Ondo, as the largest RWA project, released its own L1 hybrid blockchain today. It is called a hybrid blockchain because its nodes are fully centralized, but assets can be interconnected across chains. Ondo's nodes adopt an invitation based model, which means they are completely closed and must be their own people. Ondo itself supports multiple chains and has the ability to communicate with other public and private chains. In fact, when you read the Ondo chain document, you will find that the explanation of why you choose to issue such a chain is almost the same as my interpretation of the treasury bond token scheme issued by the US Treasury Department last year. The reason is https:// (x.com)/jason_chen998/status/1855782343480594770 So Ondo's start was expected, and he had previously discussed and reached a consensus on this trend with the leader of the third board, @ thecryptoskanda. However, if we really want to interpret this matter, it may be a pessimistic trend for everyone who generally believes that RWA, the last high ground of Ethereum, is a pessimistic trend. Ethereum is the most secure chain besides Bitcoin, built by tens of thousands of nodes that do not require admission permission. This is an undeniable fact, so "security" is the foundation of Ethereum's existence. Because of security, it is widely believed that RWA will be the main battlefield of Ethereum, as the public chain that carries assets must be sufficiently secure. But here comes a cognitive bias, the safety we understand and the safety understood by institutions are two different things. When I worked at a certain toB company before, when we faced large institutions such as banks, state-owned enterprises, and governments, no matter how much we emphasized the security of public clouds, they would always require us to deploy private clouds or even local data centers when the budget was sufficient, because in their eyes, the understanding of security was whether I could control this thing. So what we understand as security is technical security, and what they understand as security is management security. Today on Space, I also mentioned to @ sujiuyan that the current dominance and authoritarianism of right-wing forces in the United States have made support and suppression of various factions very obvious. Simply put, it means that those who are not of our ethnicity will have different hearts. Because institutions with the ability to issue RWA assets are inevitably very large in scale, such as BlackRock, Citigroup, etc. When considering issuing their assets on the chain, in addition to performance, (technical) security, and other indicators, they will definitely consider (management) security in a very important position. After all, even USDT has a blacklist, how can I issue assets on a "public chain" that I cannot control? This is too unsafe! So the consensus that has been reached before this is that the possibility of the Ethereum mainnet being used to undertake RWA assets of large institutions is relatively low. If the Ethereum ecosystem must be chosen, there is a relatively high probability that the institution will issue a controllable L2, borrow Ethereum technology security, and obtain management security. But as the CEO of a multi billion dollar institution, when you hear that sending an L2 requires almost permanent transfer of 2% -5% of transaction fees to Ethereum, would you also consider sending an L1 that you completely control? Yes, this is Ondo's answer, and also the answer of the US Treasury Department.