Read_888 - 密码朋克银行技术栈即将到来

想象一下你需要支付园艺师的服务费用，而你的钱分散在Cash App、Venmo和PayPal这些你并不完全信任的平台上。

Imagine having to pay a landscaper for doing work, and you have money on Cash App, Venmo, and PayPal, all of which you don't fully trust.

不过你还是在每个平台都留了些余额，以备需要与朋友或特定商家交易时使用。

However, you keep a small balance on each of them just in case you need to spend between friends or with certain vendors.

这次园艺账单比往常贵了些，于是你没有将Cash App、Venmo和PayPal的资金先提现到银行账户再支付，而是直接整合了三个应用的部分余额来支付园艺师提供的统一账单。

The landscaping bill is a bit heftier than it typically is, so instead of sending funds from Cash App, Venmo, and PayPal to your bank account to then pay the landscaper instead, you combine part of the balance from each application to pay the singular invoice the landscaper has provided you.

这本质上就是Cashew协议刚刚推出的功能。

That is essentially what has just been launched on the Cashew Protocol.

这只是冰山一角。

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

比特币领域的精华，用声音呈现。

The best in Bitcoin made audible.

我是盖伊·斯旺，这里是《比特币可听》。

I am Guy Swan, and this is Bitcoin Audible.

大家好！

What is up, guys?

欢迎回到《比特币可听》。

Welcome back to Bitcoin Audible.

我是盖伊·斯旺，一个比你认识的所有人都更了解比特币的人。

I am Guy Swan, the guy who has read more about Bitcoin than anybody else you know.

今天我们要深入探讨一篇精彩短文。

And we are diving into a great little read.

现在继续带来马蒂·本特的专栏《马蒂的见解》。

We're back with Marty's Bent by Marty Bent.

他刚刚对艾伦·法林顿那期内容做了个简短而精彩的点评，正好与我们上期节目高度相关。

And he just had a great, like, really short little rip on something that was super relevant to just the last episode we had with Alan Farrington's piece.

我确实很想深入探讨并吐槽一下电子现金，这次正好给了我机会。

And I just really kinda wanted to do a bit of a dive and a rant on e cash, and this presented me with the opportunity.

我浏览了阅读清单时，这篇文章特别引人注目。

I was looking through my my read selections, and this one, like, really stood out.

我就是非常喜欢它。

And I just really liked it.

这某种程度上是对我们上期讨论内容的总结。

It's kind of a cap on a lot of the things we talked about in the previous episode.

快速插播：本节目由HRF（人权基金会）赞助，他们发布了精彩的金融自由报告并设立了发展基金。

Real fast, this show is brought to you by the HRF, the Human Rights Foundation, and their amazing financial freedom report, plus their development fund.

如果你有像Cashew这样精彩的项目，正在开发自由工具让比特币、闪电网络和电子现金更易用，我强烈建议你联系他们并订阅通讯。

If you have, like, a really fascinating project, Cashew being a great example, you are trying to build freedom tools and make Bitcoin and Lightning and e cash and all of these things accessible, I highly encourage you to reach out and, of course, subscribe to their newsletter.

相关链接都会在详情里注明。

The link will be in the details for both of those.

他们是人权斗争中极佳的信息资源库。

They're such an amazing resource for the fight and to stay informed on the fight for human rights.

对了还有明年的奥斯陆自由论坛。

Oh, and also for, next year's Oslo Freedom Forum.

一定要关注这个他们举办的重要活动，非常精彩。

Definitely check that is the big event that they put on, and it's amazing.

我去过一次，真的很想再去。

I've been there once, and I really wanna go back again.

所以别忘了也去看看那个。

So don't forget to check that out too.

最后还有，公钥。

And then lastly, pub key.

假设你能回到过去，用非常网络友好的架构重新设计互联网，但你知道Web2.0即将到来，而你想确保它不会发生，那会怎样？

So what if you could go back and redesign the Internet in a very web friendly architecture, but you knew web two was going to happen and you wanted to make sure that it wouldn't?

最重要的是你真正去中心化了那些导致垄断的关键要素。

That you actually importantly decentralized the very things that led to that consolidation.

这就是PUBKey。

That is PUBKey.

因为我实在没法在十五秒内解释清楚，我会放个链接让你们自己去了解。

And because I can't possibly explain it in, like, fifteen seconds, I'm just going to link to it so you can go check it out.

我在测试阶段已经用了一段时间，就想让你们体验下用PUBKey戒指登录PUBKey应用的感觉。

I've been using it for a while during the beta, and I just want you to experience the feeling of signing into the PUBKey app with your PUBKey ring.

先做到这一步，然后在PUBKey上关注我。

Just get that far and then follow me on PUBKey.

我会在节目详情里放链接。

I'll have link in details in the show notes.

好了。

Alright.

今天我们要聊聊电子现金。

So we're gonna talk about e cash today.

我还想接着发表一段很长的吐槽。

And I also just want to I go off in the rant to follow, which is really long.

最近他们有很多东西都相当冗长。

They have a lot of them have been pretty long recently.

但我确实有点偏离主题，试图描绘出我认为市场将如何发展以及其真正意义——比特币和闪电网络基础层无需许可的力量究竟有多强大，为什么我们某种程度上忽略了我们已经拥有的这些解决方案是多么卓越的基础，以及我们如何让市场回归到明确的信任，打破那些因为不信任网络而不使用它，而是因为所有人都在使用才被迫使用的限制。

But I really kinda go off and trying to paint a picture of how I think the market is going to evolve and what it really means, what the power of permissionlessness of the base layer of the network itself of Bitcoin and Lightning, how powerful that actually is, and why we we really kind of miss how brilliant of a foundation really we really have to find all of these solutions, and how we bring the market back to explicit trust and break down a lot of those limitations of where you aren't using a network because you trust it, but you're using it because everyone is on that network.

而且大家某种程度上都讨厌它，但你必须使用它，因为所有人都在那里。

And everybody kind of collectively hates it, but you have to use it because that's where everybody is.

比特币和闪电网络作为基础，避免了网络被控制，并允许即时结算——你不再被困在围墙花园里，如果你有这种电子现金，你只能和拥有同样电子现金的人交易。

With Bitcoin and Lightning being the foundation that avoids control of the network and allows instant settlement between like, you're no longer trapped in a walled garden of if you have this e cash, you can only you can only spend it with people who have just this e cash.

因此你可以拥有一个真正的信任市场，因为你不再局限于必须使用相同的服务、应用或铸币机构才能向对方付款。

So you can have a true market of trust because you're not limited to using the same service or app or Mint as somebody else in order to pay that that person in their app and their Mint.

读完这篇文章后，这一切应该会变得更有意义。

And this is all gonna make this should make a lot more sense after the read.

所以不进行长篇大论（毕竟现在连背景都还没交代），让我们直接开始今天的阅读吧。

So without going into a long rant that literally doesn't even have any context yet, let's go ahead and get into today's read.

标题是：《注意了》。

And it's titled, Pay attention.

《密码朋克银行体系即将到来》。

The Cypherpunk Banking Stack is coming.

作者：Marty Bent，来自Marty's Bent。

From Marty's Bent, written by Marty Bent.

未来的银行体系正在所有混乱中逐步构建。

The future banking stack is being built out in the midst of all the chaos.

引述：‘天啊，这太让我震惊了。’

Quote, my god, this blows my mind.

同时从两个不同的Cashew铸币厂支付了100,000聪的发票。

Paid a 100,000 sats invoice from two different cashew mints at the same time.

每个铸币厂贡献了50,000聪。

Each contributed 50,000 sats.

这将彻底改变Cashew钱包的用户体验。

This is gonna be a major game changer for cashew wallet user experience.

让我来解释多坚果支付。

Let me explain multi nut payments.

加州比特币，2025年5月5日。

Cali BTC, 05/05/2025.

来自加州比特币的推文。

Tweets from Cali BTC.

所有Cashew钱包都允许你使用多个铸币厂。

All Cashew wallets let you use multiple mints.

为了降低跑路风险，我们建议用户在每个铸币厂只保留少量资金。

To reduce rug risk, we encourage users to leave only small amounts on each mint.

这带来了巨大的用户体验挑战，迫使用户需要智能地分散资金到不同铸币厂。

This introduces a big user experience challenge, which forces users to distribute funds on different mints in a smart way.

当你试图用小额余额支付更大的闪电网络发票时，问题尤为突出。

It's particularly problematic when you're trying to pay a bigger Lightning invoice from your small balances.

如果没有任何一个单独余额能覆盖发票金额，你就不得不在多个铸币厂之间转移资金。

If no individual balance can cover the invoice, you're forced to shift funds around multiple mints, etc.

谁有那个时间呢？

Who has time for that?

闪电协议允许节点将单笔支付HTLC拆分为多个部分以提高到达目的地的概率，这种技术称为多路径支付。

The Lightning protocol allows nodes to split a single payment HTLC into multiple parts to increase the chance of reaching the destination, called multi path payments.

通常，这是通过单一发送方对单一接收方完成的。

Typically, that's done with one sender to one receiver.

如果你能打破规则会怎样？

What if you can just break the rules?

多坚果支付源自多个闪电网络节点共同支付同一张发票，具有原子性。即使你的各个铸币厂余额都不足以支付发票，只要总余额足够，你就能完成支付。

A multi nut payment originates from multiple Lightning nodes to pay a single invoice, atomically, Even if none of your Mint balances can cover an invoice, as long as your total balance is large enough, you can pay the invoice.

话题结束。

End thread.

当许多人正忙于上市公司宣布增持比特币储备的新闻稿、关于OP_RETURN限制的论战或更广泛的地缘政治动态时，密码朋克们正在编写代码。

While many are currently wrapped up in press releases from public companies announcing that they've added to their Bitcoin Treasuries, flame wars over op return limits, or more general geopolitical developments, cypherpunks are writing code.

当大众（包括许多比特币用户）沉迷于日常的点击诱饵话题时，真正的建设者此刻正在创造重要的东西。

While the masses, many in Bitcoin included, are enthralled in day to day clickbait banter, there are serious builders building serious things at the moment.

其中一位建设者是我们的朋友Kali，他与其他开源贡献者共同开发了Cashew协议，该协议能让用户在比特币基础上使用Chaumian电子现金。

One of those builders is our friend Kali, who alongside other open source contributors is building out the Cashew Protocol, which enables individuals to leverage Chaumian eCash on top of Bitcoin.

今天早些时候，他演示了Cashew协议的一项重大突破——多坚果支付，使用户能通过合并两个独立Chaumian铸币厂的余额来支付闪电网络发票。

Earlier today, he demoed a pretty notable breakthrough for the Cashew Protocol a multi nut payment, which enables users to pay a Lightning invoice by combining balances held in two separate Chaumian Mints.

对于不了解或需要复习Chaumian铸币厂的用户：它们允许个人将一定数量的比特币锁定在铸币厂，并获取相应数量的电子现金代币。

For those of you who are unaware or need a refresher on Chaumian Mints, they enable an individual to lock up a certain amount of Bitcoin in a mint and receive a commensurate amount of eCash tokens in return.

Chaumian和铸币厂采用盲签名方案，确保用户在使用电子现金代币时享有隐私。

Chaumy and Mints leverage a blinded signature scheme to ensure that individual users have privacy while they're spending their eCash tokens.

用户将比特币锁定在铸币厂后，铸币厂会向用户发行不同面额的代币。用户获得代币后，铸币厂无法追踪具体哪个用户在使用哪些电子现金代币。

Users lock up Bitcoin in a mint, the mint issues tokens of different denominations to those users, and after the user receives their tokens, the mint has no idea which individual user is spending which eCash tokens within the mint.

这在隐私优势的基础上进一步提升了个人用户的隐私性。

This increases the privacy of individual users on top of the privacy benefits.

使用eCash支付可实现即时结算、极低费用，并能与闪电网络等其他二层解决方案互操作。

Spending with eCash comes with instant settlement, very low fees, and is interoperable with other second layer solutions like the Lightning Network.

当用户决定使用Chaumian铸币厂时，他们实际上在做一种权衡。

When users decide to engage with Chaumian Mints, they are making a trade off.

他们信任各个铸币厂运营商不会窃取资金或贬值其铸币厂内的eCash代币，以换取能够进行私密、低成本且跨多种互操作协议的交易能力。

They are trusting the individual Mint operators not to steal their funds or debase the eCash tokens within their Mints for the ability to transact privately, cheaply and across multiple different interoperable protocols.

尽管这确实是一个不应轻率对待的权衡，但重要的是要理解像Cashew这样的Chaumian铸币协议是无许可的，这意味着任何人都可以利用这些协议的开源代码建立自己的铸币厂，参与比特币银行服务的竞争并为终端用户服务。

While this is certainly a trade off that no one should take lightly, I think it is important to understand that these Chaumian Mint protocols like Cashew are permissionless, which means that anyone can leverage the open source code these protocols are built on to spin up their own Mints, enter the competition for Bitcoin banking services, and serve end users.

由于Cashew等铸币协议的准入门槛极低，我认为竞争可以迫使铸币厂运营商以终端用户的最佳利益行事，这种说法并不夸张。

Due to the very low barrier to entry that exists among these Mint protocols like Cashew, I don't think it's crazy to say that competition can be a forcing function for Mint operators to act in the best interest of their end users.

我坚信在未来几十年里，Chaumy和铸币厂将成为比特币扩展到数十亿用户的关键部分，而Kali今天早些时候演示的功能将是这一扩展过程中至关重要的组成部分。

I strongly believe that Chaumy and Mints are going to be a vital part of scaling Bitcoin to billions of users over the coming decades, and this feature that Kali demoed earlier today is going to be a very crucial component of that scaling process.

让个人用户能够将风险分散到多个铸币厂，对于创建必要的竞争格局至关重要，这种竞争格局形成的激励机制将迫使铸币厂运营商提供可靠且有价值的服务。

Enabling individual users to distribute risk across many mints is going to be crucial to create the competitive landscape necessary for an incentive framework from which mint operators are pressured by the market to provide reliable and valuable services.

解锁将多个铸币厂的余额合并支付单一发票的功能，是朝着这个方向迈出的惊人一步。

Unlocking the ability to combine balances from multiple Mints to pay a single invoice is an incredible step in that direction.

想象一下你需要支付园艺师的工作费用，而你的钱分散在Cash App、Venmo和PayPal上，这些平台你都不完全信任。

Imagine having to pay a landscaper for doing work and you have money on Cash App, Venmo and PayPal, all of which you don't fully trust.

但你在每个平台都保留少量余额，以备不时之需，比如与朋友或特定商家交易时使用。

However, you keep a small balance on each of them just in case you need to spend between friends or with certain vendors.

这次的园艺账单比平时要高一些，于是你没有将Cash App、Venmo和PayPal的资金先转到银行账户再支付，而是直接合并使用这三个应用的部分余额来支付园艺师提供的单一发票。

The landscaping bill is a bit heftier than it typically is, so instead of sending funds from Cash App, Venmo and PayPal to your bank account and then pay the landscaper instead, you combine part of the balance from each application to pay the singular invoice the Landscaper has provided you.

这基本上就是Cashew协议刚刚推出的内容。

That is essentially what has just been launched on the Cashew Protocol.

这只是冰山一角。

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

看到Chalmeon Mint协议及其支持的应用场景持续发展，我无比兴奋。

I'm extremely excited to see the continued development of all Chalmeon Mint protocols and the use cases they enable.

迄今为止这些协议的最大软肋在于：用户被迫将风险集中在个别Mint运营商身上来解决支付体验问题。

The Achilles heel of these protocols up to this point is the fact that users are incentivized to concentrate risk with individual Mint operators to solve payment UX problems.

多坚果支付能缓解这种风险，并强化竞争市场机制的强制作用，最终为协议用户带来更好的产品。

Multi nut payments alleviate that risk and intensifies the forcing function of competitive market dynamics that should lead to better end products for users of these protocols.

我已多次强调：关于如何在协议层扩展比特币的讨论有很多。

I've said it many times, but I'll say it again: there are many discussions being had about how to scale Bitcoin at the protocol layer.

我认为依赖协议层改动来扩展比特币是不明智的。

I think it is unwise to depend on changes to the protocol layer to scale Bitcoin.

我们现有诸多工具可立即将比特币扩展到十亿级规模，只是这些方案存在尚未验证的权衡取舍。

We have many tools at our fingertips to scale Bitcoin to billions today that come with certain trade offs that have not been tested.

多坚果支付就是利用现有工具扩展比特币的绝佳范例。

Multi nut payments are a great example of ways to scale Bitcoin with the tools that are at our fingertips right now.

多数人完全没注意到，但密码朋克的未来正在我们眼前构建。

Most are completely missing it, but the cypherpunk future is being built out right before our eyes.

虽然价格飙升和语义学上的攀比确实吸引眼球，但我恳请你们超越喧嚣，关注这类真正实时解决重大用户体验痛点、且当下就可用的项目。

Number go up and semantic dick measuring contests can certainly draw a lot of attention, but I implore you to rise above the noise and follow projects like this, which are actually solving massive user experience pain points in real time with things that can be used today.

若不采用比特币，养老金将面临第二个失落的十年。

Pensions facing a second lost decade without Bitcoin adoption.

唐·贝（Don Bay）是一名消防员，正在竞选卡尺（Caliper）公司董事会席位，他在我们最近的谈话中发出了强有力的警告。

Don Bay, a firefighter running for Caliper's board of trustees, delivered a compelling warning during our recent conversation.

他指出，考珀（Cowper）公司即将离任的首席投资官将错过私募股权繁荣期称为他们的'失去的十年'。

He pointed out that Cowper's outgoing chief investment officer described missing the private equity boom as their, quote, lost decade.

贝认为，全国各地的养老基金因忽视比特币而正在错失另一个机会，导致它们长期资金不足，同时不得不寻求风险越来越高的传统投资。

Bay argues that pension funds nationwide are setting themselves up for another missed opportunity by ignoring Bitcoin, leaving them perpetually underfunded while seeking increasingly risky traditional investments.

'到2035年，全国各地的养老基金都会发表类似评论说：嘿，我们现在要投资比特币了。'

Quote, you're gonna have similar commentary from pensions around the country in 2035 saying, hey, we're going to get into Bitcoin now.

'我们有过一个失去的十年，当时机会明明就摆在眼前，我们本不需要做太多，只需去了解它，但我们却错过了。'

We had a lost decade where it was just staring us right in the face, and we didn't really need to do much but learn about it, and we missed the boat.

多姆贝（Dombey）。

Dombey.

我长期坚持认为机构对比特币的采用是不可避免的，但时机对回报至关重要。

I've long maintained that institutional adoption of Bitcoin is inevitable, but timing matters tremendously for returns.

鉴于加州公务员退休基金（CalPERS）资金充足率仅为75%且首席投资官更替频繁，贝提出的教育普及和渐进式采用方案提供了一条切实可行的前进道路。

With CalPERS sitting at just 75% funded and facing high CIO turnover, Bay's approach of education and incremental adoption offers a practical path forward.

养老基金因波动性恐惧而回避比特币的问题，只能通过适当的教育来解决——这些管理着数万亿退休金的巨型金融机构恰恰严重缺乏这方面的认知。

The volatility fears that keep pensions away from Bitcoin can only be addressed through proper education, something severely lacking in these massive financial institutions managing trillions in retirement funds.

点击此处收听完整播客，了解更多关于比特币在能源转型中的作用、考珀公司治理的政治因素，以及工会如何将比特币纳入资产负债表的内容。

Check out the full podcast here for more on Bitcoin's role in energy transitions, the politics of Cowper's governance, and how unions are adopting Bitcoin on their balance sheets.

最后一点想法。

Final thought.

我对Z世代改变了看法。

I've come around on Gen z.

我非常看好。

I'm pretty bullish.

好的。

Alright.

希望你们喜欢这个。

I hope you guys enjoyed that one.

一直是Marty's Bent的粉丝。

Always a fan of Marty's Bent.

我强烈推荐它，我会在节目说明里放一个链接。

I would, highly recommend it, and I'll put a I'll put a link down in the show notes.

再次强调，这是我持续关注的少数几份简报之一。

Again, it's one of the few newsletters that I keep up with.

我想我大概有10到15份真正喜欢持续关注的简报。

I think I have, like, maybe 10 or 15 that I really like to keep up with.

比如HRF的《自由报告》就是其中之一。

Like, Freedom Report being one of them by HRF.

实际上他已经把它总结完了。

Also, he actually wrapped it up.

我跳过了这部分，因为它有点像一个小清单。

I skipped this part just because it was a little it was just kinda like a little list.

它提到了今天正在举行的比特币政策峰会，一些近期头条，还对他们的1031基金做了简要分析。

It mentions the Bitcoin policy summit that is literally happening today and some recent headlines and also, mentioning and kinda giving a breakdown for ten thirty one, their fund.

我会附上链接，感兴趣的话你可以去看看。

So I'll have the link so you can go check that out if you're interested.

但这个确实引起了我的注意，因为我认为它确实代表了该领域正在发生的事情以及始终处于前沿的建设方向。

But this one really caught my attention because I think it really is, you know, the the signal of what's happening in the space and what's being built is always at the edge.

令人惊讶的是，人们如此悲观，认为一切都已被现有体系捕获——他们完全盯着比特币储备公司或贝莱德推出ETF这类事情，却未能意识到其中最大部分始终会是所谓'上轮成熟期的常态化'，也就是这个事物增长阶段的收尾。

And it's amazing how much you know, I I it's crazy to me that people are, like, pessimistic or, like, oh, it's all captured now or whatever because they're focused entirely on Bitcoin treasury companies or BlackRock making an ETF and failing to realize that the biggest portion of it is always is always going to be the quote, unquote normalization of the last era of maturation, of of the the growth phase of this thing.

就像今天谈到互联网时只盯着Twitter和Facebook，而非比特币和Noster一样。

You know, it's like focusing today entirely on Twitter and Facebook when it comes to the Internet rather than Bitcoin and Noster.

在我看来，解决前一个时代最前沿问题的最后阶段终将常态化，这是必然的。

Like, in my mind, it only makes sense that kind of the last era of what was the bleeding edge of solving the problems of the era before is going to be normalized.

它会扩展到能解决特定问题的规模。

Like, it's going to scale up to the point that whatever problem that that is specifically solving.

当我们审视比特币的基础层时，它解决的是最根本的问题——而这个最根本的问题并非零售支付。

And when looking when we're looking at Bitcoin, the base layer, it's solving the largest problem, and the largest problem is not retail payments.

最根本的问题在于全球货币体系的信任与独立性——一个不受单一政治实体控制、也不受任何大小政治集团支配的全球货币资产。

The largest problem is the trust and independence of a global monetary system, of a global monetary asset that isn't controlled by one political entity or subject to any small or large group of political entities.

它正在解决信任层问题，并将在这方面持续扩展。

It is solving the trust layer, and it is going to scale up at doing that.

我们最需要的正是这种为货币商品和货币流通提供无需信任的全球基础层。

And what we need more than anything is that trustless global foundational layer for the monetary good and monetary access.

我认为其无需许可的特性是最被低估的——人们对此强调得远远不够。

And I just think the permissionless nature is one of the least like, people don't talk that up enough.

人们不明白这在当前语境下的重要性——现在所有人都过分关注零售支付网络。

People don't understand how important that is in the context of like, everybody's so focused on retail payments network.

比特币能成为优秀的零售支付网络吗？

Can Bitcoin be a good retail payment network?

我们如何打造一个更好的零售支付网络？

How do we make it a better retail payment network?

我们已经失去了理解黄金失败原因的能力——金本位的崩溃并非源于零售层面。

And have lost the the understanding of why it is that gold failed because it wasn't at retail that we lost the gold standard.

零售层并非问题的核心，真正的问题在于全球资本定价错误，以及无法在庞大资本市场中确保价格稳定，这源于现实资源的实际稀缺性。

It was not like, the retail layer is the thinnest layer at the edge of where it actually where the bulk of the problem of mispricing the world's capital and the inability to actually secure prices in massive capital markets against the limitation, the actual scarcity of real resources on the ground.

早在互联网交易出现之前，黄金就已经失败了——甚至在人们去商店用现金支付之前就已发生。

Gold failed at that way before we were sending transactions on the Internet, and it happened way before it it wasn't at the going to the store and paying somebody your money.

黄金的失败并非发生在那个层面。

That was not the level where gold failed.

高度中心化带来了诸多问题：监控问题、信任问题、限制问题——比如我们甚至难以获得一个经过认证的服务。

And the massive centralization in so many of the problems that we have with surveillance, with, trust, with limits on, like, what we can even have as, like, an authored service, like, how difficult it is.

即便在金融科技时代，服务同质化严重，几乎无法真正区别于你使用的其他服务或其他银行。

Even with fintech, the fact that there is so little variety, there is so little real opportunity to actually be different from the other service that you use or from the other bank.

你是否真正了解创办银行需要什么条件？

Have you ever actually looked into what it takes to make a bank?

几年前我纯粹出于好奇研究过这个问题。

I actually did this a few years ago out of just sheer curiosity.

甚至要获得申请许可的资格——你要明白，你必须先获得申请资格。

There's something, like, to even ask to even, like, get on the table for asking a permission from the intel like, understand, you have to ask permission.

你不能随便创办银行。

You can't just make a bank.

你必须接入别人拥有的网络体系。

You have to be able you have to be plugged in to somebody else's network that they own.

这就像向Twitter申请API，只不过这次是向法定货币系统申请API。

It's like asking for an API from Twitter, except that it's an API from fiat.

要向美联储申请，你必须先在他们那里开设账户。

From a Federal Reserve, you have to get an account with them.

而要开设账户，仅仅为了能上谈判桌启动流程，你就得持有价值数百万美元的债券作为某种证明——证明'我正在做这件事'。

And to start one, just to just to get on the table and get the ball rolling, you have to have like a multimillion dollar bond as like this this like proof of I'm doing this.

因此它从一开始就被限制在极高的门槛里，想想那些技术障碍、要填写的表格、需要层层审批的环节、卡片发行方的许可程序——所有这些千篇一律的流程。

So it's immediately, like, limited to such a huge degree and just think about the technical hurdles, the forms you have to fill out, the number of different layers of people that you have to ask permission for, the card issuer permission and programs that you have to do, which are all the same, are all the same.

这就是个巨大的饼干模具。

It's a big giant cookie cutter.

所以最终所有人的收费标准都趋同。

That's why everybody ends up charging the same fees.

这就是为什么所有系统和金融科技工具最终都大同小异，只能在边缘功能上做些几乎无关痛痒的差异化竞争。

That's why all the systems and the fintech tools all end up being the same, and they try to compete on the edges with these, little things that barely really make a difference.

实际上他们不过是想成为更酷的品牌——像Venmo、PayPal和Cash App那样。

And really, they're just kinda trying to be the cooler brand with Venmo and PayPal and and and Cash App.

当然，这些系统之间互不通信。

And, of course, they don't talk.

它们彼此完全不互通。

They don't interoperate with each other.

我无法从Cash App转账到PayPal。

I can't send something from Cash App to PayPal PayPal.

它们依然存在所有相同的局限性。

They still have all the same limitations.

他们仍然掌控着后端系统。

They still own the back end.

就像是所有功能都勉强能用。

It's like everything kinda works.

看起来在1000美元以下时运行飞快，但一旦涉及两三千美元，一切又变得糟糕透顶。

It seems like it works really fast when you're in the sub $1,000 range, but as soon as you're sending 2 or $3,000, everything sucks again.

最终还是回归法币体系，因为你实际上必须使用真实的法币通道。

It's all right back to Fiat because you actually have to use the real fiat rails.

你无法使用那个内嵌在应用里的可笑附加层——那本质上只是Cash App内部用来转移交易的电子表格。

You can't use this little, like, silly layer on top that's actually built into the app, and it's actually just Cash App's internal spreadsheet that you're moving transactions between.

然后他们还要对你进行双重身份验证，由于没人真正持有密钥，这存在巨大风险。

And then they gotta, like, double KYC you, and then there's this huge risk because nobody's actually holding keys.

你只是某个中心化机构的账户，而该机构本身又隶属于另外两大中心化主体，它们监控着所有交易，你还得沿着层级逐级完成身份验证。

You're just an account with some central party who's actually just subservient and and dealing with account their own account that you're just a subaccount of for two other major central parties that are all, like, monitoring and watching everybody's transactions, and you have to KYC up the ladder.

整个体系就是个疯狂的控制与权限结构。

Like, the whole thing is an insane structure of control and permissions.

当然，你们只是在互相转移债务。

And, of course, you're only sending debt back and forth.

这完全建立在信用基础上。

It's all based on credit.

你仍然依赖系统中每个实体来完成支付，如果所有人都在各处支付手续费——由于这是封闭网络且需要许可，他们基本上就是在收过路费。

You're you're still just reliant on every other entity in the system to have fulfilled payments, and you're all if everybody's paying fees everywhere, and they basically because this is a closed network, because they can require permission, they basically charge the fee.

他们基本上可以为所欲为。

They can basically just kinda, like, run the gambit.

只要他们收取的费用不至于糟糕到让人愿意投入300亿美元甚至更多去建设一套完全替代性的基础设施并吸引1亿用户——实际上没人会这么做，因为这里的网络效应简直强得离谱。

As long as they don't charge a fee so bad that somebody's gonna put up $30,000,000,000 or maybe more to build a completely alternative infrastructure and onboard a 100,000,000 customers, which nobody's going to do because the network effect here is just ungodly.

这简直不可思议，因为它是一个需要许可的网络。

Like, it's incredible because it's a permissioned network.

就像，你连门都进不去。

Like, you just you can't even get in the door.

你实际上依赖其他人才能做任何事。

It's other people that you are reliant on to actually do anything.

你自己什么都做不了。

You can't do anything yourself.

你不能随便造个东西出来。

You can't just, like, build a thing.

你不能随便开家银行。

You can't just make a bank.

比如现在，我可以去我的车间直接造个东西。

Like, right now, I could go down to my shop and I could just build something.

对吧？

Right?

我可以坐在这里用电脑开发个应用，然后其他人就能使用它。

I could sit here on my computer and I could just build an app, and then somebody else could use it.

我能这么做是因为切割技术是无须许可的。

I can do that because my my the saw the saw the technology of cutting things is permissionless.

我能这么做是因为互联网、我的电脑以及所有编程代码都是无须许可的。

I can do that because the Internet and my computer and all of the programming, the code is permissionless.

比如，我不必向你请求API就能使用Python语言来编写一个简单的脚本，从而在我的工作流程中实现某些功能。

Like, I don't have to request an API to you to make use of the Python language to then build a simple script to to make something in my workflow.

这就是我们拥有所有这些工具的原因。

This is the reason we have all of these tools.

这就是我们拥有数百万应用程序的原因。

This is the reason we have a million apps.

你会注意到我们所有问题存在的地方——那些需要修复、需要寻找新解决方案的地方——最终都会回到权限系统上。

And you notice where all of our problems exist, where everything is like, oh, we need to fix this, and we need to find a new solution for this is where we end up back in a permission system.

比如我们必须通过苹果应用商店才能在iOS设备上架应用。

It's where we have to use the Apple App Store to get on the iOS devices.

比如我们必须获得政府许可才能提供货币服务，或是向他人提供可以发送支付款项的应用程序服务。

It's where we have to ask government permission in order to provide a monetary service or to provide a app service to somebody else where you can send payments.

就像推特二十年前本可以添加打赏功能，却因监管问题无法实现——他们会被扼杀至消亡，而且会面临比如今更严苛的KYC（了解你的客户）流程，那将是一场噩梦。而现在他们不得不这么做，全因为那些糟糕的机器人和AI问题。

It's when Twitter could have added tips twenty years ago, but they couldn't because of a regulatory problem, because they would have been choked out of existence, and it would have been an an unbelievable nightmare with worse KYC than they already have, which now they have to do because of the horrible bots and AI stuff.

无需许可就是一切。

Permissionlessness is everything.

它就是一切。

It is everything.

它属于那种核心三要素之一——如果你失去了它们，即使不是直接失去，也基本上会连带失去其他东西。

It's one of the it it's it is tied into, like, that that trifecta of those core things that if you lose them, you basically lose the other things even if you didn't directly lose them.

明白吗？

You know?

比如隐私和资产保障，所有这些好东西。

Like privacy and assurances of the asset, all of that good stuff.

对吧？

Right?

就像这个系统的核心属性是相互依存的。

Like, these core attributes of the system are interdependent.

它们实际上不是独立的属性。

They're not actually individual attributes.

它们的存在本身就依赖于其他因素。

They're dependent on the other things to actually exist in the first place.

所以它必须是去中心化的，而无许可性只是去中心化的自然属性。

So it must be decentralized, and permissionlessness is just a nature of decentralization.

但我想试着描绘这种力量有多强大。

But I want to try to paint the picture of how powerful that is.

回到我试图创办银行的想法。

Go back to the idea of me trying to start a bank.

我不是指要等两年才能获得许可——我是说，看看那个叫什么来着？

And I don't mean from the waiting two years for permission for I mean, look at, what was it?

是Caitlin Long的银行吗？

Was Caitlin Long's bank?

就是他们一直在尝试成立的那家完全储备银行。

The one that they've been trying to get that's literally just a fully reserved bank.

他们建立的这个系统正在申请许可，这很可笑，因为它基本上会成为托管领域最安全的银行。

Like, they the the system that they have set up and they're trying to get permission for is hilarious because it's it would basically be the most secure bank in the custodia.

托管银行。

Custodia.

它本应是整个银行体系中最稳健的银行，而这恰恰是他们无法获得许可的原因——这很荒谬——你必须像其他所有人一样加杠杆。

The it would be the most sound bank in the entire banking system, and that's actually why they can't get permission, which is crazy, is that you have to leverage up just like everybody else.

这有点像2008、2009年的强制纾困，BB&T银行甚至根本不想要——我记得是BB&T。

It's a little bit like the bailouts back in 2008, 2009 is actually forced like, BB and T didn't even want I think it was BB and T.

BB&T银行连这些贷款都不想要。

BB and T didn't even want the loans.

他们不想要纾困资金，却被强制接受，并受到威胁——如果不接受将面临灾难性后果，因为这将暴露某些银行是负责任的，而其他银行完全是在实施欺诈。

They did not want the bailout, but they were forced to take it, and they were threatened if they didn't take it because of what a disaster it would be if it showed or if they were allowed to demonstrate that certain banks were responsible and other banks were entirely well, just committed fraud.

必须营造出整个体系濒临崩溃、不得不拯救的假象。

It had to be that the entire system was dying and they had to save it.

绝不能承认存在骗子，而本可以安然无恙的人只是因为没有行骗。

It couldn't be that there were crooks and that you actually could have been fine if you weren't a crook.

但请仔细想想。

But just think about it.

别管他们是否给你许可，或者你要等多久才能获得许可。

Ignore the whole do they even give you permission and how long do you have to wait to get permission?

单从技术角度来说，运营一家正常运转的银行需要具备哪些条件？

But just from a technical standpoint, what all do you have to have in place to have a bank that works?

你需要依赖多少其他实体？

How many other entities are you dependent on?

你需要在多少不同地方开设多少个账户？

How many accounts do you have to have at how many different places?

还有审查流程、设立手续、表格文件、合规架构、数据共享——具体需要提供哪些数据？

And what's the process of vetting and setup and forms and, you know, structuring of compliance, and giving and what data do you have to share?

你需要从所有这些不同方式中选择哪一种，才能技术上实现一个具备银行卡功能的银行系统，让人们能往账户里存钱，并提供与多家法币机构挂钩的相关银行服务，以及托管服务。

What do you have to plug into from all of these different ways to actually technically to just get something up that works as a bank with a card and where people can bring send you money in an account, and you can provide them relevant banking services tied to a bunch of different fiat institutions and, you know, custodial offerings.

说实话，我甚至不愿去细想那种体验会有多糟糕。

Like, that doesn't even like, I don't even want to think too hard about how horrible that experience probably is.

现在想想，从技术上讲，我要建立一个电子现金铸币厂会有多困难。

Now think about how difficult technically it would be for me to set up set up an ecash mint.

我是说，我打赌我大概二十分钟就能搞定一个。

I mean, just I I bet I could I bet I could have one up in probably twenty minutes.

其实我连看都没看过具体内容。

I mean, I haven't even looked at it.

我也没实际操作过。

I haven't done it.

但我打赌我建的甚至能支持Nostr钱包的电子现金功能。

But I bet I could have one that even works with the Nostr Wallet to support e cash.

轻松一小时以内搞定。

I under an hour easily.

比如我可以暂停播客，然后说'让我快速建个电子现金铸币厂'。

Like, I could just pause the podcast and I could be like, ah, let me set up an e cash mint really quick.

接着我还能回来继续录完今天的节目。

And then I could come back to the podcast, and I could still finish the episode for the day.

猜猜还有什么？

And guess what else?

我连邮件都不用发。

I don't have to email anybody.

我不需要请求许可。

I don't have to ask permission.

我不需要填写表格。

I don't have to fill out a form.

要明白，我并不是说监管环境表明我可以合法地这样做，而且没有问题，也不意味着我不需要对客户进行KYC（了解你的客户）之类的操作。

And understand, I'm not saying that the regulatory environment suggests that I can legally do this and that there's no problem and that I'm not supposed to KYC my customer or anything like that.

这不是我要说的重点。

That's not what I'm talking about.

我是从技术角度讨论——我是否希望它存在？

I'm talking about from a technical point of do I want it to exist?

就像，如果我完全不知情，仿佛生活在某种信息茧房里，单纯从监管角度认为这根本无需担忧或考虑，我只想提供并调整服务，然后通过Noster或其他任何他们使用的钱包提供给他人。

Like, if I didn't know, like, I was just in some sort of a bubble and I just thought that, right, from a regulatory standpoint that there wasn't even anything to be concerned or to consider, and I just wanted to offer and make amends and then offer it to someone else on Noster or with, you know, whatever wallet that they're using.

我永远不会遇到这种情况：有人跳出来说'你不能联网，因为你没有建立这套向我们提供特定数据的合规架构，也没有验证用户身份'。

Like, I would never reach a point where somebody was like, do you you can't, you know, you can't connect to the Internet because you haven't set up this compliance structure that feeds us this particular data and, you know, prove somebody's identity.

这种障碍根本不会存在。

Like, there would just never be that barrier would never exist.

最终我可能运营着这个电子现金铸币系统，如果公开运作且稍有起色，几个月后就会收到勒令停止的邮件。

Like, I would just end up running the ecash mint, and then somebody would you know, if I did it publicly, somebody would just you know, a couple of months, if it was even slightly successful, I'd get an email saying cease and desist.

然后我会想：等等——

And I like, wait.

什么？

What?

没有任何障碍能阻止我提供这项服务。

I don't like, nothing would be in my way from providing this service.

这仍然是一个可信的托管服务，但关键在于——与建立铸币厂、支付系统或小型企业不同，它不需要10万客户基础就能实现可持续运营，而是为两个人服务即可。

And this is still a trusted custodial service, But just that difference, just that difference from setting up some sort of a mint or payment system or little business for not needing a 100,000 customers to start out to even begin to be sustainable, but for two people.

我们可以直接试用，而且确实可行。

We can just try it out and it works.

它确实有效，我可以直接发送给Noster上的任何人。

It works and I could send it to literally anybody on Noster.

正是这种无需许可的特性。

Just that element of permissionlessness.

关键在于任何人都能开发、接入和提供服务——这与全球法币体系中的一切形成鲜明对比。

The fact that anybody can build, anybody can plug in, and anybody can provide a service in comparison to literally everything, everything in the global fiat system.

仅此一点就足够颠覆——即便我们只能使用中心化可信服务，但关键在于服务提供者的准入门槛和提供服务的难度发生了根本性变化。

That alone, even if all it did was mean that we could only use centralized trusted services, but simply that was the change, the dynamic of the change when it comes to who can offer that service and how difficult it is to offer that service.

这一项改变就足以颠覆世界。

That singular change is world shattering.

我想打个比方：这就像从模拟ISP升级到数字ISP的跨越。

I would I would liken it to But if I wanted an analogy to to try to get someone in picture to think about how big of a deal it is, is that it's a little bit like being able to go from a analog ISP to a digital ISP.

这话怎么理解？

Now what do I mean by that?

就像你的网络服务商必须实际铺设线路到你家。

So the Internet your Internet service provider, like, literally has to run lines to your house.

对吧？

Right?

现实中这些线路往往需要多家公司共享带宽——本质上是个许可网络，他们共享着通往你家的那根（运气好可能是两根）物理线路的带宽。这意味着你的选择只有共享同轴电缆的三家公司，或是拥有光纤的那一家（其实就两种选择）。

Like, there's lines on the road, and in fact, a lot of the same companies end up having to rent space, like, rent bandwidth on those lines just to offer you the service, which means that it's like a permissioned network where they're actually sharing the the available bandwidth on the one physical line or maybe two if you're lucky that connect to your house, which means that your options are the three companies sharing the coax or the one company that owns the fiber, which is really just two options.

现在想象一下，如果你根本不需要任何实体关系。

Now imagine if you don't actually need any physical relationship whatsoever.

现实世界中没有任何你必须连接的东西。

There's nothing in the real world that you actually have to connect.

你可以拥有一个数字化的关系。

You can have a digital one.

实际上任何能编写软件的人都能让你连接到这个网络。

And literally anybody who can just write a piece of software and that you're just like connected to this.

你可以喜欢远在北卡罗来纳州的我。

You can like like me right here in North Carolina.

只需往我的调制解调器里粘贴一个网络地址就行。

By just like pasting an address, like a like a Internet address into my modem.

我的网络服务提供商可以是中国深圳某个只为10个人服务的随机家伙。

I could have my Internet service provider be some random dude running it for 10 people in Shenzhen, China.

更疯狂的是我还连接到了更广阔的互联网。

And even crazier is I was connected to the broader Internet.

就像我可以直接连接到所有内部网络，就是这样。

Like like I I could just connect to all the inner like, that was it.

我可以直接使用它，我在哪里根本不重要。

I I could just use it just didn't matter where I was.

我可以选择俄罗斯的服务器，也可以选择印度的。

I could I could pick one in Russia, I could pick one in India.

我还可以选择巴西的。

I could pick one in Brazil.

我可以选一个欧洲的。

I could pick one in Europe.

无所谓。

Doesn't matter.

现在全球任何一家互联网服务提供商我都可以选择。

Any ISP in the world is now on the table for me.

我的选择范围从两家伪装成四家的公司，直接扩展到了全球所有互联网公司。

My selection just went from two different companies pretending to be four different companies to literally all Internet companies.

全部。

All of them.

世界任何角落。

Anywhere in the world.

正因为这张联合互联网的存在，这张连接我们所有人的虚无网络，让我能访问所有互联网服务。

And because of this joint net Internet, because because there's this this ethereal network that somehow connects us all, I have access to all the Internet services.

这就是我们讨论电子现金时所说的——拥有一个纯软件版本的支付系统，就像铸币厂一样，可供全球任何人使用。而借助闪电网络，凭借即时支付结算能力，通过支付闪电发票，我瞬间就能与所有人建立连接。

This is what we're talking about when it comes to e cash and having like a mint, having a pure software version of a payment system that you can use by or for anyone anywhere in the world, and then because of net because of the Lightning Network, because of the the instant payment and the settlement, the ability to pay a Lightning invoice, I'm immediately connected to everyone.

我可以在中国深圳通过Noster平台给你发送eCash聪，你直接就能收到这些聪。

I can send my one dude in Shenzhen, China, eCash Sats to you on Noster, and you just receive Sats.

你甚至不需要知道我在用什么。

You don't even have to know what I'm using.

这完全是因为：需要央行账户授权的层级已被比特币取代，需要Fedwire、ACH和Visa兼容性才能支付的环节已被去中心化、无需许可的闪电网络取代。

And this is specifically because the you need a central bank account permissioned level has been replaced with Bitcoin, and the you need Fedwire and ACH and Visa compatibility in order to make payments has been replaced with a decentralized permissionless Lightning.

单从结构体系来看，这比法币系统要优越10到100倍。

Like, as a structure, just as a system, this is 10 to a 100 times better than the Fiat system.

作为一个网络，它目前规模尚小，但将比它正在取代的法币体系有价值得多——这就像将互联网与广播媒体对比：前者让你能自由决定做什么、与谁交谈、获取什么内容、如何触达人群、如何在网络上建立社群；而后者就像收音机和广播电视，你只能受限地使用几个主要频道及其传播的观点。

As a network, it is still small, but it is going to be so much more valuable than the fiat system it is replacing because it's just going it's it's literally going to be like comparing the Internet to broadcast media to, like, the three main channels that everybody got and the opinions that were shared on them versus what can what can you do, who can you talk to, what can you access, how can you reach people, how can you build networks and communities on the Internet versus what you have limited when you have radio and broadcast TV.

显然，如果把前互联网时代的媒体价值总和与互联网相比，仅从结构上看互联网就已价值高出10到100倍，更不用说由此带来的网络规模将呈数量级增长。

Obviously, if you were just adding up the media that existed before the Internet and then you compare it to the Internet, the Internet is 10 to a 100 times more valuable because of just the structure of it, let alone the fact that the network is going to be orders of magnitude larger as a consequence of it.

具体到我的思考中，这类事物的演进似乎总是进两步退一步——我们先是构想出某种服务或运作模式的心理模型，但初期仍以人工方式实现。

And specifically in my thinking of you know, the evolution of these things always seems to be a one two steps forward, one step back sort of thing where we create this, you know, most things exist in the realm of creating some sort of service or, like, kind of mental model for how things should work, but then they're implemented manually.

对吧？

Right?

它们先以模拟形式实现，然后我们才找到方法将核心功能自动化或制定协议，从而迈入新时代。

They're implemented in some analog sense, and then we figure out how to automate or create a protocol for one of those core functions, and it kind of moves into this new era.

现在我们在更高层级上又退了一步，因为这并未从根本上解决问题。

Now we have this one step back at the layer above because it doesn't fundamentally solve the problem.

这都只是发展轨迹的一部分。

It's all just a trajectory.

对吧？

Right?

这不过是单向演进光谱上的进程。

It's just a spectrum of moving in one direction.

但我认为我们正持续迈向构建能自主运行的体系，人们参与其中——这种激励机制的建立纯粹源于生存需求。

But I think we're consistently moving toward building structures that stand on their own and people participate within them, like and the incentives are set up because it's simply because of survival.

我并不认为技术最终必然通向自由和去中心化。

I don't think this is like, oh, technology is ultimately freedom and decentralizing.

我认为只是因为去中心化和自由具有适应变化的本质，才是能应对环境变迁的唯一选择。

I think it's just that decentralization and freedom are the only thing that actually have the adaptive nature to overcome a changing environment.

你必须进化。

You you have to evolve.

如果你不符合进化的自然动力与趋势，终将碰壁。

If you're not in line with the natural incentives and flow of evolution, you're just going to run into a wall at some point.

就像，中心化意味着脆弱。

Like, centralization is fragility.

它确实能分散解决问题的途径，但也会变得异常脆弱。

It it works to spread out the access to the solution to a problem, but it becomes incredibly brittle.

它像陶瓷一样坚硬，非常非常坚硬，但也非常非常易碎。

It's it's hard like ceramic, like it's an it's a very, very hard thing, but it's also very, very brittle.

所以它能正常运行，直到突然分崩离析。

So it works right up until it breaks apart.

我认为任何试图建立激励机制的行为，让大部分人在激励框架内工作，而另一部分人在框架外强制执行，就像让裁判也参与比赛一样荒谬。

And I believe anything that attempts to create incentives in which some group of people where the larger group of people work inside of the incentive structure, but another group of people outside and enforce the incentive structure, you can't have people it's it's like having your referees also be part of the game.

所以你看，如果裁判也参与比赛，这根本无法避免。

So, you know, if your referees like, and you can't escape that.

如果系统由人运行，那么裁判必然也是游戏的一部分，因为社会游戏必须包含所有人。

If the if the system is run by people, then necessarily the referees are part of the game because the game of society must encompass everyone.

没有人能真正置身于社会之外。

There's nobody who can just, like, be outside of society.

我们建立这些治理体系时，假装那些人可以超然物外，甚至编造出他们是公仆的神话，说他们毫无私心、无欲无求。

So we set these governance systems up as if those people are separate, and then we even have this, like, weird mythology that they're public servants, and they have no ill intent, and they couldn't possibly want things.

他们永远不可能自私或偏颇——这种想法简直愚蠢至极。

They couldn't ever be selfish or biased, which is so stupid.

这简直是最典型的，这种内容只适合教给幼儿园到四年级的孩子，因为只有那个年龄段你才会傻到真的相信这些。

It's it's the most like, it only makes sense to teach that to people in kindergarten through fourth grade because that's the only time that you're stupid enough to really buy it.

等你真正长大后就会发现，基本上每个人都会撒谎，都会把事情扭曲成对自己有利的角度，这就像是一种天性。

You act when you actually grow up and you realize that basically everybody lies and everybody twists things to their perspective or what benefits them, like, there's just kind of like a natural thing.

你根本不可能让一个二十七八岁或三十多岁的人真的吞下这套说辞。

You couldn't you couldn't get somebody who's in their late twenties or thirties to really swallow that.

这是件非常非常困难的事。

That's a very, very difficult thing.

但如果你在他们二三四年级时就灌输这些，他们长大后就会深信不疑，甚至忘记去质疑。

But if you teach them that when they're in second, third, and fourth grade, and they just grow up believing it, they forget to question it.

他们永远不会想到：哦，我该重新审视这个观点了。

It never just comes into their realm of like, oh, I should reassess this idea.

通常他们的世界观和情感状态会与这个观念深度绑定，筑起高墙，当你试图指出时，他们甚至会暴怒——因为意识到自己一生都错了实在太痛苦了。

And often their worldview and emotional state becomes so invested in that idea that it they build up this wall, and they just get angry when you even, like, put it's so uncomfortable to even begin to realize that you've been wrong about that your whole life.

所以当运行系统的人类本身也是系统产出的组成部分时，根本不可能保持公正。

So when you have humans running the system also necessarily being part of the outcome of that system, you there's no way to have impartiality.

如果规则本身都要受所谓'执法者'的主观解读影响，而执法者又能从中获利，那整个体系注定完蛋——这绝对没有任何转圜余地。

There's no absolutely no way if the rules themselves become subjective to their inter to the interpretation of the quote, unquote enforcer, and the enforcer themselves can profit from that, the entire thing is doomed.

只是时间问题罢了。

It's just a matter of time.

如果裁判亲自下场踢足球还能得分，甚至能随意分配分数，那最后赢家肯定是裁判——事情必然如此发展。

If the referees are in the actual football game and they can earn points and the referees are able to just hand out points, the referees are gonna end up winning the game, and that's just how it's going to be.

最终整个比赛会彻底变质，不再是为了踢出精彩的足球（或其他任何运动）而存在。

And everybody's going to end up the game is gonna be completely it's gonna devolve from actually trying to produce good football or whatever the sport is.

与其精进运动技能，不如说这正在演变成一种体制，一种讨好裁判的游戏。

It rather than be good at the sport, it's going to devolve into a system, into a game of pampering the referees.

你如何拉近关系？

How do you cozy up?

你如何与那些随意打分的人交朋友？

How do you become friends with the people who just arbitrarily hand out points?

因此在我看来，市场试图寻找中心化的解决方案。

And so as I see it, what happens is the market attempts to find centralized solutions.

它试图构建问题解决方案，并将其作为服务提供。

It tries to build solutions to problems and offer them as a service.

但当这些问题涉及人与人之间的协作与组织时，最终这些方案都会转向协议——因为这才是真正解决问题的途径，而中心化服务提供的解决方案总会演变成庞大、脆弱且易腐败的实体。

But when those problems are cooperation problems and organization problems between people, eventually, those things shift towards protocols because those are the only real solutions to those problems because the centralized service provided solutions always turn to giant centralized, very brittle, and very corruptible entities.

这甚至不是自由优于共产主义或道德优越的问题。

And it's not even a matter of, like, freedom is better than communism or morally superior.

而是生存能力的问题。

It's a matter of survivability.