Dialogue with Conflux Founder Long Fan: From Tsinghua Yao Class to Technical Commitment to High-Performance Public Chains

On May 15, Conflux held a conference on digital finance and ecological development. As the founder, Professor Long Fan made another appearance in the public eye. This Tsinghua "Yao Class" alumnus, MIT PhD, and professor at the University of Toronto has faded from public view in recent years, quietly leading his team to advance Conflux as the only compliant public chain in China through technological exploration and global expansion.

In the face of the RWA boom, the surge of Memecoins, and the accelerated development of stablecoins, the pace of blockchain is faster than ever. How does Conflux maintain its technical focus? As the only compliant Chinese public chain, what long-term thinking lies behind Conflux's compliant identity?

In this exclusive interview, Professor Long Fan systematically shared his choices of path for the first time, his independent judgment on industry trends, and his advice for young developers.

The original intention of entrepreneurship and the technological foundation of Conflux

Q: If you could describe Conflux in one sentence, how would you say it?

Answer: What Conflux is doing now is to insist on being a high-performance public chain based in Asia, aiming 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 persist in doing.

Question: What are the significant advantages of Conflux in terms of stablecoins and payments?

Answer: 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 and security.

Since the launch of the Conflux mainnet, it has maintained zero security incidents, reflecting the stability and credibility of its architecture. What we are doing is based on our unique market position, focusing on what we do best. Everyone has seen us actively promoting offshore RMB, stablecoins, and other directions; we are also focusing on the cooperation with China Telecom on the BSIM card. The BSIM card can be understood as the gateway to the blockchain world, and it is the key channel for us to connect with real-world application scenarios.

Compared to other public chains, as a public chain platform originating from China and currently the only compliant one in the country, we are able to do some unique things, which brings different advantages and changes to our on-chain ecosystem.

Compliance is not "fought for", but rather a combination of "long-term belief + path selection"

Q: Conflux has signed a strategic cooperation agreement with partners aimed at cross-border trade scenarios along the Belt and Road. Which landing scenarios do you think can be realized relatively quickly?

Answer: I think there are two aspects worth paying attention to.

First is the offshore RMB stablecoin. Our ecological partner AnchorX is already fully prepared in terms of compliance and other aspects. We are currently discussing how to release the offshore RMB stablecoin to allow more people to access and apply it in relevant scenarios. Soon, a compliant offshore RMB stablecoin will be running on our chain, and we will also launch a series of ecological solutions to help this project expand its influence. This will be one of the priority directions for our upcoming public chain development strategy.

Secondly, the BSIM card's entire technical development process, including collaboration with telecom operators and card suppliers, has basically concluded. We expect to launch the BSIM card in some overseas markets of China Telecom in the coming months, allowing users to truly use it. If the results meet expectations, we can anticipate more promotions and even collaborations with other operators. Dongxin He Ping, as one of the largest credit card manufacturers in the world, is also motivated to treat this as a pilot project and increase investment in this direction in the future.

Q: Conflux is one of the few public chain projects that currently has significant advantages in compliance. Do you think that such a path can send a positive signal to the entire industry?

Answer: We have always adhered to this approach, and the signal we convey is to tell everyone that compliance is possible and that it can be maintained.

We have become the only compliant public chain in China due to historical reasons. This is not something we fought for, but rather, in previous regulations and policies, most teams actively gave up on this matter. Many did so for short-term strategic considerations, such as the high costs of compliance and maintaining communication with regulators in China, leading them to relocate to Singapore, which is the choice of many teams. We insist on the path of compliant development, and the compliance costs we bear are very high, which also means that in many decisions, we must exercise more restraint.

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.

Most members of our core team graduated from Tsinghua University, and there are also some researchers who have studied abroad. We are all engaged in a highly technical and serious endeavor. We wonder, why must we go into exile overseas? It is possible to persist in pursuing a path of normal development. We firmly believe that in terms of 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, during the communication process, we also found that regulation is not completely uncommunicable. Everyone has their own starting point, and regulatory agencies have their own positions and considerations. But as long as both parties are willing to communicate, the logic and reasons on both sides can gradually be clarified, ultimately finding a solution that is mutually understood and can be further advanced.

Q: Conflux has also been actively expanding in Hong Kong recently. In this process, what role do you think Hong Kong plays?

Answer: First of all, Hong Kong can now be understood as a "special zone" for blockchain. When China faces a brand new thing that presents both opportunities and significant risks, it often chooses to first establish a special zone for pilot programs. Blockchain is a typical example of this, and Hong Kong happens to take on this role. Due to some financial risks brought about by blockchain, such as capital flow and cross-border regulation issues, it might be less pressured for the country to pilot in Hong Kong, a place that is already capital open. This is the current positioning of Hong Kong. You can consider that for quite some time, various applications can be legal in Hong Kong without worrying about various policy risks. This environment has directly led to a clear result: compared to the mainland, the compliance costs in Hong Kong are much lower.

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 case, where "people are" and where "the project is registered" are often two separate matters. You will see that many projects recently choose to register in Hong Kong regardless of where their team members are located. The reason is simple: once it becomes a "Hong Kong project", it is much easier to promote compliance and less likely to encounter unnecessary troubles. From this perspective, Hong Kong is in a natural policy dividend period, which is a very important opportunity window.

Of course, I have been chatting with industry people recently, and there is a certain sense of urgency in Hong Kong now, which mainly comes from the United States and other overseas regions. Other places are moving quickly on blockchain matters. Although Hong Kong's policies have been relatively open, the local context is also reflecting: Is the current policy still too conservative? If we continue to maintain the current pace, we may still miss some key opportunities in the future. This might also be a direction for Hong Kong to further adjust and accelerate its policies in the future.

RWA is evolution, Memecoin is humanity: the dual survival laws of the blockchain world.

Question: What is your opinion on the recently highly关注的 RWA sector and the market frenzy caused by Memecoin earlier? Will Conflux choose to actively chase certain market trends, or will it stick to its established technology and strategic path?

Answer: First of all, I have always believed that RWA is not a bubble, and stablecoins are not a bubble either. They essentially represent the entire industry's ongoing search for new narratives to optimize their development path as they break through regulatory barriers and existing framework limitations. This endeavor itself is meaningful and represents an important step forward in humanity's better utilization of blockchain technology.

In the past, we talked about "stablecoins"; now we talk more about "RWA", but essentially it's the same thing, just that the concepts are continuously expanding and the narratives are evolving. It can be understood as people within the industry continually 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 varies with time and social context, as the saying goes, "at one time, at another time." Take stablecoins for example; initially, no one had a positive view of stablecoins, thinking they were merely an alternative for traders unable to cash out, but now, no one says that anymore. When you see that stablecoins are already among the top ten buyers of U.S. Treasury bonds, it indicates that their use cases and influence have far surpassed cryptocurrency trading itself. The primary application of stablecoins now is not speculation, but rather in payment, remittances, especially in areas like cross-border trade. Of course, the exchange scenario still exists, but it is no longer mainstream. Things are constantly evolving, and RWA is no exception.

At first, everyone viewed stablecoins as "tools for speculation," which many Chinese people consider speculative, improper, and even a bubble. But now we see that through RWA, some real assets can be digitally packaged, thus 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; now it’s just a matter of changing the name and narrative to promote it.

Ultimately, this is the entire blockchain industry changing its perspective to convey the same core message to the outside world: 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.

As for Memecoin, I think it is an ancient human need. It's actually quite simple; the urge to gamble is an ancient human need. If gambling is always a bubble, then Las Vegas casinos should have closed down long ago.

Memecoins are essentially a manifestation of this demand, a form of "gambling in the crypto era." Just like gambling, memecoins have their dealers, and even the President of the United States can be the dealer at this table. In Las Vegas casinos, there are also dealers, and the casino itself is a dealer. So if you ask whether this thing is a "bubble," I think the answer to that question depends on your attitude towards "gambling."

If you believe that the demand for gambling should not exist, you may see 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 poker table.

At the Memecoin poker table, people bet, chase prices, 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 just playing a round in this "casino," and that’s all there is to it.

Q: The Conflux team has consistently adhered to the "Asian high-performance public chain" technological route. From 2018 until now, they have remained true to their original intention. If we extend the timeframe to five years or even a bit longer, do you hope that what Conflux is doing will still be the same as it is now?

Answer: I believe we will continue to persist in this direction. Of course, if I have any hopes, it is definitely that the things we are committed to have made significant progress, even if our methods and approaches are different from those of many teams.

Many teams do the following: once there is a heat