Hyperliquid’s Bold Vision for DeFi | Jeff Yan | S9 E3

你刚才描述的，其实正好是我一直想问你的问题：关于多个并行出块者，还有Solana那边的情况，你怎么看？

What I heard you just describe actually is sort of a and this was a a question that I had for you around, your thoughts on multiple concurrent proposers and what's going on in Solana.

对吧？

Right?

因为Solana的并行出块方式，完全违背了我们对位置集中化的理解。

Because the Solana approach to multiple concurrent proposers is this flies in the face of what we know about co locating, right?

按理说，如果我们建一个中心化的节点，就应该尽量靠近它，比如在东京或者法兰克福，越近越好，就这么简单。

Which is, hey, if we're going to build a centralized box, you want to locate as close as you can to that box in Tokyo or Frankfurt or whatever, and that's the end of it.

但据我了解，Resnick的愿景恰恰相反：他认为，如果全球各地都有不同的出块节点，反而能更快地打包区块，他们估计能到20秒左右。

But the my understanding is the Resnick totally vision around this is that if you actually have a bunch of different proposals all over the world, then that you can actually quote or you can, you know, do blocks faster, somewhere around 20, I think, is their idea.

我刚听你说把这些想法都整合在一起了，但我真没明白你是怎么做到的。

You I just heard you unite all of those ideas, and I don't understand how you did it.

所以你能不能说说，怎么把‘优先费决定一切’这套机制，应用到L1这样的环境里？

So talk to me about how you can bring priority is all you need to an l one type environment.

另外，如果你能再谈谈多个并行出块这个思路，以及它作为共识机制的可行性，那就更好了。

And then if you could layer in your thoughts about multiple concurrent proposals and how viable that is as a consensus strategy.

是的。

Yeah.

我可不敢把这功劳算在我头上。

Yeah, I don't wanna take credit for that.

我其实只是在读一篇论文，试着用自己的话复述一下它的意思，可能我理解错了。

I was actually just reading I was trying to just paraphrase what I thought this paper was saying, so maybe I misread it.

我觉得这跟Solana有关，还有ANZA团队的那些人，

But I think it's like the Solana, I think the ANZA folks and

对。

Yeah.

Resnick和Atulia。

Resnick and Atulia.

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得他们可能也是这样想的。

I think maybe them as well.

我真该好好去了解一下原始文献。

I really should, you know, learn the sources.

但当时就看了这篇论文，觉得讲得特别有道理。

But it was just this paper, and it was think it was it made a lot of sense to me.

其实我不是做MEV研究的。

As I so I'm actually not an MEV researcher.

我们

We

我们通常都是从第一性原理出发来思考问题、动手搭建，后来别人往往会给我们的东西起个高大上的名字，你懂吧？

we kind of just think about things from first principles and build stuff, and often people later on come and, like, give some fancy names to something that we did and, like you know?

也可能别人也在同时琢磨同样的想法，只是我们压根不知道。

Maybe also, like, someone else was thinking about the same thing in parallel, we just, like, didn't didn't know.

所以我在用一些技术术语的时候，可能会说得不太准确。

But so I might I might butcher some of the, like so, like, technical terminology here.

但简单来说，我觉得在网络速度特别快的情况下，你根本不会在意多跳几跳，或者出块和执行之间那点额外的时间。

But but, basically, I don't think I I I think in in a world where networks are super fast, you don't care about, like, additional hops and, like, sort of additional times of, like basically between proposing and executing a block.

我觉得多个提案者没什么坏处，大家各自提交交易，等一会儿再统一公开出来。

I I don't really see any downside to having multiple proposers, just kind of like, you know, all commit transactions and then the kinda, like, unveil them after the sorry.

大概一分钟吧。

Maybe a minute.

不同的构建者提出交易，内容可能会有重复。

So the different builders propose transactions, and there can be duplicates.

然后提案者把这些交易打包，构建者之后再把内容公开。

And then the the proposer basically bundling these, and then the the builders kind of unveiling them after the fact.

如果有人搞恶意行为，可能会有惩罚机制。

And maybe there there's some, like, slashing if there's malicious stuff.

但在我看来，这些问题好像都能解决。

Like, it all seems kinda, like, very solvable to me, though.

当然，我也没深入想过这个问题。

Granted, I haven't thought about it too much.

而且，确实，这样会增加延迟，因为提案者得等多个构建者的数据，达到某个阈值后才能开始打包区块。

And, yeah, I think this this adds, like, latency because you need to listen to multiple builders as a proposer before you hit some threshold where, like, you're okay building the block.

否则，如果不允许这样，那你就只能选其中一个，所有的MEV就又回来了。

Otherwise, if that's not allowed, then you can just take one of them and then all the MEV is back.

不过，除了这些看似恒定的延迟增加，以及可能增加整个网络的通信开销之外，其他倒没什么大问题。

But, yeah, I mean, other than these sort of, like these these what feel like constant factor latency increases and maybe and probably increases the sort of networking overhead of the network as a whole.

但话说回来，我觉得这些都不算事儿，硬件的扩展性太强了，这事儿应该顺其自然就解决了。

But again, I think these are all just like like, hardware just scales super well, so I feel like this should just happen.

而且在我看来，一旦你能在同一个区块里整合来自不同源头的交易，再按优先级排序，博弈的规则就彻底变了，根本没法再钻空子。

And, yeah, in my mind, it feels like, yeah, then you just once you have all these once you have different sources of transactions in a single block and you just order them by priority, there's there's, like, no way for like, the game theory just completely changes, there's, like, there's, like, nothing you can really do to game it.

不过话说回来，我觉得另一个关键点是，快速出块本身就能从两个方面解决这个问题。

That being said, I think, like, basically, another one I'd point is that I think just having, like, really fast blocks also kinda solves the problem in two different ways.

因为区块里的MEV总量其实和区块间隔时间成正比——想象一下，如果一天才出一个区块，以太坊价格可能已经涨跌10%了。

Like, it makes like, the amount of MEV in a block scales with the time between blocks because, like, imagine you just have one block a day or something, then ETH's price probably has moved plusminus 10%.

那时候，如果你是打包这个区块的人，就有太大空间去挑拣交易了。

Then obviously, if you're the one building that block, you have so much wiggle room to pick people off.

但如果区块间隔只有一毫秒，那这些就根本无关紧要了。

But if blocks are one millisecond, for example, then doesn't really matter.

在同一个区块里，你能 dishonest 到什么地步？

Like, how dishonest can you be in a block?

你最多就是重新排个序，但那一毫秒里根本啥都没发生。

Like, all you can do is reorder stuff, but, like, nothing happened in that millisecond.

所以你其实根本没法动手脚。

So, like, you can't really mess with it.

我觉得这俩就是你可以考虑的两个极限，中间显然是一条连续的谱系。

So I think those are, like, the two limits you can think about, and there's, like, clearly a continuum there.

从某种角度说，你愿意把区块时间做得越短，这个问题本身就越小。

And so in some sense, the, like, yeah, the faster you're willing to make blocks, the less of a problem there is to begin with.

但另一方面，区块时间越短，想做那些复杂的多提案、多人提交输入之类的事情就越难。

And then but that's intention with the fact that the faster you make blocks, the harder it is to do all these fancy things of multiple proposals, etcetera, or multiple people proposing inputs to give to the proposal.

我也不清楚这叫什么名字。

I don't know what that's called.

所以我觉得这两点都是对的。

So I think they're both yeah.

其实这里你想到的更像是一个三维的曲面或者三维空间，三个维度分别是区块生成的速度、地理分布的广度、网络容错能力，以及你愿意支持多少复杂功能。

There's probably just some there's basically some three-dimensional surface you're thinking about here or three-dimensional volume of and the axes are how fast blocks or how geographically dispersed or how much network tolerance you have and the amount of fancy stuff you're willing to do.

在这个空间里，有很多相当理想的取值点可以选择。

And there's a lot of pretty optimal points you can pick.

所以，我觉得MEV最终会成为一个被解决的问题。

So, yeah, I think MEV will be a solved problem.

我觉得协议的核心应该先聚焦在吸引用户上。

I think protocols really should focus on getting users first.

但另一方面，我真的很欣赏这些研究人员所做的工作。

I think but on the other hand, I really appreciate all these researchers doing this work.

从技术角度看，这真的很有意思。我觉得特别棒的是，和以太坊刚诞生时相比，这个领域已经走了这么远——据我了解，当初以太坊设计时根本没怎么考虑过MEV，因为那时候他们要解决的问题实在太多了。

It's really interesting technically, I think it's really cool to see how far the space has come since Ethereum, which my understanding is there was not much thought given to MEV at all, just when Ethereum was built because they had so much shit to figure out.

所以，这真的挺令人振奋的。

And so it's just it's really cool.

我觉得这两方面都极其重要。

I I think both are super important.

我觉得，未来几年内可能会有答案。

I think, probably prediction would be like in the next few years.

人们回过头来看，会觉得挺有意思，当初居然觉得这玩意儿能搞垮加密货币，其实它只是众多技术难题中的一个罢了。

It's people look back and say, like, oh, that's it's funny that we thought this would, like, kill crypto, but it's just, like, just one of those technical challenges.

大家好。

Hey, everyone.

特别感谢今天的赞助商 Marinade。

Quick shout out to today's sponsor, Marinade.

自2021年上线以来，Marinade 已经扩展了产品线，为 DeFi 用户和传统金融领域都提供了全套解决方案，包括流动性质押、原生质押，以及直接的企业级集成。

Since launching in 2021, Marinade has expanded their suite of products to provide solutions for both DeFi users and TradFi, including liquid and native staking, as well as direct enterprise integrations.

Marinade 的平台专为机构设计，帮助它们安全地增加对 Solana 的敞口。

Marinade's platform is optimized for institutions to securely expand their exposure to Solana.

无论是通过托管或非托管收益产品，将质押奖励整合进 Solana 金融工具，还是利用 Marinade 市场领先的收益率来管理收入和资金库，都能满足需求。

Whether through the provisioning of custodial or noncustodial yield, integrating staking rewards into Solana financial products, or leveraging Marinade's best in market rewards rate for revenue and treasury management.

无论你是做 DeFi、TradFi，还是介于两者之间，Marinade 都有适合你的方案。

Whether you're in DeFi, TradFi, or somewhere in between, Marinade has something for you.

想了解更多关于 Marinade 的信息，请查看本期节目简介中的链接。

To learn more about Marinade, follow the link in today's show notes.

我想接着刚才的话题追问一下，比如同时处理多个提案，还有在降低延迟方面遇到的那些挑战。

I guess one follow-up from, like, hearing about, like, multiple concurrent proposals and just the the challenges of, like, you know, maybe trying to reduce latency as much as you can.

感觉好像很难真正达到那种中心化交易所的速度，毕竟它们的所有数据都托管在一家公司的服务器上。

In a sense, it feels like it might never be possible to match the sort of, like, speed of a centralized exchange that's just everything's kind of sitting in one one company server.

我觉得从这个角度来看，Hyperliquid 目前真正要竞争的对象就是这类中心化交易所。

And I think in a way that's, like, kind of who who Hyperliquid is really competing against right now.

感觉就像是大池塘里的小鱼，周围全是那些大玩家。

It's kind of more of like a small fish in a in a very big pond with all the sexes.

所以我挺好奇的，你是怎么看待 Hyperliquid 相对于其他中心化平台的优势的？可能在纯速度上我们永远没法跟它们拼，但除了速度之外，还有什么因素能让 Hyperliquid 的交易体验更具竞争力，甚至比中心化交易所更好，尽管在某些方面速度稍微慢一点。

So I'd be curious, like, kind of how how you view Hyperliquid's edge against some of these other centralized players where maybe you'll never be able to compete just on pure speed, but kind of what what else is gonna make the trading experience on Hyperliquid competitive or maybe even, you know, much better than than you could get on a centralized exchange despite being a little bit slower in a way.

对。

Yeah.

我觉得关于速度慢这个问题，用户其实不会觉得 10 毫秒的响应时间比 1 毫秒的差十倍那么多。

I think the slowness I think I don't I don't think users think, like, a ten millisecond response time is 10 x worse than a one millisecond response time.

所以我不觉得这会成为致命弱点。

So I don't actually think that's going to be, like, the ultimate Achilles heel.

我觉得去中心化交易所和区块链迟早会快到足够，用户根本不会把速度当成中心化和去中心化之间的区别。

I just feel like DEXs will DEXs and blockchains will get fast enough, and users like, that will not be a differentiation point between centralized, decentralized.

真正重要的是，在中心化交易所，你是在信任一家公司——这层信任很明显，就是把钱交给他们，但这还不是全部，你还在信任他们能持续创新。

I think what will matter is that with a centralized exchange, you're you're really trusting, like, this one company, and you're not there's the obvious sense you're trusting them, which is that you're trusting them with your money, which which is a super big sense in which you're trusting them, but you're also trusting them to, like, kind of continue to innovate.

我觉得他们确实不错，但中心化交易所不可能跟全球分布的开发者社区竞争。

And, I think they're good, but I think there's no way a centralized exchange can compete with a globally distributed community of builders.

这其中有两个方面。

And there's two aspects.

一个是合作，就拿Hyperliquid来说。

There's the cooperation of just you got Hyperliquid.

我们完全不知道怎么搞市场推广。

We have zero idea how to market.

我们根本没有市场部门。

We do not have a marketing department.

这完全是自发形成、由社区驱动的。

It's just completely organic and community run.

我觉得这个社区做得特别棒，比所有中心化交易所的市场团队都强。

I think that community does an amazing job, better than the marketing departments of all these centralized exchanges.

Hyperliquid 能取得这么大的成功，我觉得就是靠这些用户真心认同这个项目，发自内心地去推广，而不是为了KOL的广告费。

That's what I attribute Hyperliquid's amazing success to, is all these users kind of coming together around something that they believe in and really organically sort of chilling it from the bottom of their hearts, from, like, a KOL paycheck.

对吧？

Right?

而且现在还只是刚开始。

So and and it's still so early.

对吧？

Right?

如果你想象一下，它从一个小小的加密货币推特圈子，发展成全球性的规模，作为单一的中心化机构，根本没法跟这个比。

So, like, if if you imagine that going from, like, a niche crypto Twitter thing to, like, something much more global, like, you just you, like, cannot compete with that as as a central entity.

当然，用去中心化的方式做事情，困难也很多。

And, obviously, there's there's a lot of difficulties with, like, doing something in a decentralized way.

我觉得中心化交易所之所以到现在这么成功，就是因为它们能绕开很多这类问题，或者说根本不用去操心这些麻烦。

And I think that's that's why centralized exchanges have been so successful so far is that you get to basically cut a lot cut a lot of these corners, or or I guess you just kinda, like, get to not think about a lot of these problems.

比如 MEV 就是一个，还有其他好多事，确实如此。

Like, you know, MEV is one of them, but, like, other things just like yeah.

还有很多技术难题还没解决。

There's just, like, a lot of unsolved technical problems.

你怎么去协调这些验证节点呢？

Like, how do you how do you coordinate these validators?

还得保证交易体验依然流畅无缝。

Like, do things that still allow for a seamless trading experience.

对吧？

Right?

但我相信这些问题都能解决，而且解决它们本身也挺有意思的。

And but I think all these can be solved, and it's also, like it's it's, like, a fun thing to solve.

我觉得聪明人天生就爱挑战难题，这些事最终都会被搞定。

So think it's, like, smart people naturally are attracted to hard problems, and we'll solve them all.

所以，我确信未来的全球金融体系会建立在一个由民众共同拥有的去中心化平台上。

And so, yeah, I I would definitely bet on the global financial system being on a decentralized platform, like, owned by the people.

没错。

Yeah.

就像所有这些方面一样，因为DeFi最初的理念确实有很多可取之处。

Just like with all the because there's there's there's a lot of really good points, like the ethos, the original ethos of of DeFi.

杰夫，

Jeff,

也许我们可以转到生态系统设计这个话题上。

I want maybe we can transition into, you know, something like ecosystem design.

在整个这一季里，莫内和我一直在探讨的一个主题是，那些倾向于模块化设计的DeFi架构。

And, you know, one question that like, theme that Monet and I are kind of poking at throughout this entire season is DeFi architectures which lean into more modular design.

我们之前讨论过像Uniswap V4这样的例子，它不再只是推出协议的某个具体版本，而是试图吸引一大批不同的AMM设计者加入，而目前它们的结构还比较垂直整合。

So we've been talking about this within the context of something like Uni v four, where instead of designing, you know, like, this is the v three instantiation of the protocol, you know, you are trying to attract a whole bunch of different AMM designers, right, within your kind of they've got a little bit of a vertically integrated structure at this point.

或者像Morpho这样的平台，它不是只提供一个借贷池，而是支持多个相互独立的借贷池。

Or something like Morpho instead of one, you know, instantiation of a borrow lend pool, you actually have a bunch of different, you know, isolated borrow lend pools.

我觉得我刚才听你说的意思是，DeFi 的一个核心优势在于，它不依赖于一个非常出色的内部团队，而是能调动所有人来为 Hyperliquid 平台做创新。

And I think that's what I kind of just heard you say that a core advantage of DeFi is that instead of relying on, you know, obviously, a very competent team that you've built, but you're actually going to leverage the creativity of everyone to build on top of Hyperliquid in general.

你能具体描绘一下这个场景吗？

So can you kind of paint a little bit of a a picture for that?

你觉得，是应该让一个团队把所有东西都自己搞定，还是应该吸引外部开发者来打造你们自己都想不到的东西？

What do you think about the idea of kind of building everything in house in one team versus, you know, kind of trying to attract other people to build things that you guys would never really thought of?

你怎么看待在 Hyperliquid 生态里引导这种创造力？

How do you think about channeling that creative energy within the Hyperliquid ecosystem?

对。

Yeah.

过去两年里，Hyperliquid 经历了很多变化。

Our Hyperliquid has evolved a lot over the two years in which it's been growing.

一开始，就像你说的，一个团队全包确实效率很高。

So, initially, it was, like you said, one team doing something is super efficient.

所以我们当时就想，干脆先快速迭代，做出用户真正喜欢的东西。

So, like, let's just let's just iterate and, like, just build something that users love.

到了现在，情况完全相反了。作为核心团队，我们负责维护协议、处理底层技术工作，我们的原则是：只要别人能做，就该让别人去做。

And at this point, it's completely the opposite, which is that our thinking as the core team building sort of maintaining the protocol, sort of working on, like, protocol level stuff is that if something can be built by someone else, it should be built by someone else.

我们非常重视这一点，因为我们的团队实在太小了。

And we take this very seriously because we're a super, super small team.

我们总共只有十个人，包括技术人员和非技术人员。

So we're actually only 10 people, and that includes technical and nontechnical.

我们根本没多余的人手去干几乎所有其他事情。

And we just don't have capacity to, like, do almost anything.

但我认为，这其实是个意外的幸运。

And I think that's, like, a that's actually, like, a blessing in disguise.

如果一个协议能设计得足够好，让别人能自由进来，表达自己的想法，无缝接入这个无许可的系统，那它的力量就非常强大。

Basically, if if a portal if a protocol can be set up in a way that it's it's, like, well architected so that people can come in and actually express what they want to express and plug into a permissionless protocol and do it, that's that's very powerful.

他们可以完全利用底下已有的基础，只专注自己那一块的创新。

Basically, they get to they get to leverage everything that exists underneath and basically just focus on their component of it.

但反过来，你如果过早地去构建协议，也容易犯错——这种事在加密领域其实屡见不鲜。

I think the the flip side here is, like, you can make this mistake by by building a protocol too early, and this has happened a lot in crypto as well.

我觉得人们特别兴奋，看到很多Web 2的案例。

I think people get really excited, and they see there are these Web two examples.

比如平台型公司是最成功的那种。

Like, platform businesses are are the biggest ones.

对吧？

Right?

你需要足够多的用户，还有流动性——在DeFi里就是这个意思——而且得把开发者真正需要的东西抽象出来。

So you really need you you need a critical mass of users, and you need to really users and liquidity, I guess, in the case of DeFi, and you need to really abstract the you need to abstract away exactly what the builder needs.

但在没有用户、没有真实需求之前，很难说清楚那到底是什么。

And it's hard to know what that is until, I guess, until you have users and sort of like genuine demand.

这其实就是市场普遍面临的鸡生蛋还是蛋生鸡的问题。

It's bit of like the chicken and egg problem of markets in general.

我觉得Hyperliquid大概在半年到一年前达到了这个转折点。

So Hyperliquid, I think, hit this inflection point maybe half a year to a year ago.

现在有足够多的人想在上面做东西，这对开发者来说特别棒，因为我经常听到这样的反馈。

And I think there there is just, like, this critical mass of people who wanna do things on it, and that's, like, really cool as a builder because I hear this kinda hanging.

就像是开发者们以前在其他链上做些通用项目，结果一来到 Hyperliquid，他们就惊了。

It's like it's like builders kind of maybe they they were doing stuff on the other chains, general purpose, and, like, come Hyperliquid, and they're like, wow.

突然间，一堆人涌进来，都说：‘Alpha，Alpha，我的协议马上就要上线了，就一小时后！’我本来还说，存款上限我都快达到了。

It's like all these people it's just it's like, oh, like, you know, alpha alpha alpha, like, pre alpha version of my protocol, like, launching in, like, one hour, it's like the the deposit cap I hit is, I I said, hit.

这背后其实藏着巨大的潜在需求，大家都想动手做点什么。

It's it's it's like all this kind of there's just, like, so much latent demand to, like, do things.

而且，大家很清楚现在有哪些问题。

And, like, people know what the problems are.

所以，没人是先凭空造个问题，再去找解决方案的。

So also, it's not like people are coming in and, like, trying to create a problem before solving it.

你一来 Hyperliquid，就会发现一堆没被解决的空白，比如投资组合保证金。

It's just like you come to Hyperliquid, and there's, like, all these things left open, like portfolio margin.

为什么我不能拿这个资产做抵押，去交易永续合约呢？

Like, why can't I why can't I borrow against this asset and trade perps?

其实是因为用户自己就能搭建这些功能，只不过协议层还有些更基础的东西在优先处理。

Well, like, it's because a user could build it build it, and, like, it's you know, there's, like, other stuff happening at the protocol level that's more base layer.

那用户为什么不能自己来开发这个功能呢？

And so why shouldn't a user build this?

所以现在有很多团队进来，就是想做这类东西。

And so teams coming in and trying to build that.

类似的情况在各个领域都不少见。

Similar many examples across the board.

杰夫，

Jeff,

我觉得Hyperliquid有一件事特别有意思，它是极少数采用这种设计思路的协议——大多数协议都是先打造一个通用型平台。

what do you think about one thing that I find really interesting about Hyperliquid is Hyperliquid is one of very, very few protocols we've built with this sequence, which is mostly what you see is protocols kind of build as a general purpose type platform.

你看以太坊，它的理念就是极度中立，你随便在这里搭建任何东西都行。

If you look at something like Ethereum, right, the idea is this is incredibly neutral, come build whatever you want here.

这种模式在选择不多的时候是有效的。

And that worked when there weren't a lot of options.

以太坊和Solana都是走的这条路。

So kind of Ethereum and Solana both took that approach.

你现在看到的新一代L1都在说：我们不能再这么做了。

What you're seeing from newer L1s is to say, hey, we can't do that anymore.

必须解决一个冷启动问题——一旦我们上线这条新链，用户根本没什么可做的。

There needs to be some sort of we need to solve a cold start problem of there being nothing to do with for users once we launch this new competing chain.

所以你开始看到像Barachain这样的链一上线就自带稳定币和去中心化交易所，让用户有事可做，这可能是从Cosmos那里吸取的教训。

And so you're starting to see chains like Barachain launch with a native stablecoin and a native DEX, basically, so that users have something to do, which was a little bit of a lesson learned from Cosmos maybe.

所以我特别想知道，你怎么看第一方应用和纯第三方应用之间的区别，以及什么样的组合才是最合适的。

So I'm kind of very curious what you think about this idea of first party applications versus purely third party applications and what the right mix is.

如果我要对Hyperliquid的策略稍微质疑一下的话，假设你是个应用开发者。

Because if I had to maybe poke a little bit at the Hyperliquid strategy here is, let's say, I'm an app developer.

你会说：

I'm like, hey.

这太棒了。

This is amazing.

对吧？

Right?

我会选择一个已经拥有庞大去中心化交易所、大量用户和交易量的生态。

I'm going to this ecosystem where there's already a huge DEX and tons of users and volume, etcetera.

但我要怎么确定，Hyperliquid 不会直接把我打算开发的功能给做出来呢？

But how can I be sure that, you know, Hyperliquid won't roll out what I want to build as a feature?

对吧？

Right?

因为他们在这个生态里已经掌握着太大的话语权了。

Because they have so much power in the ecosystem already.

所以，你怎么在两者之间找到平衡呢？

So how do you kind of thread that needle in between, okay.

一方面有用户和流动性，另一方面又不跟那些你希望吸引来构建生态的应用开发者产生竞争？

I've got the users and the liquidity, but maybe competing a little bit with application developers who you'd want to build in your ecosystem?

是的。

Yeah.

这是个好问题。

It's a good question.

我对他们推出时的看跌情绪不太了解，不过你说的原生DEX，是指他们自己开发的吗？

So I'm not super familiar with the with the bearish in rollout, but I assume when you say native DEX, you mean, like, they built the DEX?

对，就是他们自己开发的。

They built the DEX.

是的。

Yeah.

就是他们自己开发的。

They built the DEX.

没错。

Yep.

对。

Yeah.

这跟那个点是不一样的。

So that's different from point.

对。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

但那些基本上都是EVM上的应用。

But but that's, like, all sort of, like, EVM applications.

是吧？

Right?

他们团队部署了一些智能合约，就这么固定下来了。

Like, they the team deployed some smart contracts and kind of enshrined them in that way.

对。

Yeah.

Hyperliquid在这方面不一样。

So Hyperliquid's different there.

它的原生部分并不是说，某天团队突然换上应用开发者的心态，跑去开发几个应用。

The native side is not like it's not like the team decided to one day just put on their application developer hat and build some applications.

我觉得，人们所说的Hyperliquid原生应用，其实更像底层基础设施。

It's more like I think that what people call native applications on Hyperliquid are, in my mind, more like infrastructure.

从开发者角度看，我认为Hyperliquid本质上是一个通用的智能合约平台。

So I think what Hyperliquid does is it basically I view it as a general purpose sort of like smart contract platform from the perspective of a builder.

只是你身边有这么多内置的功能可以直接调用。

It's just that you have all these native things to interact with.

就像在以太坊上，有个预编译函数可以用来计算哈希值。

Like, just like on Ethereum, there's a precompile to, let's say, like, compute a hash.

这个运算特别耗资源。

It's a very expensive function.

如果你用Solidity自己写这个哈希函数，Gas费用会高得离谱，根本没人敢用。

If you wrote this hash function in Solidity, it would take a lot of gas and you would never use it.

但协议的维护者觉得：等等，其实我们可以……

But the protocol maintainers were like, You know what?

计算这个哈希值太重要了。

Computing this hash is important enough.

直接搞个预编译函数，让开发者调用，成本还低。

Let's just build a precompiled, let people call it, and cheaply compute it.

没人会说以太坊的开发者是在做应用吧？

So I think the line between No one says the Ethereum developers are building applications.

如果你用 Solidity 写了个特别高效的哈希函数，又怎么样？

What if you wrote a really good hash function in Solidity?

没人会对此有意见，对吧？

No one's complaining about that, right?

有些东西明显就是底层基建，对开发者特别有帮助。

It's just like there's some things that are very clearly infrastructure and good for builders.

我觉得 Hyperliquid 把这个界限重新定义了，或者说推得更远一点，尤其当你真正在做 DeFi 的时候，这种理解才更准确。

And I just think Hyperliquid redefines that or pushes that boundary a bit to where I think it's more correct if you're really focusing on DeFi.

在我眼里，一个流动性极高的永续合约交易平台，任何人都能无缝接入，滑点几乎为零，没有多空大户操控，

And so in my mind, a perps, like a very liquid order book perps exchange where you can anyone can just, like, plug in and basic with, like, almost zero slippage, no long short majors.

这根本就是一种公共产品。

I think that's just, like, a public good.

这根本就不是该让用户去做的东西，它太重要了，作为基础组件，理应像哈希函数一样，直接内置在 Solidity 里作为预编译合约。

And there's no reas like, that's not something that's not that's that's that's just, like, so important as a building block that it should be almost like a hash function as, like, a precompile in in Solidity.

我不觉得用户自己搞个 BTC 永续合约的 AMM 版本，然后跟链上原生的比拼，有什么大不了的。

And, like, I don't think I don't think it's that bad that a user can't come and build some AMM version of this BTC perp and be like, Man, I'm competing with the chain.

这种事根本不该由普通用户来干。

That's just not something that users should be building.

用户应该去利用这些核心基础设施，做出真正对终端用户有价值的东西。

Users should be leveraging these core infrastructure things, build actually interesting things for for end users.

我觉得根本不存在什么竞争关系，而且我觉得我们走的路一直都很对。

And so I I I don't think there's this, like, competitive element, and I I think we've made it I think I think the the trajectory has been good.

现在 Hyperliquid Labs 做的这些事，本质上都在往协议层的方向走。

Like, basically, the stuff that sort of, like, Hyperliquid Labs works on these days are all trending to be basically, like, protocolized things.

对吧？

Right?

比如无许可的永续合约。

Like, permissionless perps.

无许可的现货交易功能其实早就出现了。

Like, permissionless spot appointments came a lot earlier.

但这一切都是为了帮助别人去做他们想做的事。

But it's all these, like, it's like things to enable other people to do things.

当然，别人可以在 EVM 上搭建协议，但我觉得总得有个界限。

I'm like, yeah, like, someone else could build a protocol on the EVM, of course, but I think that you kinda have to draw the line somewhere.

所以我们一直想的是：什么样的设计对开发者最有利？

And so the thinking is always like, what is best for builders?

而这一点，我认为和协议本身的最佳利益高度一致。

And that is, I think that's very closely aligned to what's best for the protocol.

回到我之前说的，全球有这么多优秀的开发者，关键是要给他们提供支持。

Going back to my previous point, it's just like you have a global set of talented developers, you just enable them.

我还想补充一点，Hyperliquid 和其他协议最大的不同在于，我们在设计协议时，非常重视让开发者能够真正获利——让他们能深度分享自己创造的价值。

Maybe one more thing I should add here is think one thing Hyperliquid does super differently from other protocols is we actually in designing how the protocol works, a really high priority is that builders should be able to monetize, basically, like participate in upside in a substantial way on what they do.

比如现货交易者，就可以保留自己交易对所产生的全部手续费的 50%，全部以基础代币形式发放。

So, like, spot players, for example, can keep up to 100% of the fees collected in the token in the base token, which is to say, like, 50% of the total fees on their pair.

而且，这一点就连中心化交易所都不会提供，根本不可能。

And, like, that's something that no exchange even if it's a central exchange, like, they they will never offer a team that.

对吧？

Right?

所以这会吸引高质量、有创新性的资产直接在 Hyperliquid 上上线。

So that encourages, like, really high quality innovative assets to deploy natively on Hyperliquid.

衍生品也是同样的道理。

Perps, same story.

当然现在还没上线，但那边也是同样的思路。

Obviously, not live yet, but, like, same story there.

我觉得这个理念很清楚：如果你开发了一个用户界面，你拿到的每笔交易手续费甚至可能比协议本身还多。

And I think this this theme, like, builder codes, like, if you build a UI, you can capture, like, more fees per trade than the protocol captures.

这些做法其实都在真正地建立开发者对协议的信任，明确传达出：协议存在的目的就是支持你，我们真心希望你能做出十亿美元级别的业务。

Like, these these these are all, I think, things that do move the needle on, like, building trust with builders and sort of, like, just making it clear that protocol is here to support you and to basically, like, we we want you to build a build billion dollar business.

我们不想设任何障碍，也从没打算挡你的路。

We don't want to we we're not trying to get in the way.

我们正努力让这一切成为可能。

We're trying to, like, make that possible.

对。

Yeah.

本集由Citrea赞助播出。

This episode is sponsored by Citrea.

Citrea是首个增强比特币区块空间能力的零知识滚动扩容方案，让比特币应用成为可能，充分释放比特币作为可编程金融平台的潜力。

Citrea is the first zero knowledge rollup to enhance the capabilities of Bitcoin block space, enabling Bitcoin applications and unlocking Bitcoin's full potential as a programmable financial platform.

借助Citrea，开发者现在可以利用比特币的流动性，构建可扩展的支付系统、隐私解决方案等。

With Citrea, developers can now tap into Bitcoin's liquidity to build scalable payment systems, privacy solutions, and more.

Citrea目前正处于测试网阶段，即将上线主网。

Citrea is currently in its test net phase and is approaching its main net launch.

如需了解更多关于Citrea的信息，请查看本期节目说明中的链接。

To learn more about Citrea, follow the link in today's show notes.

我想就这一点再追问一下。

I'd love to ask, like, a follow-up on that.

我觉得特别有意思的是，HyperEVM 明显只是一个非常基础的协议，专门供开发者在其之上构建应用。

I think it's super interesting how the HyperEVM is obviously, like, a sort of just a very primitive, like, base layer protocol designed for people to build on top.

看到 HyperCore 的一些功能，比如现货市场，真的挺让人兴奋的。

And it's been really cool to see how HyperCore features like the spot markets.

但现在有了开发者部署的永续合约，整个方向似乎正朝着更像一个平台型产品的方向发展。

But then also now with builder deployed perps, it's kinda moving towards more of, a platform business take on it.

我很好奇，对于开发者部署的永续合约，你个人怎么看？

I guess I'd be curious, like, how do you view for a builder deployed perps specifically?

你觉得在新开发者推出的市场和 Hyperliquid 核心团队自己的市场之间，是否存在某种隐性的竞争压力？

Do you think that there's, like, any sort of competitive pressure maybe implicitly between markets that are coming from from new builders making them versus from the sort of, like, Hyperliquid core team?

另外，你们有没有考虑过，如何在保持整体体验一致、高质量的前提下，兼顾那些大家都知道安全的、来自核心团队的市场，以及那些来自更多长尾开发者部署的市场？

And then do you have any ideas about how how you're thinking of, like, maintaining that high quality, unified, coherent UX across not just markets that, you know, we kind of all know are safe because they're from, like, the core team, but also from some of these, like, more longer tail builder deployed markets?

是的。

Yeah.

问得好。

Good question.

我们的本意并不是要设一个竞赛机制，这本来就是一个无许可协议，任何人都可以根据自己的判断部署永续合约。

So the intention is not really to have a comp so it is it is a it is a permissionless protocol, people can deploy perps on sort of what they see fit.

这个协议本身就是无许可的。

And it is the protocol is permissionless.

所以我没法准确预测接下来会发生什么。

So I can't exactly predict what will happen.

不过，这么做的初衷是，如今加密货币的永续合约其实包含了大量创新，Hyperliquid 的永续合约也不例外。

That being said, the motivation behind it is that, basically, crypto perps are, like, such there are actually, like, so many innovations that go into Hyperliquid perps today.

我们站在巨人的肩膀上。

We're standing on the shoulders of giants.

永续合约本身就是一个了不起的创新。

Mean, like, perps themselves are amazing innovation.

还有很多其他方面的改进。

There are a lot of other things.

它的范围其实非常聚焦。

It is super narrow.

我觉得现在是时候了，应该由开发者来思考：我们怎么利用这个基础工具和基础设施？

And I think the time has kind of come where I think it should be up to builders to come in and say, how can we apply this primitive, this infrastructure?

我们的定位本质上就是一个基础设施模块。

Our view purpose is kind like an infrastructure element.

有了这个基础设施，我们能做出些什么？

Like, what can we build with this infrastructure?

这其实就是我们背后的初衷。

So that's kind of the motivation.

我预计大家会直接复制验证节点运营的永续合约市场，然后说：嘿，咱们来比比谁更厉害。

I expect people to just put up the exact same markets as validator operated perps and say, Hey, let's just try to compete.

这根本说不通。

It just doesn't really make sense.

我觉得创新的方向有很多，但最终目标是让所有金融活动都迁移到 Hyperliquid 上。

I think there are various axes on which people can innovate, but the ultimate goal is for all of finance to be on Hyperliquid.

我真的觉得这非常透明。

I really think it's transparent.

现在是2024年了。

It's 20 fourseven.

延迟非常低。

It's low latency.

而且可以审计。

It's auditable.

它有太多优势了，简直就像是对传统金融系统的一次十倍升级。

It has so many things going for it that it really is like it should be like a 10x upgrade on like, legacy financial systems.

我知道离实现还有很长的路要走，但这些由开发者部署的永续合约已经是一个重要的进展。

I think there's a long way to get there, but I think these builder deployed perps are a big step in that direction.

我们确实还有一点时间，但还有很多问题想问你。

I I wanna I know we're a little I we got a little bit of time left here, and we got so many more questions still to to ask you.

杰夫，这一季我们特别关注的一个主题是垂直整合。

Jeff, one one theme that we're very interested in this season is this idea of vertical integration.

当你看现在的以太坊或者加密领域里的去中心化交易所时，已经开始出现一些这种趋势了。

And when you look at a lot of the DEXs and Ethereum or in crypto today, you're starting to see a little bit of that.

对吧？

Right?

比如Uniswap，它最初是从AMM层起步的，现在正朝着上下两端扩展，自己做用户界面、自家的钱包，甚至往下发展到自己的区块链。

Which is, like Uniswap is a really good example of of a protocol that started at the AMM layer, and they're kind of going up and down the stack, right, towards the distribution layer of having their own, you know, UI, like desktop UI and then their own wallet and then down the stack to their own chain.

Solana上最近Pump Fun和Radium之间的竞争也是一个很好的例子。

You can look at like the recent competition between pump fun and Radium in Solana is another good example.

Jupiter也是同样的情况。

Jupiter is the same thing.

我觉得，尤其是在交易所领域，用户界面特别关键，这可能正是推动这一切的核心原因。

And so, you know, I think especially like UI is super, super critical when it comes to exchanges, which is maybe what is the the sort of driving force here.

不过我很好奇，你对DEX的垂直整合整体怎么看？Hyperliquid是怎么思考这个问题的？你们觉得在技术栈的哪些环节，自己掌控最重要？

But, you know, I'm curious on, you know, on your thoughts in general on the idea of vertical integration when it comes to DEXs, whether or not, you know, how Hyperliquid thinks about that, what areas of the stack are the most important for you to have, you know, direct control over.

你在这集开头提到过，或者其实我之前听你参加0xResearch那期时也说过。

And then, you know, you mentioned at the beginning of this episode that or actually, I heard you in sorry, 0xResearch episode that I was listening to before this.

有太多事情必须做到位了。

You know, there are so many things that you need to get right.

你得为交易员和做市商打造一个合适的环境，同时UI也得做到位，这一点在永续合约领域一直是个大难题，不过你们确实把这事推进了不少。

You need to design the right environment for traders, for market makers, but you also have to get the UI stuff right, which has been a real challenge in the perps space so far, obviously, until, you guys have done a really good job on moving the ball forward there.

那你能不能聊聊，你整体是怎么看待垂直整合的？尤其是UI这块？

But talk to me about how you think about vertical integration in general and then UI, right?

从交易员的角度来看，哪些地方是最关键的？

Like, what important to get right from a trader's perspective here?

对。

Yeah.

我觉得从商业角度来说，垂直整合确实非常有利。

So I think vertical integration is obviously super good as a business decision.

如果你是一家传统公司，自然希望掌控尽可能多的环节。

If you're just a traditional company, you want to own as much of the stack as possible.

一方面是因为价值到底落在哪里往往不清晰，另一方面，如果你依赖太多外部合作伙伴，整个用户体验就会被最弱的那一个环节拖垮。

I think it's like part of that is just like it's often unclear where the value accrues, but another part of that is just reducing the overhead of and if you have many people you need to rely on to uphold their part of the deal, then your ultimate user experience is only as good as the weakest link in that chain.

这一点在加密领域也一样，但加密里有个更明显的矛盾：完全掌控整个栈，其实和DeFi本来该有的精神有点背道而驰。

And I think that's also true in crypto, but I think there's a bit more tension in crypto, which is that sort of owning the full stack is also a bit antithetical to, I think, the like, what DeFi should be.

我觉得，如果每一层都有多种可选方案，DeFi 会更稳健。

Like, I think DeFi is more resilient if there are multiple possible choices at each layer of the stack.

万一其中某个环节出问题、宕机，或者偏离了正确方向，不再优先考虑用户需求，你还是能找到别的路径——因为每一步都有别的选择。

And so if any one of them, you know, is compromised or just goes down or, like, whatever, like, loses it starts going in one direction and, like, stops prioritizing the right things that that like, ultimately, you you can find some path through these so, like, different options at each step.

总能找出一条依然不错的路来。

You can, like, find some path that's, like, still pretty good.

我觉得这样才真正构建出一个更坚韧的金融系统。

I think that that, like, creates a much more robust financial system.

所以这取决于你到底想优化什么。

So it kinda depends what you're optimizing for.

从 Hyperliquid 的角度看，我们根本没打算把金融领域的所有东西都自己从头做一遍。

From Hyperliquid's perspective, I don't I don't think it's, like, a huge basically, like, we we we never even seriously entertained the idea of building everything in finance.

当目标这么宏大时，它注定得靠很多人一起完成。

And so I think when the like, when the vision is that big, it it's, like, necessarily built by many people.

我个人非常看好通过协议来实现协作，而不是靠管理层来协调。

And I'm very bullish personally on, like, coordination through protocols, not through, like, management.

这就像一家一万人的公司，你可能会把整个金融体系都自己做出来。

It's like you have, like, a 10,000 person company, you probably build all the finance.

每个人都很优秀、配合默契，但说实话，我觉得现实中根本不可能这样。

Like, everyone's super good and coordinated and whatever, but, like, I just I just feel like that's that's a I just don't see that happening in the real world.

所以更好的方式是，一万人分布在上千家公司里，各自负责一部分，再通过一个精心设计的协议来协调这些工作。

And so, like, the next best thing is, like, 10,000 people coordinating across, you know, a thousand companies, like, each building their own pieces and, like, a thoughtfully designed protocol to coordinate those efforts.

我觉得这就是Hyperliquid所处的位置。

And I think that's where I see Hyperliquid being.

而且说实话，最终的结果影响实在太深远了。

And yeah, I think it's just like the end state is so massively impactful.

整个金融体系价值这么大，我不觉得Hyperliquid非得把所有利润都赚走不可。

It's just such a valuable enterprise as a whole finance that I don't think it matters if Hyperliquid doesn't need to capture of it.

那种想法太贪婪了，我觉得。

That's like a super greedy perspective, I think.

如果你只专注一个小领域，那也许你确实会想把每一分利润都榨干，给股东们最大化回报。

I think if you're like, yeah, I'm doing this one super small segment, yeah, maybe you actually care about squeezing out every last bit of profit for your shareholders or whatever.

但当你在构建一个支撑整个金融体系的协议时，我觉得心态应该是：咱们先把蛋糕做大。

But when you're building a protocol to power all the finance, I think the perspective is more like, you know, it's just like like, let's just, like, grow the pie.

如果这件事真能成功，大家都会特别开心，至于利润分多少，根本没那么重要。

And, you know, if if this thing if this thing is to succeed, like, everyone's going to be, like, so happy that, yeah, it doesn't matter.

我很好奇你对交易所里一种垂直整合的现象怎么看——很多中心化交易所都在试图获取用户存在平台上的稳定币所产生的收益。

There's maybe one area of, like, sort of vertical integration that we've seen across a lot of exchanges that I'd be curious for your take on, which is we've seen a lot of, like, centralized exchanges try to capture some of the economics from the stablecoin balances that are held on exchange.

比如Coinbase和Circle签了份非常赚钱的分销协议，拿走了很大一部分收益。

So Coinbase has this very lucrative distribution ex agreement with Circle where they get a lot of the the carry.

Binance也多次尝试合作或推出自己的稳定币，想分走平台上那些稳定币积攒的巨额利息。

Binance several different times has tried to either partner or kind of like white label their own stablecoin to capture some of that huge amount of of, like, yield that's just latently being generated on all the the stables that are on their exchange.

这其实是个很有趣的切入点，因为它拿的不是开发者或用户的钱，而是完全外部的资金。

And I think that's a really interesting angle because it's taking money that's completely outside of it's not, like, taking from builders or users.

本质上，它是在把美国政府的钱，也就是美元计价的利息，导入到自己的生态里。

It's just taking money from basically the US government and injecting it into your ecosystem.

所以我想知道，Hyperliquid有没有考虑过怎么分一杯羹？比如和Circle或Coinbase合作，或者干脆推出一个白标稳定币之类的？

So I'm curious if, like, Hyperliquid has any if you have any thoughts about, you know, how to capture some of this economic juice from all the USDC on chain on Hyperliquid, whether that's, you agreements with Circle or with Coinbase or maybe even having another kind of white labeled stablecoin or something like that.

是的。

Yeah.

目前我们还没在做这个。

It's not currently something we're working on.

你的问题其实点出了关键：有太多现成的机会了，听起来可能有点难以置信，但确实在Hyperliquid上躺着几十亿美元的稳定币，不过到目前为止，我们的优先级一直不在这个上面。

I think your question sort of highlights the point that there's just so much low hanging fruit that It's kind of hard to believe, but yeah, there are billions of dollars of stables sitting on Hyperliquid, but up until now, the priority has not been That has actually not been the low hanging fruit.

现在光是这笔收益可能就超过一亿美元了。

Yeah, that's maybe more than $100,000,000 of yield at this point.

但协议本身的年化收益还要再高五到十倍。

But also, protocol makes annualized about five to 10 x that.

我也不太清楚具体细节。

I you know, I I don't know the exact details.

数据还不够多，没法精确推算一年的数字，但我想你应该明白我的意思——有太多事情等着做了。

Like, not enough data points exactly to extrapolate a year, but but I think you get my point, which is, like, there's there's just, like, so many things to do.

我觉得，最终让协议和用户都能享受到各种好处，肯定会很酷。

And, yeah, I think I think it'll be cool eventually for the protocol slash users to be able to have all all sorts of benefits.

对吧？

Right?

我觉得这就是当所有金融活动都集中到一条链上时会发生的情况。

And I think this is what kind of what happens when all of finance moves onto one chain.

如果这条链的设计是深思熟虑的，而不是贪婪的，不是那种只追求最大化的抽血式盈利，而是专注于创造真正酷炫的东西，那这些可能性就真的都能实现。

So you get to kind of if that chain is designed thoughtfully and not greedily, not as a sort of company maximizing extraction, but rather a company maximizing just cool shit that can be done, then, yeah, I think I think all this stuff becomes possible.

好的，杰夫。

Okay, Jeff.

我们的时间快到了。

We're nearing the end of our time here.

那我最后提一个问题，接着Monet刚才的问题继续聊。

So maybe closing question and building on the question that Monet just asked.

我想知道，在你的生态设计里，稳定币和代币炒作之间，你更看重哪个角色？

I'm curious what you think about the role of stablecoins versus the role of hype, the token, in your ecosystem design.

特别是Hyperliquid这个例子很有意思，你看以太坊，他们当初对ETH这个资产的价值捕获设想，是把它当成一种价值储存或交易媒介的货币。

And specifically, I think you know, Hyperliquid is a really interesting example here where, you know, even if you look at something like Ethereum, like the way that they thought of value accrual for Eth the asset was that it was going to be used as this store value or medium of exchange kind of money.

早期的时候，甚至到现在，如果你交易NFT，通常都是以以太坊计价的。

And in the early days, you saw a lot of even still today, right, if you trade NFTs, it's typically NFTs are denominated in something like Ethereum.

像Uniswap这样的平台，早期的交易对基本都是ETH，尤其是在AMM的V1版本里。

But a lot of the early use cases for something like Uniswap is the pair was ETH, right, in a lot of these AMMs, something V1.

但随着时间推移，越来越多的交易开始转向美元计价的交易对，尤其是在二层网络上，因为他们想吸引那些手里主要持有美元、而不是以太坊的新用户。

And gradually, that's kind of moved over time or shifted over time towards more dollar denominated trading pairs on l twos, especially as they kind of try to go out and get new customers from the world who mostly hold dollars instead of something like ETH.

有意思的是，Hyperliquid的起步顺序可能跟以太坊或Solana上的很多交易所正好相反——从第一天起，他们就把USDC和美元作为核心。

And so it's interesting, you know, Hyperliquid maybe developed in reverse order than a lot of exchanges on on place like Ethereum or Solana, right, where you started from day one with USDC and dollars at the core.

对吧？

Right?

因为这才是用户真正想要的。

Because that's what your customers wanted.

但现在，你们也有了代币炒作这一块。

But now you also have a token hype.

对吧？

Right?

看起来你们考虑价值捕获的方式是通过回购。

And it seems like the way that you think about value accrual there is buybacks.

不过我挺好奇，你们有没有想过让 HYPE 代币更多地成为交易对或者生态系统的核心部分？

But I'm just curious how you think about this that like, have you ever thought about, like, making hype kind of more of a a trading pair or a core part of the ecosystem?

你们是怎么平衡客户想用美元交易的需求，以及让 HYPE 代币实现价值捕获这两者之间的关系的？

Or how do you, yeah, kind of balance this desire for customers to trade with dollar, basically dollars, versus value accrual for hype?

对。

Yeah.

我觉得，一种原生资产要成为硬通货，这恐怕不是靠强行推动就能实现的。

I think the money thesis of a native asset is probably not something you can force.

所以我认为，作为一个团队，你不能跑去说，你知道的？

So I don't think you can, as a team, you can go and say, You know what?

我觉得我要去打造一种货币。

I think I'm gonna build money.

这就好比，货币是世界上最难以捉摸的东西之一。

And it's just like Money is one of the most elusive things in the world.

我认为，货币是人类最伟大的发明之一。

Humanity's, I think, one of the greatest inventions.

它是最了不起的协作工具。

It's the greatest coordination invention.

它推动了人类的大量进步，但你没法直接去造出它。

And I think it was the source of a lot of human progress, but also it's not something you can directly build.

你只能通过建设一个国家来间接实现。

You can build it kind of by building a country.

美国在这方面做得特别出色。

It's something that US had to do a super good job.

美元是一个极其出色的产品。

The dollar is a super good product.

你也可以像比特币那样，像中本聪做的那样，先打造一些有趣的技术。

Or you can build it like Bitcoin, like like Satoshi kind of did, which is let's just build some interesting tech.

这项技术足够颠覆，或许你就有机会创造出一种像货币一样的东西。

And this technology is, like, so groundbreaking that, yeah, maybe you you have a chance to create something that's that's like money.

不过除此之外，我也不太确定。

But yeah, otherwise, I don't I don't know.

我的意思是，如果所有金融活动都转移到Hyperliquid上，那 hype 说不定真能变成货币。

I mean, I think I think hype will be money if all the finance moves on the Hyperliquid.

但我们还是更关注后者，因为那才是能实际操作的。

But but, yeah, we're we're kinda focused on the latter because that's actionable.

所以我觉得，拿 hype 来做交易？说实话，我也不太明白。

And so I I think that, yeah, trading against hype, like I don't know.

人们经常聊这个，但我觉得，至少在加密货币领域，大家心里想的还是美元。

I'm not I think people talk about it a lot, but I I think genuinely what like, people think in dollars, in in crypto at least.

而且放眼全球，人们普遍更愿意用美元计价。

And but I think broadly around the world, like, people kind of prefer to denominate in dollars.

如果你说，来这个平台交易的就是 hype，那大概率没人愿意来了。

And I don't think that's some Like, if you say, if you come on this platform, you're trading in hype, then I think probably what happens is people stop going to the platform.

归根结底，还是得看大家真正想要什么。

And I think it's like, ultimately, it's kind of what people want.

所以从技术上讲，它们都是这个去中心化账本上的资产，具体会怎样，还得看时间怎么发展。

So I think sort of, like, technologically, they're both assets on this decentralized ledger, and I I guess time will tell.

好的。

Alright.

杰夫，我们本来还能再聊一个小时，但你已经特别慷慨地花了这么多时间，我知道该收尾了。

Jeff, we could go for another hour here, but you've already been super generous with your time, and I know we gotta wind it down.

今天聊得太棒了，兄弟。

This was great, man.

谢谢你来参加这个播客。

Thank you for coming on the podcast.

如果大家想了解更多关于Hyperliquid的信息，或者关注你、跟进你做的工作，最好的方式是什么？

If folks wanna find out more about Hyperliquid or follow you or just keep updated with the work that you're doing, what's the best way to do that?

是的。

Yeah.

你可以关注Hyperliquid的Twitter账号，账号是Hyperliquid x，我的账号是chameleon_jeff。

There's a Hyperliquid Twitter you can follow at Hyperliquid x, and I'm at chameleon underscore Jeff.

好的。

Okay.

这才是真正的干货。

This is the real alpha.

为什么叫变色龙，杰夫？

Why chameleon, Jeff?

我特别喜欢问那些网名有意思的人。

I love to ask people with interesting Twitter handles.

那个变色龙这个名字背后有什么特别的含义吗？

What's the what's the alpha behind

我觉得它们是非常酷的动物。

I think they're really cool animals.

我不知道这有多人知道，但它们真的特别有意思。

So I don't I don't know how well known this is, but they're they're, like, they're just, like, so interesting.

你知道吗，它们是少数几种眼睛能独立朝不同方向转动的动物之一。

They're, you know, like, they're one of the only animals where the their eyes can point in different directions, like independently controlled.

它们还是少数几种脚掌前两爪、后三爪的蜥蜴，这显示出非常独特的进化路径。

And they're one of I think they're one of the only lizards that have, like, two claws forward and three claws back, which shows, like, a very interesting evolutionary trajectory.

而且它们的舌头特别有力，这点真的很酷。

And they also have, like, a really powerful tongue, which is, like, pretty cool.

是的。

Yeah.

它们还会变色，这大家都知道。

They just, like and they change colors, obviously.

这可是众所周知的特点。

I mean, that's the that's a well known thing.

所以我觉得它们真的很特别，我一直对它们特别着迷。

So, yeah, I think they're just, like, they're I've always been really fascinated by them.

它们就像地球上的外星生物。

They're kind of like aliens on Earth.

好了，我就说这些。

So, yeah, that's that's it.

只是对这种动物的尊重而已。

None nothing more than just respect for the animal.

所以各位《Belkrav》的听众，你们一定要听到最后，本来以为这期是聊Hyperliquid的访谈，结果还学到了关于变色龙的知识。

So listeners of Belkrav, this why you gotta stick around to the end of the episode always because you thought you were getting an interview on Hyperliquid here, but you're also gonna learn about chameleons.

这就是为什么你们得听到最后。

So that's why you stick around.

杰夫，今天聊得太开心了。

Jeff, this has been really fun, man.

非常感谢你来参加这期节目。

Thank you so much for coming on the show.

咱们改天再约一期吧。

We'll have to do it again sometime soon.

是的。

Yeah.

谢谢你的邀请。

Thanks for having me.

这场对话真有意思。

It was a fun conversation.

干杯。

Cheers.

谢谢。

Thank

不客气。

you.

好了。

Alright.

莫奈，这场采访太棒了。

Monet, what an interview, man.

我明白为什么大家都对Hyperliquid这么兴奋了。

I can see why everyone's so hype on Hyperliquid.

真是太好了。

That was great.

是的。

Yeah.

不是。

No.

那真挺有意思的。

That was that was fun.

听了杰夫的一番话，我确实更有干劲了。

Definitely got a little more bulled up after hearing Jeff.

我也是。

Same.

对。

Yeah.

我的意思是，我觉得挺有意思的。

I mean, I thought you know, it was interesting.

我们一开始做这个采访的时候，我主要关注垂直整合，没太去想其他一些季节性的话题。

We kind of went into this interview, and I was very focused on at least kind of vertical integration and not thinking about some of the other themes of the season.

但我们最后聊了很多关于模块化设计和碎片化的问题。

But it felt like we ended up talking a lot about this kind of idea of modular design and fragmentation.

杰夫不仅非常注重发挥团队的创造力——他们到目前为止已经很好地实现了这个愿景，还特别看重加密领域整体的创意、开发者和创业人才。

And it seems like Jeff is highly focused on leveraging not just the creativity of his team, which has done very well executing on the vision thus far, but also leveraging the collective creativity and builder and entrepreneurial talent of crypto.

这其实挺有意思的。

And, you know, it's kind of interesting.

他们做Hyperliquid的思路，跟以太坊或Solana这类通用平台完全相反。

They've they've approached Hyperliquid from the exact opposite direction of more general purpose platforms like Ethereum or Solana.

他们是先从盈利模式和能产生费用的产品入手，再慢慢围绕它培育生态，而不是像早期的智能合约平台那样，先搞社区和生态，再鼓励大家去开发各种应用。

And they've kind of started with the monetization and the product which generates the fees, and now they're trying to bootstrap the ecosystem around it as opposed to some the earlier smart contract platform, which really started with the ecosystem and the community and then encouraged them to build a bunch of ideas.

所以我想知道，你觉得Hyperliquid这种做法，跟Solana或以太坊这类通用智能合约平台相比，各自的优缺点在哪里？

And so I'm curious when you think about that approach, how do you weigh the the pros and cons of the way that Hyperliquid is going about it versus a more general smart contracting platform like Solana or Ethereum?

是的。

Yeah.

我的意思是，你在节目里也提到过，这正是以太坊和Solana的情况。

I mean, I I think you mentioned in the show, like, that's Ethereum and and Solana to another extent.

他们当初占了先发的便宜。

Like, they had the luxury of, being early.

所以呢，他们可以直接动手做，反正开发者总会来的，那时候也没多少别的机会可选。

So, you know, they they could just kinda build it, the builders will come and and, you know, build on them because there weren't, you know, a wealth of other opportunities.

但我觉得，Hyperliquid 其实挺聪明的，他们早就明白，不可能一上来就搞个生态系统或者平台。

But, I think that in a way, Hyperliquid, they kind of they were very smart because, they recognized you can't just launch an ecosystem or a platform from day one.

得有个吸引用户的钩子，而他们的永续合约市场，我觉得就是这个钩子。

There needs to be a hook to acquire users, and, their, you know, perps, markets, I think, have been been that hook.

而且这还从一开始就给平台带来了扎实的商业模式，让人有动力参与进来。

And it also gives the platform, like, some really solid economics to, to get people excited about, from the start.

不过我觉得这事儿特别有意思，因为他们现在还处在转型初期——从一个专注做最好用的 DeFi 永续合约交易所，慢慢转向成为一个让开发者实现想法的平台。

But I I think it's also it's gonna be very interesting because it feels they're still quite early in, sort of transitioning from, really a product focus, just having the best perps exchange that you can in DeFi to more of a platform focus, being somewhere that builders can come and and, you know, make their vision happen.

所以我觉得，是的。

So I think it's yeah.

Jeff 似乎一直很清楚这些挑战背后的矛盾，但这条路才刚起步，还远没到定型的时候。

There's still seems like, Jeff was, like, really he had a an eye to all of these challenges that you you have, the tensions between those, but, it's still very early in that process.

所以，说实话，现在还看不出来他们是不是已经遇到这些挑战了。

So it you know, it's tough to see if, they've they've run into these these challenges yet.

对。

Yeah.

我觉得Hyperliquid在解决这个问题上其实远远走在了前面。

I I think that Hyperliquid actually is way ahead of its time in figuring this.

这其实也是现在新推出的L2，甚至新L1普遍在走的趋势。

And that's actually the trend that I think you see in not only new mostly new L twos in general, but also new L1s that are launching.

他们都说，现在的市场环境和当初以太坊、Solana刚推出时完全不一样了。

They're saying, Hey, it's a completely different market structure than it used to be when Ethereum and Solana launched.

从Barachain自带DEX，到Honey推出自己的稳定币，再到像MegaEats这样的新平台，已经不是简单地喊一句‘大家来吧’那么简单了。

As everyone from Barachain launching with their own DEX to Honey, their own native stablecoin, that's new platforms like the MegaEats of the world where it's not just like, hey, everyone.

它们更像是高度聚焦的加速器，也许‘选边站队’这个词太重了，但它们确实在全力支持少数几个顶尖团队。

They're very concentrated accelerator programs where they're maybe king making is too strong of a word, but they're really putting their resources behind a couple of very high quality teams.

所以，你看到的是各种不同的玩法在不断迭代。

And so you're seeing different iterations on this.

我觉得，关于第一方和第三方应用的区分，将来会成为生态系统设计中的一个核心议题。

And I think this idea of first versus third party apps is gonna be a huge a huge topic when it comes to ecosystem design in general.

我觉得Hyperliquid在这方面简直拿捏得死死的，远远走在了时代前面。

And I think that Hyperliquid basically absolutely nailed the meta, and they were way ahead of their time.

但关键问题其实还是回到我们之前一直在讨论的那个点上。

Then the I think the rub is it's ultimately gonna come down to that question that we were kind of asking.

你提了一个特别有意思的问题：Hyperliquid很可能得向它的合作伙伴保证，它不会跟他们竞争。

I thought you had a a very interesting question to ask, which is, one, there's Hyperliquid's probably going to have to reassure its its complements that it's not going to try to compete with them.

对吧？

Right?

现在有数亿美元的手续费来自稳定币交易，

So, okay, there's hundreds of millions of dollars of fees which are being generated from stablecoins.

那么Hyperliquid是打算自己拿走这部分收益，还是愿意让别人来搭建？

Like, is Hyperliquid going to try to take those, or is it going to let someone else build?

所以我觉得，它可能得用实际行动证明，愿意让开发者进来分一杯羹。

And so I think maybe it has to demonstrate that it's willing to let builders come in and take money on the floor.

这事儿就这么摆在那儿，没人管。

This is just kind of sitting out there on the floor.

另外，我觉得你提了一个特别有意思的问题：怎么保证第三方开发者的服务质量？

And then also, I thought you had a really interesting question around how do you ensure the standards of third party app developers?

对吧？

Right?

这其实也是苹果应用商店早期遇到的难题，回头看看苹果当初的第一方和第三方应用策略会很有意思——一开始他们还挺开放的。

This was actually a challenge for the App Store in the early days and why Apple you know, it'd be interesting to go back and look at Apple's first party versus third party app strategy because in the beginning, it was a little bit more permissionless.

结果突然发现，里面一堆应用用户体验差得要命。

Then it's like, woah, there are a lot of apps in here which are not creating a great user experience.

用户老来抱怨，说下个第三方应用就被骗了，或者用起来特别糟心。

And I'm getting complaints from users that when I download this third party app that I'm getting scammed or it's a bad UX.

所以后来他们就把标准卡得死死的。

And so they got much more stringent around standards.

因此，挺值得观察的是，Hyperliquid会不会从一开始的‘谁都能来搞’，慢慢转向更规范的做法，好让整体用户体验保持一致。

And so it'll be interesting to see whether or not Hyperliquid goes from a more, hey, anyone can sort of build here to a more prescriptive approach in terms of basically just generating a good unified user experience.

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得你提到这点特别有意思，因为他们其实正在同时推行两种不同的策略。

I think it's it's really interesting you mentioned that because I think they're almost they're like kind of doing both of those at once, like, two different strategies.

比如 HyperEVM，目前完全开放部署，没有任何限制。

So the HyperEVM, fully permissionless to deploy, at least for now.

也许未来他们会改，但现在就是完全开放的。

Maybe they'll change that in the future, but, it's just permissionless.

而他们的 builder 部署的永续合约，虽然还在测试网，但很快就要上线了，这里有个很高的质押要求。

And then for their builder deployed perps, which are still on test net but, expected, like, soon, I think, there's, like, this big, staking requirements.

你需要押注一部分资金来保障市场的稳定。

So you're putting up some capital to secure the market.

而且你还得竞价，才能获得做市的资格。

And then you also have to, like, bid, to to essentially, like, have the right to make a market.

我觉得挺有意思的是，他们在 HyperCore 的一些功能上，比如永续合约市场，采取了更精选的模式，但同时又保留了完全开放的机制。

So I think it's it's interesting that they're kind of doing a more curated approach for some of these, like, HyperCore features like the perps markets, but then also doing the permission list.

我觉得，即使在这种更精选的平台模式下，仍然会遇到一些问题。

And I think there's still gonna be some challenges that you see with this platform model even with the more curated ones.

我知道杰夫说过，他不指望有人会推出另一个直接跟现有市场竞争的比特币永续合约。

Like, I know Jeff said, like, okay, I don't expect people to be launching, you know, another Bitcoin perp market that competes directly with the ones that already exist.

但如果某个开发者推出一个全新的小众市场，结果变得特别受欢迎呢？

But what if, you know, a builder deploys some new long tail market, that ends up becoming very popular?

这种情况下，核心市场会不会也想跟它竞争？

You know, is is that something that, like, the sort of core markets are gonna try and compete with?

会不会有好几个开发者都在抢着做同一个市场？

Are there gonna be several builders who are all chasing after the same market?

流动性分散、用户注意力分散、体验不一致，这些问题该怎么解决？

How do you deal with the sort of, like, fragmentation in liquidity, but also just in kind of mind share and and, user experience?

我觉得，等真正落地的时候，这里头会有不少棘手的挑战。

So I think there's there's gonna be a lot of, interesting challenges when the, when the rubber meets meets the road on this.

对。

Yeah.

看着他们怎么应对这件事，肯定会很有趣。

It's gonna be fascinating to watch watch their approach to that.

说到生态系统设计，我觉得稳定币的问题最值得探讨，就像你提到的，USDC 其实是 Coinbase 的主要收入来源之一，他们通过 Center 联盟和 Circle 获得分成。

And, you know, when we were discussing ecosystem design as well, I think that the question of stablecoins is probably the most interesting one because as you as you pointed out, yeah, USDC actually is a huge source of revenue for Coinbase, you know, through the rev share that they get through the center consortium and circle.

总的来说，稳定币的一大分销策略就是借助交易所。

And so this will be and and actually a huge distribution strategy in general for stablecoins is leveraging an exchange.

所以，当 Hyperliquid 推出自己的原生稳定币时——我相信这迟早会发生——会怎么样，真值得期待。

So it'll be interesting to see what happens when a native stablecoin comes to Hyperliquid, which I'm sure is probably inevitable.

对吧？

Right?

Hyperliquid 会不会像 Coinbase 那样，对稳定币交易抽成呢？

Is this something that Hyperliquid is going to try to take a rake on in the same way that Coinbase does or whatever?

最终会怎么发展，真的很值得观察。

It'll just be interesting to see how that ends up playing out.

另外，我觉得挺有意思的是，之前聊到围绕 HYPE 代币和法币资产作为交易对的生态系统设计。

But the other thing that I thought was interesting was talking about just ecosystem design around hype, the token, and dollar assets as a trading pair.

我觉得杰夫说得对，我基本同意他的观点，他们这种分工确实很有意思。

And I thought Jeff was Yeah, I largely agree with Jeff here and I think that the division that they have is super interesting.

这一直是以Rollup为中心的以太坊路线图里的核心问题，现在Solana里也开始频繁提到，就是那个Rollup的SOL代币到底该是什么角色。

I've had some This has been a core question of the rollup centric roadmap in ETH, and it's now increasingly coming up within Solana as well, which is what is the rollup SOL token.

当时大家关注这个问题，是因为想把ETH推到L2上，让它成为交易对，这在早期确实推动了ETH的需求。

But, you know, the question there being, okay, there's a little bit of attention here because we wanted to ship ETH up to L2s where it was going to be used as a trading pair, and that created a lot of the buy pressure for ETH in the early days.

但L2团队的想法是：我们想吸引新用户，而他们更愿意用美元交易，把美元当作主要交易对。

But L2s are like, hey, I want to go out and attract new users and they want to hold dollars and trade with dollars as a trading pair.

Hyperliquid一开始就是这么做的。

And that's obviously how Hyperliquid started.

所以他们的解决方案是：我们本身就有个交易所，能产生大量手续费，那就拿这些钱来做回购。

And so their solution to that was, well, we do have an exchange which is generating a tonne of fees, so we're going to do buybacks.

这种回购机制，就成了Ethan代币价值累积的主要方式。

And so that was kind of like the burn mechanism as a value accrual method for Ethan that really is.

听到他把美元在生态中的角色和Hype代币的作用区分开来，我觉得挺有启发的。

So it was interesting to hear him stratify kind of the the difference in between how he thinks about dollars in the ecosystem versus the role of hype, the token.

但我很好奇，你觉得这种清晰的划分能不能延伸到以太坊、Solana 或其他 L2 生态系统中？

But I'd be curious what you thought about that and whether or not we can extrapolate that kind of clean division in between, you know, across, you know, like the Ethereum or the Solanas or the L2s of the world as well.

对。

Yeah.

我觉得他说得特别到位，尤其是我们讨论‘你的代币算钱吗’这个问题的时候。

I thought I thought he was dead on about when when we were talking about, like, you know, is your token money?

杰夫说，你不能真拿钱作为设计目标。

And Jeff said, you can't really you can't build for money.

这根本没法操作。

It's just not actionable.

所以他当时就说，算了。

So he was like, you know what?

我们还是专心做最好的体验，做最棒的产品和平台吧。

We're just going to focus on shipping the best experiences, you know, the best, yeah, the best, like, products and and platform that we can.

我觉得，确实如此。

And I think that that, yeah.

感觉以太坊现在太盯着以太币的价值了。

It feels like Ethereum maybe has gotten too focused on Ether's money.

你知道，我手里持有很多，

Like, you know, I own a lot of this.

我当然希望它 someday 能变成真正的货币，但光这么想其实没什么实际意义。

I hope it becomes money at some point, but it's really not not super actionable.

我觉得那种观点特别清新，也确实是对的。

So I think that was, like, a really refreshing and and kind of, like, the right viewpoint to have.

有一件事我觉得以太坊和Solana很不一样，而且我不确定其他通用链能不能复制——那就是Hyperliquid自带一个原生的应用生态。

One thing that I I think is really quite different from Ether Solana, and I'm not sure it's really replicatable from these just more general purpose, chains, is that Hyperliquid has this sort of, like, native app side of things.

他们有HyperCore永续合约，你可以质押来降低交易手续费，也可以质押来上线自己的永续合约市场。

They have the HyperCore perps where you can get you can stake to get reductions in, trading fees, or you can stake to be able to deploy a perp as a, you know, the builder deployed perp market.

甚至你得竞价抢HYPE，才有资格上线一个永续合约市场。

And you even need to bid in hype to be able to, like, sort of, like, win the the right to deploy a perp market.

我相信未来还会有更多这样的模式出现。

And I'm sure there's gonna be more of these in the future as well.