Some really interesting takes on BLP — it seems like people are either really bullish or really bearish. Firstly, I’ve mentioned this before, but I see the HyperEVM’s primary role as the tokenization layer for the ecosystem. It allows value to be tokenized and then imported and exported in an industry-standard way to the wider world of DeFi. Two prime examples of this are USDe and USD₮0, neither of which would be on the order books without the HyperEVM acting as the tokenization layer. As for the HyperEVM as a general-purpose chain, nothing changes when it comes to the value proposition that the HyperEVM provides — access to HyperCore liquidity. This is the killer feature that no other chain has, and it still exists. I would imagine that BLP primitives would be exposed via Precompiles and the CoreWriter in some way, which would only enhance that value proposition. When it comes to DeFi lending, that’s clearly the area that will be impacted the most, but it’s not going to kill it off. Lending protocols will see an outflow of TVL where that TVL’s primary purpose was to unlock capital on HYPE for trading on HyperCore — but that’s not all of the demand. There’s also still a lot of capital sitting on HyperCore that hasn’t moved to the HyperEVM for various reasons. For one, users might not be comfortable with bridged stablecoins and then paying slippage to swap in and out — this is something that USDH will go a long way toward addressing. But the larger reason is probably that many of those users just don’t want to move into EVM-based “DeFi,” and if that’s the case, there’s a lot of value capture that isn’t happening because those users don’t have a solution. The BLP will also have other nuances to deal with. For example, the users likely to be borrowing will be much more sensitive to rates — they’ll want cheaper and more stable borrowing costs. In that case, who are the lenders when borrowers are only willing to pay 2–3% borrowing costs? The status quo of DeFi lenders are still more likely to be lending within DeFi. BLP is probably more suited to specific scenarios — for example, users supplying USDH might earn 2% from borrowing costs, plus another 4–5% from USDH treasury yield. Another app might decide to charge borrowers 0.5% in borrowing costs and then subsidize lenders with builder-code revenue. There are also unlocks that the BLP can provide that other lending protocols can’t. For example, what if the BLP allowed you to use your natively staked HYPE as collateral? You’d then have people staking HYPE for the fee discounts, likely also for borrowing discounts, staking yield, and now collateral for margin. That’s an insane amount of token utility for HYPE — and that’s not even including HIP-3. The teams that are equipped to adapt will adapt, and the teams that aren’t will get left behind — but that’s always been the way things are in crypto. It just happens a lot quicker when the 11 people at Hyperliquid iterate as fast as they do.