#173 – Nic Carter：比特币核心价值、分层扩容与区块大小之争

对。

Yeah.

你必须

You have to

在那个小孔上戳个洞才能使用，这样就能防止你花掉后又声称里面还有钱。

poke a hole through the the little hole and that renders it spendable, So, you know, that's protection against you spending it and then representing that it's still loaded.

这确实很酷。

That's definitely cool.

是啊。

Yeah.

所以我带来的另一件东西实际上是12面的骰子。

So that the other thing I brought here are basically dice, 12 sided.

这些骰子上没有比特币。

They don't have any Bitcoin on them.

它们只是印着各种对比特币的批评意见

So they just have a bunch of different critiques of Bitcoin on

在每一面上。

each side.

那我们就一个个来看吧。

We'll go through them then.

这太棒了。

This is awesome.

我不知道我们是否有时间看完所有11条，因为其中一面印着我的基金标志。

I I don't know if we have time to do all 11, because there's one with my funds logo on it.

但这本质上是个戏谑的玩笑——对比特币的批评如今已经公式化到可以直接印在骰子上了。

But it's just basically a tongue in cheek joke that the critiques of Bitcoin are so formulaic at this point that you can just put them on dice.

没错。

Yeah.

这挺傻的。

It's it's silly.

不过其中一些或许能成为有趣的讨论话题。

Well, some of them might be topics for interesting conversations.

哦，是的。

Oh, yeah.

我们甚至可以安排对话。

We could even arrange the conversation.

这样你就能掷骰子看看结果如何。

That way, you can roll the dice and see what you got.

好吧。

Alright.

但首先，比特币的哲学基础是什么？比如，你如何看待比特币超越基本协议和基础货币的层面？

But first, the the philosophical foundations of Bitcoin, like, how do you see Bitcoin outside of just a basic protocol and a basic currency?

就像你说的，它似乎是个坚实的基础。

It seems to be, like you said, it seems like sturdy ground.

那么你这是什么意思？

So what do you mean by this?

是的。

Yeah.

没错。

Yeah.

所以它不仅仅是任何转移价值的协议。

So it's not just any protocol for moving value around.

它不仅仅是任何一种货币。

It's not just any currency.

它内含特定的规则和价值观。

It's got specific rules and values that are embedded in it.

这里有个关键点，比特币是对某些价值观的编码，这些价值观常被误解或未被充分认识。

And this is an important point, is Bitcoin is the encoding of certain values, which are often misunderstood or not acknowledged necessarily.

可以说它本身就蕴含着这些价值观。

And so it's sort of impregnated with values.

具体是哪些价值观存在争议，甚至有人为比特币内在的价值观发动过内战。

And what they are specifically is a topic of debate, and there have been civil wars fought over the values inherent in Bitcoin.

比如其中一种分歧是：比特币应该作为廉价、可扩展的基础层低费率支付系统，侧重点对点支付；还是应该更像数字黄金这种大宗商品，最终主要在机构间进行低频结算？

You know, one of them was, should Bitcoin be this cheap, scalable, the base layer, low fee payment system with an emphasis on P2P payments, or should it be more of this, like, gold like digital commodity that would eventually settle infrequently and mainly between institutions?

对吧？

Right?

这本质上是理念的根本冲突。

So that's fundamentally conflict of visions.

对吧？

Right?

不过要记住，这只是一个普通人的观点。

But the so, you know, keep in mind that this is just one man's opinion.

我并不能代表比特币发言。

I don't speak for Bitcoin.

对吧？

Right?

我认为比特币蕴含的首要核心价值是非任意性货币政策理念。

So I would say the key the key number one value that's embedded in Bitcoin is the notion of nondiscretionary monetary policy.

即算法货币政策，而非人为制定的货币政策。

So algorithmic monetary policy as opposed to human based monetary policy.

中本聪对此阐述得非常清楚。

Satoshi was very clear about that.

比特币是现代中央银行体系的替代方案，中本聪认为央行持续调整和干预会导致信贷泡沫等问题。

Bitcoin is an alternative to modern central banking, where you have constant tweaking, constant intervention, which Satoshi felt leads to credit bubbles and so on.

因此比特币提出了一种完全非自由裁量的货币政策，其供应量会随时间逐步衰减。

So Bitcoin proposes a completely nondiscretionary monetary policy, sort of decays over time.

前四年发行了50%的币量，接下来四年发行25%，再四年发行12.5%，如此递减直至总量达到2100万枚。

50% of the coins were issued in the first four years, and then the next 25% in the next four years, then 12 and a half percent in the next four years until you get to 21,000,000 units.

其实这些具体数字并不重要。

And none of those numbers really matter.

比如总量本可以设定为2500万枚，发行曲线也可以更陡峭或更平缓。

Like, it could have been 25,000,000 units, and it could have been a more aggressive slope or a more gradual slope.

关键在于这个发行计划在代码公开前就已确定。

But what matters is that this schedule was proposed even before the code was public.

这个计划被提出后，我们所有人共同承诺遵守它。

The schedule was proposed, and then we all collectively agreed to stick to it.

这在货币体系史上堪称首创。

And that is kind of a first for monetary system.

黄金某种程度上也具备这种特性。

I mean, gold kind of has that property.

对吧？

Right?

因为地表黄金存量每年仅增长1%到2%。

Because gold the supply of gold above ground only really increases at one to 2% a year.

所以它某种程度上是非人性的，但这恰恰是个优点。

So it's it's sort of inhuman, which is a good feature.

对吧？

Right?

你不想让人类对它拥有太多控制权。

You don't want to give humans that much control over it.

比特币在这方面采取了更为严苛的方式。

Bitcoin is a much more, you know, fastidious approach to that.

它对供应计划有着极其具体的规定，最关键的是这个计划不可更改。

It really is super concrete about what the supply schedule is, and the fact, crucially, that it can't change.

所以我们无法对债务人实施救助。

So we can't have a bailout of debtors.

假设有很多人背负比特币计价的债务，我们需要宽松的货币政策来救助他们。

It was a lot of people let's say a lot of people had debts denominated in Bitcoin, and we needed loose accommodative monetary policy to bail them out.

这在比特币体系里是不可能的。

That's not possible.

我们无法用比特币实施债务豁免，因为我们共同认可的社会契约具有非自由裁量性。

We couldn't have a Jubilee denominated in Bitcoin because the social contract that we've all, you know, bought into and committed to is that it's nondiscretionary.

这可以说是首要原则之一。

So that's sort of one of the first things.

我认为这最终体现的是对财产权的强烈尊重。

And I think ultimately that comes back to basically a strong respect for property rights.

因为如果出现意外通胀——比如某个极具魅力的领袖突然劫持比特币系统，说服大家将总量从2100万改为3000万——这将稀释所有持有比特币并认可2100万总量规则的人，凭空多出的900万会对其他所有人产生稀释效应，这实际上是通过通胀窃取购买力的隐蔽手段。

Because if we were to have unanticipated inflation, let's say, you know, really charismatic leader somehow commandeered Bitcoin and convinced everyone that we should have 30,000,000 units and not 21,000,000, that would basically be dilutive on everybody that held Bitcoin and had opted into the 21,000,000 set of coins, an additional 9,000,000 unanticipated would have a dilutive effect on everyone else, and that would be a covert way of effectively stealing their purchasing power through inflation.

这可能吗？

Is that possible?

是那种情况吗？

That kind of thing?

我是说，比特币有什么机制能抵御那种魅力型领袖的影响？

I mean, what what's mechanism the of Bitcoin that resists that kind of charismatic leader?

嗯，过去确实有人在比特币领域拥有很大影响力，他们曾试图修改协议。

Well, we've had people that have had a lot of influence in Bitcoin in the past, and they've tried to make changes to the protocol.

虽然没那么戏剧性，但比特币持有者通常都会抵制这些个人和机构，而且你知道，比特币持有者在坚守这些核心价值观方面有着良好记录。

Not as dramatic as that, but Bitcoiners have generally resisted those individuals, institutions, and they you know, Bitcoiners have a good track record of sort of staying true to to those core values.

所以，你提到的价值观，比如坚持货币属性，但其实还有更宏大的价值观。

So the you know, the you mentioned values and and, like, sticking to the monetary thing, but there's bigger values.

比特币几乎被灌输了一种心理层面的价值观。

There's almost like psychological values that are instilled in Bitcoin.

你提到一个观点：比特币对许多人而言是承载他们期望、希望和梦想的容器。

You make a point that Bitcoin for many is a vessel, quote, for their expectations, hopes, and dreams.

比特币协议能支持这种复杂的人类境况吗？

Can the Bitcoin protocol support this kind of complexity of the human condition?

比如，这里还涉及到人们常说的自由理念。

So, like, there's ideas of freedom that seem to be spoken about.

甚至还有某种，我是说，爱的理念。

There's a sort of ideas of of, I mean, even love.

是啊。

Yeah.

我是说，有些人把它当作一个梗来用，比如'比特币就是爱'之类的，主要是为了调侃我，因为我总把爱挂在嘴边。

I mean, some people kind of use it as a meme like, you know, Bitcoin is love or something like that, you know, mostly to troll me because I talk about love all the time.

但你知道，这些理念远不止于货币交换这么简单。

But, you know, these bigger ideas than just the exchange of currencies.

是啊。

Yeah.

我觉得比特币本身其实非常简单。

I mean, Bitcoin itself is very simple, I would say.

说到底，它并不试图做太多事情。

Like, ultimately, it doesn't, you know, pretend to do very much.

它本质上只是完成交易结算。

It really just settles transactions.

但人们确实会把自己的观点强加于它。

But people do superimpose their own views on it, for sure.

比特币的特性确实会让人产生这些认知：它具有抗审查性，能提供交易自由，或一定程度的交易隐私。

And Bitcoin's qualities give rise to these perceptions of it having censorship resistance, or giving you transactional freedom, or a measure of transactional privacy.

由于任何人都可以运行节点参与共识过程，而且挖矿是个竞争性的自由市场过程，这意味着矿工很难对你进行审查，从而保障了交易自由。

So because anyone can operate a node and join the consensus process, and because mining is a competitive free market process, that means that it's likely that you can't be censored by the miners, so that means you have transactional freedom.

正是这些系统的计算机科学技术特性，赋予了它这些政治属性——很难或几乎不可能审查特定个体。

So you have these computer science technical features of the system that cause it to have these political qualities, which is it's very hard or impossible to censor a specific individual.

所以看到这种关联很有意思。

So it's it's interesting to see that flow.

因此抗审查性确实是其核心价值之一。

But so that's one of the core values for sure is is the censorship resistance.

然后还有这样一个事实：这是一个基于密码学的系统，比如你可以通过记住12个单词在脑海中存储价值。

Then you have the fact that it's a cryptographic based system, and you can hold value in your brain by memorizing 12 words, for instance.

这赋予了它抗扣押的特性，这再次是一个政治概念。

That gives it seizure resistance, which is, again, a political concept.

如果你想带着完整的财富逃离你的司法管辖区，你知道，这个系统的密码学特性，它建立在公钥密码学基础上，你可以用12个单词编码一个比特币私钥，这赋予了它这种政治意义，让你相对于一个粉尘机器人拥有了权力。

If you wanted to desert your jurisdiction with your wealth intact in your brain, you know, that, you know, cryptographic feature of the system, the fact that it's built on public key cryptography, and that you can encode a Bitcoin private key in 12 words, that gives it this political salience that, you know, you can you're now empowered relative to a dust bot, basically.

是啊。

Yeah.

我是说，加密货币和比特币背后有太多美好的概念，代表着某种自由。

I mean, there's so many beautiful concepts behind cryptocurrency, behind Bitcoin that stand for sort of freedom.

就像这个国家建国时的一些基本理念。

So some of the basic things at the founding of this country.

我个人不喜欢比特币和加密货币的一点是涉及金钱，有时甚至关系到人们的毕生积蓄。

The one thing I don't like personally behind Bitcoin and cryptocurrency is that money is involved, and it's like people's life savings sometimes are involved.

所以自然会产生一种恐惧，一种自我保护的本能教条主义，这时人性中最美好的一面就会消失。

So there is naturally a kind of fear, a self preservation, like instinctual kind of dogmatic thing that comes in, where you're not the best of human nature.

你会变得不再像乔治·华盛顿那样，失去与那些我认为很美好的基本原则的联系，就像这个国家的立国原则一样。

You're you're you stop being a George Washington and you lose touch of the like foundational principles, which I think are beautiful, just like defining principles of this country.

所以我更喜欢停留在哲学层面，而不是'我所有的钱都投资在比特币上'这种层面。

So that's that's just like so I like staying on the level of like the philosophy versus the level of like, all my money is invested in Bitcoin.

那样的话，要开展原则性讨论就会变得非常棘手。

And that that becomes very tricky territory to have principal discussions Yeah.

关于理念的讨论。

About ideas.

嗯

Well

这种紧张感很有意思。

It's an interesting tension.

尽管大量持有比特币，我还是努力保持平衡。

I try to stay balanced despite being very exposed to Bitcoin.

所以

So

让我问个离谱的问题以防万一。

Let me ask the ridiculous question just in case.

中本聪是谁？

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?

我们不知道。是你吗？

We don't Is it you?

我们不知道。

We don't know.

很可能不是我，因为中本聪发明比特币时我才17岁左右。

It's probably not me because I was, like, 17 when Satoshi invented Bitcoin.

16岁？

16?

所以不太可能，而且我也不是真正的程序员。

So unlikely, and also I'm not really a programmer.

当然。

Of course.

存在许多理论，但老实说，这是有史以来最伟大的谜团之一，因为即便是从比特币诞生第一天就参与其中的比特币玩家，那些在比特币问世前就活跃在邮件列表和密码朋克社区的人。

There's a lot of theories, but honestly, it's one of the greatest mysteries of all time because even Bitcoiners that have been around since day one, really, you know, people that were around before Bitcoin came out, they're on the mailing list, they're active in the Cypherpunk community.

你问他们，他们确实不知道，甚至可能对中本聪是谁连像样的猜测都没有。

You ask them and they sincerely will not know, and they may not even have a good guess as to who Satoshi is.

知道这个重要吗？还是说其实不知道更重要？

Is it important to know, or is it like actually important not to know?

你觉得

Do you

你认为这是个特性还是缺陷——我们不知道中本聪是谁？

think that's a feature or bug that you we don't know?

有些人不喜欢这种不确定性，特别是华尔街的那些人。

Some people don't like the uncertainty, especially, you know, folks on Wall Street.

他们非常想知道真相。

They really want to know.

如果你读过Coinbase的S-1文件，他们IPO前的披露材料中，中本聪可能回归被列为风险因素之一。

And if you read the Coinbase s one, their disclosure pre IPO, that's a risk factor that Satoshi could come back.

所以风险管理派想知道答案，因为他们担心中本聪可能持有不受欢迎的政治观点之类，会永远玷污这个项目。

So the the risk management crowd wants to know because they wanna know if maybe Satoshi had, you know, undesirable political opinions or something that would forever taint the project.

你觉得他们提出'中本聪身份是风险因素'是在恶搞吗？

Do you think they were just trolling with that risk with Satoshi's identity being a risk factor?

还是说真的为此开过会，正式讨论过这个风险？

Or is that like actual like, was there an actual meeting and a discussion of that being a risk factor?

我认为在招股说明书的风险因素章节里，律师们只是把能想到的所有可能性都列出来以防万一。

I think in the risk factor sections of the prospectuses, it's really just the lawyers doing a total brain dump to cover absolutely everything they So can think

就是律师们搞的。

it's just lawyers.

不像你知道的那样，我觉得埃隆在SpaceX的法律文件里提到过，地球政府对火星没有管辖权。

It's not like you know, it's like I think Elon was somewhere in the legal documents for SpaceX mentioned that like Earth governments have no jurisdiction on Mars.

是啊。

Yeah.

就像他们随手加进去的，感觉可能是律师干的，但也可能只是埃隆在恶搞。

Like they threw that in there, and it feels like, yeah, that could be lawyers, but it could also just be Elon trolling.

没错。

Yeah.

所以我怀疑这是Coinbase的人在恶搞，还是说...我不确定...或者是律师的手笔。

So I wonder if it's like the Coinbase folks trolling or if it's I don't or if it's lawyers.

我希望是恶搞，不是律师干的。

I hope it's the trolling, not the lawyers.

Coinbase的领导层可没有埃隆那么爱恶搞。

The the Coinbase leadership, they're not as big trolls as Elon is.

但对他们来说这确实存在风险，假设中本聪回归（虽然不太可能），假设他决定抛售所有比特币（同样不太可能），据传闻或估算约有100-120万枚比特币，价值约5060亿美元。

But I mean, it's a it's a risk for sure from their perspective because, let's say, Satoshi returned, doesn't seem likely, and let's say they decided to spend all their coins, which also seems very unlikely, that's, you know, rumored to be or estimates have it at 1 to 1,200,000.0 Bitcoin, which is like $5,060,000,000,000 dollars worth.

所以有些人认为这是个风险。

So some people consider that to be a risk.

你觉得这几乎像是个关于领导力的话题。

You think it's you know, this is almost like a topic of leadership.

感觉没有任何一个人能代表比特币发声。

It doesn't feel like anybody, any one person speaks for Bitcoin.

这里甚至连知名人物都没有。

Not there's not even, like, prominent figures.

比如以太坊有Vitalik Buterin这样的代表人物。

Like, you have for, like, Ethereum, you have Vitalik Buterin.

虽然有很多像你这样的顶尖头脑在讨论它，但并没有一两个核心人物。

It doesn't there's a lot of, like, top minds talking about it like yourself, but it's not like one or two.

你再想想，这算特性还是缺陷？

Do you think again, is that a feature or a bug?

你觉得比特币要在社会中扮演比美元更重要或同等重要的角色，这样真的有效吗？

Like, do you think for effective for Bitcoin to effectively have a role in society that like is as large or larger than the dollar.

它需要有个代表它的领导层。

There needs to be like leadership that represents it.

几乎像是民主制度那种形式。

Almost like democratic kind of thing.

这个观点其实很反直觉，因为包括我在内的大多数比特币支持者会说，没有领导层恰恰是它的优点。

Well, that's a real counterintuitive point because most Bitcoiners, including myself, would say, no, the lack of leadership is a great quality to have.

因为如果有个魅力型领袖或控制它的基金会/公司，他们可能会操控协议特性，甚至剥夺持币者权益，或者建立特权基金让他们优先获取代币。

Because if you have a charismatic leader and a foundation or corporation that controls it, maybe they can control the features of the protocol, and maybe they can expropriate holders of the coin, or, you know, build in an endowment that pays them off and gives them privileged access to the units of the coin, for instance.

所以我们把那些拥有货币特权渠道的人称为'坎特隆内部人士'——有位叫Richard Cantelon的经济学家指出，货币流入经济时分布是不均衡的。

So, you know, we we call people that have privileged access to the money spigot Cantelon insiders, which is there's this economist that pointed out that as, you know, I think Richard Cantelon, that as money enters the economy, it has an uneven flow.

对吧？

Right?

过去十年甚至更早就能看到，这个国家货币超发的后果就是持有金融资产的人暴富，而没有的人依旧贫穷。

And so you see this in the last last decade or so, before that too, the consequence of money printing in this country is people that own financial assets made a lot of money, and people that didn't didn't.

所以你看那个坎塔隆内部人士效应和外部人士效应。

So you see that cantalon insider, cantalon outsider effect.

加密货币也是如此，许多其他替代加密货币确实存在这些公司实体或领导者和CEO，他们能够就协议和资产货币做出特定决策，为自己及其亲信谋利等等。

And it's the same with a cryptocurrency, and many other alternative cryptocurrencies that do have these corporate entities or these leaders and CEOs, they're able to make specific decisions regarding the protocol and the currency of the asset, the benefit themselves, their cronies, etcetera.

这并不是一个值得拥有的特性。

And that's not a good feature to have.

我是说，它确实赋予你更快速高效地协调决策的能力。

I mean, it does grant you, you know, the ability to orchestrate decisions in a faster and more efficient way.

但从长远来看，如果你在创造一种货币，你试图优化的目标是货币的可信度和稳健性。

But long term, what you're trying to optimize for, if you're creating a money, is monetary credibility and soundness.

所以你并不希望它经常变动。

So you don't really want it changing all that often.

而且你也不希望给人留下这些精英在从事寻租活动之类的印象。

And you don't want to have the appearance of, you know, these elites that are engaging in rent seeking or anything like that.

当然，比特币领域确实存在有影响力的人物。

So there's definitely people that are influential in Bitcoin.

核心开发者们之所以被人倾听，很大程度上是因为我认为这是个精英体系，他们某种程度上自封为协议的高级祭司。

There's core developers that people listen to because it's, I would say, a meritocracy largely, and they're sort of self appointed high priests of the protocol.

我写了很多关于比特币的文章，人们会听我的，但这完全是个思想自由市场。

I write a lot about Bitcoin, people listen to me, but it's a completely free market of ideas.

对吧？

Right?

我在比特币领域没有任何权威可言。

I don't have any authority within Bitcoin whatsoever.

我只是个涂鸦者，你知道吗？

I'm just a scribbler, you know?

你不过是个涂鸦者罢了。

You're just a scribbler.

只是个涂鸦者。

Just a scribbler.

嗯，亚里士多德、苏格拉底和尼采也曾如此。

Well, so was Aristotle, Socrates, and Nietzsche.

好吧。

Okay.

从高层次技术角度来说，比特币是如何运作的？

At the high level, technically, how does Bitcoin work?

你能说说有趣的部分吗，比如矿工是什么？

Is there interesting things you could say, like, are miners?

节点是什么，全节点又是什么？

What are nodes, full nodes?

区块是什么？

What are blocks?

工作量证明是什么？

What's proof of work?

有没有一种简洁的方式来总结这个协议的运作原理？

Is there a nice way to wrap up a clean explanation of the protocol?

哦，天哪。

Oh, man.

那可能得花上整整五个小时。

That's that could be a whole that could be another five hours.

这个话题很有趣，我很想和你聊聊区块大小战争，以及围绕它的政治、心理和原则问题。

Is there interesting because I'd love to talk to you about block size wars and sort of the the politics, psychology, the principles around that.

不过在深入之前，先谈谈这个系统如何运作会更好。

But sort of building up to that, it'd be nice to talk about how the thing works.

这很合理。

That's fair.

我认为区块大小战争确实是个引人入胜的讨论，它展现了治理辩论如何与技术特性相交织。

I mean and the block size wars are a really fascinating discussion of how governance debates intersect with technical features.

所以我想我们可以...是的。

So I guess we can yeah.

简单来说，比特币本质上是一个全球共享的复制账本，任何想要成为该账本平等参与者的节点，都需要维护并同步这个账本的全球状态。

So, basically, at the highest possible level, Bitcoin is a globally shared it's really a replicated ledger that any participant that wants to be an equal peer on that ledger, they want to maintain that ledger, and they wanna stay up to date with the global state of the ledger.

实际上，任何货币体系都只是带有实体现金的账本。

And really, any monetary system is just a ledger with physical cash.

我们受益于货币的物理实体化。

We benefit from the physical instantiation of the money.

因此物理形态就是账本。

So the physics is the ledger.

物理形态就是账本。

The physics is the ledger.

对吧？

Right?

黄金也是如此。

Same with gold.

对吧？

Right?

你不能随意生产新的黄金单位。

You can't just produce new units of gold.

所以我们相信金原子很难被制造出来，尽管并非不可能。

So we trust that gold atoms are hard to create, although not impossible.

对吧？

Right?

可以发射一堆质子轰击邻近金属，从而制造出金原子。

Could fire a bunch of protons and whatever is adjacent metal, and create gold atoms.

但这会非常昂贵。

It'd be expensive.

美元也是同样的道理。

And the same with dollars.

要知道，我们相信伪造美元是很困难的。

You know, we trust that it's hard to counterfeit a dollar.

所以我们依靠物理世界的模拟机制来维护账本状态。

So we trust the physical analog world to help maintain the state of that ledger.

至于数字货币，比如你银行账户里的活期存款，我们本质上信任金融机构会忠实记录，并最终信任央行来管理这个体系。

With digital money, like, you know, the money in your bank account, your checking account, we basically trust our institutions or banking institutions to keep a faithful record, and then ultimately, we trust the central bank to administer that system.

所以这里存在着一系列关键节点。

So there's kind of a handful of nodes.

在比特币中，我们相信系统的经济激励机制基本上是经过精心设计的。

In Bitcoin, we trust that the economic incentives of the system are carefully poised, basically.

因此我们相信，自由市场的挖矿竞争将促使矿工以忠实且正确的方式将交易打包成区块，并且我们会持续达成账本的全球状态共识，大约每十分钟更新一次，存在一定的时间波动。

So we trust that the free market mining competition will lead to the miners assembling transactions into blocks in a faithful and correct way, and that we are gonna converge on a global state of the ledger continuously, which updates every ten minutes or so with some variance.

此外，矿工并非控制系统的唯一实体。

And then the miners aren't the sole entities that control the system.

要真正参与其中，如果你是商家并接受比特币，你确实需要运行自己的全节点并核验全部交易历史——大概可以说，比特币网络上发生过5亿到6亿笔交易。

To really participate, if you're a merchant and you're accepting Bitcoin, you really wanna run your own full node and check the whole history of transactions, sort of something like, I wanna say five to 600,000,000 transactions that have ever occurred on Bitcoin.

所以一个

So a

全节点包含比特币区块链上所有发生过的交易，据我所知数据量大约200GB左右。

full node contains all the transactions ever transacted on the the Bitcoin blockchain, and that's, I saw it's like 200 gigs or something like that.

大概350GB左右吧。

Like, three fifty, something like that.

这在普通消费级笔记本电脑上就能运行，这点对后续讨论非常关键。

It's doable on a regular consumer laptop, and that is gonna be really key later on in the discussion.

但要知道，这才是最根本的信任模型。

But so, you know, that's really the ultimate trust models.

首先，我们信任那些将交易打包成区块的矿工，他们是档案保管者。

First of all, we trust that the miners that assemble transactions into blocks, and they are the archivists.

他们将交易记录刻录到账本上，并且有经济动力保持行为正当，因为他们能获得比特币奖励。

You know, they inscribe those transactions onto the ledger, and they have an economic incentive to sort of behave correctly because they're getting paid and no units of Bitcoin.

这是其中一部分原因。

That's part of it.

但实际上，你也没有完全信任他们。

But then really, you are also you're not fully trusting them.

如果你想运行一个节点，实际上你需要重放比特币历史上从最初到当前的所有交易，通过这种方式达到当前状态。

You're actually if you wanna run a node, you replay every single transaction in the history of Bitcoin from the beginning to the current day, and you arrive at the present state that way.

所以你并不需要真正信任太多人或实体。

So you don't really have to trust too many people or entities.

你可以验证所有规则是否被遵守，所有比特币是否以有效方式产生，通胀率是否被遵循，没有隐性通胀——比如当你花费50个比特币时，你确实拥有这些比特币可供花费。

You can validate the correctness of that all the rules have been followed, that all the Bitcoins that were created were done so in the valid way, that the inflation rate was adhered to, and that there's no covert inflation, you know, that if you're spending 50 units of Bitcoin, you had that Bitcoin to spend in the first place.

这就像是在节点运营者（他们进行这种有效性检查，类似防伪检查）与矿工（作为工业实体，主要负责生产区块空间并在区块中组装交易）之间形成了一种微妙的平衡。

So it's sort of delicately poised between node operators who who, you know, engage in this validity checking, kind of anti counterfeiting checking, and then also the miners, which are an industrial entity, and they basically produce block space and assemble transactions in the blocks.

因此矿工们有动力不破坏系统，因为他们正从系统中获取价值。

And everybody so the miners are incentivized to not mess with the system because they're getting value from the system.

如果他们破坏系统，就会降低他们实际工作投入的价值。

So if they mess with it, it's going to decrease the value of their physical work investment.

是的。

Yeah.

他们必须承担实际的物理成本才能生产一个区块。

So they have to incur real physical cost to produce a block.

对吧？

Right?

现在每个区块至少能获得6.25个比特币，可能还有些手续费。

So right now, you get 6.25 Bitcoins in a block at a minimum, and then maybe some fees as well.

现在生产一个区块有多难？

And How hard is it to produce a block now?

嗯，很有挑战性。

Well, challenging.

我是说，你需要大约6.25个比特币，而一个比特币价值约55,000美元。

I mean, you need so 6.25, and a Bitcoin's worth $55,000 or so.

因此生产它的成本大概就是这个金额，因为这是自由市场竞争，矿工的利润空间非常薄。

So it's probably gonna cost you about that amount to produce it, because it's a free market competition, and miners have very thin margins.

这就好比如果我拍卖一美元，你会出价最高99美分来买这一美元。

So it's like if I auction off a dollar, you would pay up to 99¢ to buy that dollar from me.

矿工们的情况正是如此。

It's exactly what happens with miners.

他们基本上是在竞争获取新货币单位的权利。

They're, you know, basically competing for the right to obtain new units of money.

因此从逻辑上讲，他们会支付接近该货币价值的成本来获取它。

So logically speaking, they would pay up to the value of that money in order to earn it.

对于不熟悉的人来说，挖矿过程就是解决一个复杂的密码学问题。

And for people who are not familiar, the process of mining is solving a difficult cryptographic problem.

这是个计算问题。

That's a computational problem.

我想说它并不像人们有时描述的那样是个非常困难的谜题。

It's I would say it's not like, people sometimes represent it as like a really challenging puzzle.

实际上单个谜题非常简单。

Like, the individual puzzle is very simple.

如果你愿意的话，甚至可以用纸笔来计算，比如SHA-256算法。

Like, you can do it with pen and paper if you wanted, you know, like SHA-two 56.

你不过是在广阔的数学空间中大海捞针。

It's just that you're searching through the big mathematical space to find the needle in the haystack.

你只是在重复解一个简单的谜题。

You're just doing lots of iterations of a simple puzzle.

这就是暴力破解，因此，整个工作量证明机制的核心稳定性得以保障。

It's just brute force, hence, like, the stability of of the whole idea of the proof of work.

如果存在捷径，那这个机制就失效了。

If it was a if if you if there was a shortcut, it wouldn't be it wouldn't work.

没错。

Exactly.

所以希望没人能破解SHA-256算法。

So let's hope nobody solves SHA two fifty six.

是啊。

Yeah.

量子计算领域有很多讨论，但我咨询过的所有同事和量子计算机专家都说：我们距离量子计算威胁密码学安全还很遥远，更不用说威胁加密货币了。

There's a lot of discussions in from the quantum computing space, but everybody I I I talk to, all my colleagues and that work in quantum computers say this, we're quite a way quite a long way away from that being an issue in cryptography and then and certainly an issue in cryptocurrency.

这骰子本该有个面写着这个。

That should've been one of the sides on these dice.

应该写'量子'的。

It should've been quantum.

量子？

Quantum?

因为我觉得不是。

Because I don't think it is.

我忘记放它了

I forgot to put it

在这一版上

on this edition.

大家应该了解一下斯科特·阿伦森

People should check out Scott Aronson.

现在有很多人在兜售量子骗局，所以你们要非常小心

He there's a lot of people that are kind of selling quantum snake oil, so you should be very careful.

我认为这是一个非常激动人心的领域，可能会在未来十年或几百年内改变世界，特别是在模拟量子力学系统方面

I think it is a really exciting space that might change the world in the next decade or hundred couple hundred years, especially for simulating quantum mechanical systems.

但在量子机器学习领域，大家可以看看TensorFlow Quantum

But in quantum machine learning, people should check out TensorFlow Quantum.

这是个很好的自我教育途径，实际上如果你注重实践，可以通过软件工程来探索如何模拟量子电路，如何在这些量子电路上运行机器学习

It's a nice way to sort of educate yourself about the space, and actually, if you're pragmatically minded to, you know, through software engineering, explore how you simulate quantum circuits, how you run machine learning on those quantum circuits.

斯科特·阿伦森的主要观点（大家也应该看看他的博客）是：目前还没有任何一个机器学习应用在经典计算机上不能达到几乎相同的效果

The the main point that Scott makes, Scott Aronson, people should check out his blog too, is that like, there's not yet a single machine learning application that doesn't do almost as well in a classical computer.

所以虽然梦想是量子计算机会改变人工智能的本质，但至今还没有一个实际算法、问题集或数据集能证明这一点

So it doesn't like, yes, the dream is somehow quantum computers will change the nature of artificial intelligence, but there's yet to be an actual algorithm that or a problem set or a dataset where that would be the case.

在这个领域保持怀疑态度是好的

Skepticism is good in this space.

话说回来，你刚才解释了比特币的运作原理

Anyway, that said, so you kind of explained how Bitcoin works.

你最近还写了一篇博客文章，推荐了新书《区块大小战争》

You also wrote a blog post recently giving a shout out to the new book, The Block Size Wars.

什么是区块大小？

What is a block size?

什么是区块大小战争？

What are the block size wars?

它的历史、重要性及其哲学基础。

Its history, its importance, its philosophical foundations.

是啊。

Yeah.

我是说，比特币发展到这个阶段，我们也有自己的内战，如果你想知道政治斗争能激烈到什么程度的话。

I mean, Bitcoin, at this point, we have our own civil wars, if you're wondering about how politically intense it gets.

目前局势并不紧张。

It's currently not hot.

现在是冷处理阶段。

It's cold.

哦，确实。

It's Oh, yeah.

我们现在处于缓和期。

We're in a detente right now.

至少目前还没有坦克导弹，希望永远不会有。

There's no tanks or missiles, at least not yet, hopefully.

可能会有点暴力冲突吧。

It can get a little violent, I guess.

我记得比特币核心开发组里有个参与者在这场战争期间曾被特警突袭过。

I think one of the Bitcoin core developers or one of the participants in the in the war got swatted at one point.

什么是'恶意报警'（swatted）的意思？

What's swatted means?

就是有人打假报警电话，谎称你家里劫持了人质，特警队就会出动，这非常可怕。

When someone does a fake phone call saying that you're holding someone hostage at your house and the SWAT team goes, it's pretty scary.

哇。

Wow.

网络战争策略。

Internet warfare tactic.

是的。

Yeah.

但区块大小之争可以说已经基本结束了。

But the block size war, would say, effectively ended.

不过比特币社区肯定还会爆发更多内战。

Although, we're definitely gonna have more civil wars in Bitcoin, for sure.

但本质上，核心争论表面是技术问题，深层却是政治博弈。

But basically, the core argument was a technical one on its surface, but a very deep political one at its core.

技术问题是：每个连续区块应该包含多少兆字节？

The technical question is how many megabytes should be in each successive block?

所以中本聪最初设定了每个区块1兆字节的限制。

So Satoshi basically installed a limit of one megabyte per block.

我们应该回溯一下。

So we should backtrack.

最初是没有这个限制的。

There was no limit in the beginning.

这看起来像是中本聪的什么？

And it seems like Satoshi what is this?

2000年战争是在哪里爆发的？

2000 the war started in what?

2017年还是差不多那时候？

2017 or something like that?

我不知道具体时间

I don't know when

'15年就是，你知道的，《战吼》结束的时候

the '15 was when the, you know, the Battle Cry ends.

开始的时候

Began.

内战的第一场战役是什么？

What was the first battle in the Civil War?

我不记得了

I don't remember.

但是中本聪先生，我不知道您能否对此发表评论

But Sir Satoshi, I don't know if you can comment it on it.

比如，为什么中本聪突然几乎秘密地将限制设置为一兆字节？

Like, why does Satoshi set the limit to one megabyte all of a sudden almost secretively?

而最初是完全没有限制的

And in the beginning, there was no limit whatsoever.

是啊

Yeah.

我是说，我们可以深入探讨这个问题，人们已经花费数千小时仔细研读中本聪的著作，试图找出他站在哪一边，你几乎能找到任何文本解读。

I mean, we can get into and people have spent thousands of hours pouring over Satoshi's writings to find, you know, which side Satoshi was on, and you can find, like, any textual exegesis.

你都能找到支持任何一方的证据。

You can find evidence for either side.

对吧？

Right?

是的。

Yeah.

不过，确实。

But, yeah.

我的意思是，实际上比特币刚推出时就有区块大小限制，因为如果用最初版本的代码创建超过特定大小的区块，会导致节点崩溃。

I mean, effectively, when Bitcoin was launched, there was a block size because if you made a block over a certain size with the first edition of the code, it would have crashed nodes.

但后来在2010年，中本聪以隐蔽方式添加了1MB的限制，没有任何注释说明，这个限制基本上就固定下来了。

But then, yeah, in 2010, Satoshi added the one megabyte limit in a covert way with no comments or anything, And that stuck, basically.

随后比特币区块逐渐被填满，那些被灌输'比特币本质上是免费交易网络'理念的人就开始质疑：既然没有拥堵，为什么要支付交易费？

And and then Bitcoin blocks filled up, and people that had been socialized into this vision of Bitcoin as an effectively free transactional network were like, why pay a transaction fee if you're not at congestion?

如果区块没满，矿工就会免费打包你的交易。

If the block isn't full, the miner will mine your transaction for free.

对吧？

Right?

那些从2009年到2015年左右适应了这种现状的人，他们注意到区块开始被填满，于是认为：好吧，那就取消这个人为限制吧。

People that had been brought up in that status quo from 2009 to kinda 2015, they noticed the blocks started to fill up, and they're like, okay, well, let's just remove this arbitrary limit.

对吧？

Right?

这能有什么坏处呢？

What what could possibly be the harm?

对。

Right.

然后另一派系表示反对，认为必须限制系统的数据吞吐量，因为一旦提高吞吐量，就会形成高度排他性，最终普通用户将无法运行完整节点。

And then a whole other faction said, no, you need to cap the data throughput of the system because if you increase it, it's gonna be highly exclusionary, and ultimately, regular folks are not gonna be able to run a full node.

所以区块生成频率是固定的。

So there's a fixed number there's there's a fixed frequency of blocks.

因此如果想提升每秒交易量，就需要扩大区块容量。

And so if you wanna increase the number of transactions per second, you wanna increase the size of the block.

大区块能容纳大量交易。

So huge blocks allow you to shove in a lot of transactions.

没错。

Right.

小区块则不行，这就是你说的限制系统性能的意思。

Small blocks don't, so that's what you mean like constraining the system.

那么当区块容量小到只能容纳少量交易时，小区块的优势是什么？

So what's the benefit of a small block size where transactions when you can squeeze in only a small number of transactions?

而能承载大量交易的大区块优势又在哪里？

And what's the benefit of a huge block size where you can squeeze in a lot of transactions?

这实际上取决于你对系统的理解方式。

Well, it really comes down to the way that you think about the system.

当时很多人希望比特币能达到Visa的规模水平。

So a lot of people wanted Bitcoin to be Visa scale.

因此，区块需要足够大，才能容纳Visa级别的交易规模。

So to have blocks sufficiently large that you could accommodate a Visa level scale of transactions.

这意味着交易量要高出好几个数量级。

Which is many orders of magnitude more transactions.

没错。

That's right.

我的意思是，在数据吞吐量方面，它比比特币提供的要大得多——或者说至少过去是这样——每天144兆字节的空间，而平均每笔交易占350字节。

I mean, preposterously larger in terms of data throughput than, you know, Bitcoin offers up, or at least it used to, 144 megabytes of space per day, and your average transaction's 350 bytes.

所以，在极限情况下，每天可以处理四五十万笔交易，这并不算多。

So, you know, you could, at a push, do four or 500,000 transactions a day, which is not many.

如果想达到Visa的规模，就必须将区块扩大到令人难以接受的程度。

So if you wanted to get to Visa scale, you'd have to increase blocks obnoxiously large.

小区块支持者声称，这将超出普通人处理数据的能力范围，使他们无法同步账本状态、重新广播并验证所有交易以确保协议规则的有效性。

The small blockers claimed that this would overwhelm the ability of any regular person to ingest that data and stay current at the, you know, state of the ledger to rebroadcast to replay all those transactions to ensure that the protocol rules were valid.

简而言之，小区块派的观点是：通过系统推送海量数据会破坏系统的去信任化特性，因为届时只有一两个工业级重型节点才能运行该协议。

So basically, the small blocker contention is that you eliminate the trustlessness of the system by pushing a ton of data through the system because only one or two industrial heavy duty nodes would ever be able to run the protocol at that point.

顺便说一下，在内战中，双方——正如你所称的小区块派和大区块派——

So, by the way, in the civil war, the two sides, as you're you're calling them, the small blocker and the big blocker sides.

对。

Yeah.

这就让我们回到你提到的观点：普通电脑也可以成为节点。

And so that takes us back to the thing that you mentioned that a regular computer could be a node.

而如果采用大区块，这种情况将不复存在。

And with a big with big blocks, that's no longer going to be the case.

因此，交易数量的激增将导致每个全节点必须存储的区块链体积爆炸式增长。

So just the number of transactions is going to blow up the size of the blockchain that every full node has to store.

这样一来，与普通的家庭式节点不同，你将不得不建立数据中心，这些设施将由大型组织掌控，数量将极为有限——这正是整个系统走向中心化控制的途径。

And so then, as opposed to a regular mom and pop type of node, you're gonna have to have data centers, so they're going to have to be owned by large organizations, there's gonna have to be very few of them, and that's how you centralize the control over this whole operation.

所以大区块支持者虽然能实现Visa级别的海量交易处理，但代价是系统中心化。

So the big blocker, yes, it allows you to be Visa and do a huge number of transactions, but it becomes centralized.

而小区块方案虽然无法处理商业级交易量，却能保留去中心化的优势。

And then the small blocker is you cannot actually do kind of merchant style transactions, but you get the decentralized benefit.

坦白说，我认为大区块方案甚至无法达到Visa的级别。

Well, I don't even think the big block approach would allow you to be Visa, frankly.

因为Visa网络本质上只有一个节点。

Because there's effectively one node at the Visa network.

对吧？

Right?

所以你根本不需要维护这种点对点架构。

So you don't really need to maintain this peer to peer architecture at all.

要达到Visa级别的交易量，需要通过网络传输的数据量简直荒谬。

And the amount of data you'd have to push through the network to reach Visa scale is a really preposterous amount.

我们现在已经看到，当区块链试图扩容到每日处理1000万笔交易时会发生什么——这还远不及Visa的规模。

I mean and and we have now evidence for what happens when you try and scale up as a blockchain and do 10,000,000 transactions a day, which is still not Visa scale.

对吧？

Right?

我亲眼见过运营那些节点的状况，实在不容乐观。

You know, I've I've, you know, seen what it's like to operate those nodes, and it's not pretty.

因此确实存在计算机科学上的物理限制，因为它是一个广播网络。

So there are totally genuine computer science physical limits, because it's a it's a broadcast network.

每个人都必须知晓每一笔交易。

Everyone has to be aware of every transaction.

这种模式让你无需信任，提供了良好的保证——网络中的每个节点都是平等的，每个人都审计过完整的交易历史。但这种模式在压力下会崩溃。

And that model, which gives you the trustlessness, the nice guarantees where everyone's an equal peer on the network, everyone has audited the full history of the transactions, That model falls apart under stress.

小区块支持者的愿景是最终通过分层方式扩展，基础层处理结算类交易，而支付则主要发生在其他层级。

So the small blocker vision is that ultimately, you would scale in a layered approach with the base layer transactions being settlement style transactions, and, you know, payments happening at the other layers, basically.

这是普遍认同的吗？或者说，在很大程度是否认为小区块支持者已经赢得了这场辩论？

Is that universally agreed upon or, like, to a large degree agreed upon that the small blockers have won in this in this debate?

那么你认为当前局势处于什么阶段？

Well Where would you put the the current state of affairs?

2015年从比特币XT开始，曾出现过一波相互竞争的比特币实现方案。

There was a wave of competing Bitcoin implementations in starting in 2015 with Bitcoin XT.

实际上，中本聪离开时将管理权交给了Gavin Anderson，而他支持大区块提案。

Actually, Gavin Anderson, who was the guy that Satoshi handed the reins to when Satoshi left, Gavin supported this large block proposal.

因此这个方案未能达成共识，后来出现了比特币无限（Bitcoin Unlimited）。

And so that was that didn't achieve consensus, and then there was Bitcoin Unlimited.

之后发生了真正的硬分叉，当时大区块支持者无法在比特币本体上推进他们的提案，于是创建了竞争版本的比特币。

And then later on, there was a genuine hard fork, where the small blockers couldn't or the large blockers couldn't push through their proposals on Bitcoin itself, so they just created a competing version of Bitcoin.

你知道的。

You know.

顺便问一下，或许你可以评论下硬分叉和软分叉的区别？

So by the way, maybe you can comment on, but sort of hard fork versus a soft fork.

硬分叉是指不再兼容的情况。

A hard fork is when it's not no longer compatible.

正确的说法应该是什么？

What's the right way to put it?

它们不能在同一个区块链上运行吗？

They can't operate on the same blockchain?

同样适用于相同协议的情况。

The same with the same protocol.

是的。

Yeah.

定义它们有几种方式，而且这个问题也颇具争议性。

So there's a few ways to define them, and it's pretty it gets controversial as well.

但其中一种定义方式是：硬分叉是协议规则的扩展，而软分叉是协议规则的收缩。

But one one way to define it as a hard fork is a expansion of protocol rules, and a soft fork is a shrinking of protocol rules.

这个定义角度很有意思

That's an interesting way to find

这种说法不太直观，所以我不喜欢这种定义方式。

It's not very intuitive, so I don't like that way.

另一种定义是：硬分叉是向后不兼容的，而软分叉理论上应该是向后兼容的。

Another way is that a hard fork is backwards incompatible, whereas soft fork is, in theory, backwards compatible.

于是在2017年8月，大区块支持者终于忍无可忍，他们决定要对比特币进行硬分叉。

So in in August 2017, basically, the large blockers had had enough, and they said, we're gonna hard fork Bitcoin.

我们要创建一个克隆版本，一个比特币的替代版本——它与比特币共享相同的历史记录，但会完全分叉并创造新的未来。

We're gonna create a clone, an alternative version of Bitcoin, which has the same a shared history as Bitcoin itself, but you completely fork it and you create a new future.

不过，你知道的，当时所有在比特币上有余额的人，在分叉币比特币现金上也同样有余额。

And but, you know, everybody that had a balance on Bitcoin at the time also had a balance on the alternative coin, Bitcoin Cash.

所以这确实是

And so that was really

这就是它的名称。

That's what it's called.

比特币现金是硬分叉产物。

Bitcoin Cash is the hard fork.

那是其中之一。

That was one of them.

实际上还有更多。

There were more, actually.

我是说，那个什么比特币中本聪愿景BSV到底是什么鬼？

I mean What what the heck is Bitcoin Satoshi Satoshi's vision BSV?

比特币SV？

Bitcoin SV?

所以这些都是在讨论不断提高区块大小的上限限制。

So this is all talking about increasing the max the limit of the block size more and more and more.

是的。

Yeah.

这是他们想要推动的变革之一。

That was one of the changes they wanted to push through.

但BSV是比特币现金的分叉币。

But BSV was a fork of Bitcoin Cash.

所以比特币现金的硬分叉。

So Hard fork of Bitcoin Cash.

是啊。

Yeah.

所以现在有好几个大区块区块链在流通。

So and so now there's multiple big blocker blockchains floating around.

就像是

It's like

你对它们有什么看法？

What are your thoughts about them?

嗯，我本来

Well, I was

因为它们相当受欢迎。

because they're pretty popular.

抱歉打断一下。

Sorry to interrupt.

它们受欢迎吗？

Are they popular?

我是说，如果你看数据指标的话，其实并不。

I mean, if you look at the metrics, they're not.

而且它们没有交易量。

And they they don't trade.

我认为，它们的交易量都不到比特币本身价值的1%。

They, I think, each trade below 1% of the value of Bitcoin itself.

我明白了。

I see.

所以衡量流行度就是看他们实际上的，呃，价值？

So measuring popularity is, like, how much they actually oh, value?

价值。

Value.

交易频率。

Frequency of trade.

哦，不。

Oh, no.

不对。

No.

我是说，他们确实进行了不少交易，但无法判断这些交易是真实的还是人为操纵的。

I mean, they they do like a fair number of transactions, but there's an there's no way to know that that is genuine or just contrived.

懂了。

Got it.

要知道，我认为最终的真正衡量标准是市场将这些协议相对于比特币的定价。

You know, ultimately, the true measure, think, in my mind is just where the market prices these protocols relative to Bitcoin.

因为这就像是一个预测市场。

Because that's like a prediction market.

如果比特币现金的价格是比特币的50%，你可以说市场认为它有50%的可能性取代比特币。

If if Bitcoin Cash was being priced at 50% of Bitcoin, you could say the market has given it a 50% chance of unseating Bitcoin.

对吧？

Right?

但比特币现金和比特币SV——后者本身就是从比特币现金硬分叉出来的

But both Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV, which was a hard fork from Bitcoin Cash itself

嗯

Mhmm.

我认为它们现在的价值都远低于比特币的1%

Are well, I believe at this point, well below 1% of the value of Bitcoin.

那么在加密货币的排名中，它们大概在什么位置？

And in the so in like the ranking of different cryptocurrencies, what is it?

比特币、以太坊？

Bitcoin Ethereum?

以太坊的价值如何？

Is Ethereum in value?

对

Yeah.

第二或第三位吧

Second or two.

而比特币现金是排在前五的那个

And then Bitcoin Cash is the one that it's in the top five.

对吧？

Right?

但它的价值已经快速下跌了

But it's just a fast drop off.

老实说我最近没关注，但我觉得它已经进入某种半死不活的状态了

You know, I haven't checked lately, but I think it's it's reached kind of morbidity, you know.

它实际上并没有多少吸引力。

It doesn't really have much traction.

区块并未填满，所以整个价值主张就是，如果我们增加区块大小，就能获得所有这些商户的采用。

The blocks aren't full, so the whole value proposition was, you know, we will get all this merchant adoption if we increase the block size.

但这并没有实现。

That just didn't materialize.

在我看来，他们对采用如何运作以及区块链应该优化什么有着错误的愿景。

In my view, they had a flawed vision of how adoption works and what blockchain should optimize for.

也许你能在节目中找到一位比特币现金支持者，他们会给你不同的答案。

Maybe maybe you get a Bitcoin Cash supporter on the show, they'll give you a different answer.

但是，是的，完全披露一下，你知道，我有我的同情心，我认为小区块派确实赢得了这场小冲突。

But, yeah, full disclosure, you know, I have my sympathies, and I think the small blocker is won that skirmish for sure.

所以目前还没有商户采用等等。

So at this time, there's no merchant adoption and so on.

所以它的愿景，至少目前存在的整个理由还没有实现。

So it's kinda it's vision, the whole reason for existence for at least for now hasn't materialized.

因此，这可能表明，嗯，这是一个迹象，也许这是实现可扩展性的错误方式。

And so that's that's a indication as possible that, well, it's a sign that perhaps that's the wrong way to accomplish the scalability.

嗯，你知道，首先，我认为分层扩展模型绝对是正确的。

Well, you know, first of all, I think the layered scaling model is definitely definitely correct.

我的意思是，考虑到区块链的限制，这绝对是这些事物必须运作的方式。

I mean, that's absolutely the way these things have to work, given the constraints of blockchains.

什么是分层扩展模型？

What is the layered scaling model?

这正是所有支付系统扩展的方式，无论是区块链还是其他技术。

It's really how all payment systems scale, blockchain or otherwise.

我认为很多人不明白这一点，就是在常规支付领域没有与基础层扩展等同的概念。

And I think a lot of people don't understand this, is that there is no equivalent to scaling of the base layer in the regular payment space.

这种情况根本不会发生。

That totally doesn't happen.

它们都是建立在分层架构之上的。

All of them are built on layers.

比如Visa就像是支付栈的第五层，最终依赖于联邦电汇、CHIPS、ACH这类公用事业级清算系统，本质上都是银行间结算系统。

So Visa is like the fifth layer in the payment stack that ultimately depends on these utility scale settlement systems like Fedwire, chips, ACH, basically interbank settlement systems.

所以这些系统虽然处理速度慢，但具有极高的结算确定性。

So you've got these slow moving, but high assurance settlement systems.

联邦电汇可能是最重要的，你知道的，通常电汇就是使用联邦电汇系统。

Fedwire is probably the number one, you know, like when you send a wire that's using the Fedwire system typically.

在这之上，还有银行，然后是支付处理商。

On top of that, you know, you have banks and then you have payment processors.

然后层层叠加，最终形成这些快速支付系统——Venmo、PayPal、信用卡、借记卡、Visa等等。

And then you build up these layers and layers and layers, and then you have these fast payments, you know, Venmo, PayPal, credit, debit, Visa, you name it.

这些支付在发生时并非最终结算。

Those payments are not final when they occur.

比如信用卡交易在90到120天内都不会最终确认。

You know, a credit card transaction will not be final for ninety to a hundred and twenty days.

所以

So

这真令人着迷。

That's fascinating.

你们已经将支付、金融消息和结算解耦了。

You've decoupled the payment, the financial message, and the settlement.

这些是不同的概念。

Those are distinct concepts.

而且结算是以延迟方式进行的。

And the settlement happens on a deferred basis.

所以这就是实现可扩展性的方式——通过处理大量消息，但这些消息很长时间都不会结算。

So that's how you get scalability, is you have lots and lots of messages, but that they don't settle for a long time.

它们可能会以净额结算，在日终进行结算。

They might settle on a net basis, on an end of day basis.

但这就是它实际运作的方式。

But so that's really how it works.

然后还有Fedwire系统，平均每笔交易金额达数百万美元，每天只有几十万笔交易。

And then you have Fedwire where your average transactions in the millions of dollars, and there's only a few 100,000 transactions a day.

它有点像银行间结算网络。

It's sort of an interbank settlement network.

所以这也是我认为比特币会如何发展的愿景。

So that's my vision for how I think Bitcoin will develop too.

比特币基础层本身是缓慢移动、高确定性的最终结算网络，当你需要向地球另一端不信任的人汇款，希望支付能在短时间内最终确认，且交易双方都知道这是最终结果时，你就会使用它。

Bitcoin itself on the base layer is the slow moving, high assurance final settlement network, where if you're sending money to the other side of the globe to someone you don't trust, where you want that payment to be final in a short period of time, and both counterparties know it's final, then you would use that.

但如果你想买咖啡，可以在第二层网络上完成。

But if you wanted to buy coffee, you could do it on a second, you know, second layer.

闪电网络是一种方式。

Lightning would be one way.

现在有很多侧链。

There's a bunch of side chains now.

或者你也可以选择更中心化的解决方案。

Or you could use, you know, a more centralized solution if you wanted.

这是个深刻的概念——在交易场景中，无论是买咖啡还是其他商品交易，大多数时候基础诚信行为（人类社会似乎确实建立在大多数人诚实的基础上）意味着交易通常不会出问题。

It's kind of a profound idea that in the space of transactions, when you're buying coffee or buying anything really from merchant or exchanging goods and all those kinds of things, that most of the time, like basic honest behavior, human behavior, which it does appear that most of our societies is based on the fact that we're all most of us are honest, is like stuff is not going to go wrong when you do this transaction.

你只需要底层协议，不管是比特币还是信用卡系统（我忘了术语），它只用于验证和解决纠纷或可疑行为。

And you only need like the base layer, whether it's Bitcoin, it's I forget the terms you use for the for the credit card version, but you need that just to verify, just to like resolve any disagreements or shady shit.

对。

Yeah.

这种情况确实很罕见，所以完全可以用低频的小区块辩论机制来处理，处理速度远低于交易速度。

And and that's a really rare occurrence, so it's okay for that to be handled in this in a small block debate, handled at a rate that's much much lower than the rate of the transactions.

这其实是个很有趣的观点：我们花钱时，大多数时候并没有实际交换货币。

That's a kind of it's a really interesting idea that when we spend money, we didn't actually exchange the money most of the time.

没错。

Yeah.

大多数交易发生时，你并没有获得最终结算。

Most of the time, you're not getting final settlement when you do a transaction.

这种情况往往利弊共存。

And oftentimes, that causes there are there's pluses and minuses.

好处是如果使用Visa这类信用网络，效率会极高。

On the plus side, you have huge efficiency if you use a credit network like Visa.

但这正是信用卡名称的由来。

But that it's in the name credit.

对吧？

Right?

Visa是在向你提供信用额度。

Visa is extending you credit.

对吧？

Right?

他们某种程度上是在向商家担保你的信誉。

They're kinda guaranteeing your reputation to the merchant.

但欺诈行为时有发生。

But fraud happens all the time.

对吧？

Right?

欺诈总是存在，因为交易具有可逆性。

There's always fraud, because you have this reversibility.

对吧？

Right?

所以你可以对商家实施欺诈。

And so you can, you know, engage in fraud against a merchant.

如果是最终结算，就没有欺诈的可能。

If you have a final settlement, there's no possibility for fraud.

这就是商家愿意接受比特币的一个原因——一旦收到比特币付款并交付商品或服务，这笔支付就无法撤销。

So that's one reason merchants kinda like accepting Bitcoin because once you receive an inbound Bitcoin payment and you deliver some good or service, you know, that payment can't be reversed.

但坦率地说，我们日常进行的大多数交易并不需要那些强有力的最终结算保证。

But frankly, most of the transactions we, you know, undertake on a daily basis do not require those strong assurances of final settlement.

有一个例外，那就是实物现金。

There's one exception, which is physical cash.

无论是实物现金还是类似现金的产品OpenKNIME，你实际上获得的是最终结算。

With physical cash or the OpenKNIME, a cash like product, you actually are getting final settlement.

嗯。

Mhmm.

但在线上，美元体系中的大多数网上银行交易、大多数P2P数字钱包交易，它们根本算不上真正的最终结算。

But online, most online banking transactions, most p two p digital wallet transactions in the dollar system, they're not really final at all.

你提到了闪电网络。

You mentioned Lightning Lightning Network.

它是什么？

What is it?

你对此有何看法？

What are your thoughts on it?