<div id="readability-page-1" class="page"><div><div>Compiled by:Wu Shuo BlockchainAt the 2026 Davos Forum's &#34;New Era for Finance&#34; roundtable, representative figures from the financial sector across various regions discussed how technological innovation is reshaping global finance, particularly the application of cryptocurrencies, blockchain, and artificial intelligence in payments and financial transactions. This article is a portion of the speech by Binance founder CZ.CZ believes that although the payments sector still faces challenges, it will see greater growth in the future as traditional payment methods merge with cryptocurrencies. He also expressed concerns about the risks of Bitcoin payments, Memecoin, and traditional banks, believing these areas are highly speculative and uncertain. Regarding the need for a unified global regulatory framework, CZ believes that due to differences in national regulations, a global regulatory framework is difficult to implement. He suggested a &#34;regulatory passport&#34; approach, where licenses obtained in one country are recognized in other countries, which is more feasible than creating a global regulatory body. Cryptocurrency, Blockchain, and Artificial Intelligence: Reshaping Financial Payments and Future InnovationCryptocurrency, Blockchain, and Artificial Intelligence: Reshaping Financial Payments and Future InnovationKristin: People talk about how AI has accelerated many scientific breakthroughs, such as creating water from the air and helping plants adapt to global warming. These advancements are exciting, but macroeconomic and geopolitical issues are more worrying. Today's discussion will focus on how technology is reshaping global finance, especially payments, currency, and financial transaction infrastructure, and which innovations will have the most impact on the future.CZ: I focus on cryptocurrency, blockchain, and Web 3 technologies. These technologies are undoubtedly disruptive, and the past 15 years have proven that they won't disappear. Binance is the world's largest cryptocurrency exchange, with over 300 million users and trading volume exceeding that of the Shanghai and New York Stock Exchanges.Currently, the two sectors that have proven effective in the crypto space are exchanges and stablecoins. I am very excited about tokenization, as it can help governments achieve fiscal benefits and develop related industries. I am currently discussing the possibility of asset tokenization with several countries. Payments are an area we have tried but haven't fully solved yet. Although we have tried, cryptocurrency payments are not yet widely adopted. Now we are seeing traditional payment methods begin to merge with cryptocurrencies, where when consumers pay with cards, the funds are deducted through a cryptocurrency account, and merchants receive US dollars or euros. Once this bridge is built, the payment sector will see tremendous growth. The native currency of artificial intelligence will be cryptocurrency; in the future, AI will use cryptocurrency as a means of payment, rather than relying solely on bank cards or credit cards. Bitcoin Payments, Memecoin, and Traditional Banks: Risks and Challenges of Future Innovation Kristin: AI has generated a lot of excitement, but MIT research shows that while AI creation is fast, its performance is often mediocre. Bitcoin's experiments in El Salvador have received a lot of publicity, but adoption remains low. The technologies we're excited about today may be obsolete in ten years. CZ, what areas do you think we should be concerned about, or what areas we shouldn't invest in? CZ: I'm going to give some direct answers that might offend many people, including those in my own industry. I agree with Steven's views on Bitcoin payments. If you had asked me this question 10 years ago, I might have said Bitcoin payments would succeed, but 10 years later, we still haven't quite reached that goal. Therefore, I remain skeptical about the future of payments. While we are working hard and investing in many payment projects, I believe that, like all innovative fields, the chances of failure are high, but a few successes will lead to exponential growth. I also agree with Steven's views on &#34;memecoin&#34; and the &#34;metaverse.&#34; NFTs were once incredibly popular, but have become relatively quiet. I strongly feel that memecoin may also experience a similar process. I might be wrong, and many people in the crypto community might criticize me, but these are high-risk areas, highly speculative in value, and extremely difficult to build application scenarios. Some memecoins may endure, like Dogecoin, which has been around for 15 years and still has a market capitalization of billions of dollars. So, some memecoins with cultural value will have long-term viability, but most memecoins probably won't last that long. Additionally, I'd like to offend other industries as well. I believe traditional brick-and-mortar banks will decline significantly over the next 10 years. With the development of cryptocurrencies and blockchain, the need to go to physical banks has already decreased considerably. While banks won't disappear and will still play a very important role, people no longer rely on physical banks as much as they used to. I think online banking pioneers like ING started driving this shift more than 20 years ago. Now, with technologies like electronic KYC (electronic KYC), the demand for physical banks is likely to continue to decline. Nevertheless, these industries, whether emerging or traditional, face risks. Therefore, we need to regularly review and carefully observe changes in these areas. What I mean is basically that Memecoin is high-risk, and so is physical banking. I could go on, but that would offend even more people. Accelerated Risks and Bank Liquidity: Challenges of Technological Innovation and the Traditional Financial System Kristin: With the rapid changes in financial flows and technology, especially under the influence of algorithmic trading and AI, the risks faced by banks and financial markets are accelerating. How can we effectively address these accelerated risks and maintain the stability of financial markets through regulatory frameworks and innovative means? CZ: I think this question can be discussed in several key points. First, if other conditions remain unchanged, faster speed and lower cost are always better, and this in itself does not bring more risk. The real risk is that faster speed may make problems appear to erupt more quickly. If banks adopt a fractional reserve system, it means that if banks do not have enough funds, simply because people can withdraw funds more quickly, this will only accelerate the exposure of problems. Slowing down the withdrawal process doesn't solve the problem; it only makes it harder for more consumers to withdraw, leaving them in a predicament. So, simply slowing down the process doesn't really make a difference. Technology can make transactions cheaper and faster, which is good, as is the case with Silicon Valley Bank. When it comes to the cryptocurrency industry, the situation is different. Banks may or may not be in trouble, but our impression of banks is that they are cryptocurrency-friendly, and might even be shut down by 2.0 operations in 2023. For example, in what happened at Binance (December 2023), the Binance platform experienced a record $7 billion withdrawal in a single day, and there were no issues that week. The withdrawals in the past few days ranged from tens of billions to billions, then to 7 billion, and finally back to 100 million, totaling $14 billion in withdrawals within a week. No problems arose, which makes me wonder if any bank can handle such a large-scale withdrawal. The root cause of the problem is the fractional-reserve banking system. Liquidity problems arise when banks have fractional-reserve banking systems, and this has nothing to do with artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence can indeed cause synchronization problems, but the risks it poses are relatively small, and we shouldn't attribute all problems to it. That's my point of view. Global Differences in Cryptocurrency Regulation and the Challenges of a Unified Framework Kristin: Globally, different countries manage financial risk differently, especially in banking and cryptocurrency regulation. Given the increasing risks of cross-border spillovers, do we need a global regulatory body to address these issues uniformly? How do the regulatory policies of different countries affect development opportunities in global financial markets? CZ: I have a different perspective on this question because we are in different industries. The banking and securities industries are highly developed and very mature in terms of regulation, and the differences between countries are relatively small. While there are indeed differences, they are generally similar. However, for cryptocurrency regulation, the approaches vary greatly from country to country. Binance has 22 to 23 licenses globally, but most countries currently do not have a cryptocurrency licensing system. We see rapid progress in this area in the United States, but it is still in progress. The Market Structure Act passed last year has laid some foundations for this. Meanwhile, countries like the UAE have adopted more advanced regulatory policies, and countries like Bahrain, Pakistan, and Kenya are actively participating in discussions. We are pleased to participate in the consultation process in these countries, and although I am not an expert in cryptocurrency or regulation, as a market participant, I will offer some advice from this perspective. In this process, key policy differences exist between countries, particularly regarding capital controls. Many countries have limits on cross-border capital flows, exceeding which is considered money laundering or illegal activity, while the United States does not have such restrictions. Tax policies also vary significantly from country to country, directly impacting financial regulation, especially regarding the taxation of crypto assets such as Bitcoin, for example, how to tax unrealized or realized gains. Therefore, we believe greater clarity and consistency would be more beneficial to global markets. As for a global regulatory body, I think it would be very difficult to operate at present. Different countries have different priorities and policy agendas, making a globally unified regulatory framework difficult to implement. Nevertheless, we hope to see a global regulatory body, especially a regulatory framework that supports innovation, which would help industry participants operate more smoothly. Logically, a global regulatory framework is feasible because cryptocurrencies are essentially the same across different countries, and we don't need to tailor regulatory standards for each country. Therefore, we should develop an optimal framework, and I have been working to explore how to cooperate with various countries to jointly promote the establishment of this framework. The Challenges of a Global Regulatory Framework and the &#34;Regulatory Passport&#34; Solution Kristin: While now may not be the best time to launch a global international organization or a global regulatory framework, we may need to prepare some contingency plans in advance should a crisis or major financial collapse occur. What feasible solutions can we consider in this situation? CZ: I think a more feasible solution might be a &#34;regulatory passport.&#34; This means that once a license is obtained in one country, it is recognized in other countries. This only requires some form of agreement between the regulatory bodies of the different countries. We have already seen discussions on this, and this approach is most likely to be implemented first. In contrast, creating a new global regulatory body or forum, establishing a global organization, is very difficult and takes a long time to advance to the implementation level.</div></div></div>

At the 2026 Davos Forum, Binance founder CZ discussed the impact of cryptocurrencies, blockchain, and AI on global finance. He expressed skepticism about Bitcoin payments and memecoins, labeling them as high-risk and speculative. CZ proposed a 'regulatory passport' for global crypto regulation and highlighted the merging of traditional payment methods with cryptocurrencies. He predicted a decline in traditional banks over the next decade as digital finance evolves, emphasizing the need for innovation in payment solutions.

- At the 2026 Davos Forum, financial leaders, including Binance's CZ, discussed the transformational impact of technologies like cryptocurrencies, blockchain, and AI on global finance.  
- CZ emphasized the need for a "regulatory passport" to streamline cross-border cryptocurrency regulations due to varying national standards, while also expressing skepticism about Bitcoin payments and the long-term viability of memecoins.  
- He warned of the risks posed by rapid technological advancements but acknowledged the potential for significant growth in the payment sector through the merger of traditional and cryptocurrency systems.

CZ's speech at Davos: Here, I'd like to offend traditional banks.