比特币扩容困境与Shinobi的探讨 - WBD776

如果你想在链上花费给丹尼，那么它必须先实际展开并在链上得到确认。

If you wanted to spend it to Danny on chain, then it would have to actually unfurl and get confirmed on chain first.

但是

But

那可能是一个闪电通道。

that could be a lightning channel.

丹尼也可以用同样的方式拥有一个带有虚拟UTXO的闪电通道。

And Danny could have his own lightning channel with a virtual UTXO the same way.

你们可以直接通过闪电网络进行链下支付，而不必实际在链上创建VUTXO。

And you guys could just make this payment off chain over lightning and not have to actually get the VUTXO created on chain.

好的。

Okay.

那么最重要的是，所有钱包都会自动处理这些，完全不需要我们操心吗？

So most importantly, will all the wallets abstract this away and just do it all for us that I wouldn't even have to be aware of?

是的。

Yeah.

我试图找张图来简化说明，但似乎没什么帮助。

I tried to pull up a diagram to make this simple, but I don't think it helped.

哦，

Oh,

有用吗？

does it?

这看起来像是以太坊路线图。

That looks like an Ethereum roadmap.

各位的困惑已经解除了。

Your confusion is absolved everyone.

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得我们甚至不该尝试解释这个。

I don't think we should even try and go through this.

那确实看起来像是以太坊路线图。

That does look like an Ethereum roadmap.

我的意思是，就把它想象成一棵基本树。

I mean, just just think of it as like the basic tree.

就像你把根放在顶部，这是实际存在于链上的UTXO。

Like you have the roots at the top and this is the actual UTXO that exists on chain.

然后它分裂出来，生成四个不在链上的虚拟UTXO。

And then it splits out and makes four more virtual UTXOs that aren't on chain.

接着这些虚拟UTXO再分裂生成四个，直到你到达树的底部。

And then those split and make four more virtual UTXOs until you get to the bottom of the tree.

然后这些虚拟UTXO就是所有共享链上真实UTXO的人，用来主张他们对真实UTXO部分权益的凭证。

And then those are the virtual UTXOs that all the people sharing the real one on chain, like, have as, like, their claim for, like, their parts of the real UTXO.

所以这在你想一次性支付100个人的场景下很有效。

And so that works in the scenario where you wanna pay a 100 people at once.

比如说，我只想通过链上给丹尼转200美元，哪怕是一千美元，但当前链上手续费就要200美元的环境下。

Just say, I just wanna send Danny $200 on chain, even a thousand dollars, but we're in an environment where on chain fees are 200.

对吧？

Right?

我能用这个合并到另一个UTXO里吗？

Can I be merged into another UTXO with that?

还是说它只适用于我想同时支付一群人的情况？

Well Or or is it only work in the instance where I wanna pay a bunch of people at the same time?

我认为这些工具最强大的使用方式是——

Here here's like the, I think the most powerful, like way that these things can be used.

如果你再想象一下那棵树。

If you just like picture the tree again.

嗯。

Yeah.

好吧。

All right.

所有的

All of

底部的VUTXO只需支付给每个用户的单一密钥。

the VUTXOs on the bottom just pay out to each user's like single key.

如果你使用Schnorr和Taproot，创建一个多重签名地址实际上就像把两个独立密钥相加那么简单。

If you use Schnorr and Taproot, making a multi sig address is literally just as simple as just taking two individual keys and adding them together and that's it.

因此，这里我们可以做的不是让CTV不可逆地承诺所有这些链上确认事项，而是可以到底部采用四人一组的方式。

So what you can do here is instead of only having like CTV irrevocably commits to all of these things confirming on chain, we can go to the bottom and like it's groups of four.

我们会把这四个人的密钥合并成一个多重签名地址。

So we'll take these four people's keys and smush them together into a multi sig address.

这个多重签名地址需要这四个人全部签名才能动用资金，他们可以自由支配。

And we'll have that multi sig address where a 100% of those four people have to sign and they can do whatever they want.

在Taproot结构中，其下层是CTV承诺。

And underneath that in Taproot, you have the CTV commitment.

你可以在整个树状结构中这样操作。

So you do this through the whole tree.

每四人组构成一个多重签名，然后向上一层级聚合，直到链上这个实际UTXO包含全部100人——需要所有100人签名才能创建穿透树状结构的交易。

Every group of four gets added into a multi sig and then you go up a level And all of those get added into a multi sig and you go up a level until like this actual UTXO on chain is all 100 people and all 100 people have to sign the multi sig key to kind of make a transaction cutting through the tree.

现在，与其最终展开整个交易链并在链上确认所有交易，只要能在树状结构中找到所有人都愿意合作签署新交易（比如正确分配资金）的节点，就可以直接截断其下所有分支，让资金更高效地自由流转。

And so now instead of having to eventually unfurl this whole chain of transactions and confirm them all on chain, wherever you can get to a point in that tree where everybody will cooperate and sign a new transaction, like distributing the funds properly, you can kind of just cut out all of the tree below it and everybody can just move the money wherever they want to much more efficiently.

好的。

Alright.

让我说说我在意和不在意的事。

Let me tell you what I care about and I don't care about.

比如上网时，我输入网址就能打开网页。

So with the Internet, I put in a web address and the website comes up.

我不关心数据包是如何传输的。

I don't care about how packets of data move.

我对此毫无兴趣。

I've got no interest.

说实话，我根本不在乎具体怎么实现。

With this, really, I kinda don't care about how it's done.

我只想知道：我打开钱包，选择给丹尼转账，钱就能到他手里。

What I wanna know is I open my wallet, I choose to send Danny money, and it gets to him.

用比特币转给他。

Bitcoin and it gets to him.

至于用的是CTV、UTXO、独立UTXO还是闪电网络，我都不关心。

And hopefully, whether it's a CTV, a UTXO, a UTXO on its own, the lightning, I don't really care.

我只希望用最快最便宜的方式转给他，所有技术细节都封装好。

I want to get to him as quickly and cheaply as possible and want everything abstracted away.

这能实现吗？

Will that happen?

本质上，我们讨论的这些是不是大多数比特币用户根本不会察觉的底层机制？

And essentially, are we discussing something that most Bitcoin users will never know is happening?

对。

Yeah.

这类功能最简单的实现方式就是通过LSP，比如Phoenix或Breeze钱包。

Like the the simplest way that this type of thing can work is like an LSP, like Phoenix or Breeze.

它们可以基于单个UTXO构建大型树状结构，让所有用户最终都与Breeze或Phoenix建立闪电通道来实现。

They would just make like a giant tree like this on a single UTXO where everybody has a lightning channel with Breeze or Phoenix at the end, and they can just do that.

这样每个人只需分摊很少的通道开通费用。

And then everybody has a fraction of the fee to actually open the channel.

当需要关闭通道时，Breeze或Phoenix可以协调整个流程，用更高效率的方式批量处理。

And whenever it comes time to close like Breeze or Phoenix can kind of coordinates like the whole process of we're gonna close some stuff out, but do it much more efficiently.

这只是它们作为闪电服务提供商提供的常规服务之一。

And this would just be part of the service that they're providing as your Lightning service provider.

所以这个与闪电网络配合得非常好。

So this this works really well with Lightning.

具体来说，我将拥有一个闪电网络地址，这意味着如果是我控制的地址，那么我就控制着与该通道关联的UTXO。当有人从他们那端发送时，资金最终会通过闪电网络通道流入我的通道，而这部分资金就属于该UTXO。

In that, I will have a a Lightning address, which means an if it's an address I control, I therefore control the UTXO associated with that channel, that somebody does that send their end, and then it ends up going through that Lightning channel into my Lightning channel, which is part of that UTXO.

嗯。

Mhmm.

在某个时间点，如果我想要关闭那个UTXO，完全由我决定。

And at some point, if I wanna close that UTXO, that's up to me.

如果里面只有100美元，这么做就不太划算。

If I've got a $100 in it, it doesn't make sense.

但如果随着时间积累到1万美元，我可能会直接关闭那个通道，或者关闭那个——对，就是那个通道，然后让那个UTXO持有这1万美元。

But if over time, I build up $10,000, I might actually just close that channel down and or close down that yeah, that channel, and I just have that UTXO holding $10,000 in.

这大致就是运作原理吗？

Is that is that kind of what's happening?

对。

Yeah.

这与闪电网络配合得很好。

This works well with Lightning.

是的。

Yes.

如果没有闪电网络——其实现在不用考虑这个，因为你的钱包已经能帮你处理所有闪电网络相关操作，你根本不需要操心。

Without Lightning, it if you're not on the Lightning Network well, now actually, because your wallet will have because your wallet can do all the Lightning stuff for you, so you don't even have to think about it.

嗯。

Mhmm.

对。

Yeah.

没错。

Yeah.

好的。

Okay.

我是说，我不知道。

I mean, I don't know.

我是说，随便吧。

I mean, whatever.

比如，如果你告诉我这就像...某种程度上说得通，但如果你说这就是路径，只要最关键的部分被抽象封装好了就行。

Like, if you're telling me this is like, it kinda makes sense, but if you're telling me this is the path, as long as it's abstracted away the the most important thing is this is abstracted away.

人们不想了解这些。

People don't want to know about this.

我甚至不觉得人们想开通频道来声明'我已经对你开通了频道'。

I don't even think people wanna open channels to say, I've opened a channel to you.

我认为所有这些都需要被抽象封装起来。

I think that all just needs to be abstracted away.

嗯。

Mhmm.

那为什么人们会反对呢？

So why are people against it?

如果我们看看左翼反对者，主要是因为他们对比特币的技术原理几乎一无所知。

Well, if we look at the left curvers, it's because they pretty much don't understand anything about how Bitcoin works technically.

而且最近几年还出现了一些极其荒谬的论调和叙事被传播。

And there have just been like some really ridiculous arguments and narratives propagated in the last few years.

比如CTV会让政府能冻结你的币，除非政府同意才能使用。

Like CTV will allow the government to make your coins unspendable except where the government says it's acceptable to spend them.

但这根本不是它的运作方式。

And that's just not how this works.

这种说法的依据是什么？

What's the basis of that argument?

这毫无根据。

There is no basis.

字面意思就是这个论点被提出了。

It's literally just this argument was made.

理论上，你可以构建更高级的契约来实现类似功能。

And in theory, there are much, much more advanced covenants that you could build that would do something like this.

但CTV不是这样的。

But CTV is not that.

这其中存在两种固有特性。

And there there are two kinds of inherent aspects of this.

第一，CTV本质上只是预先签名的交易。

One, what CTV does is just essentially pre signed transactions.

只是这些交易无法撤销。

It's just, there's no way to back out of them.

发起这组交易的人也无法进行双花。

There's no way for the one guy who made it the set of transactions to double spend them.

好的。

Okay.

所以你不能随意限制资金只能流向特定地方，同时又在允许范围内自由支配。

So you cannot just arbitrarily restrict your money only going to certain places, but still let you spend it however you want in the acceptable places.

因为想想看：

Because like, think about this.

假设政府允许你在100家不同商户消费。

Let's say there's a 100 different merchants that the government says it's okay for you to shop at.

想象下他们需要为每家店铺每种可能的消费组合预先签署多少交易——从每笔订单，

Think about how many pre signed transactions they would have to make for like every possible purchase that you could make at every single one of these stores and every single order.

小到2美分的口香糖，大到20美元的整箱啤酒。

Like from like, I'm buying a 2¢ stick of gum to a $20 case of beer.

就像你必须提前想清楚。

And like you have to pre figure out.

这完全就是，这完全就是

It's just all the It's just

我不理解政府是如何介入其中的。

How does, I don't understand how the government inserts themselves into that.

嗯，这是接下来的部分。

Well, this is the next part.

就像当你给我发送比特币时，你和你的钱包会生成接收比特币的地址。

Like when you go send me Bitcoin, you and your wallets generate the address to send the Bitcoin to.

如果政府想这么做，你的钱包生成地址后展示给别人，他们拿到地址或底层脚本后添加内容。

Like if the government was going to do something like this, your wallet generates your address and you show it to somebody and then they take that address or the script underneath it, and then they add stuff to it.

你的钱包会显示钱没到账，因为你没把钱发到我给的地址，所以你没付钱给我。

Your wallet's just gonna go money didn't show up because you didn't send money to the address I gave you, so you didn't pay me.

所以是接收方设定规则？是的。

So does the receiver set the rules Yes.

关于资金可以在哪里使用？

Of where that can be spent?

嗯。

Mhmm.

所以你是说政府根本无法介入这个过程。

So there's no way that the government can insert themselves in the middle of that is what you're saying.

没错。

Exactly.

是的。

Yeah.

我明白你的意思了。

I get you.

好的。

Okay.

所以这是契约的一个版本，是杰里米·鲁宾提出的。

So that that is one version of covenants, which is Jeremy Rubin's.

怎么说呢，剥猫皮的方法不止一种。

There's, what, multiple ways to skin a Not cat.

剥猫皮的方法有很多种。

Multiple ways to skin a lot cat.

猫其实不是契约。

Cat is actually not a covenant.

不是。

No.

不是。

No.

我知道。

I know.

我知道。

I know.

我说了我们只是在开玩笑。

I said we're just making a joke.

但剥猫皮的方法有很多种。

But there's multiple ways to skin a cat.

所以要么是少数几种可行方法，要么是无限种方法。

So this is either a select few ways you can do it, infinite ways you can do it.

我不...我是说，我不是开发人员。

I don't I mean, I'm not a developer.

好吧，我们先专注讨论CTV一会儿。

Well, there's let let's just stick with CTV for a minute.

比如，它承诺在你创建CTV币后，将花费该币的整个交易。

Like, it commits to the entire transaction that would be spending the CTV coin after you make it.

所有输出，包括这些输出的脚本、资金去向以及金额分配，本质上就是整笔交易的全部内容。

All the outputs, like the scripts for those outputs and where the money is going, like how much money is going there, like the entire transaction essentially.

你可以做一些更细粒度的操作。

You could do something a little more granular.

比方说，我想确保锁定的10个比特币中，当这笔钱被花费时，必须有1个比特币流向丹尼。

Like, let's say I want to guarantee that out of the 10 Bitcoin that I lock in here, one Bitcoin when this gets spent has to go to Danny.

就像你可以拥有类似CTV的功能，但不是承诺整个交易，而只承诺那个特定输出。

Like if you could just have a thing like CTV, but instead of committing to the whole transaction, it just commits to that output.

剩下的9个比特币，你可以随意支配。

And then the other 9 Bitcoin, you can spend wherever you want.

这些可以等到实际花费这笔钱时再决定，而不是在创建输出前就必须确定。

And that can just be decided, like whenever you go to spend the coin, instead of like, you have to decide before you even create this output.

这算是CTV这类契约可以实现的另一种方向。

Like, that's kind of another direction that the type of covenant CTV is could be done.

所以核心理念相同，但不是承诺花费这笔币的整个交易，而只承诺其中特定部分。

So like the same general idea, but instead of committing to the entire transaction, that's gonna spend this coin, you just commit to certain parts of it.

其余部分，你可以在实际花费时自由处理。

And then the rest, you can, like, do whatever you want with when you go to spend it.

本节目由我们的会议秘籍赞助播出。

This show is brought to you by our conference cheat code.

四月份我们将在我的家乡、比特币的发源地贝德福德举办首届完整会议。

Now on April, we're going to be hosting our first ever full conference in my hometown and the home of Bitcoin, which is Bedford.

我们邀请了令人难以置信的演讲嘉宾阵容，包括琳·奥尔登、普雷斯顿·皮什、杰夫·布斯、亚历克斯·格拉德斯坦等众多大咖，具体名单可查看官网。

Now we have an unbelievable set of speakers coming, including Lyn Alden, Preston Pisch, Jeff Booth, Alex Gladstein, and so many more, and you can see them all listed on the website.

会议周六当天，我们将稍作调整，所有演讲者和参会者将前往铁路贝德福德足球俱乐部的主场麦克马伦公园，观看我们本赛季最后一场主场比赛，并有望见证捧杯时刻。

On the Saturday of the conference, we'll be mixing up a little, and all speakers and attendees will be heading to McMullen Park, the home of Rail Bedford Football Club, to watch us play our last home game of the season, and fingers crossed, maybe collecting the trophy.

我迫不及待想带大家去贝德福德，希望能见到尽可能多的你们。

Now I can't wait to bring you all to Bedford and hope to see as many of you there as possible.

门票销售火爆，但我们仍有剩余。

Tickets selling well, but we do have some left.

如果你想购买门票，想加入我们在贝德福德的活动，请访问cheatcode.co.uk，也就是cheatc0de.co.uk。

So if you wanna get yourself one, if you wanna join us in Bedford, please head over to cheatcode.co.uk, which is cheatc0de.co.uk.

接下来，我们要介绍屡获殊荣、功能丰富的BitCasino。

Next up, we have award winning and feature packed BitCasino.

BitCasino成立于2013年，是游戏创新领域的标杆。

Established in 2013, BitCasino is a beacon of innovation in gaming.

BitCasino受到全球数万用户的信赖，提供尖端的安全保障，当然还有比特币支持。

Trusted by tens of thousands worldwide, BitCasino offers cutting edge security and, of course, Bitcoin support.

通过BitCasino，你可以体验闪电般的提款速度、VIP服务以及超过4000款游戏。

Now with BitCasino, you can experience lightning fast withdrawals, VIP experiences, and over 4,000 games.

BitCasino致力于打造公平的游戏环境，不收取交易手续费，倡导负责任博彩，并通过实时RTP功能帮助玩家识别涨跌游戏。

BitCasino believes in a fair gaming environment, offering no transaction fees, promoting responsible gambling, and empowering players with their live RTP feature to identify bullish and bearish games.

如果你想了解更多，请访问bitcasino.io，也就是bitcasin0.io。

Now if you wanna find out more, join bitcasino.io, head over to bitcasino.io, which is bitcasin0.io.

请记住要负责任地参与博彩。

And please remember to gamble responsibly.

此外，今天我们还有Iris Energy。

Also, today, we have Iris Energy.

Iris Energy是纳斯达克上市的最大比特币矿企，采用100%可再生能源，他们正在建设面向比特币挖矿、生成式AI等领域的下一代数据中心。

Now Iris Energy is the largest Nasdaq listed Bitcoin miner using 100% renewable energy, and they are building next gen data centers for Bitcoin mining, generative AI, and beyond.

我和Danny与他们的创始人Dan和Will合作已近一年，他们的价值观令我们印象深刻，尤其是对当地社区的承诺。

Now Danny and I have been working with their founders, Dan and Will, for nearly a year now, and we've been super impressed with their values, especially their commitment to local communities.

能与他们合作开展播客、拍摄影片、举办活动，还有我的足球俱乐部Raoul Bedford，真是太棒了。

It's been so cool to collaborate with them across the podcast, the films we've made, the events we put on, and also my football team, Raoul Bedford.

Iris Energy是为比特币及其他领域提供能源的负责任方式。

Iris Energy is the responsible way to power Bitcoin and beyond.

如果你想了解更多，请访问irisenergy.co，网址是irisenergy.co。

And if you wanna find out more, please head over to irisenergy.co, which is irisenergy.co.

好的。

Okay.

所以杰里米提出了这个提案，创建了一个BIP。

So Jeremy put the proposal forward, created a BIP.

嗯。

Mhmm.

因为，我是说，我知道它没有通过。

Because, I mean, like, I'm I'm aware it didn't get through.

我知道杰里米对这一切感到失望。

I'm aware Jeremy became disillusioned with it all.

事件最不带感情色彩的版本是什么？

What is the most non emotional version of events?

那么，解释这些事件的方式。

Well, explain way of explaining those events.

杰里米当时在研究CTV，我记得概念上大概是在Taproot之前，但实际上是在Taproot开发期间尝试实现它。

Well, Jeremy was working on CTV, I think around like conceptually before Taproot, but like actually trying to implement it while Taproot was being developed.

他最初试图将其与Taproot一起推进。

And he originally was trying to kind of push it with Taproot.

这样在Taproot树结构下，就像可以有不同花费条件一样，他希望CTV能从一开始就作为Taproot内部的一个特殊操作码存在。

So that like under the Taproot tree, like how you can have different spending conditions, he wanted CTV to just be at the start, like a special op code inside Taproot.

这本来会成为捆绑升级的一部分。

And this would just be like part of the bundled upgrade.

核心开发者不想这么做，仅仅因为Taproot本身已经是一个庞大而复杂的变更。

Core developers didn't wanna do that just because Taproot was such a massive, like complicated change to things.

他们想保持简单，就像Taproot本身那样，不试图在上面添加其他功能，这个论点并非没有道理。

They wanted to keep it simple, like just do like Taproot itself and not try to add all these other things on top of it, which is not an unreasonable argument to make.

所以，你知道的，Taproot、快速试验，所有这些戏剧性事件发生后，它成功激活了。

So, you know, Taproot, speedy trial, all that drama happened and it activated.

然后杰里米

And so Jeremy

快速试验要解释什么？

What speedy trial to explain?

我们只需看看矿工是否会在三个月内激活这个分叉。

Let's just see if minors will activate this fork in three months.

如果他们不激活，那就不会生效。

And if they don't, then it just won't activate.

所以你们实际上是在推动它被实施？

So you actually pushing it's actually being pushed then?

不，这就是我们激活Taproot的方式。

No, this was how we activated Taproot.

这是因为当时没人能就采用哪种激活机制达成一致。

And it was because nobody could agree on which activation mechanism to use.

大家都说，我们就做个简短的试验期吧。

Everybody was just like, we'll do the little trial period.

我们给矿工三个月时间。

We'll give minors three months.

如果矿工在这期间发出信号，它就会启动并激活。

And if minors signal within that period, it'll turn on and activate.

如果他们不这样做，那就不会激活。

And if they don't, then it just won't activate.

之后我们再想办法解决。

And we'll figure out what to do after that.

所以CTV是被推动激活的？

So CTV was pushed for activation?

Jeremy讨论过这件事。

Jeremy discussed it.

但这件事在之后的几年里被严重曲解了。

But this this is something that has been wildly misrepresented in like the years afterwards.

比如，我自己就不喜欢快速审判机制。

Like, I I myself did not like Speedy Trial.

我认为任何让矿工能够通过扣留激活信号来阻止激活的机制都是糟糕的主意。

Think I think any type of activation mechanism that gives miners the ability to just withhold like their signal for activation and actually stop it from activating is a horrible idea.

如果网络其他部分已达成共识要启用某个功能，矿工就不该有选择权。

Like, if there is consensus amongst the rest of the network that we want to turn something on, miners should not have an option.

很简单，这里有个最后期限。

It's simply here is the deadline.

如果你不在期限前手动启用，它也会自动激活。

If you don't turn it on earlier before that deadline, it's turning on anyway.

这个可以实现吗？

And that can be done?

是的。

Yeah.

好的。

Okay.

那么之前的升级中也用过这种方式吗？

And so has and that's been done with upgrades before?

2017年的UASF基本上就是这么做的。

That's pretty much what the UASF in 2017 was.

只不过不是核心团队使用那个激活机制，而是大家写了新的客户端来实现。

It's just instead of core using that activation mechanism, everybody wrote a new client that worked that way.

我们就是，我们无论如何都要把这个功能打开。

And we're just like, we're we're turning this on, like, one way or another.

那么在这件事上共识点在哪里？

So where does consensus exist with this?

因为如果是快速试验，矿工之间已经存在共识。

Because if it's speedy trial, consensus exists with the miners.

矿工需要多少比例的同意率？

If the miners what's the percentage approval you need?

我记得是90%或95%

I believe it was 90 or 95

对。

Yeah.

这个比例很高。

It's high.

针对那个。

For that.

所以如果矿工...如果我们推快速试验方案并且达到90多，九十五同意，那么共识就成立了。

So if the miners if we if it's pushed to speedy trial and 90 whatever, ninety, ninety five agree, then exists.

剩下那几个百分点如果不升级，他们的区块会失效吗？

And the other few percent, if they don't upgrade, their blocks become invalid?

对。

Yeah.

或者说不是。

Or no.

我是说，不，不会失效。如果他们挖的区块在功能启用后不遵守Taproot规则，那才会被孤立并失效。

I mean, no, that not invalid if they mind a block after it turned on that didn't respect the taproot rules, That would be, like, orphaned and invalid.

好的。

Okay.

这样就能激励5%的人加入另外95%或那10%的群体。

So that so that 5% are incentivized to join the other 95% or that 10%.

很好。

Great.

另一个版本中，共识存在于何处？

The other version, where does the consensus exist?

这是开发者共识吗？即开发者们像没有两个X那样达成一致？

Is that a developer consensus that is the developers agreed like with no two x?

我认为这始于开发者快速试验激活，但前提是开发者不会发布快速试验客户端，除非他们认为存在更广泛的用户基础或商业共识。

I I would say that it starts with the developers in a speedy trial activation, but the assumption is developers are not going to release a speedy trial client unless they think that there is wider, like user base business consensus around something.

但关键点在于，我想和杰里米讨论的是，他提议启用CTV时就被描述为试图在Taproot后立即通过快速试验强行推动CTV。

But like the the key thing though, I kind of wanna touch on with Jeremy proposing turning on CTV is it has been portrayed from like the the instant he proposed this, that he was just trying to push CTV to turn on with speedy trial, like immediately after Taproot.

事实并非如此。

That is not what he did.

他实际做的是发布了一个带有CTV快速试验激活机制的客户端。

What he did was release a client with a speedy trial activation mechanism for CTV.

但他也为不希望激活的人编写了代码——如果人们开始发出激活CTV的信号，那些运行客户端但不想激活的人会自行分叉出去。

But he also wrote code for people who didn't want it to turn on to run where if people started signaling to activate CTV, the people running the client who didn't want it activated would fork themselves off.

他们本质上会做出与UASF相反的行为。

And they would essentially do the opposite of the UASF.

比如我们将修改客户端，使这个功能无法被激活。

Like we are going to change our clients so that it is impossible for this feature to activate.

所以杰里米实际做的是：这是给希望激活功能的人准备的客户端。

And so what Jeremy actually did was kind of go, here's a client for people who want this thing to activate.

这是给不希望激活功能的人准备的客户端。

And here's a client for people who don't want it to activate.

我为双方都提供了工具。

And I've given you guys the tools for both options.

就像你们都搞明白的那样。

Like you guys all figure it out.

而且这被描绘成杰里米试图利用快速审判强行通过CTV。

And it's been portrayed as Jeremy trying to like force CTV through using speedy trial.

匆忙是我听到的

Is Rushed is the word I've

很多次的词。

heard a bunch of times.

是的。

Yeah.

但事实并非如此。

But that is just factually not what happened.

这是否像政治一样，如果你想赢得共和党提名，就必须花大量时间在全国各地奔波，去不同的州，不同的社区，是的，与人交谈，告诉他们你是谁以及为什么他们应该关心。

Is this like politics in that if you want to be if you wanna say win the the Republican nomination, you have to spend a lot of time traveling around the country, going to different states, going to different communities, yeah, and talking to people and telling them about who you are and why they should care.

维韦克·拉马斯瓦米可以和唐纳德·特朗普做同样多的工作。

And you could do Vivek Ramaswamy can do as much work as Donald Trump.

他可以去任何地方。

He can go everywhere.

但维韦克·拉马斯瓦米还没有像唐纳德·特朗普那样受欢迎的政治支持，因为他是新人。

But Vivek Ramaswamy doesn't already have the popular political support because he's new compared to Donald Trump.

所以即使他取得了不错的进展，还是有很多人会支持唐纳德·特朗普，因为他们已经了解他。

So even if he's making good ground, there's a lot of people who will stick with Donald Trump because they kinda know who he is.

所以到了投票的时候，维韦克就是无法赢得支持。

So when it comes to a vote, you know, Vivek just doesn't make the ground.

是不是因为杰里米不像那些核心开发者那样有受欢迎的背景？我知道他有很强的背景，但请听我说完。

Is it a case that Jeremy doesn't have he's not like that OG core developer has that popular I know he does have a strong background, but bear with me.

他不像彼得·威利、卢克·达舍或亚当·贝克那样。

He's not like the Peter Willey, the Luke Dasher, the Adam Back.

所以他可能在争取政治支持方面做得不够。

And so he maybe didn't do enough work gaining political support.

让我这么说吧。

Let me put it this way.

亚历克斯·B昨天发了一条推文

Alex B made a tweet yesterday

那是个男人。

That's a guy.

这完全是事实。

That is completely reality.

如果杰里米为Blockstream工作，CTV可能两年前就激活了。

If Jeremy worked for Blockstream, CTV would have been active like two years ago.

所以这就是一场政治游戏。

So so it is a game of politics.

是的。

Yeah.

好的。

Okay.

而政治往往关乎信任、熟知的魔鬼之钟，以及影响力。

And politics is often about trust and a bell of the devil you know, and influence.

所以这是否意味着一个现实：杰里米没有为Blockstream工作，他可能需要争取更多政治支持，花更多时间去拜访他人，与那些有影响力的人相处，告诉他们'这是我的想法'。

And so is that maybe a reality in there that Jeremy didn't work for Blockstream, and he maybe needed to gain more political support, spend more time going to visit people, spending time with people who do have that influence to say, This is what I'm thinking.

获取他们的反馈。

Get their feedback.

这仅仅是个政治流程吗？

Is it just a political process?

可悲的是，即使在我们这样的去中心化系统中，因为我们需要社会共识，我们需要人们为某事争取足够的政治支持。

And that sadly, even in a decentralized system as we are, cause we require social consensus, we require people to gain enough political support for something.

从某种程度上说，是的。

I mean, to a degree, yes.

但实际情况是，这些事情确实都是他做的。

But the the reality of how things played out is he did all those things.

他投入了大量时间，比如撰写文档解释十多种可以用CTV构建的功能。

He spent a massive amount of time, like writing up explaining like a dozen things that you could build with CTV.

他构建了各种概念验证原型。

He built proof of concepts of all kinds of things.

他甚至开发了一个编程环境。

He even built a programming environment.

这个类似于迷你脚本SAPIO的工具，是为了方便其他人进行概念验证，展示CTV的潜力。

It's kind of similar to mini script called SAPIO to make it easier for other people to do proof of concept showing what you could do with CTV.

多年来他一直在组织黑客马拉松和工作坊。

Like he threw hackathons and workshops for years.

我记得是2021年、2022年，可能2023年没有。

Like I think 2021, 2022, 2023, or maybe not 2023.

他举办这些平民化活动，比如黑客松，主题都是'你能用CTV构建什么'。

He was doing like these plebify events, like hackathon events, like what can you build with CTV?

他还在其他会议和美国各地做这些活动。

And he was doing those at other conferences and like places across The US too.

他做这一切的同时，Blockstream的人和很多核心开发者却在抹黑Jeremy，编造荒谬的阴谋论，暗示他有不可告人的动机、不值得信任或不遵循流程。

He was doing all of this, but you had people from Blockstream and a lot of core developers at the same time throwing shade at Jeremy and kind of inventing nonsense conspiracies and insinuations that Jeremy had some ulterior motive or wasn't trustworthy or just wasn't following the process.

所以当Jeremy实际落实你说的那些工作时，Peter，总有人不断向他泼脏水，破坏他试图公开透明推进流程的努力。

So the entire time Jeremy was putting in the work to actually do all of those things you said, Peter, like there were other people just like throwing bullshit at him and undermining his attempts to honestly and openly like go through that process with people.

所以你给我们提供了左派观点。

So you gave us the left curve argument.

如果让你站在对立面，反对契约的最佳论点会是什么？

What if you had to like take the other side, what would the good argument against covenants be?

嗯，我不认为存在这种情况，但我要告诉你很多开发者提出的论点，即CTV功能不够全面、不够灵活、不够先进。

Well, I don't think there is one, but I'll tell you the argument that a lot of developers are making, that CTV doesn't do enough, that it's not flexible enough, that it's not advanced enough.

实际上有一个TX Hash提案来自——我想说是Blockstream的Russ O'Connor。

And there is actually a proposal TX Hash from, I wanna say Russ O'Connor from Blockstream.

不过别让我为此负责。

Don't hold me to that though.

现在事情变得需要跟踪的内容太多了。

Things are getting it's getting to be a lot of stuff to keep track of these days.

但它本质上就是CTV，只不过是我们而不是Jeremy开发的。

But it it's essentially just CTV, but we made it instead of Jeremy.

就像我之前说的，是对整个交易还是仅对部分内容进行承诺的问题。

And like, know, I was talking earlier about like committing to the entire transaction versus just parts of it.

CTV在设计时就特意考虑了未来升级的可能性，可以从承诺整个交易过渡到选择性承诺部分内容。

CTV was specifically designed so that it could be upgraded in the future to go from committing to the entire transaction to we're just gonna pick different pieces to commit to.

交易哈希字面上就是完全相同的概念。

Transaction hash is literally that exact same thing.

它默认模式是对整个交易进行承诺，但我们会提供升级路径让你可以选择性承诺交易的特定部分。

Like it has the default mode of like it commits to the whole thing, but we're gonna have upgrade paths to where you can pick specific parts of a transaction to commit to.

这实际上就是CTV，只不过是由Blockstream而非Jeremy开发的。

And it it literally is just CTV, but Blockstream made it and not Jeremy.

在我看来，这某种程度上说明了事情变得多么荒谬。

And that's kind of, in my opinion, like how absolutely ridiculous things are getting.

我们就是要做和Jeremy完全相同的事，只不过不是Jeremy做的。

Like, we just we were gonna do the exact same thing that Jeremy did, but it wasn't by Jeremy.

所以这次没问题了。

So it's good this time.

所以我猜想如果他们在这里，会提出不同的论点。

So I'm I I imagine if I had them here, they would put up different arguments.

我听到的一个论点——因为我们做过研究——是说存在非零概率的币会被卡住的风险。

And one one so one argument I've heard, because we do our research, is that there are there's a nonzero risk that coins can get stuck can get stuck.

这完全无关紧要。

That's completely irrelevant.

交易哈希也可能出现这种情况。

That can happen with TX hash too.

这就像你丢失私钥一样会发生。

That can just happen with you losing your keys.

是啊。

Like Yeah.

但这里有个不同点。

But there's a different point.

按我的理解，你已经花掉了这些密钥。

Like, you've spent so my understanding is that you spent these key these keys.

你是诚实地花掉了这些币，但在CTV场景下确实存在币被卡住的可能性。

You spent these coins honestly, and there are certain scenarios with CTV that coins can get stuck.

你要记住，需要向别人解释这个论点现实性的人是你。

Now you gotta remember, you're the one who has to explain the reality of that argument.

我不会给你技术层面的理由。

Not I'm gonna give you a technical reason.

唯一可能发生这种情况的条件，就是你丢失了等效于预签名交易的必要文件。

If the only way that can happen is if you lose the equivalent of the pre signed transactions that you need to spend it.

这和闪电网络的运作原理完全一致。

That is the exact same way that lightning works.

如果你开了闪电通道后丢了手机，或是硬盘损坏导致所有交易记录丢失，你的钱就没了。

If you have a lightning channel open and you lose your phone or, you know, the hard drive gets screwed up and all the those transactions get lost, you just lost your money.

除非和你建立通道的是个超级好人，你还能找到他说：嘿，我搞砸了。

Unless the person you have that channel with is a super nice guy and you have some way to go up to him and be like, Hey, I screwed up.

你能把我应得的钱给我吗？

Can you give me the money that I'm supposed to get?

而且你没有办法强制执行这一点。

And there's no way for you to enforce that.

你只能相信他会这么做。

You just have to trust him to do it.

这完全是一回事。

It's the exact same thing.

因为没有中止机制。

Because there's no abort facility.

是的。

Yeah.

就像你一开始从链上提取代币并依赖预签名交易或链下数据时，这种风险就存在。

Like the minute you start like lifting coins off chain and relying on pre signed transactions or off chain data, that risk exists.

你使用什么具体协议或方式来实现这一点根本不重要。

It does not matter at all what specific protocol or thing you're using to do that.

所有链下操作都存在这种风险。

Like everything off chain has that risk.

那最初与Taproot的兼容性问题呢？

What about the original incompatibility with Taproot?

它原本就兼容Taproot。

It's it was compatible with Taproot.

就像Jeremy最初的实现支持在TapScript和TapTree内部完成操作。

Like the original implementation Jeremy made supports doing it inside TapScript and a TapTree.

也可以直接作为独立的裸脚本实现，其中只有CTV且没有其他花费代币的方式。

And then also just doing it as its own bare script where it's only CTV and there's no other, like, way to spend the coin.

所以当我被告知它最初与Taproot不兼容时，这个说法是错误的？

So when I was told it was originally incompatible with Taproot, that was incorrect?

是的。

Yes.

除非你能给出更具体的论点，否则根据我的理解，这完全不是事实。

Like, unless you can give me like a more specific argument about that, like that's from my understanding, just completely not true.

所以你认为对方在这方面没有合理的批评意见。

And so you don't have a valid criticism that you think the other side has with this.

你觉得没有一个，你知道吗？

There's not one you think, do you know what?

他们在这里说得有道理。

They've got a point here.

因为这种情况非常罕见。

Because it's very rare that somebody yeah.

我可以想象，像杰里米这样的人（不是直接批评）走一条完美路径的情况非常罕见。

I I can imagine I it's very rare that someone like Jeremy, not criticizing directly, would go through a perfect path.

不。

No.

我的意思是，如果你想抛开CTV与交易哈希的比较，转而比较CTV和交易哈希与其他完全不同类型的契约，那确实可以提出论点，比如我们应该采用更灵活的方案来实现更多功能。

I mean, if if you wanna like set aside CTV versus transaction hash and look at CTV and transaction hash versus other, like, very different types of covenants, there are definitely arguments that you can make there that, like, let's do something more flexible that we can do more stuff with.

但仅就CTV和交易哈希相互比较而言，所有反对CTV而支持交易哈希的论点都荒谬至极。

But just looking at CTV and transaction hash, like, compared to each other, there I every argument to not do CTV and do transaction hash instead is just completely ridiculous.

因为我们显然需要联系Blockstream的人，让他们陈述己方观点。

Because we're we're obviously gonna have to reach out to people at Blockstream and say, you need to tell your side of the story on this.

是的。

Yeah.

所以我认为像你这样的人应该尽可能充分地阐述他们的论点。

And so I would think it's good for someone like you to play out their arguments as you you maybe see it.

我的意思是，这有点像昨晚我在BitDevs上讨论covenants.info网站时的情况。

I mean, like this this is kinda like what I got into during the BitDevs last night with that covenants.info website.

好的。

Okay.

里面充斥着事实性错误。

It is full of factual inaccuracies.

谁在运营那个网站？

Who runs that website?

Blockstream的史蒂文·鲁斯。

Steven Roos from Blockstream.

有意思。

Interesting.

收到了他和斯蒂芬（应该是）一起做的播客。

Was sent a podcast he did with, I think, Stefan.

那个播客里也有问题，他说了很多根本不符合事实的内容。

That podcast also, there are numerous things he said in that podcast that are just factually not true.

明白。

Okay.

这些升级会给开发者带来额外风险吗？

Does do these upgrades does this upgrade produce any additional risk to developers?

过去几年开发者已经开始面临繁重的诉讼和威胁。

We've been in a period of couple of years now where developers have started to have to face onerous lawsuits and onerous threats.

这类变更是否会扩大开发者面临的威胁面？

Is there anything here where we increase the threat surface to developers with this kind of change?

不会。

No.

这是个极其简单的改动。

This is a incredibly simple change.

只有大约100多行代码。

It's only like a 100 something lines of code.

实际上就是获取交易，花费CTV输出，进行哈希运算后与CTV锁中匹配该交易的哈希值进行核对。

It's literally just take the transaction, spending the CTV output, you hash it and you check against the hash that the CTV lock has that matches the transaction that's supposed to suspend it.

说白了就是核对一个哈希值。

It's it's literally just check a hash.

丹尼，如果你不同意就告诉我。

Tell me if you disagree, Danny.

作为非技术人员，我这么说可能不太专业，但你应该自己回答这个问题。

So as nontechnical per I say people, but you should answer yourself.

作为一个非技术人员来说。

As a nontechnical people.

是啊。

Yeah.

技术层面的争论我永远插不上话，那些技术细节我搞不懂。

Technical people, I can never get into the debate, the technical side of things.

这根本不可能发生。

It's just never gonna happen.

但我对比特币很感兴趣，如果可能爆发新一轮内战，我会关注，因为我差不多是在上次内战时加入比特币的。

But I have an interest in Bitcoin, and if it's a it's a new civil war that potentially comes, I have an interest because I I kinda joined Bitcoin during the last one.

这总是可能威胁到我的世界观、储蓄技术和财富积累方式。

And it's always a potential threat to my world view, my savings technology, my wealth generation.

所以我才会关注。

So I take an interest.

我的观察是，这是个政治问题。

My observation is this, this is a political problem.

没错。

Yeah.

这是个政治问题。

There's a political problem.

我在想，争论的双方是在互相绕圈子还是针锋相对？

And I wonder whether the two sides of the argument are talking around each other or across each other?

有没有办法促使房间里这些人真正把问题摊开来讨论清楚？

And is there a way to facilitate getting these people in the room to to actually kind of hash this out hash this out hash this out?

说实话，就是些随机的题外话。

You know, honestly, just random tangents.

我觉得可以把对话引向更深层次，比如Reardon Code或Brandon Black可能是你们想邀请上节目的嘉宾。

I think like kind of taking that conversation into a deeper direction, Reardon Code or Brandon Black might be somebody you guys are interested in trying to get on the show.

在最近为LNHANZE项目提交PR之前，他并非核心开发者，那个CTV项目，需要验证堆栈签名和内部密钥。

He's not a core developer before his recent poll request for the LNHANZE thing, CTV, check sig from stack and internal key.

虽然那些代码是他写的，但他作为这个领域的开发者已有多年，对开发流程的关注比我更深入持久。

He wrote those, but he has been a developer working in the space for years and has been deeply following the development process a lot closer and more consistently than I have.

他曾在Bitco工作过，但显然他对开发流程比我更熟悉，可能也会比我更包容。

He used to work at Bitco, but he is definitely, I think somebody who just frankly has a little more familiarity with the development process than I do, and also will probably be more charitable than I am going to be.

就理解对方立场而言，比如反对意见的那些论点。

Like as far as looking at the other people's side of that, like the other people's arguments against things.

而且他也是CTV的支持者。

And he also is a supporter of CTV.

所以没关系。

So it's Okay.

有意思。

Interesting.

他对核心议题的理解会更深入透彻，而且在争论中也比我更愿意向对方展现包容。

He's gonna be a lot deeper and closer to like the core subject matter and also just a lot more willing to extend charity than I am to the other side of an argument.

不过我们可能还需要和Polestra、Adam Back聊聊。

But we're also gonna probably wanna talk to Polestra, Adam Back Mhmm.

如果可能的话，还有Gregory Maxwell。

Gregory Maxwell, if we could.

你知道的，那些老派人物，我们也想和他们谈谈。

You know, the you know, the old guard, we're also gonna wanna talk to them.

但这确实感觉像是老派与新派之间的对立。

But it it does feel like an old guard versus new guard thing.

这个观察公平吗？

Is that a fair observation or not?

是的。

Yeah.

我...我的意思是，事情并非非黑即白，但我认为这是其中的一个重要动态，因为很多所谓的'老派'已经退出了，原因包括克雷格提起的诉讼，以及他们不愿承担这类风险，或者是对某些事情感到厌倦。

I I would and not I mean, not just that black and white, but I would say that is a huge dynamic of this because a lot of the old guards, so to say, have kind of stepped away, like for a combination of things like the lawsuits from Craig and just not wanting to be involved to that type of risk, just getting burnt out on things.

这正是我提出的观点。

That was the point I raised.

他们曾面临风险。

People have been at risk for them.

嗯，具体来说，比如彼得·威利斯，他辞去了职务，不再碰共识代码，正是因为人们盲目信任他。

Well, I mean, like Peter Willis specifically, like he stepped down from his role and will not touch consensus code anymore, specifically because of how blindly people just trust Peter.

而他并非...我其实非常尊重彼得这样做。

And he was not like, I actually respect the shit out of Peter for doing that.

他审视了这种动态，看到人们会盲目接受他的任何建议，认为那是最好的做法。

Like he just, he looking at that dynamic and how blindly people would just accept whatever he said is like the best thing to do.

他选择退出，表示不希望个人对开发过程有如此大的影响力。

He stepped away and went, no, I do not want to have that degree of personal influence on the development process.

有点像中本聪的隐退。

Kind of similar to how Satoshi stepped away.

嗯。

Mhmm.

是啊。

Yeah.

因为我确实担心从事比特币工作的人面临的诉讼风险。

Because I do I do worry about litigation risk for people working on Bitcoin.

我们已经看到了威胁，正在进行的诉讼过程非常艰难。

We've seen the threats, live lawsuits that they're rough to go through.

而且我认为社区没有给予相关人员足够的支持。

And I don't believe the community has stepped up enough to show support for people.

如果不是杰克·多尔西提供资金支持处理这些诉讼，我甚至无法想象，从个人财务层面来看，这对相关开发者会有多糟糕。

If it if it wasn't for Jack Dorsey bankrolling, like dealing with these lawsuits, I I don't even imagine like, I cannot imagine how bad this would get on a personal financial level for the developers developers involved.

相关开发者。

Involved.

我可以以个人经历告诉你，因为我亲身经历过。

Well, I can tell you personally, because I have been through that.

而杰克·多尔西的基金是面向开发者的。

And Jack Dorsey, his fund was for developers.

不是给网红准备的。

It wasn't for influencers.

不是。

No.

这没问题。

That's which is fine.

你知道吗？

You know?

我很高兴他支持他们。

That's I'm I'm glad he supports them.

我得到过一些支持。

I've had some support.

Tethr支持过我，还有几个人私下提供了帮助，但我已经亏损了约一百万英镑。

Tethr supported me, a couple of other people privately support, but I'm about a million pound down.

嗯。

Mhmm.

我...我银行里没有那种零钱。

I'm I'm I don't have that kind of loose change in the bank.

对吧？

Right?

而且它会毁了你。

And it fucks you.

你无法入睡。

You can't sleep.

丹尼见过我最糟糕的样子。

Danny saw me at my worst.

我已经因为严重的恐慌发作两次住院，因为我和律师以及他们律所内部部门开会解释破产流程。

I've been to hospital twice after massive panic attacks because I've had meetings with my lawyers and departments within their law firm that explains how bankruptcy works.

因为如果我输了，我就会破产。

Because if I lose, I'm gonna be bankrupt.

我见过COBRA经历的一切。

I saw I've seen what COBRA went through.

我们这个社区很...我们社区有很多亿万富翁，也有些连百万富翁都不是的人遭到攻击。

The community is a very we have a wealthy community with lots of billionaires, and we've had some people who aren't even millionaires who've had have been attacked.

这会产生寒蝉效应。

And that's a chilling effect.

社区里有些人完全可以站出来支付所有诉讼费，对他们来说就像我捐出一千英镑那么简单。

There are people within this community who could step forward and pay for every lawsuit, and it would be like me giving away a thousand pound.

我们在这方面做得还不够。

And we haven't done enough in that area.

远远不够。

Nowhere near.

因此，我完全理解那些对比特币重大升级感到恐惧、担心因此被起诉的人。

And so I can fully respect some people who are fearful of big upgrades to Bitcoin and then being considered someone that can be sued.

是啊。

Yeah.

但这确实是个两难困境。

But then that's kind of a quandary then.

比如，我们是否该想办法推进并解决那些必须解决的问题？

Like, do we find some way to push forward and solve problems that we need to solve?

还是干脆放弃，认为比特币的主权使用最终只能是那1%中的1%才能负担得起的特权？

Or do we just throw up our hands and go, well, I guess sovereign use of Bitcoin is something only 1% of the 1% we'll ever be able to afford?

从我们这边来说，我显然同意你的观点，因为这正是我们也在思考的问题。

Well, from our side, obviously, I agree with you because it's a question we're asking.

所以这些讨论很有价值。

And so these conversations are useful.

我们只需要让更多人参与进来共同探讨。

We just have to get other people in the room and have those conversations.

虽然不确定能否帮上忙，但至少可以试着帮助大家理解。

And I don't know if we can help, but at least we can help try and help people understand.

要不要找杰里米聊聊？

Should we talk to Jeremy?

杰里米·鲁宾？

Jeremy Rubin?

如果他愿意来的话。

If he'll come on.

当然。

Absolutely.

说实话，我最近都开始叫他小格雷格·麦克斯或小G麦克斯了——说真的，在我亲自接触或交谈过的开发者中，实在想不出还有谁能接近格雷格那种纯粹的天才水准。

I he is honestly, I've kind of taken to calling him Greg Max junior or G Max junior lately because I like, honestly, I struggle to think of a developer I have personally interacted with or talked to that approaches Greg's level of just sheer genius Brilliance.

是的。

Yeah.

比如杰里米。

Like Jeremy.

比如你和格雷格·麦克斯韦尔谈过这事吗？

Like Have you talked to Greg Maxwell about this?

说实话，我基本没怎么和格雷格深入交流过。

I honestly, I never really talked to Greg that much at all.

大概在2013、2014年那会儿，我偶尔会在IRC上和他有些零星的互动。

Like way back in like 2013, 2014, I'd have like some odd interactions with him on IRC once and again.

但我从没和他有过深入或持续的交谈。

But I I never really talked with him that deeply or consistently.

他...他总是那种'哦格雷格又在某处发了什么'的存在。

He he's just always been like, oh, Greg posted something somewhere.

我必须去读一读，因为这里面100%会包含非常有价值的见解。

I have to go read this because there is a 100% going to be very valuable insights on this.

嗯。

Yeah.

好吧。

Okay.

我们能聊聊Opcat吗？

Can we talk about Opcat?

我就知道这破事会发生。

I knew this was gonna fucking happen.

你当然知道，因为昨晚我们讨论过这事，把我吓得够呛。

Of course you did, because we discussed it last night and it it scared the bejesus out of me.

吓得我魂都飞了。

Scared the catcher out of me.

对。

Right.

解释一下Opcat是什么。

Explain what Opcat is.

所以这就是

So this is

为什么我如此害怕这种情况确实有可能发生。

why I am terrified that there is actually a chance that this happens.

严格来说，OPCAT的作用就是在执行比特币脚本时，比如你有像哈希值或一段数据这样的独立元素，你需要哈希验证或像公钥那样获取签名并验证。

Strictly speaking, all OPCAT does is when you are executing a Bitcoin script, like you have individual things like a hash or a piece of data that you hash to check against the hash or like the public key and then you take the signature and verify it against that.

OpCAT让你能做的是将两个独立的数据片段输入脚本解释器进行验证，并将它们合并为一个整体。

What OpCAT lets you do is take two separate pieces of like data being fed into the script interpreter to verify and just smash them together into one thing.

这听起来可能像是，有什么大不了的？

And that might just sound like, what's the big deal?

但在一种本应功能非常有限、限制严格的编程语言环境中，这就打开了各种可能性的大门。

But in the context of a programming language that is supposed to be very limited, very restricted in what it can do, that opens up all kinds of doors.

因为现在像数据或你想逐步验证的内容，这些以前不可能实现的事情突然变得可能，因为你不再受限于单独验证各个数据片段。

Because now like a piece of data or like some thing that you want to verify step by step that was not possible before, all of a sudden becomes possible because you're no longer limited by like, here are the individual pieces of data being verified.

你可以像粘合东西一样，直接构造而无需预先输入待验证内容。

You can like glue things together, like just construct rather than have it fed in already what you are validating.

用外行话来说，它让你能够

So in layman's terms, it allows you

把以太坊那套乱七八糟的东西全搬到比特币上实现？

to do everything all the fuckery from Ethereum on Bitcoin?

单靠它本身并不能立即实现。

Not immediately by itself.

不过它确实自行打开了许多可能性的大门。

There although it does by itself open a lot of doors.

但真正可怕的是，如果我们开始在OPCAT之后添加其他功能，因为每新增一个特性，你就得考虑当有了OPCAT并能动态拼接不同数据片段时，这会带来什么可能性。

But the real horrifying thing is if we start adding other features after OPCAT, because each new thing you add, you have to think about now what does this enable when you have OPCAT and you can glue separate pieces of data together dynamically.

而在OPCAT之后添加的每个新功能都会让情况变得更加疯狂。

And each new thing you add after OPCAT just starts making it even crazier.

什么是...什么是

What's a what's

OPCAT有什么好处？

a good side of OPCAT?

为什么人们会想要它？

Why why do people want it?

它最酷的地方是什么？

What what's the cool thing about it?

开发者想要它是因为现在他们可以完全沉浸在自己的世界里，构建各种当前无法实现的疯狂东西——这正是我不想要它的原因。

Developers want it because now they can just go full autist and build all kinds of crazy stuff that you can't do right now, which is exactly why I don't want it.

恕我直言，在比特币这样复杂的分布式系统中，不该让只关注自我兴趣的人决定他们能玩什么玩具，因为每个决定都会产生连锁反应。

Because I'm sorry, but autists should not be the ones deciding what toys they get to play with in a complex distributed system like Bitcoin because everything has, like, knock on consequences.

本节目由Ledger赞助播出。

This show is brought to you by Ledger.

Ledger是全球比特币安全领域的领导者，是持有和保管私钥的最佳方式。

Now Ledger is the world's leader in Bitcoin security and is the best way to own and secure your private keys.

如果你仍将比特币存放在交易所或托管机构，现在或许是时候更认真地对待资产安全了。

If you're still holding Bitcoin on an exchange or with a custodian, it might be time to take your security more seriously.

记住：私钥非你掌控，比特币即非你所有。

Remember, not your keys, not your Bitcoin.

Ledger硬件钱包搭配Ledger Live应用，是开始自主管理私钥的最简单方式。

Ledger hardware wallets paired with the Ledger Live app is the easiest way to start managing your own private keys.

你可以通过Ledger Live应用完全透明地发送和签署比特币交易——说实话，操作起来可能比想象更简单。

You can send and sign your Bitcoin transactions with full transparency in the Ledger Live app, and, honestly, it can be easier.

我从2017年开始使用Ledger，非常喜欢他们的产品。

I've been using Ledger since 2017, and I absolutely love their products.

此外，Ledger最近推出了比特币橙色纳米硬件钱包，并配套推出了一个非常酷的计划。

Also, Ledger have recently released their Bitcoin orange nanos and have a very cool initiative that's going with it.

每笔购买将有5美元捐赠给比特币开发者社区，他们首先选择了Brink组织作为合作方，这真是太棒了。

$5 from every purchase will go to the Bitcoin developer community, and they're starting out with Brink, which is so cool to see.

如果你想了解更多或购买Ledger硬件钱包（包括橙色款），请访问shop.ledger.com（即sh0p.ledger.com）。

If you wanna find out more and purchase a Ledger hardware wallet, even the orange hardware wallet, then please head over to shop.ledger.com, which is sh0p.ledger.com.

接下来要介绍的是Swan。

Next up today, we have Swan.

Swan是一家领先的比特币专属金融服务公司，支持通过ACH或电汇购买比特币，无额外点差，手续费低于1%。

Now Swan is a leading Bitcoin only financial services company and allows you to buy Bitcoin with ACH or wire transfers, no added spreads, and fees under 1%.

Swan的使命是为比特币和比特币持有者谋福祉，目标是让1000万用户成为真正的比特币信徒——那些理解健全货币重要性并坚守原则的人。

Swan's mission is to do what's right for Bitcoin and Bitcoiners, and their goal is to onboard 10,000,000 dedicated Bitcoiners, people who appreciate the importance of sound, incorruptible money and are uncompromising about it.

Swan还提供教育引导服务，他们深知比特币用户需要自主掌控密钥，因此提供免费自动提现至自托管钱包的功能。

Swan also provides lead in education, and they know that Bitcoiners want to look after their own keys, so they offer free automated withdrawals to self custody.

另外，如果你计划购买10万美元或更多比特币，请了解Swan Private服务。

Also, if you're looking to buy a $100,000 of Bitcoin or more, please check out Swan Private.

你将获得专属顾问支持，包括交易执行、税务亏损收割、退休账户、遗产规划等服务，并能参与独家活动、获取研究报告等专属内容。

You'll get concierge support for buy execution, tax loss harvesting, retirement accounts, inheritance and estate planning, and access to exclusive events, research, and other content.

Swan Private由我的老友Steven Lubkah负责，他曾多次参与节目。

Swan Private is headed up by my boy Steven Lubkah, who's appeared on the show several times.

Swan还提供IRA退休账户产品，让你能持有真实的比特币（而非代币）作为退休储蓄。

Swan also offers an IRA product that lets you put real Bitcoin, not proxies, into your retirement savings.

Swan是购买比特币的最佳平台。

Swan is the best place to buy Bitcoin.

欢迎访问swan.com（即swan.com）了解详情。

Check them out at swan.com, which is swan.com.

另外，今天我们介绍OpenSats。

Also, today, we have OpenSats.

OpenSats是一家501(c)(3)注册的非营利组织，致力于支持自由开源软件项目和贡献者。

Now OpenSats is a five zero one c three registered nonprofit dedicated to supporting free and open source software projects and contributors.