BTC146: Broken Money 2/2 w/ Lyn Alden (Bitcoin Podcast)

就是新一代人从小就这么习惯了。

Like, just newer people kind of grow up with it.

对他们来说，这更自然。

It's more natural to them.

只要激励机制合理，它就会慢慢融入社会，而比特币的固定总量和去中心化特性，正好让它在这段过程中更加稳固。

And it just kind of slowly puts itself in in society over time as long as the incentives make sense, which, you know, Bitcoin's fixed supply and decentralization helps it be robust through that process.

这是我对于这个问题的第一个回答。

That's my first answer to question.

第二个回答是，很多人以为美元是永恒不变的，觉得现在看到的美元，五十年后也差不多还是这样，顶多就是慢慢通胀而已，本质上不会有什么大变化。

The second answer to the question is that people often assume that the dollar is a steady state, that the dollar as it looks now is roughly gonna look like the dollar in fifty years, except, of course, it'll have gradual inflation along the way, but that it is essentially gonna look the same as it does now.

但你要是看发展中国家就会发现，尽管它们的本币严重贬值，比特币的波动性却还是太高，以至于很难被广泛接受。

One of the problems you see is that if you look at developing countries in particular, Bitcoin is often too volatile often to accept even though they have a major debasement problem with their local currency.

所以很多国家的人转而选择了稳定币。

And so a lot of them jump to stablecoins.

你要是看阿根廷，就会有人这么说：我懂比特币，也长期持有了一些。

You know, if you look in Argentina, you'll see someone, okay, says, well, I understand Bitcoin and I hold some of it long term.

但如果我想把钱存六个月，我不会选择比特币，因为可能会贬值。

But if I wanna hold money for six months, I don't wanna hold in Bitcoin because I could lose value.

我会用泰达币。

I'll hold it in Tether.

对他们来说，美元显然比阿根廷比索靠谱多了。

And from their perspective, it's you know, a dollar is way better than the Argentine peso.

尽管泰达币是中心化的，但它的核心不在阿根廷，这才是他们最在意的。

And even though Tether centralized, the central hub is not in Argentina, which is for them the key thing.

他们说：当然，我不会把全部积蓄都放进去，但作为六个月的过渡选择，它真的很合适。

And they're saying, well, sure, I'm not gonna put my life savings in Tether, but it's like a really good six month option.

所以很多人实际上持有的泰达币价值，反而超过了比特币。

And they might they that's why a lot of them will actually hold more value in in Tether than than Bitcoin.

只要美元本身足够稳定、波动更小，很多人还是会倾向于美元，而不是直接跳到比特币，变成只认比特币的极端支持者。

So it's as long as the dollar itself is robust enough to work and is less volatile, a lot of people gravitate still towards the dollar rather than going directly to Bitcoin and becoming like instant Bitcoin, you know, Maxis and is just only focusing on Bitcoin.

这在很多国家都是现实情况。

And that's just a reality on the ground in a lot of these countries.

现在我觉得，最终可能打破这个体系的因素之一，就是比特币会持续壮大，被越来越多的人接受，波动性也会逐渐降低。

Now I think what can eventually interrupt that system, so one is that Bitcoin is gonna keep, I would argue, keep getting larger and more adopted and eventually less volatile.

这是正在发生的一个变化。

That's one variable that's happening.

但这个过程需要很长时间。

It it just takes a long time.

另一个变化是，美元正变得越来越不稳定。

And the other variable is that the dollar is increasingly becoming less stable.

你知道，当债务占GDP的比例不断攀升，迟早会达到一个需要重新调整的临界点。

You know, as debt as a percentage of GDP keeps building up, you eventually get to a point where you get some sort of reset.

听起来像是阴谋论，对吧？

And that sounds like that's like a conspiracy theory.

这确实是一种非主流的看法。

That's like a heterodox way of thinking of it.

但纵观历史上的货币体系，每两三代人，总会发生一次重大的贬值、脱钩或系统性重置。

But when you look at this monetary system throughout history, every two or three generations, you tend to have some big DPEG or devaluation or reset.

这就是现实的运作方式，尤其是当系统有这么多层抽象和集中控制的时候。

It's just how it's how things work, especially when you have such layers of abstraction and centralization.

历史上，当发达国家的债务占GDP比重达到这种水平，系统最终总会崩溃。

And historically, when you get developed countries with this much debt to GDP, eventually, the system just breaks down.

只是因为利息支出变得太过庞大了。

It's just that the interest expense becomes too immense.

简直荒谬到离谱的程度。

It becomes too exponentially comical.

就连美元这样坚挺的货币，最终也会变得严重通胀。

And people even something as robust as the dollar eventually becomes quite inflationary.

它在与其他资产对比时，越来越难保持价值。

It's just very hard for it to use it relative to other assets.

新货币的发行量已经大到不可思议了。

The the amount of new currency creation becomes so significant.

所以我认为，从长远来看，美元的衰落和比特币在多个周期中的崛起，共同构成了它能逐步挑战美元这种庞然大物的可能。

And so I would say the combination of although over the long arc of time, the eventual breakdown of the dollar and the ascension of Bitcoin through multiple, multiple cycles is what can allow it to gradually compete with something as large as the dollar.

我认为跟第二个因素相关的是，美元体系建立之初，也就是布雷顿森林体系时期，美国占全球GDP的比重超过40%。

And I think the variable that ties into the second one is that when the dollar system was born, so Bretton Woods, The United States was, like, over 40% of global GDP.

我们拥有最大的工业基础。

We had the biggest industrial base.

我们拥有最多的黄金储备。

We had the most gold.

我们拥有最强大的军事力量。

We had the biggest military.

那时候，我们可以说是全面占优。

Basically, we were just completely dominant.

随着二战后世界逐步恢复，各国重新构建自身实力，我们看到中国和印度正重新成为全球性大国——就像它们在过去的两百年之前那样。

And as the world has recovered from World War two and as it's as it's kind of, rebuilt aspects of itself, you know, we see China and India reasserting themselves as major global powers like they actually were prior to this, you know, past two hundred years or so.

这些地区一直以来都是重要的经济力量。

They were always major economic powers, those regions at least.

现在它们正在重新确立自己的主导地位。

And they're reasserting themselves as being very dominant.

所以现在我们看到，全球GDP的分布正在变得更加分散。

And so we see more decentralization across the world in terms of where is the percentage of GDP?

工业基础又在哪里呢？

Where is the industrial base?

黄金储备又分布在哪儿？

Where is the gold?

当美国在全球GDP中的占比从40%下降到25%时，让全世界继续依赖美元记账体系就越来越不合理了。

And it becomes increasingly untenable for the entire world to use a dollar ledger system when The United States is, you know, diminishing from 40% of global GDP to 25%.

现在来看，无论你是按购买力平价还是按名义值计算，美国的经济总量大概占全球的15%到25%之间。

And right now, when you look at it, depending on how you measure it, whether purchasing power parity or nominal, we're somewhere between 1525% of global GDP.

随着美国占比持续下滑，单一货币对全球金融体系的绝对控制就越来越难维持了。

And as we keep slipping, it just becomes increasingly untenable for that that one currency has such a big lock on the world.

所以我认为，我们正在逐步走向去中心化，而且发达市场的货币，相比过去五十年的平均水平，正变得越来越不稳定。

So I think we're gradually moving toward decentralization, I and think developed market currencies are becoming increasingly unstable compared to how they've averaged over the past fifty years.

普雷斯顿，你在书里提到了格雷欣法则和瑟尔法则。

Preston In your book, you get into a little bit of Gresham's law and Thur's law.

你提到，当观察格雷欣法则中那些不受欢迎的货币时，它们的流通速度会不断加快，几乎像达到终端速度，然后突然转向瑟法则。

And you talk about how when you're looking at Gresham's law in this money that is less desirable, the velocity of it keeps picking up as you approach almost like a terminal velocity and then a flipping into Thur's law.

当我们看稳定币，发现它们一发行就能立刻交易，需求还在持续增长——想想这些稳定币在这么短的时间内大量涌现，相关资产规模增长得如此惊人。如果我们把这种流通速度放在全球宏观背景下看，你认为通过对比稳定币的流通速度和比特币闪电网络的速度，能帮我们判断是否已经发生了向瑟法则的转变吗？

When we look at stablecoins and we look at how they're immediately saleable and the desire for more, I mean, we look at the amount of stablecoins that just keep popping up and the size of these assets that are contained inside of these stablecoin markets and how large and how substantial they are in such a short amount of time, and we look at that velocity as part of the overall global equation, Is this something that you think could help us understand whether that flipping over to Thurs law is taking place is by contrasting the stable coin velocity to Bitcoin's Lightning Network?

我们是不是应该通过比较这两个市场中货币流通的速度，来判断这种转变是否正在发生，以及我们当前所处的位置？

Is that how we should maybe look at that flipping happening and maybe where we're at in space and time by comparing and contrasting the speed of money between those two markets?

除了这个方法，你还有没有其他方式来理解这种可能发生的转变？

Is there some other way that you could think through understanding that potentially happening, that flipping part?

我觉得同时监控相对市值和流通速度，都是非常有用的指标。

So I think mon monitoring both relative market capitalizations and monitoring velocity are both very useful metrics.

某种程度上，这就像在比较苹果和橙子，因为比特币和美元的使用方式并不相同，尤其是在当前的普及程度下。

In some ways, it's apples and oranges because Bitcoin and and and dollars are not quite used the same way, especially at their current level of adoption.

一般来说，规模更大、流动性更强的货币，会成为主导的记账单位。

The larger and liquid more liquid money is generally gonna be the one that's denuded of account.

所以在比特币能真正与美元抗衡之前，大多数人还是会习惯用美元来思考问题。

And so until Bitcoin, say, rivals the dollar, it's it's you know, we're gonna most people are gonna think in dollars.

所有东西都是以美元计价的。

They're gonna things are priced in dollars.

所以比特币相对于美元来说波动更大，而不是反过来。

And so Bitcoin is the thing that's kind of volatile relative to the dollar rather than the other way around.

我们总说一切该用比特币计价。

We like to say everything priced in Bitcoin.

真正波动的不是比特币。

It's not Bitcoin that's volatile.

真正波动的是其他所有东西。

It's everything else that's volatile.

但说实话，当你持有比特币时，买苹果或者铜这类东西，对你来说价格波动更大，而不是对持有美元的人。

But really, your ability to buy, say, apples or copper, when you hold Bitcoin, those things are more volatile for you, not for the dollar holder.

对。

Mhmm.

所以即便我是个狂热的比特币支持者，也不是说美元对比特币来说波动大。

So really, you know, even as a big Bitcoin enthusiast, it's not that the dollar is volatile to Bitcoin.

说到底，比特币相对于美元确实是波动的。

It genuinely is that Bitcoin's volatile relative to the dollar.

美元才是更大、更流动、更容易变现的计价单位。

That's the larger, more liquid saleable unit.

但现在它是个更差的单位。

Now it's a worse unit.

它受控于人。

It's controlled.

它是集中的。

It's centralized.

它在不断贬值。

It devalues.

但从计价功能来看，它依然是掌握话语权的那个。

But for unit of account purposes, that's still the one that that has the power.

而且我觉得，随着时间推移，就像我刚才说的，美元的这种优势会逐渐减弱，而比特币则会越来越强，实际上已经在变强了。

And, you know, I think over time that as we as I just discussed, that that degrades with Bitcoin hopefully strengthens and has been strengthening.

当我们谈到格雷欣法则时，最初人们是用金银比价来解释的。

And when we look at Gresham's law and law so the originally way to, like, think of Gresham is say that a gold and silver ratio.

比如说，美国把金银比定在15比1，但国际市场上的实际比价是15.5比1。

So let's say you peg you know, United States pegs it at 15 to one, but the global exchange rate is 15 and a half to one.

这样一来，就会出现价差问题。

And so you'll get this, like, mismatch.

所以，被低估的那个金属反而会留在手里，而被高估的才会在市场上流通。

And so whatever metal ends up kind of being pegged at an undervalued rate, that's the one that's going to circulate.

不对，应该是被低估的被囤积，被高估的才会流通。

Actually, no, the undervalued one's going to be hoarded and the overvalued one's going to circulate.

人们会把价值较低的钱花出去，而把真正值钱、却被低估的钱藏起来，或者转到国外去。

You're going to spend the weaker money into the economy, and you're gonna hoard or you're gonna move offshore the the stronger money that's that's not being valued appropriately.

第二种情况，我也认同，就是当更好的货币被征税的时候。

The second way that that I agree this can apply is when you have a tax on the better money.

如果每笔比特币交易都要缴税，而美元交易不用，那除非你真的需要比特币的特性，或者你纯粹是出于信仰在支持它，否则没人会愿意用比特币付款。

So if every Bitcoin transaction is a taxable event and every dollar transaction is not a taxable event, well, then unless you specifically need the properties of Bitcoin or unless you're so into the space that you're kinda just doing it on purpose, you wanna pay with more things in Bitcoin because you wanna support Bitcoin.

大多数人通常会用那些不用缴税的货币来支付。

Most people will generally pay in the units that are not taxable.

对。

Mhmm.

是吧？

Right?

如果现在有大量比特币持有者都在跟政客们说，把这些税收取消了吧。

And so now if it gets to a point where there's so many Bitcoin holders that are all talking to politicians and saying, hey, take away these taxes.

这正是我想要的。

That's what I want.

对。

Mhmm.

是吧？

Right?

所以你得一点一点地慢慢推动改变。

So you have to you have to chip away at that over time.

所以他们会说，是现有网络效应、规模和稳定性，加上大家对它运作方式的了解和品牌认知的综合结果。

And so would say, yeah, a combination of existing network effects, existing size and stability, existing understanding and brand of how it works.

美元就像可口可乐，其实也没多特别，但它的品牌深入人心。

The dollar is like, you know, like Coca Cola is not that special, but it has a brand.

全世界的人都知道可口可乐是什么。

Everybody in the world knows what Coca Cola is.

同样，全世界也都认得美元这个品牌。

Similarly, everybody knows the brand of the dollar.

这背后是网络效应、流动性，还有品牌力量的共同作用。

And that's a combination of the network effects, liquidity, the brand.

这些都不是一朝一夕能建成的。

These take time.

这就像一艘巨型油轮，转向得特别慢。

It's a gigantic ship that has to turn slowly.

再加上税收权力这些因素，我觉得要么比特币得足够大、足够稳，要么美元体系崩溃，要么美国政府干脆切断稳定币。

And then when you add on to that tax authority and things like that, I think either until Bitcoin gets large and and stable enough or the dollar breaks down or The United States decides to cut off stablecoins.

阿根廷对泰达币无能为力，但美国如果不想再让这些数字美元稳定币存在，完全有能力干预。

Argentina can't do anything to Tether, but The United States could if they decided they didn't want these digital euro dollars to exist anymore.

所以我觉得可能有好几种方式会发生，但无论如何，这条路都会非常漫长。

And so I think there's multiple paths where it can happen, but I think it's inevitably going to be a long one.

普雷斯顿，财政部难道不需要稳定币吗？

Preston Doesn't the treasury need stable coins?

如果我们继续这样走下去，五到十年后，总得有人来买下这些资产吧。

We go further down this road, five, ten years from now, you need a buyer for all of this stuff.

最让我觉得不可思议的是，买家居然真的出现了——就是这些稳定币发行方，他们愿意买短期国债，却不碰长期债券，因为长期债券的通胀风险太高，他们扛不住。

And I find so miraculous is the buyer really kind of emerges as these stablecoin entities that are going to be willing to buy short duration debt, not long duration, because there's just too much inflation risk there for them to squat on long duration.

但我认为，美国财政部，或者说任何G7国家的财政部，都天然需要稳定币。

But I think that you have this natural relationship that the treasury here, at least in The United States, and I would argue any G7 country needs stablecoins.

你认同这个观点吗？

Do you agree with that idea?

如果不认同，我很想听听你的理由。

If not, I'm curious to hear why.

普雷斯顿，我们常把政府看作铁板一块，但实际上，大多数政府内部都有多个不同的派系或人员，对事物的看法也各不相同。

Preston We often think of governments as monolithic entities, but in reality, most governments have multiple different factions or people that understand things differently.

举个例子，在比特币挖矿这个问题上，有些政府官员会说，嘿。

And as an example, when it comes to Bitcoin mining, there are some government officials that say, hey.

出于环保考虑，我们想把比特币矿工赶出去。

For environmental reasons, we wanna kick out Bitcoin miners.

但政府里也有其他人说，不行。

And there are other ones in the government that say, no.

不是的。

No.

我们希望吸引所有的挖矿活动都来到这儿，这样我们就能用法律来监管这个网络。

We wanna encourage all the mining to come here so we can sense of the network with our laws.

对吧？

Right?

这仅仅是因为优先级不同，或者是对他们想达成什么目标的理解程度存在差异。

And it's just different priorities or different understate levels of understanding of what they're trying to accomplish.

这两种立场确实是存在的。

Those two factions do exist.

说到稳定币，一方面，有些团体担心，有这么一种不受我们完全掌控的离岸数字美元，虽然它不是完全无监管的，但让我们很不安。

When it comes to stablecoins, you know, on one hand, there's there's groups that say, we don't like the fact that there's this, you know, unregulated or like, not unregulated, but there's like an offshore digital euro dollar that we don't have full control over.

另一方面，也有人认为，这可是购买美国国债的一大新买家。

On the other hand, there are people that say, well, this is a huge new buyer of treasuries.

而且它还能帮助美元在全球范围内扩大影响力。

And also, it it it helps extend the dollar's reach globally.

这是一项很有用的新技术，我们不该去干预。

And it's a useful new technology that we shouldn't interfere with.

这其实就是不同派系之间的分歧。

That it's kind of the different factions.

再来看去美元化这个概念。

And when you look the concept of de dollarization.

最近这话题频频上新闻，主要是因为金砖国家的动作，还有对俄罗斯外汇储备的制裁等等。

That's it's in the news a lot because of the whole BRICS thing and and, you know, sanctioning of Russian reserves and all this stuff.

现在有很多主权层面的尝试，一些有影响力的国家都在努力跟美元保持距离。

There's all these attempts at the sovereign level of various powerful countries to try to distance themselves from the dollar.

但有意思的是，这里其实分两个层面。

But what's interesting is that there's there's two levels here.

一个是国家主权层面，另一个就是普通老百姓层面。

So there's a there's a sovereign level, and then there's the people themselves.

所以，发展中国家的人们自己真的在去美元化吗？

So are people themselves in developing countries de dollarizing?

不是的。

No.

你看不到阿根廷人突然决定，说，你知道吗？

You don't see Argentinians deciding, you know what?

我现在想持有人民币。

I wanna hold Chinese yuan now.

你也看不到埃及人说，嘿，我想在自家公寓里囤积实物人民币，作为我的储蓄。

You don't see Egyptians saying, you know, I wanna hold physical Chinese yuan in my apartment as my monetary savings.

这种情况根本看不到。

You don't see that.

稳定币中超过99%都是美元，这可不是巧合。

It's not an accident that, like, nine over 99% of stablecoins are dollars.

需求就在这里。

That's just where the demand is.

当你能在全球范围内提供美元时，人们自然会想要它。

When you have kind of the ability to make dollars globally, people want them.

其他货币的稳定币当然也存在，但只是边缘地带，根本没需求、没流动性，也谈不上可扩展性。

Could have stablecoins with other currencies and around the margins they exist, but there's no demand or liquidity or scalability for them.

对。

Yeah.

我觉得美国那边更聪明的一派会说，好吧，支持稳定币。

I think basically like I think the smarter faction in The United States would basically say, okay, support stablecoins.

它们可是我们国债的主要买家。

They're a major buyer of our treasuries.

当主权国家试图去美元化时，这就是我们让美元继续留在那些外国普通人手中的方式。

As sovereign nations try to de dollarize, this is the way for us to keep the dollars among all those foreign people at the people level.

这能让美元的影响力维持更久。

It keeps the dollars reach going for a longer period of time.

所以，是的，我觉得这取决于他们思考这个问题的深度，以及他们对相关技术和动态的理解程度。

So yeah, I think it depends on how many orders of thought they think through this and how well they understand the technology and the dynamics involved.

普雷斯顿，在你书的某一章里，你探讨了比特币化的世界会是什么样子，以及它与我们如今熟悉的世界有何不同。

Preston In one section of your book, you get into what a Bitcoinized world would look like and how it's different than what we're accustomed to today.

你提到的一点是，没有单位抽象，没有金融中间商，全球连接更顺畅，货币兑换之间没有摩擦。

One of the things you mentioned is no unit abstraction, no financial middleman, better global connections without the friction in between the currency exchange.

但我希望你在这一部分深入探讨的一个观点是信贷的概念，以及我们社会中信贷如此充裕，实际上在整体三十到五十万亿的经济大盘中，只占极小的一部分。

But the one I want to hear that you cover in-depth here is the idea of credit and how what we view as credit and being so abundant in our society today really whittles itself down to just the pittance of the overall thirty:fifty broader economy.

非比特币支持者听到这话可能会想，你到底在说什么？

People who are not Bitcoiners that would maybe hear that would be What in the world are you talking about?

信贷永远都会存在。

The credit will always be around.

所以，琳，你来给他们解释一下，你为什么这么认为？

So help explain to them why you have this opinion, Lyn.

普雷斯顿，我同意，无论如何，信贷都会一直存在，只是程度不同。

Preston I would agree that credit's always going to be around in some degree.

关键在于，相对于货币基础，正式信贷的规模有多大，或者企业和个人更倾向于用股权融资还是信贷融资。

It's just a matter of how much formal credit exists relative to say the monetary base, for example, or how how much do businesses or individuals finance themselves with equity versus credit.

还有，这些信贷的期限有多长？

And how long duration is that credit?

这些都跟货币的性质密切相关。

Those are things that are impacted by the type of money.

从历史来看，货币的坚挺程度和债务水平几乎呈一个钟形曲线：当货币非常稳健，比如金本位或者比特币时，信贷虽然存在，但人们会非常谨慎地使用。

And generally, we see when we look in history is monetary hardness and debt is almost like a bell curve, where if money is very strong, like let's say a gold standard or Bitcoin, credit exists, but it tends to be used judiciously.

如果你是借款人，在一种相对于大多数商品都在升值的硬通货体系下，你愿意借多少长期债务呢？

Because if you're a borrower, how much long duration debt do you wanna borrow in a hard unit of money that appreciates relative to most things?

你肯定得格外小心才行。

You wanna be obviously pretty careful with that.

也就是说，对于一种非常稳健的货币，借款人的需求反而更低。

I mean, so from there's less borrower demand for a very robust solid money.

再看另一端，如果货币很弱，比如阿根廷，根本没人愿意用这种货币放贷，因为没人能确定五年、十年后能拿回多少实际价值。

When you look at the other side of the spectrum, if you have a very weak money, let's say, Argentina, for example, nobody wants to lend in that unit of account because it's very hard for them to determine what value they're gonna get back in five, ten years.

对。

Mhmm.

没错。

Right?

所以，可能有人愿意给我一笔阿根廷比索的贷款，我也会收，但根本没人愿意主动借给我。

So so there might be people want like, someone wants to give me a loan in Argentine pesos, I'll take it, but no one's gonna give me that loan.

而讽刺的是，在中间那段，像发达市场的法定货币这样缓慢贬值的货币，反而积累了最多的债务，因为对借款人和贷款人来说都还说得过去。

Whereas ironically, the middle of the bell curve, we have a gradually devaluing unit of account, like a developed market fiat currency, that tends to accumulate the most debt because it works for borrowers and it works for lenders reasonably well.

它足够稳定，于是债务占GDP的比例越积越高，但讽刺的是，这种积累本身反而成了不稳定的根源。

And it it's stable enough that it kinda builds up this more and more and more debt to GDP, but then ironically, that becomes the source of instability.

所以它的稳定性恰恰成了关键的调节点，就像微调一样，正好把债务推到最大化，而这恰恰也是它自我毁灭的开始。

So its own stability is in what part, you know, it kinda fine tune that's like the fine tune point for debt maximization, which inherently is its own undoing.

所以我认为，在一个比黄金更稀缺的计价单位的世界里，比如比特币，人们长期大额借贷它的动力会非常有限。

And so what I would argue is that in a in a world with an even scarcer unit of account than gold, so Bitcoin in this case, The incentive to borrow large amounts of it for long duration is very limited.

但依然会存在各种形式的信贷。

There's still going to be various types of credit.

只要有人欠别人钱，就会说：嘿，我需要点资金。

Anytime someone owes someone else money to say, Hey, I need some money.

你能借我一些吗？

Can I lend some?

这种信贷现象是自然形成的。

It's an emergent phenomenon in credit.

它就这么发生了。

It just happens.

当然，还是会有高回报的场景，让人想借比特币。

But and there's still high rate of return impacts where you might wanna borrow Bitcoin.

但要是总把债务挂在账上，这种做法就不太合理了。

But the idea of just having constant debt on your balance sheet would make less sense.

所以我们可以把货币和债务分成两类。

So we can kind of we can kind separate money debt into two types.

一类是极具生产力的债务。

So there's very, like, high highly productive debt.

对吧？

Right?

比如说，你想扩大生意，

Let's say you wanna expand your business.

又不想稀释股权，于是借了一年期的贷款。

You don't wanna give up equity, so you you borrow a one year loan.

这笔贷款相对于你整个企业的价值来说，其实很小。

It's, like, pretty small relative to your total business value.

有人宁愿放贷也不愿投资股权，因为他们更看重确定性高、风险低，而且在资本结构中优先级更高的回报。

Someone might make that loan rather than equity because they'd rather have a defined and lower risk outcome that's higher in the capital stack.

又或者，你想接受教育，愿意背上一些债务去拿个STEM学位，不管具体情况如何，因为你清楚这会提升你的收入潜力。

Maybe you wanna get education so you're willing to take on some debt to get, like, a, you know, a STEM degree, for example, whatever the case may be, because you know it's gonna it's gonna increase your earning potential.

信用在很多情况下都是有道理的。

There's various ways where credit can make sense.

而那些生产性较低的信贷或债务，通常是长期存在的，你主要是在做空它。

Now the the less productive types of credit or debt are ones that are just kinda permanent parts, and what you're primarily doing is shorting it.

比如可口可乐公司就有债务。

So for example, Coca Cola has debt.

这是一家已经有一百多年历史的企业。

Now this is like a century old corporation.

那他们为什么要有债务呢？

Why do they have debt?

原因在于，他们主动把债务作为资本结构中的永久组成部分，因为这笔债务会随着时间贬值。

And the reason is because they choose to have debt as a permanent part of their capital structure because that debt devalues.

他们实际上是利用自身的经济优势和高信用评级，以低利率借入大量美元，长期持有，本质上就是在做空美元。

They're basically they're using their economic strengths, their high credit rating to borrow plenty of dollars at low interest rates for long duration to basically short it.

对。

Mhmm.

但在黄金或比特币上，这就不成立了。

And that doesn't make sense in gold or Bitcoin.

无论是政府背负巨额债务与GDP之比，还是普通人背三十年房贷，又或是企业把债务作为资本结构的永久组成部分——当计价单位变得极其坚挺时，这类债务就显得没那么合理了。

Whether it's governments running these massive gigantic debt to GDP ratios, whether it's people with thirty year mortgages, whether it's corporations with debt as a permanent part of their capital structure, that's the type of debt that makes a lot less sense when the unit of account is very hard.

我并不是第一个提出这个观点的人：在比特币的世界里，债务相对于股权会少很多，因为那种本质上只是做空货币的债务类型会消失，剩下的只有真正能创造价值的债务。

So and I'm not the first to make this argument that basically in a in a Bitcoin world, you would have much less debt relative to equity because the types of debt where you're practically only sorting the currency go away, and it just becomes highly highly accretive types of debt.

再说到 fractional reserve banking（部分准备金银行制度），它在当今时代之所以还能勉强运作，我们都知道，中间总有经济周期的繁荣与衰退。

And then also when you when you think of fractionators or banking, one of the reasons that fractional reserve banking works moderately well in the current era, you know, we we have all these booms and busts and and things like that.

但它还能凑合着运行，是因为存款利率如果低于货币供应量的增长率，这种风险就相对可控。

But the reason it works well enough is because if your interest rate you're earning on your deposits is lower than the monetary growth rate, the growth of money supply, that ends up being relatively safe.

我的意思是，你其实是在被稀释，各种问题都跟着来。

I mean, you're getting devalued, you're getting all sorts of problems.

但好在有个中央机构能随时印更多钱，所以你不太可能在违约时名义上亏钱。

But the fact that a central entity can just create more of it means you're unlikely to lose nominally in a default.

所以大家也就忍了，毕竟还能凑合着用。

So people kind of put up with this because it works well enough.

而在一个存款利率高于货币供应增长率的世界里，这本身就是不安全的。

Whereas in a world where it's inherently unsafe to have a deposit rate that is higher than the supply growth rate of money.

对吧？

Right?

这本来就是必然的。

It's just inherently the case.

如果你设定这样的利率，要么承担严重的信用风险，要么面临严重的流动性风险。

You're either taking on serious credit risk by having that interest rate, or you're taking on serious liquidity risk.

至少会有一种风险，也可能两种都有，取决于你设定的回报率。

One of the two, maybe both by having that rate of return.

所以在货币供应增长率是零的体系里，任何利息都本质上伴随着风险。

So in a unit where their supply rate of growth of money is zero, any interest is inherently taking on risk.

没错。

Mhmm.

但这并不意味着人们就不会这么做。

That doesn't mean people won't do it.

这其实就是投资。

It's it's investing.

这其实就是投资。

It's it's investing.

这属于投机。

It's speculating.

这是在运用资本，但不像我们今天所理解的银行那样是无风险的被动行为。

It's putting capital to work, but it's not a passive risk free activity in a way that we think of banks today.

普雷斯顿，比特币世界里的税收怎么办？

Preston How about taxes in a Bitcoin world?

我在书里提到过这一点。

And I talk about this in the book.

整个法币体系的一个弊端在于，当政府觉得直接征税不够受欢迎、不足以支撑他们的支出时，就会直接印钱来补缺口。

One of the kind of downsides of the whole fiat currency system is that when the government doesn't feel like taxes are gonna be popular enough to do and to fund what they wanna spend, they just print the difference.

所以他们会说：‘我们没法透明地融资，那就隐蔽地融资吧。’

So they say, well, we can't we can't finance this as transparently as we want to, so we're gonna finance it opaquely.

我举的一个例子是，在一战期间，英国想要介入，尽管他们——我是说，他们并没有遭到攻击。

An example I use is that during World War one, The UK wanted to get involved even though they I mean, they weren't being attacked.

这场冲突正在欧洲进行，你知道的，然后他们说，好吧，我们出于地缘政治原因想要介入。

This conflict's going on in in, you know, in Europe, And they say, well, we wanna get involved for geopolitical reasons.

我们不想让德国赢。

We don't want Germany to win.

所以我们要介入。

And so we're gonna get involved.

所以他们知道，如果向所有人征税，他们不会去收英国钢铁工人的税，然后说，对，

And so they try to they know that taxing everyone they're not gonna tax a UK steel worker and say, yeah.

我们得去跟欧洲德国人打仗，所以得给你加税。

We gotta go fight the Germans in Europe, so we have to raise your taxes.

这肯定会非常不受欢迎。

That's gonna be very unpopular.

如果你税加得太高，就会引发革命。

You're gonna get a revolution if you tax too much.

也许可以稍微加一点税，但要是真想大幅加税，那根本行不通。

Maybe you can do a little bit, but if you try to tax a ton, you're gonna you're gonna it's not gonna be workable.

另一个办法就是增加债务。

The other option is you've raised debt.

好吧，那就这么办。

You say, well, okay.

我们付你利息，卖你国债，拿这笔钱去打仗。

You know, we'll pay you interest, buy these bonds, and we'll use it to go do war.

但在英国，没多少人愿意买这些债券。

And those in UK's case, not enough people subscribed to those bonds.

人们都说：不行。

They were like, no.

我觉得这投资不靠谱。

I don't I don't think that's a good investment.

所以英国干脆直接印钱补上差额。

And so instead, The UK just printed the difference.

他们悄悄贬值了每个人的储蓄，既没提前通知，也没让人能察觉或衡量发生了什么，钱就这么被拿走了。

And what they did was they devalued everyone's savings without telling them advance, without them being able to even know or measure what's happening, and it just got taken from them.

在比特币的世界里，如果更多人持有自己掌控的硬通货，而政府又没法随意印钞，那政府的所有开支就只能靠征税，或者少量举债来勉强平衡一下。

And so in a Bitcoin world, if more people hold their own hard money that a government can't print, then basically all of government expenditure has to be financed by either taxation or small amounts of of debt, you know, to kind of smooth things out here and there.

这实际上迫使政府得更透明一点，得说清楚：你想花这笔钱，那钱从哪儿来？

But basically, it kind of forces governments to be somewhat more transparent and say, okay, if you want to do this expenditure, how are we going to finance it?

因为我们没法再靠印钞来补缺口。

Because we can't just print the difference.

普雷斯顿，我们先插个广告，听听今天的赞助商。

Preston Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors.

普雷斯顿，你对在线交易感兴趣，但还没迈出第一步吗？

Preston Curious about online trading, but haven't taken the first step yet?

你不是一个人这样。

You're not alone.

Plus500期货是个不错的入门选择。

And plus 500 futures is a great place to start.

期货市场变化很快，使用 Plus 500，你可以交易原油、黄金、标普500、比特币等热门资产。

The futures markets are moving fast and with plus 500, you can explore popular assets like oil, gold, S and P 500, Bitcoin, and more.

从加密货币到大宗商品，总有不少动态值得关注。

From crypto to commodities, there's always something happening.

这个平台操作非常简单，随时随地用手机就能交易。

The platform is super easy to use, so you can trade on the go right from your phone.

只需100美元就能开户，立刻参与交易。

You can get started with just $100 and jump into the action.

看到感兴趣的机会了吗？

See something interesting?

账户开通后，几下点击就能下单交易。

Once your account is open, you can trade it in just a couple of clicks.

如果还没准备好，也可以先用免费的模拟账户练习。

And if you're not quite ready yet, you can practice with a free demo account.

零风险，无压力。

No risk, no pressure.

Plus 500 拥有二十年经验，让交易变得前所未有的简单。

With twenty years of experience, Plus 500 makes trading more accessible than ever.

立即访问 +500.com 了解更多。

Check it out at +500.com.

期货交易存在亏损风险，并非适合所有投资者，不是所有申请人都能通过审核。

Trading in futures involves risks of loss and is not suitable for everyone, not all applicants will qualify.

Plus 500，让交易更有优势。

Plus 500, it's trading with a plus.

假设你的企业每天都在落后于人工智能，两天下来你就被甩开一大截。

Let's say everyday your business is late to AI, you fall two days behind.

竞争对手的速度越来越快，你该怎么跟上？

The competition is only moving faster, so how do you keep up?

好在，NetSuite 接下来能帮上忙。

Fortunately, there's NetSuite next.

你可能听说过 NetSuite，这是一款由人工智能驱动的商业管理套件，能安全地将你的所有数据、财务、库存、电商、人力资源和客户关系整合在一个可信的统一平台上，已有四万三千多家客户在使用。

You probably know NetSuite, the AI powered business management suite that securely connects all of your data, financials, inventory, commerce, HR, and CRM in a single source of truth, trusted by over 43,000 customers.

NetSuite Next 是企业运营方式的一次巨大飞跃，因为人工智能已经融入了你做的每一件事。

NetSuite Next is the next huge leap in how business gets done because AI is built into everything you do.

它会在你一整天的工作中，主动提供量身定制的洞察。

It surfaces custom insights throughout your day.

AI助手会和你并肩工作，帮你处理那些琐碎的日常任务。

AI agents work alongside you to handle the routine work.

无论你有什么问题，随时问就行，就像跟同事聊天一样自然。

And anytime you have a question about anything, just ask like you're talking to a colleague.

我自己在用，你也一定要试试。

I use this and you should too.

史上第一次，你可以免费试用 NetSuite Next。

For the first time ever, you can try NetSuite Next for free.

如果你的年收入达到七位数以上，就去 netsuite.ai/tip 申请吧。

If your revenues are at least in the 7 figures, go to netsuite.ai/tip.

适合所有行业，随时准备进入任何董事会。

Built for every industry, ready for every boardroom.

netsuite.ai/tip

Netsuite.aitip.

在商业领域，有什么东西的传播速度跟人工智能一样快？

What's the one thing in business spreading as fast as AI?

人工智能带来的风险。

AI risk.

你团队注册的每一个新工具，每个供应商开启的AI功能，每一次新的集成，都可能成为出问题的入口。

Every new tool your team signs up for, every vendor that flips on AI features, every fresh integration, each one is another opening for something to go wrong.

大多数安全系统根本跟不上人工智能发展的速度。

And most security problems simply weren't built for the pace AI is moving.

这时候，Vanta就派上用场了。

Enter Vanta.

Vanta是排名第一的智能信任平台，已被超过一万六千家快速发展的企业采用，包括Ramp、Cursor和Harvey，帮助它们随时保持审计合规。

Vanta is the number one agentic trust platform trusted by over 16,000 fast moving companies, including Ramp, Cursor, and Harvey to stay audit ready.

现在，Vanta还帮助像你这样的企业，在两次审计之间的空档期，发现供应商、AI工具和整个环境中的潜在风险。

And now Vanta is helping companies like yours catch the risks that show up between audits across your vendors, your AI tools, and your whole environment.

怎么做呢？

How?

Vanta 的代理就像一位全天候运行的 GRC 工程师，后台默默发现问题、帮你起草解决方案，把供应商评估时间缩短多达一半。

The Vanta agent works like a twenty four seven GRC engineer running in the background, finding issues, drafting fixes for you, and cutting vendor assessment time by up to 50%.

无论你是快速增长的初创公司，还是全球性企业，Vanta 都能帮你自动化安全与合规流程，建立并提升信任。

Whether you're a fast growing startup or a global enterprise, Vanta is here to help you automate your security and compliance and earn, improve trust.

立即访问 vanta.com/tip 开始使用。

Get started today at vanta.com/tip.

就是 vanta.com/tip。

That's vanta.com/tip.

普雷斯顿，明白了。

Preston All right.

我们继续节目。

Back to the show.

普雷斯顿·林，我要念一段你写在书里的引文，这都跟权衡有关。

Preston Lyn, I'm going to read a quote that you put here in the book, and this all relates to trade offs.

每创建一种新的加密货币或区块链，都会不断权衡各种取舍。

As any cryptocurrency blockchain is created, there's trade offs that are constantly being accounted for what they're creating.

这是你写的一段话：新加密货币的支持者常批评比特币是过时的技术，但实际上，它只是严格遵循当初设计时的权衡，优先保障安全性和去中心化，而非其他特性。

This is the quote that you wrote, Proponents of newer cryptocurrencies often criticize Bitcoin for being old technology, When in reality, it's just strict about the trade offs that it was designed with, and was built to maximize security and decentralization over all other attributes.

为什么偏偏是安全性和去中心化这两点？

Why are those two attributes, security and decentralization?

关于去中心化，我们已经聊得够多了，但安全方面，你能不能多讲讲？另外，对于那些刚接触这个领域的人，他们看到比特币‘太老了’这种说法，你怎么看？

I think the decentralization part we've covered pretty extensively, but more on the security side, maybe talk to that and any other comments or thoughts that you have about this idea that a newcomer that's coming to this is going to look at this and say, Yeah, Bitcoin's really old.

现在有Solana，还有这几年冒出来的各种新项目。

There's Solana, there's all these other things that have come out in the last couple of years.

它们怎么可能不更好呢？

How in the world are they not better?

我觉得，一个新手如果刚接触这个话题，很可能会说：技术不是一直在进步吗？十年前的东西，怎么可能比现在的更好？

Really the argument that I think a newbie that would be showing up to this discussion and looking at it would be saying, because technology is always better now than it was 10 ago or, you know, you go back historically in time.

那为什么这些新项目反而没更好呢？

How are the new ones not better?

是的

Yeah.

我觉得我们得站在他们的角度想一想。

And I think we put ourselves in their shoes.

他们这么想其实非常合理。

It's very rational for them to assume that's the case.

就像你刚才说的，大多数技术都是随着时间进步的，所以自然会觉得，比特币虽然是个开创性的想法，但肯定不会是最终形态。

Like you've so you said most technologies are better over time, and therefore so like, well, Bitcoin was the concept, but it's, you know, that's clearly not gonna be the end.

这正是关键所在。

That's the thing.

他们会说，明白了。

They'll say, okay.

那 newer 的那个是什么？

What what's the newer one?

哪个更好呢？

What's the better one?

你知道吗，已经十四年了。

You know, it's been fourteen years.

当然，现在有更好的技术了。

Of course, there's better technology.

一个明显的区别是，当我们看协议时，它们往往能持续很长时间。

One point of contrast is that when we look at protocols, they tend to stick around for a very long period of time.

当你把东西设计得简单又坚固时，可用的设计空间就很有限，技术的进步和升级通常都是在这一层简单基础上，一层层叠加和扩展出来的。

When you make things purposely simple and robust, the design space is very limited, And the technological growth and upgrades tend to happen in layers on and around that very simple foundation.

比如以太网，已经有五十年历史了。

So for example, Ethernet is like 50 years old.

对吧？

Right?

但它远没有过时。

And it's and it's nowhere near being out of date.

他们一直以向后兼容的方式提升速度，这个协议就这样慢慢演进，变化其实非常缓慢。

You know, they upgraded the speeds over time in backward compatible ways, and it's this evolving protocol that ultimately is very slow to change.

所以我们才会想，为什么到现在还在用以太网？

And we think of, why are we still using Ethernet?

这可是五十年前的技术了。

It's a 50 year old technology.

原因就是它依然是我们最好的选择，而且已经形成了强大的网络效应。

It's because it's literally still the best we have is why, and it has that dominant network effect.

就算你做出稍微好一点的东西，也得面对一个现实：每台电脑都有以太网接口，却没有那个新协议。

Even if you make something marginally better, well, you're competing with the fact that every computer has an Ethernet port and not this other protocol.

而且第二点，你任何可能的改进，未来的以太网版本其实都可以慢慢吸收进去。

And then two, any any changes you might make, future Ethernet versions could maybe incorporate.

所以这些改进最终都会被整合进这个主流协议里。

And so they just get absorbed into that dominant protocol.

TCP/IP也是同样的道理。

The same is true for TCPIP.

USB也是如此。

The same is true for USB.

这些协议往往都是经久不衰的技术。

These protocols tend to be very long lasting technologies.

当我们回头看比特币、区块大小之争和加密货币这些事时，很多争论其实都在问同一个问题：我们到底想解决什么？

And, ultimately, when we look at Bitcoin and and block size wars and crypto and stuff like that, a lot of it comes down to trying to figure out what problem we are trying to solve.

所以最初的一些设想是，我想让交易变得更简单。

And so some of the initial assumptions were, I wanna make transactions easier.

比如，我想用底层货币直接买杯咖啡。

So I wanna be able use base layer money to buy coffee, for example.

但事实上，对很多人来说，这根本不是他们真正的问题。

But it turns out for a lot of people, that's not the problem that they have.

在美国，我买咖啡从来不是问题。

I mean, in The United States, I don't have a problem buying coffee.

我的Visa卡用得挺顺的。

My Visa card works well enough.

现金也完全够用。

My cash works well enough.

我每天出门可不会想，哎呀，我的钱转账太差劲了。

I don't go out every day and think like, man, my money is so bad at transactions.

在某些国家可能确实如此，但即便那样，也往往不是主要问题。

Now in certain countries that might be the case, but even then, it's it's often not.

我们大多数人真正想要的是，建立一种可以随时变现的价值储存方式，能全球自由流转，没人能拦得住我，或者至少很难拦住。

What a lot of us have instead is I wanna build a store of liquid value, move it around globally, have nobody be able to stop me or at least very hard to stop me.

而且我知道，未来二十年里，这套规则不会说改就改。

And that I know that the rules I'm not gonna get rug pulled in next twenty years.

对吧？

Right?

我不用天天盯着它，因为它不会无缘无故被改动。

That I'm not gonna just I don't have to watch it too closely because it's not just gonna get changed.

没有哪个中心机构能随便把发行量翻倍，或者随便把钱转给我什么的。

There's no central entity that you can just double the number of units or send to me or something.

从这个角度看，我们真正想解决的问题，是打造一种不可篡改的货币基础。

In that sense, the problem we're trying to solve is an immutable foundation of money.

说白了，就是一个去中心化的中央银行，一个基于能源支撑、分布广泛且难以被腐蚀的分布式账本。

You know, basically a decentralized central bank, a decentralized ledger that is robust and backed by energy and distributed so that it's very hard to corrupt.

就算真被腐蚀了，那过程也会非常漫长而缓慢，而且举证的责任永远在试图腐败的一方。

You know, to the extent that it'd be corrupted, it'd be a very long and slow process, and the burden of proof is always on the corrupter.

至于整个区块大小之争，我觉得大家的方向搞错了，为了追求速度而牺牲去中心化，但你其实是在解决一个错误的问题。

But the whole block size wars, I think people aired in the wrong direction for trying to, you know, sacrifice that decentralization to make it faster, but this you're you're solving the wrong problem.

说到加密货币，很多人总想让它变得更强大、更复杂。

And when it comes to crypto, a lot of it is about trying to make them more expressive and complicated.

但问题在于，这种复杂性通常是以牺牲去中心化和安全性为代价的。

But, again, that often that generally comes with the cost of decentralization and security.

所以我们考虑去中心化和安全性时，首先希望代码库尽可能简单，这样才能最小化漏洞、攻击和激励机制崩溃的风险。

So when we think of decentralization and security, we want something that, one, the code base is as simple as possible to minimize bugs and hacks and problems and and incentive breakdowns.

其次，我们希望它足够去中心化，让任何想改变网络规则或攻击网络的实体，哪怕放眼十年、二十年、五十年甚至一百年，都得打一场极其艰难的仗。

And then two, we wanted to be sufficiently decentralized so that any entity that wants to either change the rules of the network or to sense the network has a massive up to uphill battle even if you think out ten, twenty, fifty, one hundred years.

普雷斯顿，因为你无法把价值传递到未来还保持同样的购买力，因为这些单位本身一直在不断稀释。

Preston Because you can't transmit value into the future and it'd still be worth the same amount because the units are just constantly getting to base.

如果今天一百美元的购买力，或者一枚比特币的购买力，我希望二十年后它依然能买回同样多的东西。

If it's $100 worth of buying power today or 1 Bitcoin's worth of buying power today, you want to be able to transmute that 20 into the future and it still can go out and buy me the same amount of buying power as what I've got right now.

对了，我再念一段别的内容。

And yeah, let me read something else here.

这段话有点长，但我觉得这句话特别棒，而且出自这个领域里一位非常重要的人物。

This is a little long, but I think this is such a great quote and from such an important figure in this movement.

亚当·巴克，你把这段话写进你的书里了，林。

Adam Back, you put this in your book, Lyn.

他说过：比特币有些与众不同。

He said this, There's something unusual about Bitcoin.

2013年的时候，我花了大约四个月的业余时间，试图找到任何能显著提升比特币的方法——无论是扩展性、去中心化、隐私性、可互换性，还是让普通人用小型设备也能挖矿，我列了一堆衡量改进的指标。

So in 2013, I spent about four months of my spare time trying to find any way to appreciably improve Bitcoin, across scalability, decentralization, privacy, fungibility, making it easier for people to mine on small devices, a bunch of metrics that I considered to be metrics of improvement.

我研究了各种参数调整、架构改动、网络设计、加密方案，想出了不少点子，其中有些后来也被别人提出来了。

And so I looked at a lot of different changing parameters, changing designs, changing networks, changing cryptography, and I came up with lots of different ideas, some of which have been proposed by other people since.

但让我没想到的是，几乎所有看似在某一方面有提升的改动，都会在其他好几个方面带来更严重的代价。

But basically, to my surprise, it seemed that almost anything you did that arguably improved it in one way made it worse in multiple other ways.

它让系统变得更复杂，占用更多带宽，还让其他某些方面变得更糟。

It made it more complicated, used more bandwidth, made some other aspect of the system objectively worse.

所以我开始意识到，比特币其实处在设计空间中的一个非常狭窄的区域。

And so I came to think about it that Bitcoin exists in a narrow pocket of design space.

所有可能的设计组合，其搜索空间是极其庞大的。

The design space of all possible designs is an enormous search space.

对吧？

Right?

但出人意料的是，你似乎根本无法显著地提升它。

And counter intuitively, it seems you can't significantly improve it.

请记住，我有分布式系统的博士学位，职业生涯大部分时间都在为初创公司和大企业设计大规模互联网系统、安全协议这类东西。

And bear in mind, I come with a background where I have a PhD in distributed systems and spent most of my career working on large scale internet systems for startups and big companies and security protocols and then that sort of thing.

所以我觉得，如果有人能对这种系统做点微小改进的话，那大概率就是我了。

So I feel like I have a reasonable chance if anybody does of incrementally improving something of this nature.

但我试过之后发现，真的几乎什么也改不了。

And basically, I gave it a shot and concluded, wow, there's literally basically nothing.

你做的每一件事都让情况更糟，这完全不是我预期的结果。

Literally everything you do makes it worse, which was not what I was expecting to find out.

我发现这一点，对于不了解亚当·巴克的人，我得说，他可是被中本聪白皮书直接引用过的人。

I find that and for people that don't know who Adam Back is, I mean, he's literally referenced in the Satoshi white paper.

他花了很多时间仔细权衡所有取舍，试图改进它，最后却说，我根本找不到任何能真正客观提升它的方法。

For him to say that he spent this time really contemplating on all the trade offs and trying to improve it and saying, there was nothing I could do to really objectively improve this.

你在这本书里提到这一点，真的特别重要。

Think it's just a really important highlight that you put in the book.

我不知道你还有没有别的想补充的，但我觉得有必要把这段话念给听众听。

And I don't know if you have anything else that you wanna add, but I just think it's important to kinda read that out for people.

我再补充两点。

I'll add two things.

第一，就像我之前说的协议那样，如果你去分析以太网，想想怎么才能把它做得更好，你会发现，跟它现有的设计相比，改进的空间其实非常有限。

One is that, like I said about protocols, it's very if you analyze Ethernet and think how can I make this better, the design space compared to what Ethernet already does is very tight?

对。

Mhmm.

所以，说白了，答案就是随着摩尔定律带来更快的处理速度，我们能慢慢提升性能，也就这么多了。

So, basically, the answer is that as Moore's law gives us better speed, we can speed it up gradually over time, and that's about it.

对吧？

Right?

当然，有些细微的优化空间还是有的。

I mean, there's little marginal things you can do.

TCP/IP 也是同样的道理。

Same thing for TCPIP.

当你有一个简单又基础的东西时，你希望它保持简单和稳健，把复杂性留在边缘部分。

When you have a when you have something that's simple and at the foundation, you want that to be simple and robust, and you want complexity to be on the edges.

这本来就是个很好的设计原则，也恰恰是比特币生态一直以来的发展方式。

That's generally a good design principle, and that's that's historically the way that the Bitcoin ecosystem has developed.

我觉得他提到的，正是这一点。

And And I think that's what he touches on there.

第二点，我想提一下昨天打的那个比方，把比特币比作美国宪法。

And then two, I would point to the I made the analogy on yesterday about Bitcoin and The US constitution.

我可不是第一个这么讲的人，问题是，美国宪法是不是一份完美的文件？

I'm I'm not the first one that's made this, which is to say, is The US constitution a perfect document?

当然不是。

No.

事实上，我们对什么是完美的宪法可能看法不一。

In fact and we might disagree what we think a perfect US constitution looks like.

我能一口气列出十项我觉得该加进宪法的新权利。

You know, I could probably write down 10 like, a new bill of rights that are, like, added to the constitution.

我希望在理想世界里，公民能拥有这些额外的权利。

I want additional rights for citizens that I wish in my perfect world would be in the constitution.

比如说，我希望能通过一项修正案，规定每个人都有权使用自己认为合适的货币。

Let's say I want the next amendment to say, you have the right to use whatever money that you deem appropriate.

对吧？

Right?

公民理应拥有这项权利。

The citizens have this right.

我能想到另外九项权利，也希望它们能写进这份文件里。

I can and I can picture nine other additional rights that I want included in in the document.

但归根结底，宪法的价值就在于它极难被修改。

But at the end of the day, what makes the constitution valuable is that it's very, very, very hard to change.

修改它需要国会和各州都达成超级多数同意。

You need a super majority in congress and a super majority among states to change it.

所以，一份良好且几乎不可更改的文件，比一份很棒但五年后谁都说不清它变成啥样了的文件更可取。

And so a document that is good and nearly immutable is better than a document that's great, but that five years from now, we have no clue what's gonna look like because it's easy to change.

对。

Mhmm.

对吧？

Right?

所以我认为，比特币在设计上和以太网、TCP/IP类似，都是用尽可能简单的方式解决某个特定问题。

And so that I would argue that Bitcoin is in its design space similar to Ethernet or similar to TCPIP where it solves a certain problem in as simple as a way as possible.

就像美国宪法一样，比特币最想实现的也是让修改变得极其困难。

And then much like The US constitution is what it tries to maximize is difficulty of change.

所以并不是完全改不了，那样反而成了设计缺陷，只是改起来真的非常非常困难。

So it's not impossible to change because that would also be a design flaw, but it's very, very, very hard to change.

普雷斯顿，你在书里提到的一个权衡是隐私问题。

Preston One of the trade offs that you talk about in the book is privacy.

我长期参与这个圈子，知道很多人对隐私特别在意。

I know from participating in this community for a long time, privacy is something that a lot of people are really passionate about.

他们看像门罗币这样的项目，会觉得这才是更好的货币，因为比比特币更私密。

They look at projects like Monero and they're saying, This is a better form of money because it's more private than Bitcoin.

但我觉得你对这个权衡讲得非常好，解释了为什么比特币对大多数人来说反而是更好的选择，以及隐私问题可以放在第二层来解决。

But I think you do a really good job talking about that trade off and why Bitcoin is a better solution for people and where you can maybe push the privacy into a second layer.

你能给大伙儿详细说说这方面的考虑吗？

So can you explain some of that for folks?

当你看各种加密货币时，很多其实根本就是骗局。

So when you look at cryptocurrencies, you know, a lot of them are just outright scams,

但

but

确实有几个领域，聪明人会认真提出一些想法，比如说：嘿。

there are handful of areas where intelligent people truly propose things, say, hey.

要是搞一种更私密的货币呢？或者搞一种功能更强大的货币呢？

What if you make a more private currency, or what if you make a more expressive currency?

我觉得，如果我们多次重来，人们自然会去尝试各种不同的方案，看看哪些管用，哪些不行。

And these are you know, I think if we were to rerun this multiple times, it's natural that people are gonna test all these different answers to see what works and what doesn't.

不可能只有比特币这一种加密货币存在。

There's no world where only Bitcoin exists.

没人去试别的区块链网络，然后比特币就赢了——这根本不可能。

No one tries any other crypto networks, and, you know, it's Bitcoin wins.

对吧？

Right?

总会有各种测试、市场考验和迭代，去验证现实中哪些真正有效，而不只是纸上谈兵。

There's there's always gonna be these tests and these market challenges and these iterations to see what works in practice rather than just theory crafting.

比特币的一个缺点就是，它的私密性并不强。

And one of the downsides of Bitcoin is that it's not super private.

你知道，它的隐私性已经足够好，没人能确切知道中本聪是谁。

You know, it's private enough that no one formally knows who Satoshi is.

如果你用得很熟练，它确实能保护隐私，但要真正私密地使用它并不容易。

You know, if you use it very skillfully, it's private, but it's hard to use it privately.

所以出现了这些隐私币，让私密交易变得更容易。

And so there's these privacy coins that makes it easier to use the coins privately.

但代价是，它们牺牲了一定的可审计性，导致难以察觉的通胀漏洞之类的问题更容易发生。

And the downside is that they sacrifice some degree of auditability, so it's easier for undetected inflation bugs and things like that to occur.

相比比特币这种天生可审计的系统，这些隐私币在代码、加密和证明机制上多了一层信任依赖。

There's a little bit more layers of trust in the code and encryption and the proofs compared to Bitcoin that is more inherently auditable.

如果你打算打造一种基础货币，比如想构建一个价值十万亿甚至更高的网络，那这种稳健性、可审计性和去中心化， arguably 比隐私性或图灵完备性更重要。

And so if you're trying to build a foundation of money, you know, if you're trying to if you want a a network that's worth $10,000,000,000,000 or more, that robustness, that audibility, that decentralization is arguably a a more important component than privacy or Turing completeness or whatever the case may be.

所以，如果能把隐私和图灵完备这些功能叠加在上面，我觉得这种分层架构比直接把它们塞进底层更合理——毕竟在底层加入这些功能，往往会牺牲去中心化、稳健性或可审计性，只为换取一些或许有用但非核心的特性。

And so to the extent that you can build those things on layers on top of it, I think is it makes a much better engineering model than trying to incorporate those things right into the base layer where you sacrifice some degree of decentralization or robustness or auditability in order to achieve something that, sure, might be useful.

隐私和图灵完备确实有它们的用处。

Privacy and Turing completeness can be useful things.

但如果我们谈到最底层的东西——像以太网、TCP/IP，甚至宪法——我们都希望有个大家都能达成共识的简单基础。

But if we're kinda getting down to the very base layer, you know, down to Ethernet, down to TCPIP, down to the constitution, we want something that's easy for us to all agree on.

然后在上面构建各种小系统或复杂功能时，我们可以各自选择路径，但全都连接到这个简单、透明又稳固的底层。

And then when we build these these little silos or complexities on top of it, we can kinda pick our own paths that all tie into this very simple and audible and robust base layer.

所以门罗币的问题在于，它的价值通常会相对于比特币下跌。

And so the problem with Monero is that it generally degrades in value versus Bitcoin.

它很难建立起和比特币同等程度的信任和普及度。

It's hard for it to establish the same level of trust and and adoption.

你或许能获得更好的隐私，但长期持有它的价值并不明智。

And so you might get more privacy, but you don't wanna hold your value there long term.

当你进出门罗币的时候，隐私保护就失效了，因为它的流动性太差。

And then when you get in and out of Monero, that's where the privacy breaks down because there's not a lot of liquidity there.

隐私的实效取决于流动性，尤其是进出的节点。

Privacy is limited by liquidity, especially the entry and exit points.

所以你其实还是被困住了。

And so you're still somewhat stuck.

但我认为，未来会涌现出很多不错的工具，能让比特币变得更私密。

Whereas I think there's a lot of good tools on the horizon that can make Bitcoin more private.

我们现在已经有了效果不错的币混技术。

We already have coin joins that are significant.

闪电网络对发送方来说相对私密，而且随着时间推移，整体隐私性还会越来越好。

Lightning Network is relatively private for the sender and over time gets generally more private.

还有不少提案正在研究，打算进一步改善它的一些隐私短板。

There's there's more proposals to further fix some of its privacy issues.

我们还有FetMynt。

We have FettyMins.

我们用的是40年前的Traumann铸币技术，效果很好，只要流动性足够，几乎能达到完全私密。

We use, 40 old Traumann mint technology that works quite well to make it hard to you know, it's near complete privacy as long as you have sufficient liquidity.

总的来说，我认为隐私虽然是个非常重要的功能，但到目前为止，市场和工程设计的观察都表明，它并不适合做底层基础。

And so in general, think that while privacy is a very important tool, I think so far the the market and just engineering design observations have shown that it's not the best for the base layer.

Preston，你深入探讨了工作量证明和权益证明这两种协议各自的优缺点。

Preston You get into a thorough discussion between proof of work and proof of stake protocols and the advantages, the disadvantages.

你把这些观点讲得真的很公允。

I mean, you just do a really fair job laying them out.

不过话说回来，Lyn，我想强调一下你在书里提到的关于工作量证明的几个关键点：你可以离开网络，再回来时也能轻松同步到最新状态，但权益证明就不一定能做到这一点。

But with that in mind, Lyn, I just want to emphasize your discussion points around with proof of work that you lay out in the book, how there's this, you can leave the network, you can come back and you can get basically back up to date, but in proof of stake, that's not necessarily the case.

这一点对刚接触这个领域的新手来说特别重要，因为他们通常都会提出这个常见疑问或担忧。

I think this is really important when you have a newcomer that comes to the space and they come with this pretty common question or concern when they come into Bitcoin.

他们会说：你看Target这样的大公司，本该有顶尖的网络安全，可它们还是频频被黑，数据全被泄露。

They say, I see Target and I see these large companies that you would think would have really superior cybersecurity in place and every one of them always get hacked and the information is compromised.

那我怎么敢相信比特币不会发生同样的事？

How in the world do I know that something like that will not happen with Bitcoin?

既然全世界的大公司都防不住攻击，我凭什么相信比特币能成为全球最终结算层？

And how can I place trust that this thing could literally be the global settlement layer for the whole planet when the targets of the world are getting hacked all the time?

确实如此。

Yeah.

这就回到一个根本原则：保持系统尽可能简单、可审计。

So that goes back down to keeping it as simple and auditable as possible.

而另一个关键点在于，工作量证明之所以重要，是因为它把区块链和现实世界的资源绑定在了一起。

And then the other available is why that proof of work, that energy component is so important because you're tethering it to real world resources.

我常拿易失性内存和非易失性内存来做比较。

And I use the comparison between volatile and nonvolatile memory.

易失性内存速度确实快。

So with volatile memory, it's faster.

但一旦断电再重启，所有数据就都没了。

But if you lose power and turn it back on, you've lost all your data.

而非易失性内存虽然有局限性，

Whereas nonvolatile memory, it has limitations.

但断电后再开机，数据依然还在。

But if you depower it and turn it back on, the data is still there.

而权益证明的问题在于，它没有这种不可篡改性，网络本身无法证明自己就是原始的那一个。

And so with proof of state, the complication is that there's no immutable the network itself does not prove that it's the original.

你知道吗，中本聪当初选择工作量证明，就是因为你不需信任发送信息的人是谁。

You know, Satoshi originally pointed out the reason he picked proof of work is because you don't have to trust who sent the information to you.

信息本身是可以自我验证的，至少在完成初始引导之后。

The information itself is self identifiable, at least once you've gotten past the bootstrapping phase.

所以工作量证明本身就是有说服力的。

So the proof of work speaks for itself.

你不需要信任发送信息的人。

You don't have to trust whoever sent it to you.

权益证明的问题在于，它没有一个能自证其力的基础。

The problem with proof of stake is that there is no inherently there's no foundation that speaks for itself.

因此，发送信息给你的那个人或实体，就变得很重要了。

So the the person or entity that sent that information to you is an important variable to consider.

那里没有不可篡改的历史记录。

There's no immutable history there.

所以在工作量证明系统里，如果你这个节点离开后再回来，还能接着之前的地方继续。

And so if you're a node that that leaves and joins the network in a proof of work system, you can pick up where you left off.

只要没有发生硬分叉。

Whereas as long as there's been no hard fork.

所以每次出现创世或硬分叉，都会有个小小的启动阶段。

So any anytime there's an inception or hard fork, there's a a little bit of a bootstrapping phase.

但除此之外，事情本身就很清楚了。

But other than those, it's self evident.

而在权益证明系统里，如果你作为一个节点离开后再回来，就无法获得你离开期间发生过的不可篡改的记录。

Whereas in a proof of stake system, if you're a node that leaves and comes back, there's no immutable proof of what happened while you were gone.

你只能看看当前的验证者们怎么说，确认什么是所谓的客观历史。

All you can do is look around at the current validators that are saying this was the this was the objective history.

而你必须相信他们。

And you have to trust them.

但并没有证据能证明他们说的就是事实。

There's no proof that that's actually what happened.

那只是证明了现在多数人怎么说而已。

That's just proof of what the majority is saying now.

因为他们可以几乎不花成本地回溯，重新编造你离开期间哪些交易被签署、发生在哪儿。

Because they can go back and they can they can create alternative histories nearly costlessly for what what transactions were signed and where.

另一种说法是，代币持有者决定了账本的状态，而账本的状态又决定了谁是代币持有者。

Another way of putting it is that the coin holders determine the state of the ledger, and the state of ledger determines who the coin holders are.

所以这就形成了一种循环逻辑。

So you have this circular logic system.

循环逻辑的问题在于，一旦出现重大问题——比如治理危机，或者发生一些极端情况。

And the problem with the circular logic system is that if there's a critical issue, a governance problem or imagine something crazy.

比如一场太阳风暴导致全球互联网瘫痪一周，我们得花上整整一周才能恢复联网。

Imagine a solar flare shuts off most of the global Internet for a period of time, and it takes us a week to get back online.

权益证明系统的问题是，一旦出事，网络就会瘫痪，Solana 停了，Finance Chain 也停了。

The problem with proof of stake system is that the network shuts down, Solana shut down, finance chain shut down.

如果这些系统因为内部漏洞，或者断网断电而停摆，重启之后，没有任何一个节点能一直在线。

If these systems shut down, either because of an internal bug or because of just loss of Internet and power, when they restart, there's no node that's always been online.

这个网络没有客观、不可篡改的历史记录。

There's no objective immutable history of this network.

但如果是比特币，哪怕整个网络因为漏洞或全球断网停摆一周，等恢复之后，我们依然能重建出网络的真实历史，因为所有的工作量证明仍然分散在各个节点上。

Whereas it literally if you somehow shut down the Bitcoin network, like with a bug or the entire Internet just goes off for a week and comes back on, we can reconstruct what the objective history of the network was because all that proof of work is still distributed among the nodes.

所以当节点重新上线并开始互相通信时，它们能依据网络规则找到一个客观的真相来源，确定哪条链是最长的。

So as the nodes come back online and start trying to communicate with each other, there is an objective source of truth they can find for what is the longest chain that meets the the rules of the network.

没错。

Yeah.

我通常认为，工作量证明是一种更稳健的机制。

I would generally argue that proof of work is a more robust system.

它更难被操控，而且我认为这一点至关重要，不管它在能源消耗方面有什么利弊。

It's less corruptible, and it's something that, you know, I think is very important, you know, despite any costs or benefits it might have in terms of its energy usage.

这完全值得，因为你试图重建的是一种不依赖循环逻辑的系统。

It's totally worth it because what you're trying to replicate here is a system that relies on something you know, it's not circular logic.

归根结底，交易的顺序并不是由你持有的代币数量决定的，而那些代币数量本身又是由账本决定的。

At the end of the day, transaction ordering is not based on the amount of coins you hold, which is determined by the ledger.

交易顺序取决于你为系统投入多少外部能源。

Transaction ordering is determined by your ability to put external energy into the system.

Preston 哇。

Preston Wow.

说得太好了。

So well put.

我们来聊聊你书里另一个部分，你提到权益证明本质上会随着时间推移变得越来越中心化。

Let's talk about You have another section in the book where you're talking about how proof of stake is inherently a centralizing one:thirty force with enough time.

能说说为什么是这样吗？

Talk to us why that's the case.

你看比特币矿工，就算矿池规模可以很大，但单个矿工通常不会那么大。

If you look at Bitcoin miners, even though mining pools can get pretty big, individual miners generally don't.

而且矿工随时可以把算力转移到其他矿池，如果某个矿池出问题的话。

And of course, miners can always redirect their hash rates to another pool should a pool be giving a problem.

所以我们真正关心的是矿工的集中化问题。

So what we really care about is miner centralization.

而挖矿本身就是一个——这一点在实体采矿中也一样成立。

And mining is inherently a and this is true for physical mining.

比如你是铜矿或金矿的矿主，几乎从来不会出现铜或金的垄断，因为你为开采这些矿产投入的资源，几乎和你从销售中获得的收入一样多。

Like if you're a copper miner or a gold miner, there's never really like a copper monopoly or gold monopoly because you're spending almost as much resources to get the commodity as you're earning revenue from the commodity.

你根本没法控制自己的成本。

You don't really control your expenses.

你也没法决定你的商品卖多少钱。

You don't really control what your commodity sells for.

所以除了尽量做好执行，做出一些逆周期的决策之外，想经营一家商品矿企真的很难。

And so other than trying to make sure you execute well and, you know, make good kinda counter cyclical decisions, it's very hard to run a a commodity miner.

对比之下，比特币挖矿也基本是同样的情况。

And the same is generally true for Bitcoin mining.

它本质上是分散的。

It's inherently distributive.

币会随着时间慢慢分布到更多人手里。

Coins tend to distribute over time.

而最初的工作量证明，其核心目的就是一种启动机制。

And the initial proof of work, the whole point is it's a bootstrapping mechanism.

但如果你从权益证明开始，说好，现有的持币者来决定哪些新交易被添加进去。

Whereas if you start a proof of stake system and you say, well, okay, the existing coin holders get to determine, you know, what new transactions get added in.