CD182：亚历克斯·B - 方舟

各位怪咖们好啊！我是你们的主持人奥黛拉，又一次从卢加诺为大家带来单人现场报道。准确说是人就在卢加诺现场。这次依然是音频非直播形式，因为氛围实在太嗨了。

What is up freaks? It's your host, Odella, here for another solo dispatch live from Lugano. Well, in person from Lugano. Another non live audio only rep because the vibes are high.

我有个好朋友

I got a good friend

同时也是街机发烧友的亚历克斯·B在场。最近怎么样啊亚历克斯？

and arc aficionado, Alex B here. How's it going, Alex?

挺不错的。这个录音地点选得绝了。听众们虽然看不到这里的景色，但这地方真是酷毙了。是啊老兄，氛围确实超嗨。前几天我们刚启动了街机主题日活动，目前收到的反馈简直疯狂。

Well, it's good. Great spot to be recording. Mean, listeners aren't going to be have the privilege to see this view but it's a pretty kick ass spot. Yeah man, indeed the vibes are high. Kicked off the week a couple of days ago with our arcade day launch and the feedback's been insane so far.

虽然现在还是早期阶段，但我认为整个行业都需要某种验证——证明技术上确实存在进步空间，而不必依赖软性强制手段，不需要那些复杂的BitVM类欺诈证明系统。感觉我们终于...本可以再花六周时间突破实现极限，反复打磨，做更多测试再发布。但说到底，几个月前我们在里加做了测试活动，效果非常好。过去三个月我们一直在优化，做了大量测试。不过最终，这还是在四五个开发者的小圈子里进行的。

So it's still early but I think the entire industry needed some validation that there was indeed some sense of progress possible technology wise without having to, you know, without needing soft force, without needing all of these very complex BitVM type of fraud proof systems and I feel like we're finally, you know, we could have spent six more weeks pushing the limits of like our implementation, polishing, making more tests before putting it out there. But at the end of the day, you know, went live in Riga for a test event couple of months back. It went super well. We spent the last three months, you know, again polishing, doing a lot of testing. But ultimately, it's happening within the confine or like a circle of, you know, four or five, six devs.

所以归根结底，就是要让产品面世，让人们来体验。我非常想说现在就像是Arc的' reckless（ reckless原意为鲁莽的，这里可能指大胆创新）时刻。

And so at the end of the day, you're getting to get this out there to the people, get them to play around. I would very much say it's, you know, it's kind of like Arc's hashtag reckless moment right now.

我得做个对比，因为我一直挺讨厌闪电网络那个 reckless标签。就像...老兄，你光说 reckless标签，我就感觉是在拿大把钞票跟风。但我欣赏这种开放式开发理念。说到Arc...我觉得这可以很好地衔接我之前和弗朗西斯的对话。

I mean, comparison because I always, I kinda always hated the lightning hashtag reckless thing. It's like, bro, it's like, you just say hashtag reckless and I'm just like aping him with a ton of money. But I appreciate it. I like the idea of building in the open. I mean, Arc, I mean, so I thought this would be a good follow on conversation to my conversation with Francis.

是的。因为他非常看好你们正在构建的东西。没错。虽然我一直在一旁观望，但我对比特币的基本态度是忽略所有炒作，直到我能真正亲自使用它。

Yeah. Because he's very bullish on what you guys are building. Right. And because I've been watching from the sidelines for a bit, but my general premise in Bitcoin is that I ignore everything as hype Mhmm. Until I can actually use it in person.

是的。你们已经在里加证明了它至少是可行的，虽然我不在场，但我从远处看到了。弗朗西斯实际上已经在他的Bull钱包里以实验模式运行了。所以对我来说，这足以验证这个东西确实在运行。

Yeah. You guys proved it out that it at least works, in Riga, and I wasn't there, but I saw it from afar. And Francis actually has it working in an experimental mode in his wallet, in the Bull Wallet. So, like, that's enough validation for me that, like, this thing's actually like functioning.

是的。

Yeah.

那么，我们首先从高层次开始。ARC是什么？为什么人们应该关心？这是要取代闪电网络吗？还是比特币的新一层，与闪电网络竞争？人们应该如何看待它？

So I mean, let's let's just let's just jump high level first. Like what is ARC and why should people care? Is this is this a replacement for Lightning? Is this a new layer too for Bitcoin that that that competes with Lightning? Like, how how should people be thinking about it?

是的。有趣的是，如果只回答这两个问题，我会说它介于两者之间。它肯定不是闪电网络的替代品。而且在这方面我有相当独特的观点，我不认为Arc本身是二层。Arc更像是一套技术，一个引入比特币的新协议，我们可以用它来构建二层。

Yeah. I think interestingly, I if were to only answer those two questions, I would say it's liar, these two. It's certainly not a replacement for Lightning. And I mean, I have a pretty peculiar opinion as far as that's concerned but I don't consider Arc itself to be a layer two. Arc is more so, I would say, a set of technology, a new protocol certainly that has been introduced to Bitcoin which we can use to build layer twos.

但Arc从根本上说是一个允许你进行链下执行的系统，就像闪电网络能处理链下交易一样。但Arc真正独特之处在于它将链下发生的交易结算到一层的方式。这就是我们称之为交易批处理的概念。例如，与闪电网络不同，当你关闭通道时是在链上提交交易，而我们允许你将数千个操作结算到单个输出中，这个输出是由大量参与者共同协调的。闪电网络只是两个个体之间创建通道。

But what is Arc fundamentally is the system that allows you to create off chain execution, meaning an off chain layer just like Lightning is able to process transaction off chain. But what's truly unique about Arc is the way that it settles the transactions that are happening off chain into the layer one. And this is the concept of what we've been calling transaction batching. So instead of, for example, when you're using Lightning, you're closing a channel, you're putting a transaction on chain, what we allow you to do is to settle potentially thousands of operation into a single output but that single output is coordinated between a large number of participants. So Lightning is only two individuals creating channels, creating a channel between one another.

没错。闪电网络就是两方进行2/2多重签名来完成比特币交易的批量处理。

Right. It's it's it's two parties doing a two of two multi sig for batch Bitcoin transactions is Lightning.

没错，完全正确。而在Arc中，你面对的是一个多方参与的动态系统，但有趣的是，它本质上仍是双人配置。明白吗？实际情况是这样的——你可以把Arc想象成一个可调整的合约容器，你把资金存入其中，而这个合约由一名操作员负责管理。

Exactly. Exactly. Whereas with with with Arc, you have a more of a multi party dynamic but interestingly, it's also a two of two setup. Right? So what happens really is like, think of ARC a bit as you adjust the contract where you deposit your money into and the contract is sort of administered by an operator.

ARC服务器，最初被称为ARC服务提供商。

The ARC server, originally called the ARC service provider.

对。

Right.

当你将比特币存入该合约时，该操作员会协调链上的一笔批量交易。这笔交易会在链上留下记录，并生成一个带有支出限制的输出。

And that that operator, when you deposit your Bitcoin into that contract, we'll coordinate a batch transaction on chain. So that batch transaction will have an on chain footprint and that batch transaction will create an output with spending restrictions.

好的。

Okay.

你存入的比特币将受到这些支出条件的约束。主要有两种支出条件：一种是协作支出条件，需要你和操作员共同签署才能动用资金。

And your Bitcoins that you deposited are going to be encountered by those spending conditions. And there are two main spending conditions. One being a collaborative spending condition where you and the operator sign off on the spending of your funds.

就像闪电网络中的友好关闭通道。对，正是这个意思。

Like a friendly close in lightning terms. Mean, exactly.

这个案例并不是一个闭环，而是一种你花费资金的方式，因为当你在ARC上进行协作支出时，你并没有将资金移回链上，实际上是通过操作员在链下协作花费你的资金。

This case it's not a close, it's just a method by which you spend your money because when you're doing a collaborative spend on ARC, you're not moving your money back on chain, you're actually collaboratively spending your money off chain by way of the operator.

哦，但我一直保持在链下。

Oh, but I'm staying off chain.

你确实始终保持在链下。

You're staying off chain all the time.

不过是协作式的。

But collaboratively.

没错，正是这样。因为实际发生的是操作员

Yeah, exactly. Because what happens is the operator

假设你是操作员，对。我是用户，是的。我要支付给另一个用户，是的。我和操作员共同签名支付给用户C，对吧？

So let's say you're the operator Correct. And I'm a user Yes. And I'm paying another user Yes. Me and the operator are signing to pay the user C, right?

完全正确。整个过程就像比特币的运作机制一样

Exactly. Exactly. So what happens is I'm going to and it works exactly like Bitcoin works,

对吧？好的。

right? Okay.

这是一个输入输出的系统。当你把比特币存入那个合约后，你会得到这些虚拟UTXO的概念，对吧？

And so it's a system of inputs and outputs. So what you're gonna do is you're gonna have once you've deposited your Bitcoin into that contract, what you get is this notion of virtual UTXOs, right?

对。

Right.

现在你在链下环境中就有了链上UTXO的一种抽象表示。

Now you have a sort of abstraction of your on chain UTXO in this off chain environment.

好的。

Okay.

你可以像在链上花费比特币一样花费它。你给我一个VTXO作为输入，说要发送给那边的朋友，我签署这笔交易后，我们会为收款人创建一个新的输出，就像比特币一样也会有找零输出。

And you can spend it just like you spend Bitcoin on chain. So you're gonna give me a VTXO as an input and you're gonna say I'm gonna send it to my friend over there and I'm gonna sign off on that transaction and I'm going to create what's gonna happen is we're gonna create a new output for whoever you're sending the money to, the recipient, you're also gonna have a change output just like on Bitcoin.

好的。

Okay.

对吧？所以这个系统允许你以同样的方式继续链下转移。一旦收款人拥有你刚发送给他的虚拟UTXO，他也可以转给其他人，操作员会共同签名，依此类推。但这里真正重要的是，这些支付的可靠性取决于操作员不签署冲突的交易，对吧？

Right? And so, that system allows you to continue chaining those off chain transfers in the same way. So once the recipient has his own virtual UTXO, which you've just sent to him, he can also send it to someone else, the operator is going to co sign and so on and so on and so forth. But what happens here, it's really important to understand of course, is that the reliability of these payments depends on the operator not signing conflicting transactions, right?

好的。

Okay.

因为如果你花掉了之前发送给收款人的同一个VTXO，这就是双花问题？没错。如果ID操作员说'去他的收款人，你现在把钱转给我'。如果我签署了那笔交易，就会出现两个链下虚拟UTXO同时存在的情况，对吧？

Because if you spend the same VTXO that you previously sent to a recipient and Is it a double spend problem? Yeah, exactly. ID operators say screw the recipient you probably send your money to, send your money to me now. Right. If I sign that transaction, then what happens is now we have two virtual UTXOs that exist off chain, right?

那些都在花费同一个原始UTXO，没错，

That are spending the same original Exactly,

正是如此。所以很可能发生的情况是，原收款人基本上被双花了，但这存在竞争条件，对吧？就像看谁能先把钱上链，但这并不是理想情况。

exactly. So what's likely to happen is that, you know, the original recipient was double spent basically, but there's a bit of a race condition, right? It's like who gets to put their money on chain first, but it's not an ideal scenario.

谁先结算？什么意思？是谁先结算吗？

Who settles? What's that? Like who settles first?

对，就是这样。就是看谁能成功提现。实际上就是看谁先结算——更准确地说，在双花情况下，你会想把钱完全提现到链上。所以这也被很多人视为状态链信任模型的表现，对吧？

Yeah, exactly. It's who gets to put pull that money. It's really who settles, not more more more like in this case, if you're double spending, you're gonna want to bring that money on chain, like pull it out of the system completely. So this is also something that's viewed in a lot of ways as the state chain trust model, right? Yeah.

这个观点认为，前一个发送者可以与操作者合谋，再次签署一笔冲突交易。现在，我们通过Arc（特别是我们的Arcade实现）有几种不同的方式来解决这个问题。与状态链不同，ARG通常能够解决这个问题的一个方法是，一旦你收到链下支付，你可以像对待零确认的比特币交易一样处理它，对吧？不，你可以决定，好吧，实际上，也许这笔支付非常有价值，是一笔大额交易，我不会信任这笔支付，直到它被确认进一个区块。

It's this idea that the previous sender can collude with the operator to again sign a conflicting transaction. Now, the way there's different ways that we address this with Arc, specifically with our Arcade implementation. One of the way that ARG generally is able to address this, unlike state chains, is once you've received an off chain payment, you can treat it exactly in the same way that you treat a zero call Bitcoin transaction, right? No. You can decide, okay, actually, perhaps this payment is very valuable, it's a high volume, a high amount transaction, I'm not gonna trust that payment until it gets confirmed into a block.

对。

Right.

那么，我如何将它确认进一个区块呢？显然，你可以决定把这笔钱带回链上并转化为一个UTXO，但你也可以选择与操作者合作，将收到的支付包含进一个新的批次中。操作者总是在创建交易批次，因为有新的人正在向

Now, how do I confirm it into a block? Well, obviously you could decide to bring that money back on chain and turn it into a UTXO, but you have the option with the operator to include the payment you received into a new batch. So the operator is always creating batches of transactions because there are new people that are depositing money into

这个

the

Arcade合约存入资金。

arcade contract.

你就像是在链上锚定它。

You're like anchoring it on chain.

没错。完全正确。这是一种链上的承诺。

Exactly. Exactly. It's a bit of an on chain commitment.

但我是说，弗朗西斯向我们解释过这一点。实际上可能更好。所以如果我错了请纠正我，我认为这确实可能比零确认的链上交易更好。因为零确认的链上交易，特别是在高手续费环境下，我更信任付款方，因为他们可能会立即给自己发送一笔手续费更高的交易，对吧？而矿工出于经济理性会选择手续费更高的交易。如果你想欺骗我，付款方试图欺骗我，我在卢加诺有家餐厅，这里有大约300家接受比特币支付的餐厅。

But so I mean, Francis explained this to us. It's actually probably better. So correct me if I'm wrong, I think it's actually probably better than a zero confirmation on chain transaction. Because a zero confirmation on chain transaction, specifically if it's in a high fee environment, I'm more trusting who is paying me because they might immediately send a higher fee transaction to themselves or something, right? And then a miner is just going to be economically rational just With find a higher transaction this, If you want to cheat me, the payer is trying to cheat me, I have a restaurant where in Lugano, there's like 300 restaurants that accept Bitcoin here.

是的，我在一家餐厅，正在支付120瑞士法郎的账单。

Yeah, I'm at a restaurant and I'm paying them a CHF120 bill.

对。

Yeah.

他们只是赌付款方——即向他们支付款项的人——和ARC运营商不会串通起来欺骗他们，这有点不同，对吧？要完成欺诈性支付需要两方合谋才行。

They're just banking on the fact that the payee, the person paying them, and operator of ARC isn't colluding to It's draw them, a little bit different, right? Like the two parties would have to collude It's very In order to make a fraudulent payment.

确实如此。而且正如你所说，这非常非常不同，因为我们预期矿工是经济理性的。

Exactly. And it's very, very different indeed as you explained because we expect miners to be economically rational.

没错。

Yeah.

而且矿工是全球范围内去中心化的实体，你与他们之间没有任何形式的合同协议。不存在那种他们的收入流水、现金流依赖于其可信度的商业背景关系，对吧？

And miners are a globally set of decentralized entities with which with whom you have no kind of contractual agreement. There is no sort of like business context where their revenue line, their cash flow depends on their trustworthiness, right?

是的。

Yeah.

而对于ARC操作者来说，情况则完全相反，对吧？没错。一旦ARC操作者试图与用户串通进行双花交易，所有这些行为都会非常透明。

And that's completely the opposite for the ARC operator, right? Yeah. The moment that the ARC operator attempts to collude with a user to double spend a transaction, all of that is very transparent.

也就是说基本上存在欺诈行为？

And there's of fraud basically?

正是如此。系统内的每个人都能立即察觉。

Exactly. It's immediately apparent to everyone in the system.

所以商家可以发布加密可验证的证明，表明我被这个操作者欺诈了。

So the merchant could like publish cryptographically verifiable proof that's like, I got defrauded by this operator.

没错。我们在系统内部甚至设置了防护措施，比如在Arcade架构中，我们将签名模块（称为arcade签名器）独立出来，作为软件栈中的一个独立模块，其职责仅限于共同签署交易，而操作者栈的其他部分则在另一个环境中运行。理论上，因为存在操作者并非恶意但可能被黑客攻击等情况，对吧？是的。有人可能会试图...

Exactly. I mean, we put safeguards in place even within our own system where we actually have an architecture with Arcade where we separate the signer module, which we call the arcade signer, which is kinda like a separate module within the software stack whose role is only to cosign these transaction and the rest of the operator stack operates in a different environment. So in theory, because, you know, there is the scenario where the operator is not necessarily malicious, but perhaps the operator was hacked or something, right? Yeah. And somehow someone is trying to

这是非常现实的。确实，

It's a very real Exactly,

确实如此。我们试图隔离签名环境以尽可能保证安全，同时我们也制定了防护措施，实际操作软件一旦检测到双花企图就会立即关闭整个系统，对吧？这样一切都会停止，但Arc和Arcade这类系统的巧妙之处在于，即使整个系统停止，至少每个用户都有单边支付路径可以拿回资金。当然，如果系统永久停止运行，那么用户在链上强制执行支付条件就会有点混乱，可能会引发手续费激增的情况。

exactly. So we try to isolate the signing environment to make it as secure as possible but we have also plans for safeguards in place where the actual operator software is going to immediately notice if there's an attempt to double spend and ideally will shut down the entire system, right? So then everything comes to a halt but obviously the neat thing with something like Arc and Arcade is that if the whole system comes to a halt, at least every user has a unilateral spending path to get their money back. Now, of course, in a scenario where, you know, the system so like perpetually stops, then it's going to be a bit of a mess for people to kind of enforce their spending conditions on chain, right? It's probably going to create a bit of a fee event.

你认识Elfrat吗？

Do you know an Elfrat?

那是什么？

What's that?

你认识Elfrat吗？

Do you know Elfrat?

Elfrat，认识啊。

Elfrat, yeah.

我刚发现她的阳台就在那边。哦好的，Alex也在这儿，我们正在聊艺术。

I just discovered her balconies right there. Oh, okay. We So have Alex here. We're talking about art.

你好啊，嗨，最近怎么样？

Hi there. Hi. How are you?

我们正在录制一档播客节目。

We have we're recording a podcast.

你上节目了

You're on

现在就在播客里。是的，我们正在录制中。你表现得很好。很高兴认识你。

the podcast now. Yes, we're in the middle of a podcast. You're good. You're good. It's a pleasure to meet you.

我想我们还没真正见过面。不过很快我们就会线下见面了。好了，那我们就来聊聊...对了各位，我们正坐在卢加诺的阳台上，现在大家正在了解ARC。

I don't think we've actually met in person. Enough. Well, we'll meet actually in person soon. There we go. So yeah, let's talk about Yeah, by the way freaks, we're just sitting on a balcony in Lugano and, everyone's getting an education on ARC right now.

我，对，那我们聊聊吧。关于Arc的核心目标，和闪电网络类似，就是为比特币支付场景提供快速、低成本的交易。我认为这是最主要的，对吧？这是最核心的一点。

I, yeah, so let's talk. Yeah, let's talk about the so the whole point of Arc, similar to Lightning, is that you have cheap, fast transactions for Bitcoin as a payments use case. I think that's like the main, right? This is like the main thing.

我认为这确实是最初的意图，没错。而且它肯定是其中一个...

I think this was the original intention, yes. And it's certainly one of the It's

这是个关键价值主张，对吧？

a key value prop, right?

我认为并非如此。我认为它远不止于此。低成本快速支付只是其中一个应用场景。这有点像我们通过Collabs和Arcade（作为Arc协议的实现）与最初的设计理念产生了一些分歧——或者说最初的愿景——因为我们一直在努力实现这个目标，过程中我们意识到：等等，这种链下环境确实很棒，能实现廉价、即时、快速的转账，但它还能让你搭建各种有趣的可编程场景。人们最初试图在比特币上通过配置不同脚本来花费UTXO实现的功能，比如托管交易，或者像Satoshi骰子这类（虽然不适合所有人，也确实不该放在链上，有点浪费区块空间）。但归根结底，关键在于能够原生地使用UTXO模型和比特币，无需将资金转入跨链桥或侧链联盟，在保持单边退出属性的同时，构建出支持更丰富可编程环境和比特币金融场景的基础设施。

I would argue it's not. I would argue it goes beyond that. I would say that the ability to make payments in a cheap and fast way is only one application. And this is kinda like the way this is where we, our Collabs and Arcade, as our implementation of the Arc protocol, perhaps diverged a little bit from, I would say, the original design, if you will, or kinda like the original vision because we were very much working towards implementing this and as we were doing this, we realized, well, hold on, like, this off chain environment is great, yes, to do cheap instant fast transfers but it also allows you to do all kinds of interesting programmable setups, things that people were trying to do on Bitcoin originally by spending UTXOs with different script configurations, doing things like escrow and doing things like, you know, okay, maybe a Satoshi dice, that's not for everyone, it certainly doesn't belong on chain, it's a bit of a waste of block space. But ultimately, it's the ability to use the UTXO model and use Bitcoin in a way that is native, in a way that doesn't require putting your money into a bridge, putting your money into a side chain federation, maintaining the unilateral exit property but building on top of that primitives that allow for a bit more versatility in terms of programmable environment, in terms of Bitcoin finance.

所以有很多混合应用，显然我们能实现很多可能性，好的。

So a lot of mix, you know, there's a lot of applications of that obviously we can we can get Okay.

但这里有一大堆、一大堆、一大堆问题需要展开讨论。

But there's a bunch of there's a bunch of there's a bunch of things to unfurl here.

对，对，对。首先。

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. First.

好的，对我来说最酷的是——经常听Francis节目的人早就知道——无论好坏，整个生态系统已经围绕闪电网络构建起来了。所以这里的亮点在于：你可以使用支持闪电网络互换的Arc钱包，无需考虑网络效应等问题。你能享受Arc的所有优势，同时自动完成与闪电网络的支付收发，并最终在Arc结算，对吧？这是我们得天独厚的优势。

Okay. So, so the cool thing to me is and the freaks already know this if they listen to the RIP with Francis is the cool thing is for better or for worse the ecosystem has kind of been built around lightning. So the cool thing here is that you can use an Arc wallet with Lightning swaps and you don't have to deal with network effect or whatever. You get all the benefits of Arc and then you're just automatically paying and receiving from Lightning and settles in Arc, right? So we get that going for us.

但最关键的是——他正在Liquid上搭建类似架构。没错。但Liquid的问题是：你的提现能力完全依赖兑换提供商。那个联盟。对。

But the number one thing, and so he's doing a similar setup to this with Liquid. Exactly. But the problem is with Liquid, you're reliant on the swap provider to be able to get out and get your Bitcoin out. And the cool The federation. Yeah.

而ARK最酷的一点在于：我可以无需许可地退出。没错。我们能快速过一下具体流程吗？比如，假设我...你知道你总说#鲁莽，那就假设我真的鲁莽了。我转入了一个比特币。

And one of the cool things about ARK is that I can exit without permission. Exactly. So can we just go real quick, like, how does that look? Like, how do I how do I, yeah, I let's say, you know, you say hashtag reckless, but let's say I'm just reckless. I put in a Bitcoin.

我正在尝试把比特币取出来。你知道，我有10万，有12万美元卡在ARC里了。怎么把这笔钱弄出来？

I'm trying to get my Bitcoin out. You know, I got a 100 I got a 120,000 a $110,000 stuck in arc. How do I get that money out?

对，其实运作原理和闪电网络完全一样。我之前跟你提到过

Yeah. I mean, works exactly how Lightning works, really. So I mentioned to you before

嗯。

Yeah.

当你把比特币存入那个ARC合约时（可以这么说），你是在签署一套支出条件，对吧？最主要的、最乐观的是与运营商协作的那个条件，没错吧？

When you're depositing your Bitcoin into that ARC contract, if you will, you're signing a set of spending conditions. Right? Yeah. The major one, the optimistic one is the collaborative one with the operator, right?

99%的情况下运营商都会签署

99% of the times the operator is gonna sign

同意。确实如此。

with it. Exactly.

嗯。

Yeah.

但另一个，你知道，紧急情况下的方案是单边退出。所以当你存入比特币时，你会签署一笔交易，表明我可以随时将资金从链上撤回。

But then the other one, you know, the emergency case one is the unilateral exit. So when you deposit your Bitcoin there, you sign a transaction that says, hey, I can put my pull my money on chain.

这就像预先签名到一个特定地址。

It's like a pre signed to a specific address.

这是一笔预先签名的交易。现在你可以真正使用它了，我是说，是的，你

It's a pre signed transaction. Now you can spend it to to really, I mean, yeah, you

你是提前委托地址吗？我的钱包是否提前委托地址，并声明这个链上地址是我的退出地址之类的？

you Am I delegating the address ahead of time? Is my wallet delegating the address ahead of time and saying this this on chain address is my exit address or something?

不一定，不是的。好吧，不一定。你可以做的是，你能花费那个输出，即该输出的份额，对吧？

Not necessarily, no. Okay. Not necessarily. You can what you do what happens is you can spend that output, the share of that output, right?

是的。

Yeah.

我们称之为批量输出的部分，之后你可以随心所欲地花费它。所以，你知道，基本上要点就是你有一笔预先签名的交易，这是一笔已被记录在默克尔树中的有效交易。

That what we call the batch output, you can then spend it however you want to. And so, you know, that's basically the gist of it is you have a pre signed transaction which is a valid transaction that has been mined into a mid card.

我得下线了，迈克。

I've got to be offline, Mike.

就像你的通道对手方可能离线一样，运营商也可能完全离线，或者你的LSP可能离线。唯一的注意事项

And the operator could be completely offline just like your channel counterparty could be offline or your LSP could be offline. The only caveat

什么注意事项？

What's the caveat?

注意事项就是

The caveat is that

有什么陷阱吗？

What's the catch?

可能会有更多交易。所以不只是一笔交易。

There is potentially more transactions. So it's not only a single transaction.

所以我得支付巨额费用负担？是这个意思吗？

So I'm paying a huge fee burden? Is that what it means?

我是说，是的。我是说，这实际上取决于规模，因为你的所有交易基本上都在一个交易树中，对吧？它使用的是Taproot技术，对吧？对。

I mean, yes. I mean, depends really how big the because all your transaction is basically in a tree of transaction, right? It uses taproots, right? Right.

所以这相当于把一大堆交易合并成一个交易。

So There's a shit ton of transactions one transaction.

没错。当你把钱存入那个合约并发送支出、签署那些支出条件时，同时还有其他人也在做同样的事。所以你和运营商以及其他参与者是在协作完成一笔大交易。根据参与这笔链上交易的人数多少，你可能需要提交三到八笔交易。

Exactly. When you're putting your money in that contract and sending spending those signing signing those spending conditions, there are other people that are doing the same thing at the same time. So you're collaborating in a big transaction the operator and other people. Depending on how many people are in that transaction, in that on chain transaction with you, you might have to put, you know, from three to eight transaction

哦，不算多。不算多。

on Oh, not a ton. Not a ton.

我是说，再次强调...

I mean, mean, again Is

是像一千笔交易那样吗？还是说...

it like a thousand transactions or Well,

理论上确实可能达到一千笔交易。但这是可控的，因为本质上当你进行链下资金支出时，你是在创建新的VTXO（可验证交易输出），相当于在扩展这棵树。最初你有一棵被铭刻在链上的树，也就是原始交易中提交的那棵。随着你在链下花费VTXO，这棵树会继续扩展，但这些扩展只存在于链下。

theoretically, it could be a thousand transaction. Okay. But that's something that's manageable because basically what happens, right, is when you're spending your money off chain, you're creating a new VTXO, so you're expanding the tree, right? Initially you have a tree that is inscribed, that is, you know, committed to on chain in that original transaction. And then as you spending your VTXOs off chain, you're expanding the tree further, but it only exists off chain.

但每增加一个步骤都可能产生额外的交易，对吧？

But every additional step creates an additional transaction potentially. Right?

好的。

Okay.

所以你在将这些交易串联起来，这确实可能会增加单方面退出的成本。但这也正是锚定概念如此重要的原因，对吧？因为你可以构建你的应用程序和钱包，让钱包能够识别出交易链深度过大时会产生风险——是的，如果你有太多交易需要发布，实际上可能在经济上不划算退出，对吧？就像你想花5美元，但你的UTXO只有5美元，现在却要花20美元才能动用。

So you're chaining those transactions and it is the case that you could be adding to the cost of unilateral exiting. But this is also why this notion of anchoring is important, right? Because you can build your applications and your wallets so that the wallet is going to recognize that eventually the depth of the transaction chain is too large and this is creating a risk where, yes, if you have too many transactions to publish, it might actually be on an economical to actually get out, right? It's like you're trying to spend 5 you have a $5 UTXO but now it costs you $20 spend on.

这没问题。我认为这是个合理的权衡。

Which is fine. I think that's a fine trade off.

是的。嗯，对。我是说，闪电网络里也存在这种权衡。是的。所以，

Yeah. Well, yeah. I mean, that trade off exists in lightning as well. Yeah. And so,

你不能指望人们说，哦，闪电网络的美妙之处在于我能接收五笔支付之类的。你必须在链上通过经济手段来强制执行这一点。

You you can't have like, people are like, oh, the beauty of lightning is like, I'm receiving five sets or whatever. You economically enforce that on chain.

没错。所以实际情况是，通过能够定期重新承担（成本）的方式...基本上你可以把它想象成你有一套存在于链下的UTXO集合，对吧？对。你进行一系列交易后，你的UTXO集合会随时间演变，但最终你需要获得更好的确定性，对吧？

Exactly. And so what happens is by way of being able to periodically incur again. Basically you have, think of it as like you have a UTXO set that exists off chain, right? Right. And you're making a bunch of transactions and then your UTXO set evolves over time, but eventually you want to have better assurance, right?

出于安全考虑，你不想依赖运营商，但也不希望潜在单边退出的成本增加。因此，你的做法是将UTXO集合从链下取出，通过加入批次来提交VTXO，对吧？运营商持续创建批次，你只需告诉运营商‘嘿，我想把我的UTXO提交到比特币链上，我要加入这个批次’，这样你就能获得一组全新的VTXO。当然，金额与你最初投入的完全一致

You don't want to have this dependence on the operator for security reason, but you also don't want to have an increase in cost of your potential unilateral exit. So what you do is you take your set of UTXOs off chain, your VTXOs and you commit them by joining a batch, right? So again, the operator is creating batches all the time, you tell the operator, hey, wanna commit my UTXO to Bitcoin, I'm gonna join the batch And then by doing that, you get a fresh set of VTXOs. Obviously, it's the same exact amount that you

放进去但尚未结算

put But in it's unsettled.

扣除部分手续费后，你投入的金额现已结算完成。这正是我们所说的结算流程。通过这种方式，你既消除了安全依赖，又不再需要任何链上交易。现在你持有的是一组过去未被花费的VTXO，可能原本需要添加八笔交易才能上链的十笔交易，现在只需四笔就能搞定，对吧？你可以定期执行这个操作，而且不必把它当作一个主动流程。

That you put in minus some fees and that is now settled. That's exactly, we call it a settlement process. And by doing that, you remove the security dependency but you also don't have any chain transaction anymore. So you have a set of VTXOs that haven't been spent in the past and therefore, you know, maybe now instead of adding eight transaction to put on chain 10 transactions, you're back to e four, Right? So you can always kinda like periodically do this and it doesn't have to be like an active process.

钱包始终保持整合状态。没错，我之前和Francis聊过，他们在Liquid网络中采用的就是这种分级钱包模型——当你在Liquid中资金过多时，钱包会自动将部分余额转换到链上。

The wallet The wallet stays consolidate. Exactly. I was talking to Francis, you know, they have this model in liquid with so like the graduated wallet model, right? Where if you have too much money in liquid, eventually the wallet is going to kind of like auto swap to an on chain balance.

嗯

Yeah.

以此规避风险敞口

To protect you against that exposure.

我喜欢这个设计

I like that.

所以你可以在ARC中创建相同类型的模型，当操作员暴露过多时，你就会切换，进入下一批次然后重新清理。

So you can create the same type of model with ARC where if you have too much exposure to the operator, you're going to swap, you're going to settle into the next batch and now you clean again.

我喜欢这个。我，好吧。我是说，实践中很酷的一点是，我们实际上就是给每个有阳台的人免费发播客。实际上用户的钱包会自动处理很多这类事情。

I like that. I, okay. I mean, one of the cool things like in practice, like the, in practice, we're just giving everyone with the balcony a free podcast. In practice you have the user, like the user's wallet's gonna automate a bunch of this stuff.

没错。对吧？他们甚至不会

Exactly. Right? They're not even

去考虑这个。这可能就是最酷的部分。所以我想稍微换个角度。很多听众都是开发者，他们正在开发产品。是的。

gonna be thinking about this. That's probably the coolest part. So I just wanna flip the script a little bit. Like a lot of the people that listen to the show are developers and they're building product. Yeah.

他们正在思考构建自托管闪电钱包的问题。这非常困难。我认为闪电网络显然已经找到了产品市场契合点，就像一种粘合剂将不同钱包连接在一起，这个可互操作的标准协议让你能轻松支付和收款。比如从Stripe到River再到币安或Primal之类的，它他妈的就是能用。是的。

And they're thinking about the issues with building self custody Lightning wallets. It's very difficult. I think Lightning has clearly found product market fit as like this kind of glue that connects different wallets together and this like standard interoperable protocol that allows you to pay and receive very easily. You know, if you're gonna pay from like a a Stripe to River to Binance or to Primal or something, it just fucking works. Yeah.

而且你知道它肯定能用。但归根结底，当真正的建设者试图打造自托管体验时，难度非常大。是的。所以现在很多人都在关注Spark。没错。

And you just know it's gonna it's you know it's gonna work. But at the end of the day when like the actual builders are trying to like make a self custody experience is very, very difficult. Yeah. And so a lot of them are looking currently at Spark. Yep.

可能关注Arc的人相对少些。我认为目前大家对Spark都很兴奋。那么对于正在构建钱包的建设者，他们应该如何理解Spark和Arc的区别？这也是我在自我验证这个问题，因为我最近也一直在思考这个问题。

And probably to a lesser extent Arc. I think Right now, there's lot of excitement about Spark. So what is your, to the builder out there, to the person who's like building a wallet, what is the, how should they think about the differences between Spark and Arc? And this is like me also dogfooding my own question because I've been thinking about this a lot as well.

当然。我是说，主要区别就在于我们一直在讨论的，整个系统的底层安全模型。所以在某种程度上，我们共享很多单一特性，对吧？ART VTXO的链下转账与Spark比特币的链下转账采用完全相同的安全模型，对吧？

Sure. I mean, would say the major difference is what we've been discussing, right, is the security model underlying the entire system. So in a way, we share a lot of singular properties, right? The off chain transfer of ART VTXOs is the exact same security model as the off chain transfer of Spark Bitcoins, right?

不，他们不称之为GTXS，但本质上是一样的，对吧？

No, they don't call it GTXS but it's kind of the same, right?

基本上大同小异。真正的核心区别在于，一旦你进入Spark系统，就永远暴露在运营商的依赖风险中，必须信任他不会双花你的比特币。

It's pretty much more or less the same. Where the major difference lies really is that once you're in Spark, you're perpetually exposed to the operator dependency of trusting that he does not double spend your Bitcoins.

但这难道不是相同的信任模型吗？与Arc相比，信任模型在哪个环节出现了差异？

But is it not the same trust model? Where is the trust model breakdown compared to Arc?

嗯，ARC的不同之处在于，根据应用场景或接收价值的不同，你可以选择结算。

Well, the difference with ARC, right, is that depending on the application or depending on the value you're receiving, you have the option to settle.

但Spark不也支持单边退出吗？还是说没有？

But doesn't Spark also have unilateral exit or no?

Spark确实支持单边退出，但单边退出与具备结算能力有本质区别，因为当我结算时，并不是要退出整个系统。

Spark has unilateral exit but unilaterally exiting is fundamentally different than having the ability to settle because when I'm settling, I'm not exiting the system.

你们留在系统里但提升了安保人员配置？没错。是这样吗？

You're staying in the system but you're getting better security guys? Exactly. Is that what's happening?

正是如此。完全正确。

Exactly. Exactly.

那么Spark几乎是全有或全无的，在这方面Spark的差异就是这种特性吗？

So Spark is like almost all, it's like all or nothing is the Spark difference in that regard?

Spark的机制是：要么信任运营方，要么就回归链上交易。

Spark is either you trust the operator or you go back on chain.

或者选择退出。

Or you exit.

彻底退出——显然我认为最终这是必然选择。我们构建这些系统正是因为预见到未来退出的成本将高得令人却步。对我来说这是关键差异。另外对于更具...我不想说意识形态化，但更关注比特币系统整体性的建设者而言，像Spark这样将资金转移到链下、持续交易却几乎不回归链上的系统，其问题在于链下与链上层之间缺乏反馈机制。我的意思是，Spark几乎不会对比特币区块空间产生需求。

You exit completely, which obviously, I think ultimately the option, you know, I think we're building those systems because we imagine that eventually the cost of exiting is going to be rather prohibitive. It's be expensive. So for me, that's kind of like the major difference. Something else that for I think builders that are a little more, I don't wanna say ideological but kind of like conscious of the sort of holistic parts of the Bitcoin system is that when you consider a system like Spark where you're moving that money off chain, you're transacting all the time, but you're not, you know, ideally you're not going back on chain, But the problem is there is no feedback mechanism between the off chain and the on chain layer. And what I mean by that is that Spark creates little to no demand for the Bitcoin block space.

没有链上负担。这既是优势也是诅咒，对吧？

No on chain burden. That's a benefit and a curse, right?

这取决于你怎么看。如果你，如果这取决于谁在承担这个区块空间消耗的成本，当然，但对系统来说，某种程度上这终究是个缺点，对吧？因为你期望的是不需要单一个体来实际支付比特币的安全预算，对吧？没错。因为我们都知道这不太可能发生，但你期望这些二层网络能反馈某种经济需求。

Mean Depending on how you look at it. If you're, if it depends on who's paying the cost of this block space consumption, of course, but in a way for the system, it ultimately is a bit of a downside, right? Because you would expect to have something that sure does not require a single individual to effectively pay the security budget of Bitcoin, right? Right. Because we all know that's very unlikely to happen but you have this expectation that these layer twos are going to kind of like feed back some sort of economic demand.

就像闪电网络，每个闪电通道都是一笔链上交易，对吧？至少两笔，可能是一开一关两笔链上交易。

Like even with Lightning, like every Lightning channel is an on chain transaction, right? At least two, it's probably two on chain transactions and an open and a close.

是的。但我们在闪电网络中观察到的有趣现象是，我们都有这种观念：随着闪电网络越来越受欢迎，确实可能会导致更多链上操作，比如通道开启、关闭、再平衡之类的。但我们现在注意到的是，我认为闪电网络从未像现在这样受欢迎过。对。

Yeah. But the interesting thing that we're seeing with Lightning, we all had this notion that sure, as Lightning gets more popular, indeed it's going to result perhaps in more, you know, on chain, like channel opening, channel closing, kind of rebalancing operations and all of that. But what we're, I think noticing right now, right? Because I think Lightning has never been more popular than it is. Yeah.

不论你是否认为大量使用是托管式的，闪电网络确实获得了显著采用。但我们看到的是，当你考虑闪电网络的最优使用时，这是个双向通道系统，而这些通道在数学上的最优使用状态是完全平衡的，对吧？

Regardless of whether you wanna make the case that a lot of the usage is custodial, there is significant adoption of lightning. But what we're seeing is that when you think about the optimal use of lightning, you know, it's a bidirectional channel system And the sort of mathematically optimal use of that those channels is perfectly balanced, right?

因为人们既在接收又在

Because people are receiving and

发送。每个交易对手都在平等地相互接收和发送，对吧？

sending. Each counterparty is receiving and sending to the other counterparty equally, right?

是的。

Yeah.

而你需要进行通道关闭、重新开启或再平衡的唯一原因就是存在不平衡。

And because the only reason why you would need to do channel closer or reopening channel or rebalancing is because you have an imbalance.

有一方支付过多

One side is paying too

没错。或者储蓄过多。这在闪电网络早期确实是个问题。我们迫使许多应用程序和用例采用这种非常复杂的闪电网络流程，所有资金都单向流动，导致某个节点吸走了网络中所有流动性，而该节点重新分配或再平衡的唯一方式就是上链操作。

much Exactly. Or saving too And this was the case early on with Lightning. We forced a lot of applications, a lot of use cases into these sort of very convoluted lightning network flows where all the money was going in one direction and then that node is sucking up all of the liquidity in the network and the only way for that node redistribute or rebalance is to hit on chain

是啊。

Yeah.

然后生成交易。但现在我们正进入一个新阶段，我认为闪电网络正变得更加健康。我们有了更平衡的通道关系，因此实际上不会产生链上需求，对吧？

And then generate transaction. But now we're getting to a stage where I think the Lightning Network is getting a lot more healthy. We have better balanced relationship between those channels and as a result, it actually doesn't create on chain demand, right?

这也因为像Bcashers那些人某种程度上是对的。我们确实有点中心辐射式的结构。

It was also because like the Bcashers were kind of right. Like we have kind of hub and spoke.

哦没错，100%同意。Bcashers在这一点上绝对正确，就像

Oh yeah, no, 100%. No, the B casher were absolutely correct in Like,

Async在流动性管理上比我管理闪电网络更出色

Async can manage liquidity better than me managing my Lightning

哦，我是说，对，完全正确。所以，你知道，这个

Oh, mean, yes, exactly. So, you know, this

但没错，所以结果就是你在链上看不到太多闪电通道的活动

But yes, so like, so what the result is you just don't see that much on chain activity from the Lightning channel.

正是如此，正是如此

Exactly, exactly.

不过你还是能看到一些，我是说

So But you still see some, I mean,

你确实还能看到一些，公平地说像Spark这样的项目，还有

You it's still see some and to be fair with something like Spark, also What

基本上链上活动会发生在

basically would the have on chain activity be on

基本上，还需要创建一种类似

Basically, need to create also kind of like

他们不做结算交易吗？

they not doing settlement transactions?

我的意思是，这并不完全是我所说的结算交易，但对于状态链来说，至少在目前没有契约之类的情况下，最终状态链会到期。

There's, I mean, it's not exactly what I would call settlement transactions, but with state chains, at least for now, without covenants or anything like that, eventually the state chain expires.

好的。

Okay.

对吧？因为状态链是基于类似刷新的机制？是的，状态链基于递减的时间锁，最终你会用完可递减的时间，对吧？所以他们需要将其转换到一个新的状态链树中，可以这么说。但这在

Right? Because the state chain is Is based on like refresh? Yeah, the state chain is based on decrementing time locks and eventually you run out of time to decrement, right? So they need to kind of like swap this into a new state chain tree, if you will. But that is kind of very minor sort of footprint on

链上的影响非常小。他们多久做一次？

chain. How often are they doing that?

我不知道他们现在多久做一次。

I don't know how often they're doing it right now.

ARC多久会上链一次？

So how often is ARC hitting the chain?

呃，目前我们还在起步阶段，所以可以忽略不计，但我设想的是...

Well, I mean, the moment, you know, we're just bootstrapping so it's negligible right now but what I envision, what we

设想 对。

envision Yeah.

我们的设想是，ARC将成为比特币区块需求的重要驱动力，规模将达到...

Envision is that ARC is going to be Arcade is going to be a significant driver of demand for Bitcoin block to the tune of So

Arcade是

is Arcade

那家公司吗？负责创建交易。Arcade就是这家公司。

the company? Creating transaction. So Arcade is the company.

好的。

Okay.

但Arcade是实现方式，这又回到了我早先所说的观点，对吧？Arc本身也不是一个层级，因为Arc不像闪电网络那样是一个网络，对吧？Arc更像是——这需要一些比特币之外的知识——Arc更像是Rollup方案。

But Arcade is the implementation of And this comes back down to what I was saying earlier, right? Is that Arc is not a layer too because Arc is not a network like Lightning is a network, right? Arc is more like, and this is going to require some knowledge outside of Bitcoin, but Arc is more like roll ups.

好的。

Okay.

以太坊和其他网络中的Rollup方案与Arc属于同类架构。它们是一种客户端-服务器系统，对吧？大量用户连接到同一台服务器并相互交互。

Roll ups in Ethereum and other networks are a same kind of architecture like Arc. They're a client and server sort of system, right? All a massive users connect to the same server and interact with each other.

由服务器维护状态。

Servers keeping the state.

没错，完全正确。就像Rollup本身不是二层网络一样，Coinbase的Base才是二层，Arbitrum是二层，OP optimism是二层。同理，未来会有不同的ARC实现方案，比如Second团队就在构建他们自己的ARC实现。所以他们也会打造自己特色的二层方案。

Exactly, exactly. And so just like rollup is not the layer two, the layer two is base from Coinbase, right? The layer two is Arbitrum, the layer two is OP optimism. In the same way that there is going to be different ARC implementation, there is the guys at second that are building their own ARC implementation. So they're going to create also their own flavor of a layer two.

但如果他们称之为ARC会有点混淆，因为从根本上说ARC是底层技术。所以他们可能——我是说，他们自己的参考实现叫bark。也许他们会称之为bark，对吧？有bark和bark。这也是为什么我们没有完全转向，但你知道，当我们全力投入arcade方向时，我们觉得这样能完全掌控自己的叙事脉络。

But if they call it ARC, it's going to be a little bit confusing because ultimately ARC is the technology underpinning the so they might I mean, their own reference implementation is called bark. So maybe they call it bark, right? There's a bark and bark. Well, mean, so that one of the reason why we also kind of not pivoted but you know, when all in in the arcade direction is we felt then that we were able to kind of like own our entire narrative and kinda like control

所以你一直说arcade，

That's why you keep saying arcade,

街机，街机。对，街机。我是说，这对我们很重要，因为正如我所说，ARC已经从最初提案的形式发展了很多，我们认为这是它最佳的应用方式，但是

arcade, arcade. Arcade, yeah. I mean, it's important for us because all, like I said, ARC has evolved quite a bit from what it was originally proposed as and what we feel like is the best application of it But

好的，但我打断你了。我打断了你。所以我接下来还要打断你，提醒大家——我打断的频率有多高？比如一个ARC操作员平均多久会被打断一次？

Okay, but I interrupted you. I interrupted you. So on and I'm going to interrupt you to Yeah. Remind people that So I interrupted how often do you think at scale, like how often is an ARC operator?

我...我觉得ARC操作员每五秒就要创建一次承诺交易。

I I I think the ARC operator is going to be creating commitment transaction every five seconds.

哦靠，那区块里会塞满一堆东西。

Oh, shit. So like a bunch of block.

哦，那我们就要把区块塞得满满当当的，懂吗？因为这完全取决于用户在...这挺有意思的。我是说，从全局来看...我说的是这样一种前景：我们在街机里会有一个他妈万亿美元规模的经济体，对吧？没错吧？

Oh, so we're gonna be filling like the the the the the the shit out of the block, you know? Cause basically, depending on what the user is That's doing interesting. I mean, you know, ultimately globally, you know, and what I'm talking about is a is a perspective where like, you know, we have a a fucking a trillion dollar economy in arcade. Right? Right.

这样一来就会出现不同用户群体、不同应用程序都在不同时间想要结算他们的链下余额。

And so what happens then is you have different set of users, different set of applications that are all looking to settle their off chain balance at different times.

但这不会变得成本高得离谱吗？

But does that not get prohibitively expensive?

不，因为你们宣传的是数十亿或数百的结算成本。不对，准确说是数百或数千用户。所以当你们创建一个批次时，对吧？目前还处于早期阶段，但我们已经能进行测试了。虽然还没触及极限，但我们有信心处理例如单批次约100名用户的规模。

No, because you're advertising the cost of settlement across billion hundreds or something. No, well, not a billion, hundreds or thousands of users. So when you're creating one batch, right? Right now, and so it's still early days, but right now, you know, we've been able to do tests. We haven't necessarily pushed the limits but we feel pretty confident about having, for example, like around a 100 user in a single batch.

也就是说100名用户共同分摊单笔链上交易的成本。

So it's a 100 user that are splitting the cost of a single on chain transaction.

那还不错。

That's not bad.

这笔链上交易是标准的Taproot单输入双输出交易，对吧？所以成本效益非常高，而且显然

That on chain transaction is a vanilla taproot one input, two output transaction, right? So it's very cost efficient and, you know, obviously

好的，那确实不算差。

Okay, so that's not that bad.

没错，正是如此。

Yeah, exactly.

这才是关键——如果采用CTV之类的方案会更便宜，对吧？

And that's the big thing, like if you get CTV or something that would be cheaper, right?

实际上并不会更便宜，不会。什么是

It would not really be cheaper, no. What is

软分叉变更？

the soft fork change?

关于软分叉变更，这取决于你问谁，但从我们的角度来看，它可能让我们减少一些开销。是的，你知道，我们或许能在同一批次里容纳更多人。

The soft fork change, it depends who you ask, but really from our perspective what it would allow us is probably a little less overhead. So yes, you know, we'd probably be able to squeeze a bit more people in like a batch.

每笔交易。

Per transaction.

每笔交易。因为我们还减少了一轮通信环节。

Per transaction. Because we're also removing like a round of communication.

好的。

Okay.

对吧？因为当我们创建交易时，操作员会说，嘿，我要创建一个批次。谁想加入这个批次？对吧？然后用户会说，用户要注册那个批次。

Right? Because when we're creating that transaction, the operator say, hey, I'm creating a batch. Who wants to join that batch? Right? And then the users say, the user register for that batch.

对吧？

Right?

所以这几乎像是一个币联合协调机制。是的。就像是用户需要

So it's almost like a coin join coordination. Yeah. It's like the user has

被解锁。确实如此。那里需要一些互动性，对吧？任何涉及互动性的操作，如果你引入一个契约软分叉，那么你就是在减少部分互动性。

to be unlocked. There is exactly. There's there's some interactivity required there. Right? And so it as anything that involves interactivity, if you introduce a covenant soft fork, then you're removing some of the interactivity.

所以他们可能不需要在线就能参与其中？

So they might not have to be online to be a part of it?

他们需要在线，必须在线来声明他们想要加入批次的意图并指定设置，但他们不需要一直在线等待反馈，因为他们只需要签署交易。由于我们有契约，他们会说：这就是我想要的交易，这就是我想要的输出，好了，再见，处理吧。操作者无法更改任何内容，要么接受要么放弃。而没有契约的情况下，互动性会更强。我们并不认为这是个大事，因为最终，如果你把用户群体严格限定为使用手机、可能网络不稳定的用户，互动性才会成为问题。

They're gonna be online they have to be online to kinda like declare their attempt to join the batch and specify the settings but they're not going to have to stay online as long to wait for the feedback from the because all they're gonna do is they're gonna sign the transaction and because we have covenant, they're gonna say, this is the transaction that I want, this is the output that I want, okay, bye, take care of it. And the operator is not gonna be able to change any of that, either he And takes it or leave then that's over. Whereas with the, you know, without covenant, there's a bit more interactivity. We really don't think that it's a big deal because ultimately it's also like, the interactivity is a problem if you're thinking of your set of users as strictly users that are on mobile phones, maybe with spotty connections and whatever.

是的。

Yeah.

确实，这些用户是存在的，我们需要创建解决方案，提高系统效率以更好地满足他们的需求。但最终，特别是对于我们正在构建的超越零售支付的项目来说，很可能我们的很多用户实际上已经在运行服务器了。真的吗？比如想想，没人会运行服务器。

Absolutely those those users exist and, you know, there's gonna be a need to create solutions, improve the efficiency of the system to better address these. But ultimately, especially for what we're building which goes beyond, you know, retail payment, really, it's very possible a large set of our users are actually people running servers already. Really? Why? I mean, for example, think of Nobody runs servers.

不，那不是真的。我是说，闪电节点是一个

No, that's not true. I mean, a lightning node is a

我知道，我讨厌这样。我们不想运行闪电节点。

I know, I hate it. We don't wanna run lightning nodes.

嗯，我们不想，但闪电节点基础设施提供商可以用

Well, we don't want but lightning node infrastructure provider, right, can use

所以他们在运行它。

So they're running it.

所以他们可能在运行服务器，但

So they might be running a server but

所以如果我使用BullWallet，就是他们在运行服务器。这就是你脑海中所想的吗？

So if I'm using BullWallet, they're running the server. The Is that what you're thinking in your head?

我不知道你在说哪个服务器。不，

I don't know which server you're No,

不不，我是说现在还早，但我说一年或五年后，如果BullWallet使用ARC而我在移动端用Bull。你是说他们在运行服务器？

no, no, I'm saying it's still early but I'm saying in a year in five years or whatever, if BullWallet is using ARC and I'm using Bull on mobile Yeah. You're saying they're running the server?

ARC服务器吗？

The ARC server?

随便吧。我不知道。你需要的交互性...不，在移动端我是...

Whatever. I don't know. The interactivity that you need No, on mobile I is on

我是说，他们会在服务器上运行一个软件，让你可以，是的，或许...

mean, they're going to run a piece of software on their server that will allow you, yes, to perhaps

这就是我说的缓解方案吗？针对音量问题？你是这么想的吗？

Is that the mitigation is what I'm saying for the loudness? Like, is that how you're thinking about it?

是的，有这类方案。

Yeah, there are things like that.

因为我觉得普通用户实际上不会去运行服务器。

Mean because I don't think the average user isn't actually gonna be running a server.

不不不，我们完全不指望普通用户会运行

No, no, no, There's zero expectations that the average user is running

服务器。他们实际上很可能是在移动端使用。嗯，是的，

a server. They're gonna be on mobile actually probably. Well, yes,

既是也不是，这要看情况。

yes and no, it depends.

一亿、十亿用户都会在移动端运行。不会在服务器上24/7全天候运行。

A 100,000,000, a billion people using they're gonna be running it on mobile. Not gonna be running on a server 20 fourseven.

是的，但这只是我们目标市场中某一部分人群的情况。

Yes, but that is only the perspective of only a section of the market that we're building for.

对对，说得有道理。

Right, right, fair enough.

我们部分市场还包括做市商创建市场，比如DeFi那些东西。DeFi相关的，对吧？

A part of our market is also going to be market makers creating markets Like DeFi shit. DeFi stuff, right?

是啊。

Yeah.

那个搞DeFi的家伙很可能会一直开着台式机运行，很可能永远不会关机。

And the DeFi stuff guy is going to have a desktop running, most likely he's never gonna turn it off.

好的，那我们聊聊DeFi吧，因为我们之前主要都在讨论支付相关的话题。

Okay, so let's talk about the DeFi stuff because we've been mostly talking about payments.

对。

Yeah.

比如你看到了什么机会？

Like what do you see there?

我是说，有很多唾手可得的机会。对吧？我们正在考虑像比特币抵押贷款这样的业务。显然你可以通过传统的多签托管在链上实现。如果想玩得更花哨些

I mean, there's a lot of low hanging fruits. Right? We're thinking about like just Bitcoin backed loan. Obviously, you can do that on chain in very sort of like conventional multi signature escrow. If you wanna get a little more fancy

HODL HODL

HODL HODL

或者说类似的东西。没错。Huddle、Huddle、Debify、Firefish等等这些平台。如果你想更花哨些，也可以做DLCs，就像Lava正在做的那样。但归根结底，当你实例化这些合约时，都需要占用链上区块空间。

or something. Exactly. Huddle, Huddle, Debify, Firefish, and all of them. Or you can do DLCs if you feel a little more fancy, you know, like what Lava is doing. But ultimately, you know, when you're instantiating those contracts, you're required on chain block space.

最终这会变得难以承受。

Eventually, that's going to be prohibitive.

成本越来越高了。

It's getting expensive.

成本确实在上升。显然，如果你处理的是一笔1个比特币或500万美元的贷款，可能不算什么大问题，对吧？

It's getting expensive. Obviously, if you're processing a loan for, you know, 1 Bitcoin or like $5,000,000, maybe not a big deal, right?

对，付30美元手续费我根本不在乎。

Right. I'll pay $30 fee, don't give a shit.

正是如此。但说到底，贷款实例化的用户体验也很重要，对吧？如果你想开发一个面向消费者的零售应用，不希望用户必须等待区块确认才能借到——比如说美元贷款，他们现在就得等着确认完成。

Exactly, exactly. But ultimately, there's also kind of like the experience around the instantiation of the loan, right? If you wanna create a consumer retail application where you don't wanna have to get the user to wait, you know, for a block confirmation to get his, you know, whatever, they're borrowing US dollar. They wanna, you know, they have to wait right now to for the confirmation.

这是用户体验的失败。

It's a UX failure.

没错。完全正确。所以在ARC中，我们拥有这个即时执行环境来解决这个问题，但更精彩的部分还在后面。

Exactly. Exactly. So in ARC, we have this instant execution environment that allows us to address this, but it gets even more interesting.

但你认为那种情况下的终端用户是在运行服务器吗？就像我又要贷款1万美元来运行服务器，

But do think the end user in that situation is running a server? Like I'm taking another $10,000 loan running a server,

不，不，他们完全不需要运行

no, no, There's no need for them to run

服务器。好吧。

a server. Okay.

他们绝对不需要运行服务器。唯一在运行服务器的就是ARC服务器。明白吗？这才是所有人连接的那个服务器。

Absolutely zero need for them to run a server. The only thing running the server is the ARC server. Right. That's the server that everyone connects to.

所以我刚才有点搞混了。我有点

So I confused that for a second. I was a little bit

对，不，当我，对，不，我指的是，当我说服务器时，我其实是指不同的客户端，明白吗？就是各种客户端连接到，客户端本身也可以是个节点，懂吧。客户端可以是

Yeah, no, when I, yeah, no, when I meant, when I said server, I just meant like, you know, the different clients, you know, so you have clients connecting to the, the client can be also like a node, you know. The client can be

比如说

Like maybe

运行在服务器上 对，没错。就是有人运行一个启动程序。他们不是运行ARC服务器软件，而是有一个一直开着的设备，我就是这个意思，对吧？

running on a server Yeah, exactly. Someone that's running a start, a start line. So they're not running the ARC server software but they have a device that's always on is what I meant, right?

然后它连接到他们的手机或其他设备上。

And it's connecting to their phone or whatever.

可以连接到他们的手机，正是这样。对吧？你可以有这种类似瞭望塔的东西。你可以运行自己的瞭望塔。重申一次，我不指望大多数人会这么做，对吧？

It could be connected to their phone, exactly. Right? You could have this kind of like watchtower. You could operate your own watchtower. Again, I don't expect most people to do that, right?

对。

Right.

所以说，贷款是个有趣的案例，而且我们可以在这方面玩出更多花样，因为通过Arc和Arcade引入的正是：由于我们拥有这个在比特币共识之外运作的链下环境，我们能够强制执行比特币上无法实现的支出条件。

But so, yeah, loans is an interesting case and, you know, we can get even more fancy with that because what we're introducing with Arc and Arcade really is that because we have this off chain environment that operates outside the confine of Bitcoin consensus, we have the ability to enforce spending conditions that are not available on Bitcoin.

对吧？好的。

Right? Okay.

我们实际上正在引入比特币上不存在的操作码。通过服务器来强制执行支出条件，你可以想象从opcats到任何类似的东西。实际上，我们做的是直接内省，对吧？

So what we're doing is we're actually introducing op codes that don't exist on Bitcoin. Okay. We're using the server to enforce spending conditions and, you know, you can think of anything like from opcats to whatever. In reality, what we're doing is direct introspection. Right?

所以这更像是现在Liquid上已有的那些操作码。

So it's more like what the opcodes that are already on liquid right now.

对。

Yeah.

我们正在消除像opcath这样的低效方式，因为opcath虽然能实现所有功能，但效率最低。我们设计了操作码和脚本组件，可以构建系统——比如在贷款市场中，我们能为抵押品创建二级市场。用户获得贷款后，可以交易这些贷款头寸，对普通人来说可能没意义，但在金融领域这正是运作方式，这类贷款和结构化产品就是如此。

So we're getting rid of the inefficiency of things like opcath because opcath is just, yeah, sure you can do everything with it but it's actually the least efficient ways to do it. So we have opcodes and script components that allow us to design systems where, for example, we can if you have a loan market, we can actually create a secondary market for the collateral of the So users that are taking you can kinda like, say you've given a loan or whatever, you can trade those loans positions and to the average person that doesn't mean anything. But in the financial world, this is exactly how these things work, right? These kind of like loans, these kind of structured products

就像流动的二级市场，没错。

And like a liquid secondary Exactly. Market

专为贷款设计的市场。完全正确，非常有趣。这严格针对贷款业务。

for loans. Exactly, exactly. Interesting. So this is strictly for loans.

你觉得这个市场比支付更大吗？哦，绝对大得多，十万个百分比。至少在短期到中期是这样吧？或者说总体上？

So do you think that's a bigger market than payments? Oh, absolutely, 100000%. At least in the short to medium term, right? I think Or just in general?

我认为总的来说。有趣。我认为总的来说因为一切

I think in general. Interesting. I think in general because everything

所以它更像是一个金融衍生品协议？

So it's more like a financial derivatives protocol?

是的，我是说这就是DeFi的本质，对吧？DeFi就是金融衍生品，而从这一角度来看，我认为最大的突破在于它实际上构成了金融衍生品的循环，也就是比特币金融化的循环。看看迈克尔·塞勒运营的比特币储备公司，他的策略包含两个层面：一是长期带有类似庞氏特征的动态——不断增持比特币并通过ATM机或类似渠道筹集更多资金，

Yeah, mean that's what DeFi is, right? DeFi is financial derivative and I think the big, big, big breakthrough from that respect is the fact that actually it is the cycle of financial derivative. It is the cycle of financialization of Bitcoin, right? When you look at Bitcoin treasury companies that what Michael Saylor is doing, okay so there's two components to what Michael Saylor has been doing, right? One which had kind of like Ponzi like, seemingly Ponzi like dynamics for quite a while which is this notion that he would just accumulate Bitcoin and raise more capital via ATMs or via Yeah,

出售股票除以比特币。

selling stock divided by Bitcoin.

然后就像他们所说的永动机飞轮。但有趣的是，市场逐渐成熟并意识到，仅靠这种严格的积累飞轮机制不足以支撑实际更高的资产净值溢价，你知道

And then this just like perpetual like this flywheel they call it, right? But interestingly enough, I think the markets matured and the markets also realized that this strict accumulation flywheel was not enough to command an actual higher MNAV meaning, you know

本不应存在相关溢价。

There shouldn't be a premium associated.

确实不该，我的意思是，单纯基于这点不应产生溢价。于是问题就转向：如何有效利用资产负债表，对吧？

There should, I mean, there should not be a premium strictly off of that. So then it becomes a conversation around, okay, how do you leverage your balance sheet, right?

好吧，你持有60万枚比特币，打算怎么处理这些资产？

Right, you have 600,000 Bitcoin, what do you do with that?

没错，这正是

Exactly and this is

准确地说，是在

adding exactly, to

优先股领域，你正在创建由比特币担保的固定收益金融工具，让法币市场的人能获得特定资产敞口，从而获取一定收益，同时享有强有力的担保保障。所以当你思考时，我是说，不管怎样，好吧，这发生在传统金融领域，我们未必完全认同其背后的机制，但就像，如果你有个产品承诺给人10%的收益，而这个产品有五倍比特币做担保，那应该相当安全对吧？

the preferred stocks where you're creating fixed income financial instruments that are collateralized by Bitcoin that allow people in the fiat markets to get exposure to a certain asset that gets them a certain amount of yield with strong, you know, backing assurance. So when you think about, I mean, regardless of, okay, this is happening in the TradFi, we don't necessarily approve with all of the Right. Mechanism behind it, but it's like, yeah, if you have a product that you're telling someone, you're gonna give them 10% yield and this product is collateralized by five x Bitcoin, it's probably pretty damn safe. Right? Yeah.

所以他们创造的是，你

So what they're creating is You're

必须假设比特币会归零或者根本没有比特币

busy have to assume that Bitcoin's going to zero or it has no Bitcoin.

或者它会停滞不涨。对吧？这本质上就是信贷，更多衍生品，实质上是比特币之上的信贷体系兴起，对吧？我认为信贷

Or that it's just gonna stall and not grow. Right? And what this is really is credit, you know, more derivatives, what this is, is the emergence of credit on top of Bitcoin, right? And I think credit

ARK就是这个协议版本

And so ARK is the protocol version of that in

某种程度上？我是说，ARC是金融技术栈，这套技术可以让人们创建信用工具，而不需要传统金融那种对手方风险架构。对吧？因为Sailor的币最终是

a way? I mean, ARC is the financial stack, the technology stack that can enable people to create credit instruments without requiring the counterparty risk architecture that TradFi requires. Right? Because Sailor's coins ultimately are

这就像有六层不同的对手方风险。

It's like six different layers of counterparty risk.

没错。比如他们在Coinbase上，对吧？诸如此类。我之前和Preston聊过这个，他来参加我们活动日的时候说，如果有个链上金库会怎样？如果有个合约能创建...就是说卖方有这个STRC产品，对吧，stretch。

Well, exactly. Say they're like on Coinbase, right? And all of that. Whereas I was having this conversation with Preston when he came to our arcade day and he was like, what if you have an on chain treasury? What if you have a contract that is able to create so there's seller has this product that's STRC, right, stretch.

是啊。

Yeah.

那么

So what

如果你有

if you had

一份允许世界上任何人存入比特币的合约，它们保护你和我，所以我猜

a contract where anyone in the world can deposit their Bitcoin to it, they preserve you and I So I guess

基本上就是那种稳定币。

that stable coin basically.

正是如此。

That's exactly what it is.

不。但我的意思是，问题在于它被如此混淆，实际上远不止是信任Coinbase那么简单，对吧？比如你的信任，如果你在与之互动，首先你要信任你的经纪商，你要通过Coinbase，然后还要信任像MicroStrategy这样的高管层。在当前设置中存在多层的对手方风险。

No. But like, I mean, people the problem is, is that it's so obfuscated, that it's actually way more than just trusting Coinbase, right? Like your trust, if you're interacting with it, first of all, you're like trusting your brokerage, you're trying get Coinbase, then you're trusting like executive leadership MicroStrategy. There's multiple layers of counterparty risk in the current setup.

不，确实如此。你可以大幅降低这种风险。没错，因为这里的游戏规则是，如果你引入信贷，所有信贷相关的问题都归结于那个产品的信用价值，对吧？

No, exactly. You can reduce that significantly. Exactly, because the game here, if you're introducing credit, with all things credit is like what is the credit worthiness of that product, right?

是的。

Yeah.

而在传统金融体系中，信用价值基本上是由穆迪这类公司和所有评级机构盖章认证的，它们或许能获取稍多信息，但财务状况仍然极其不透明。正如你所说，存在如此多的对手方风险层级，以至于市场上很难获得准确的定价。

And in the TradFi system, the credit worthiness is basically rubber stamped by companies like Moody's and all these rating agencies, That have access perhaps a little bit more but still remains super opaque, you know, financial states, you know, like, so they but again, like you said, there's so many layers of counterparty risk that it's hard to get an accurate pricing in the market.

他们搞砸了。穆迪把2008年全搞砸了。

And they've fucked it up. Moody's fucked up all 2008.

没错。完全正确。完全正确。而如果你有一个链上结构化产品，所有信息都是公开透明的。这样你就能评估信用风险，评估技术风险，然后做出判断。

Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. Whereas if you had an on chain structured product, it's all there in the open. Like, so you can evaluate the credit risk, you can evaluate the technology risk and you can make, you know, a judge.

所以我并不是说这些东西显然不适合所有人。

So I'm not saying obviously these things are not for everyone.

对。

Right.

对吧？普通人可能根本不需要关心这些。我会建议大家都去买它，你知道的，可持续堆栈对吧？但有些人确实面临着特定的财务情况，需要以某种方式对冲风险。比如说，如果你只想获得英伟达的风险敞口，但又不想直接购买股票——因为你目前只持有比特币。

Right? The average person is probably not gonna have to be concerned with any of this. I would recommend everyone to just buy it, you know, Sustainable stack stack Right? But there are people that are dealing, you know, with specific financial situations where they need to hedge their risk in one way or another. They wanna get, you know, what if you just wanna get exposure to Nvidia, but you don't you don't wanna have to buy the equity because you you currently exist outside, you know, you only have Bitcoin.

你身处传统金融体系之外。你不想把比特币转入银行账户去买英伟达。那么如果能找到交易对手方，用比特币抵押一个能让你即时获得英伟达风险敞口的产品呢？这个产品会追踪英伟达股价，并以比特币作为抵押。这样你就能随心所欲地乘风破浪，却无需经历股票购买流程。

You you exist outside of the Tratify system. You don't wanna pull your Bitcoin into a bank account to have to buy Nvidia. Well, what if you can find a counterparty that's going to collateralize a product that's going to give you immediate exposure to Nvidia. That product is gonna track the Nvidia stock price and it's gonna be collateralized with Bitcoin. So in a way, you are able to ride whatever wave want to ride, but you know, without ever having to go through the equity purchase product.

我们认为这有点像创新突破。我们认为这是Arcade能做到的事——当然，对大型金融机构这类客户可能更有吸引力。但归根结底，就像你说的合成稳定币概念，或许存在应用场景。比如我们在卢加诺，这里是Tether的大本营。如果Tether决定...（我之前发推讨论过这个设想，想想就很有意思），毕竟现在主导稳定币市场的就是Tether。

We think that's kinda like Injury. We think this is something that Arcade can do and again, yeah, sure, it's probably more interesting for large financial institutions and things like that. But ultimately, I mean, are things where, because like you said, the idea of a synthetic stable coin, like maybe there's a case to be made, like we're in Lugano, we're in the home of Tether. What if Tether decides and one of the, I tweeted about this and I think it's fascinating to think about because you look at Tether who is dominating the stablecoin industry at the moment.

是啊，差得远呢。

Yeah, it's like not even close.

没错。他们真正特别的一点是，所有试图追赶他们的竞争对手都在建立这样的系统——分享收益，对吧？他们会分享从财政部获得的部分收益，因为他们想激励人们使用他们的稳定币，从而促进增长。

Yeah. And one of the thing that is truly special about them is that every competitor that is trying to catch up with them are creating those systems where they're sharing the yield, right? They're sharing a portion of the yield they get from the treasury because they want to incentivize people use their stablecoin so that they can grow.

因为不然的话，人们就直接用Tether了。

Because otherwise they're just gonna use Tether.

而Tether则不会分享收益。所以如果你用USDT，你什么也得不到。

Whereas Tether, they're not sharing. So if you use USDT, you're not getting any of

这些都是没用的模式，

the They're all useless models,

他们把收益都留给自己。什么都不分享。

they keep the yield. They're keeping everything.

是啊。

Yeah.

但如果Tether决定，好吧，我也想创建一个让用户获得某种收益的系统呢？我想与他们分享财富，但不想动用我的国库收益。

But then, what if Tether decides, okay, I also want to create a system where the users have some sort of yield, right? I think I wanna share the wealth with them but I don't wanna touch my treasury yield.

是的。

Yeah.

他们资产负债表上有我不知道具体多少但肯定数万枚比特币。

Well, they have a balance sheet of I don't know how many tens of thousands of Bitcoin.

他们持有超过10万枚比特币。

They have over a 100,000 Bitcoin.

所以他们可以把这些转移到Arcade，创建一种合成稳定币——其实不完全是稳定币。你可以把它想象成数字银行，你把钱存入账户，这实际上是个储蓄产品。

So they can move that to Arcade, create a synthetic stable coin, which actually is not really a stable coin. It's a think of it like a neo bank, right? You're depositing your money into that account and it's a savings product.