaking through regulatory barriers and existing framework limitations, continuously seeking new narratives to optimize their development paths. This matter itself is meaningful and represents an important step forward for humanity in better utilizing blockchain technology.

In the past, we talked about "stablecoins"; now we talk more about "RWA". But essentially, it's the same thing, just the concepts are constantly expanding and the narratives are evolving. It can be understood that people within the industry are continuously correcting and upgrading the narrative, reinterpreting how blockchain should be applied in a way that is easier for the outside world to understand and accept. Therefore, I believe this is a good thing, not a bubble.

In fact, the acceptance of these concepts by the outside world changes with time and social context, as the saying goes, "at one time, at another time." Take stablecoins for example; in the beginning, no one believed in stablecoins, thinking they were just an alternative for traders who couldn't cash out, but now, no one says that anymore. When you find that stablecoins are among the top ten buyers of U.S. Treasury bonds, it indicates that their use cases and influence have far exceeded cryptocurrency trading itself. The main application scenarios for stablecoins have shifted from speculation to payments, transfers, especially in areas like cross-border trade. Of course, exchange scenarios still exist, but they are no longer mainstream. Things are constantly evolving, and RWA is no exception.

At first, everyone's impression of stablecoins was that they were "tools for speculation," which many Chinese people viewed as speculative, improper, and even a bubble. But now we see that through RWA, some real assets can be digitally packaged, providing a new source of liquidity for assets lacking liquidity in the real economy. At this moment, people suddenly realize: RWA can serve the real economy and has real value. But in essence, this could have been done before; it’s just that the name has changed and the narrative has shifted to promote it.

Ultimately, this represents a shift in perspective for the entire blockchain industry, conveying the same core message to the outside: blockchain technology is valuable and has real application space. Therefore, I believe that RWA is by no means a bubble; it is merely an upgrade in the narrative of our industry, a way to engage in dialogue with the times.

MetaEra: So you think Memecoin is a bubble.

Professor Longfan: I believe Memecoin is an ancient human need. It's actually quite simple; the gambling instinct is an ancient demand of humanity. If gambling is necessarily a bubble, then Las Vegas casinos should have closed down a long time ago.

When it comes to Memecoin, my view is that humans inherently have a primal need to "take a gamble," and Memecoin is essentially a manifestation of this need, a form of "gambling in the crypto era."

Memecoin, like gambling, has a banker, and even the president of the United States can be the banker at this table. There are also bookmakers in casinos in Las Vegas, and the casinos themselves are bookmakers. So if you want to ask if this kind of thing is a "bubble", I think the answer to this question depends on your attitude towards "betting".

If you believe that the demand for gambling shouldn't exist, you might view it as a bubble; but if you acknowledge that there is a yearning for risk, excitement, and uncertainty in human nature, then it is merely another form of expression, another table to play at.

At the Memecoin table, people bet, chase price increases, and sell off, which ultimately is just participating in a game. Once we see through the essence of this mechanism, there is no need to overly criticize or attack it. After all, everyone is simply playing a round in this "casino," and that's all there is to it.

MetaEra: The Conflux team has consistently adhered to the technological path of "Asian high-performance public chains" since 2018, remaining true to their original intention. If we extend the timeline to five years or even a bit longer, do you hope that Conflux will still be doing the same things as now?

Professor Longfan: I believe we will continue to persist in this direction. Of course, if I have any hopes, it would be that the things we are committed to have made significant progress, even if the things we do and the methods we use are different from those of many other teams.

Many teams operate by quickly launching a new project within two weeks once a hot topic emerges, closely following market trends. However, our team is strategically more restrained and stable. The initiatives we promote are often slower-paced, partly because the direction itself requires time to mature, and partly because it indeed takes our long-term efforts to push forward. Yet, we firmly believe that opportunities in this direction exist. Especially against the backdrop of ongoing changes in the international situation, the direction we adhere to is gradually revealing its value and significance. This value may not be immediately apparent in the short term, but in the long run, it is solid and clear.

So if I were to talk about my expectations for the future, it would be: in four or five years, what we are doing will definitely achieve greater progress than now. I am willing to believe that this continuous investment will eventually bring rewards.

MetaEra: In fact, we still see many developers continuously entering Web 3.0. So if there are new developers wanting to enter the industry now, would you advise them to focus on underlying infrastructure, application layer, or some other direction?

Professor Longfan: I think this actually depends on the individual situation of the developers or possibly the team.

In fact, now in China's blockchain industry, there are two main styles of doing things. The first is to be good at seizing short-term opportunities, iterating quickly, and making quick trial and error. There are indeed many outlets in this industry, and there are also many attention scenarios that can be quickly amplified. If you are the kind of team with a strong sense of execution and rhythm, and are willing to actively chase hot spots and trends, then I think you can try more application-oriented directions. Such opportunities do exist. But the premise is, are you really comfortable with this rhythm? Adapting to this rhythm can mean that you're constantly chasing hot spots and trying out all kinds of related products or playstyles.

Another approach is to choose a direction that can be invested in for a long time, whether it is infrastructure, a certain type of subdivided application, or a technology gap in the Infra layer. As long as you confirm that there is a real, unmet need in this direction, you can choose to focus on it. The challenge with this approach is that it requires a truly long-term faith. Because the entire industry is full of short-term temptations and disruptions, the flow of capital, users and resources is highly volatile. It's not easy to persevere in such an environment. But on the other hand, the advantage of this path is that there are not many people who are really willing to do long-term things, so the "real competition" is not so fierce. The biggest challenge may not be others, but yourself - whether you can continue to invest and withstand the cycle, and whether you have enough faith and stamina to really precipitate resources.

Therefore, I believe that each team ultimately has to return to its own endowments and rhythm, and find the path that suits them best.

MetaEra: At this conference, we also saw many projects being built on the Conflux ecosystem. I would like to ask, does Conflux still have relevant resources or platforms to support young developers in their continuous growth and exploration? Will there be some incentive mechanisms in the future to help more developers join the ecosystem and participate deeply in its construction?

Professor Longfan: Our ecosystem has always had various ways to incentivize developers, and we are continuously adjusting and optimizing these incentive methods. In fact, we have tried many different paths and models. Our goal is to find projects that are willing to establish long-term cooperative relationships with us, rather than just short-term collaborations.

In fact, there are many "migrant" developers in this industry — they often move between different public chains following short-term incentives. However, for Conflux, we focus more on long-term development, so these types of developers have relatively limited help for the sustainable construction of the ecosystem. From our perspective, we prefer to support teams that are truly willing to settle down, invest, and have a clear long-term plan. We hope to establish solid cooperation with them and promote the joint growth of the ecosystem together.

As for another situation, for example, some developers may have already created similar products on other ecosystems and think they can just "Copy & Paste" the code over to deploy it, and then apply for a Grant, hoping to receive funding of twenty to thirty thousand or even fifty thousand dollars. Our support for this model will be relatively limited.