I have carefully examined the AKE liquidation incident and I think we can sympathize with the losses, but the responsibility still needs to return to the trading mechanism itself, rather than simply looking at how much money was lost in the end. At present, in the publicly available data, this time it is not like 'Binance contracts being inserted separately'. During the process of AKE's contract price increase, Mark Price and Index Price also rose significantly, and other exchanges also experienced large liquidation, which is more in line with the characteristics of an extreme short squeeze+consecutive strong flat. Additionally, the term 'arbitrage' can easily create the illusion of being risk-free. For example, doing spot long and contract short across exchanges, theoretically Delta Neutral, but margin is not Neutral. Making money on another platform does not mean that these floating profits can provide real-time margin replenishment for Binance's short positions. Once small coins experience a short-term surge, bears may still be forced to level first. If the extreme fluctuations of an AKE position can ultimately be handled together with more than thirty positions in the entire account, it at least indicates that the margin isolation, position concentration, and tail risk management at the account level are worth reflecting on. Of course, Binance should also include the Index Price at that time Mark Price、 Clear explanation of the record keeping and risk control mechanisms. If there are anomalies in the index or the system itself, that's another matter. But if these mechanisms are functioning properly, then the market's push for short positions and the rapid return of prices after a strong consolidation cannot reverse the previous strong consolidation, which is a mistake. Arbitrage essentially earns a risk premium. Usually receiving funding is a return, while extreme market conditions bear the tail risks of liquidity, margin, and short squeeze, which are also the corresponding costs of this return. So I am currently more inclined towards: The platform needs to prove that there is no problem with the system, but the trading results themselves should still be borne by the trader in principle.