If you have opened a bank account in the United States, you might have heard stories like this: having a few thousand dollars in your account, and on a cold day, a cold and impersonal template email can shatter everything.

At the end of last year, a user experienced such an incident. He opened an account at a major bank in New York, only four weeks later, he received a notice of account closure. The bank provided no explanation, just a standard procedure: destroy the card, cancel automatic payments, and wait for further correspondence. Ironically, that "full explanation" never arrived. Before Christmas, he faced a situation where bills could not be automatically deducted, and he was in chaos while abroad.

He is not the only victim. During the same period, Jack Mallers, CEO of a well-known Bitcoin payment company, encountered an even more outrageous situation—his personal and company accounts were both closed, with the reason given as "suspicious transaction activity." Even more ironic, his father had been a private banking client at that bank for many years.

This reflects a sharp contradiction: how do traditional financial institutions respond to the rapid development of the cryptocurrency industry? Are their "better safe than sorry" risk control strategies truly aimed at preventing genuine risks, or are they engaging in excessive financial scrutiny? These cases show that many legitimate crypto practitioners are paying the price for the industry's stigmatization.