In the future, it will be illegal for the project team to not fulfill their promises, and the underlying logic of listing on the exchange has also changed. I have written a deep interpretation, but it is quite long. In plain language, I will summarize the parts that have a deep impact on the cryptocurrency circle: Token itself is a 'thing', not a security; But the pie (promise) drawn by the project party when selling tokens can turn this transaction into a securities transaction. The cake has been cashed out, and the hat of securities trading has been removed. Tokens can freely circulate in the secondary market; The cake has turned yellow and the hat has been removed, but the project team may have to pay for the lies they made when drawing the cake. From beginning to end, the SEC's focus is not on the token itself, but on the set of promises surrounding it - where there are promises, there will be regulation, and if the promises disappear, regulation will exit. This is the core thinking framework of the entire document. The logic of the exchange: In the future, when the exchange decides whether to launch a token, the core issue is no longer whether the token is a security, but whether the investment contract behind the token is still there. If the project party has fulfilled all the commitments in the white paper and publicly disclosed that the token has been "unbound", listing it on the exchange will be the same as listing ETH, and there is no need to register as a securities exchange. But if the project's roadmap is still in progress and promises have not been fulfilled - tokens are still "bound" to investment contracts, and every transaction is theoretically a securities transaction, the exchange needs a corresponding license. In other words, this document gives the exchange a new yardstick: no longer have to guess whether the SEC will come to trouble me, but to see if the project party's commitments have been fulfilled.