2025-12-27 09:05:03

Strategy Executive Chairman recently shared an interesting perspective in an interview: instead of spending effort optimizing inefficient processes that should be phased out by the times, it's better to use AI to completely break the outdated framework of traditional finance.

His logic is straightforward—AI's true power doesn't lie in making bad systems run faster, but in giving you the opportunity to design unprecedented financial products from scratch. In other words, rather than patching up outdated things with AI, it's better to innovate completely.

This viewpoint is particularly thought-provoking in the current context. In the 2025 fintech wave, many institutions are indeed caught in a cycle of "using new tools to optimize old processes." But the real opportunity might lie in those who dare to overthrow and rebuild. What do you think?

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

BlockchainArchaeologist

· 19h ago

Basically, everyone is using AI to fix and improve things, but the true winners have already been drawing new maps. The traditional financial framework should have been thrown into the trash heap long ago.

View OriginalReply0

PumpDoctrine

· 19h ago

Disruptive innovation sounds great, but how many institutions are really willing to go all in? --- Sounds good, but I'm afraid it's just another PPT revolution; the money is still being spent on patching the system. --- I agree, but only if you live long enough to see the new framework succeed. Who will bear that risk? --- The problem is that traditional finance folks simply lack the guts to start over; the利益链 is too deep. --- This idea is similar to the promises of internet finance back in the day. In the end? It was just absorbed into the system. --- There's nothing wrong with the reasoning, but execution often devolves into "AI optimizing old processes," with too many gaps in between. --- Real opportunities are found in wild growth areas, not in those big institutions that speak so eloquently. --- Another disruptive narrative, but the market's actual performance tends to be more conservative... --- Looking at it from a different angle, the inefficiency of traditional finance is actually a dividend for some people. Why should it be reformed?

View OriginalReply0

ChainDetective

· 19h ago

That's right, but in reality, most institutions don't have the guts to start over. Who bears the risk and cost? --- Breaking the framework is easy, but the key is who will pay for the failures... That's the most realistic issue. --- Damn, that's what I've been saying all along. Why cling to outdated stuff? Starting from zero is much more comfortable. --- Sounds great, but how about in actual operation? How to pass the regulatory hurdles? --- True, but I haven't seen many truly successful new financial products on the chain. Still idealism. --- Designing unprecedented financial products from scratch sounds like dreaming... Who has the courage for that? --- The problem is, optimizing old processes at least makes money, but if you innovate and fail, you'll lose everything. --- I've heard this too many times in the Web3 circle. In the end, it all depends on who has stronger execution.

View OriginalReply0

MysteryBoxAddict

· 19h ago

Good words, but how many can truly overturn and start anew? In the end, it's still capital that manipulates to continue patching and repairing. --- Innovation sounds exciting, but who will bear the risks? Traditional financial giants are not fools. --- Emm, this sounds a bit like telling a story to your own fundraising; the actual implementation is another matter. --- Wait, if overturning and starting over costs so much, why are the entrepreneurial projects that dare to tinker the ones being eliminated? --- Is it true? I think most current Web3 projects are also just rebranding old wine in new bottles. Is there any essential difference? --- As long as real money is involved, everyone will compromise. This is purely an ideal scenario. --- Anyone can talk about breaking the framework, but the question is how many can survive after breaking it. --- It feels like they are hinting at some big move, but not saying it directly. --- The essence of finance is credit and risk control. Without solving these two, all innovation is pointless.

View OriginalReply0