BIP444是对比特币的攻击吗？| 罗伯·汉密尔顿

但如果仅以节点数量为例，大约占20%。

But if you just go from, like, node count as an example, roughly 20%.

显然，并非所有人都会支持这个软分叉。

Obviously, not all those people will be on board with the soft fork.

假设它能获得15%的吸引力，15%的吸引力。

So let's say it gets, like, 15% attraction, 15% attraction.

那么接下来会发生什么？

Like, what happens then?

因此，分叉将在某个区块高度激活。

So the fork would activate at a certain block height.

我目前是按照提案的原文来执行的。

I am taking the proposal as it's written right now.

达森已经讨论过改变激活时间和其他细节，我认为如果你说'嘿'，这就不太明智。

Dathan has already talked about changing when it activates and other details, which I think is just ill advised if you're saying, hey.

我正在发布一些代码。

I'm putting out some code.

你应该会预料到这一点。

You'd be expecting it.

就是说，你现在必须协调好它。

Like, you have to now coordinate it.

他目前的提案是2月1日。

His proposal currently is February 1.

一个大约在2月1日的区块高度。

A block height that's roughly February 1.

对吧？

Right?

因为区块时间从来不会精确到十分钟以上。

Because block time is never exactly over ten minutes.

但如果你选择2月1日左右，大约就是激活的时间。

But if you so February 1, roughly, is when this would activate.

接下来会发生的是，当矿工找到一个区块时，网络中某些节点会有所变化。

And what would happen is that you would now have certain nodes on the network when a miner finds a block.

问题是，那个进入的区块是否遵循了四四四四规则？

The question is, that block that comes in, is it following the four four four four rules?

对吧？

Right?

它是否遵循了新客户的规则？

Is it is it following the rules of of the new client?

如果是这样，一切照旧。

If so, nothing's changed.

所谓链分裂的情况是，假设矿工没有升级而新区块被生产出来，四四四四节点会拒绝该区块并称其无效，因为它违反了其中一条规则。

Where you would have something called a chain split is that, let's say, the miners have not upgraded and the new block gets produced, you would have a chain split because the four four four nodes would reject that block saying it's invalid because it violates one of these rules.

由于它违反了这些规则之一，网络中的部分节点会接受该区块，而其他节点则不会。

And because it violates one of these rules, you would be in a position where some nodes on the network would accept the block and some would not.

此时，矿工面临的问题是：他们将基于哪条区块链的末端（最新区块）进行构建？

And at that point, it becomes a question for the miners what block chain tip, the most recent block, are they going to build on?

矿工一次只能基于一条区块链进行构建。

Miners can only build on one blockchain at a time.

他们无法同时挖两条不同的链。

They can't dual mine two different ones.

因此你将面临一个难题：接下来会发生什么？

So you would then have a conundrum of what would happen.

这里涉及大量博弈论分析，但关键决策点是：如果这个激活客户端启动后，是否会发现新区块。

And there's a bunch of game theory we can go through there, but that would be the decision point is a new block would get found if the if this activation client launched.

代码已经发布了。

The code has been released.

有趣的是，就像比特币技术传说那样，代码被推送到了UASF组织，2017年Shalin Fry正是在那里发布了UASF客户端。

Funny enough, like Bitcoin technical lore, it was the code was pushed to the UASF organization, which is where in 2017, Shalin Fry put out the UASF client.

所以这个整整八年无人问津的代码库，刚刚因为新代码得到了更新。

So this same exact repo that hasn't been touched in eight years had just gotten an update with this new code.

我推测可能是某个曾参与USF工作的人（众所周知Luke参与过这些工作）交出了组织权限，让Nathan推送了那段代码。

I would speculate that someone who previously was involved with the USF efforts, which Luke is known to have been involved in those, would have given up access to the org to let Nathan push that code.

我不知道。

I don't know.

但这会是条合理的直接怀疑线索，因为Luke曾是UASF客户端的主要推动者。

But that would be a reasonable straight line suspicion because Luke was a very big proponent in putting forward the UASF client.

是啊。

Yeah.

我是说，我们当然无法确定，但这个结论似乎很容易得出。

I mean, I I we obviously we can't know, but that seems like an easy conclusion to draw.

对。

Right.

所以如果真发生了，显然部分算力很可能会流向这个新版本。

So if that happened and, obviously, a proportion of the hash rate would likely go to this new version.

比如可以预见某些大型矿池可能会迁移过去。

Like, you would imagine some of the ocean miners would probably move over.

显然这有点像...哦，我们会不会发展到只看最长链尖胜出的局面？

Obviously, this is kind of it is oh, do we get to the point where this is just, like, longest chain tip wins?

或者如果今天我们所知的比特币链上新增30个区块后，比特币4.04版本链上又发现了30个区块，会发生什么？

Or or what happens if, say, 30 blocks get added to Bitcoin as we know it today, and then 30 blocks later, another one is found on Bitcoin $4.04 4 version.

这是个重要的区别。

So that's an important distinction.

对吧？

Right?

为了计算方便，我们就假设区块高度是100吧。

To make the math easy, let's just say it's at I'm just gonna say BlockHide a 100.

对吧？

Right?

所以如果区块高度...比方说，我们倒回去讲。

So if BlockHide a let's say, let's just we're going back.

就是说，把区块高度设为100只是为了方便表述数字。

Like, it's at BlockHide a 100 just to make the numbers easier to say.

在区块高度100时，这个功能会激活。

At block height a 100, this activates.

假设我们按照新规则挖到了第130个区块。

And let's say we get to block 130 with these new rules.

即使第131个区块符合BIP444协议，BIP444节点也会拒绝它，因为100到130号区块是无效的。

Block one thirty one, even if it is BIP four four four compliant, the BIP four four four nodes are gonna reject it because blocks 100 through 130 are invalid.

所以实际上会出现两条独立的链在构建。

So what you would actually have is two separate chains being built.

对。

Yep.

那么问题就变成了：算力和矿池实际在挖哪条链？

And the question then becomes, where is the hash rate and the mining pools actually working on?

我们目前从矿池获得的唯一公开声明是，占全网12%算力的F2Pool表示他们不会运行这个。

The only public statement we've gotten from any mining pool is f two pool, which is 12% of the network, has said they're not gonna run this.

对吧？

Right?

博弈论角度来说——这里我要为UASF支持者辩护一下——UASF支持者主张的核心论点是：即便初期UASF链缺乏足够算力，但因其规则更严格，假设经过10个区块后，其他矿工若转向UASF链，实质上将回滚整个非UASF区块链。

The game theory that would be and this is for me to charitably steel man the proponents of the UASF, this UASF's proponents to champion it, like steel man it, is that even if initially the fork the UASF chain does not have enough hash rate, there is a game theoretic outcome where because their rules are tighter and let's say, like, 10 blocks goes by, what you're gonna have happen, is that if the other miners went over to the UASF chain, they would basically roll back the entire non USF blockchain.

具体过程是：假设那30个区块被挖出后，所有矿工突然转向另一侧开始挖矿追赶，最终这条链会成为最长链末端。

Because what would happen is you let's say those 30 blocks get found, and then all the miners push over to the other side, and they start mining and catching up and and they and that becomes the longest chain tip.

违反USF规则挖出的30个区块会消失，因为所有节点都会拒绝它们，这些区块随即失效。

The 30 blocks that were mined violating the USF rules disappear because they're all the nodes reject them and they're no longer invalid.

这就是所谓的链重组（reorg）。

This is what's called a reorg, a reorganization.

通常这种情况只在51%攻击的讨论中才会提及。

Typically, it's never really talked about outside of, like, a 51% attack.

比如，掌握51%算力的人可以在这边创建自己的区块链，然后一次性发布所有区块，从而抹除另一条链上发生的所有交易。

Like, you could have 51% of the hash rate, make your own blockchain over here, and then publish it all, and then you would wipe out all of the transactions that happened on the other chain.

但UASF客户端的博弈论在于：你通过收紧规则，使得你发现的区块在非UASF节点上也有效，这才可能触发重组动态。

The game theory, though, is if you're running a UASF client is that you're doing a tightening of the rules, which means that all blocks that you would find are also valid on the non UASF nodes, and that's where you can get this reorg dynamic to happen.

关键问题在于算力转移的速度，目前我还没看到任何矿池或大型矿工公开支持这个方案。

It's really a question of how attach rate would be going over there, and I haven't seen any mining pool or large scale miner come out in support of this yet.

那么如果真的发生这种情况，我们会面临非常大的链重组吗？

So if that did happen, though, would we be in for, like, very large reorgs?

是的。

Yeah.

那么问题就在于这将是一次非常大规模的重组。

So then the question it would be a very large reorg.

让我们以30个区块为例来说明。

Let let's take that 30 block example.

对吧？

Right?

那将需要大约五小时的重组时间。

That would be a five hour roughly five hour reorg.

如果每十分钟一个区块，每小时六个区块，30个区块就是五小时，六乘以五得三十，这意味着需要五小时来回滚链上历史记录。

If it's one block every ten minutes, six blocks an hour, 30 blocks is five hours, six times five thirty, that would be a five hour rollback of the on chain history.

目前对此的应对措施是所谓的URSF（用户拒绝软分叉）。

Now what can be done as a counter to this is what's called a URSF, user rejected soft fork.

实际上你可以这样做：在UASF激活后选择一个区块，找到某个区块并声明我们正在设置检查点，这样要让这个区块存在于我的区块链上，在区块高度101处，你必须包含这个特定区块哈希。

You effectively what you could do is just pick a block after the UASF activates, find a block and say we're checkpointing so that for this to be on my blockchain, you at block height 101, you have to have this block hash.

而这个区块哈希违反了444规则。

And this block hash violates the four four four rule.

因此如果发生URSF，实际上会导致网络永久性分裂。

So you effectively then if a URSF were to happen, that would permanently split the network.

但即便是提出URSF，你首先必须真正看到UASF存在威胁或确实可信的需求，以及有拒绝它的理由。

But to even put forward a URSF, you'd have to actually see a threat or a real credible demand for the UASF to begin with and a reason to want to reject it.

坦白说，我目前还没有看到任何人表示支持。

And I haven't to be transparent, I haven't seen the support yet from anyone.

就目前情况而言，你是否认为这永远不会发生？

So as it stands right now, do you just think this will never happen?

就目前我所掌握的信息来看，我认为这不会发生。

As of today, with the information I have, I don't see this happening.

这是我个人的看法。

That's my personal opinion.

我曾尝试评估大家的兴趣。

I have tried gauging interest.

上一次提出一个不那么有争议的UASF（用户激活软分叉）还是在2017年。

And so the last time a UASF that wasn't that a contentious UASF was proposed was back in 2017.

那次被称为SegWit2x。

This was called SegWit two x.

它本质上是uSegWit和区块大小翻倍的折中方案。

It was basically a compromise with uSegWit and doubling the block size.

对吧？

Right?

它包含了几项内容。

It was a couple of things.

在SegWit2x期间，市场上出现了大量关于此事是否会发生猜测。

And with SegWit two x, what you had happened was there was a lot of speculation on if this was gonna happen or not.

然后，没错，Bitfinex甚至为这个UASF代币的价格开设了期货市场。

And then bit, yeah, Bitfinex listed a futures market for what the price of this UASF token would be worth.

最终这事不了了之。

It ultimately fizzled out.

具体来说，当时的情况是：如果你在Bitfinex上持有1个比特币，你不仅能保留这个比特币，还会获得这个期货，你可以卖出期货来购买更多比特币。

There was like, what people would do, just to be clear, is if you had one Bitcoin on Bitfinex, you now have one Bitcoin, and you'd also get this future, and you'd be able to sell that future and buy more Bitcoin.

对吧？

Right?

这是一个强烈的信号，因为矿工们不会愿意在代币价值低于另一条链的区块链上挖矿。

And that was a strong signal because the miners are not going to want to mine on a blockchain where the token is worth less than the other chain.

如果出现分叉，你需要判断哪一条是比特币，矿工们更可能选择能让他们赚更多钱的那条链。

If you have a split and you have to figure out which is Bitcoin, the miners are more likely to build on the one that's gonna make them more money.

如果所有人都在抛售UASF分叉币，不管出于什么原因，他们都不会愿意以10美分的价格挖矿。

And if everyone's selling a UASF fork, they're not gonna even whatever reasons, they're not gonna wanna mine for 10¢ on the dollar.

对吧？

Right?

所以我一直在试图理解，这也是经济需求的一种表现。

So I've been trying to suss out it's also just an expression of economic demand.

你可能会听到'经济节点'这个术语。

May hear the term economic nodes.

你在AWS上启动一万个节点并不重要，关键在于这些节点的吞吐量和验证处理能力。

It doesn't matter that you have 10,000 nodes spun up on AWS is how much throughput and how much, like, validation is that node processing.

比如Coinbase的节点就重要得多，因为这些节点要验证他们托管的所有比特币以及在交易所里的UTXO集合。

So, like, the nodes at Coinbase, way more important because they're those nodes are validating millions of Bitcoin in the UTXO set from everything they custody and have on their exchange.

这本质上比那些只在AWS上启动节点却没有资金关联的人重要得多。

That is inherently more important than someone who just spun up a node on AWS and doesn't have any funds tied to it.

对吧？

Right?

期货市场的表现就是经济参与者能够表达他们更看重什么的能力。

And the expression of a futures market is the ability for economic actors to say, what do they value more?

矿工仍可选择开采任意链，但用户激活软分叉的提案带来了市场不确定性，因此这为他们提供了价格信息。

Miners can still choose to mine on whatever chain they want, but it gives them price information because the proposal of a user activated soft fork brings market uncertainty.

你不知道哪一方会胜出。

You don't know which side's gonna win.

你不知道会发生什么。

You don't know what's gonna happen.

人们是否会因为不确定而提前抛售？这种不确定性给比特币网络架构带来了极大的不稳定性。

Are people gonna sell early because they're not sure like, it provides a lot of instability just to uncertainty of Bitcoin as a network architecture.

比特币通常引以为豪的是像TikTok那样每十分钟准时产生一个区块。

And that's usually what Bitcoin's pride it on is like TikTok next block every ten minutes block's gonna happen.

只有在这种共识斗争中才会出现这种不确定性。

And only in these kind of consensus fights do you have this uncertainty.

期货市场正是试图为这种不确定性定价的方式。

And the futures market is a way to try and price that uncertainty.

同时，如果你相信这种用户激活软分叉，期货市场也是目前购买UASF比特币的唯一途径，因为它尚未上链。

It also gives an option for if you are a believer in this user activated soft fork, the only way today that you can buy u a UASF Bitcoin is with the futures market because it doesn't exist on chain yet.

所以如果你今天购买比特币，你就是在为两条链提供经济支持。

So if if you buy Bitcoin today, you are buying economic support for both chains.

记住，在区块高度100激活时——假设在第99个区块时你有10个比特币，一旦发生链分裂，你将在分裂后的两条链上各获得10个比特币。

Because remember, in that block height 100 activation, let's say in block 99, you have 10 Bitcoin and there's a chain split, you get 10 Bitcoin on each side of the of the chain split.

因此购买比特币意味着你正在为整个网络提供经济表达。

So if you buy Bitcoin, you're giving economic expression to the entire network.

但如果你想明确表态，嘿。

But if you wanna explicitly signal, hey.

我真心想支持这次UASF行动。

I really want to support this UASF effort.

唯一能真正购买并展示对其经济需求信号的方式就是通过期货市场。

The only way you can actually buy and show a signal economic demand for that is through a futures market.

如果能同时降低税单并囤积比特币，你会怎么做？

What if you could lower your tax bill and stack Bitcoin at the same time?

通过使用Blockware挖矿比特币，你完全可以做到。

Well, by mining Bitcoin with Blockware, you can.

最新出台的税收政策允许美国矿工在单个纳税年度全额抵扣其挖矿硬件成本。

New tax guidelines from the big beautiful bill allow American miners to write off a 100% of the cost of their mining hardware in a single tax year.

没错。

That's right.

100%全额抵扣。

A 100% write off.

所以如果你有10万美元的资本利得或收入，就可以购买价值10万美元的矿机并全额抵税。

So if you have a $100,000 in capital gains or income, you can purchase a $100,000 of miners and offset it entirely.

Blockware的矿机托管服务让你无需动手就能立即开始挖矿。

Blockware's mining as a service enables you to start mining Bitcoin right now without lifting a finger.

Blockware包办一切，从矿机安保到获取低价电力再到矿池配置。

Blockware handles everything from securing the miners to sourcing low cost power to configuring the pool.

他们提供全流程服务。

They do it all.

你每天都能以折扣价囤积比特币，还能在报税季省下一大笔钱。

You get to stack Bitcoin at a discount every single day while also saving big come tax season.

立即访问mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd开始使用。

Get started today by going to mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd.

当然，这些内容均不构成税务建议。

Of course, none of this is tax advice.

咨询您的会计或税务顾问以了解这些规则如何适用于您，然后前往mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd，每购买一台托管矿机即可获得一周免费托管和电力服务。

Speak to your accountant or tax adviser to understand how these rules apply to you, and then head over to mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd, and you'll get one week of free hosting and electricity with each hosted miner purchased.

《比特币的作为》由业界巨擘Iron赞助播出——这家纳斯达克上市的最大比特币矿企100%使用可再生能源。

What Bitcoin did is brought to you by the massive legends, Iron, the largest Nasdaq listed Bitcoin miner using 100% renewable energy.

Iron不仅为比特币网络提供动力，还以可再生能源为支撑，为人工智能领域提供尖端计算资源。

Iron are not just powering the Bitcoin network, they're also providing cutting edge computing resources for AI, all backed by renewable energy.

我们与其创始人Dan和Will合作已久，对其价值观深感钦佩，尤其是他们对当地社区和可持续算力的承诺。

We've been working with their founders, Dan and Will, for quite some time now and have been really impressed with their values, especially their commitment to local communities and sustainable computing power.

无论您想挖矿比特币还是利用AI算力，Iron都在树立行业标杆。

So whether you're interested in mining Bitcoin or harnessing AI compute power, Iron is setting the standard.

访问iron.com（即iren.com）了解更多信息。

Visit iron.com to learn more, which is iren.com.

本节目由River赞助播出，他们刚推出一款能自动逢低买入的酷炫新产品。

This episode is brought to you by River, and they've just launched a very cool new product where you can automatically buy every price dip.

他们的零手续费定期购买是积累比特币财富的有效方式，现在还能在订单执行时遇到价格下跌时追加购买最多100%的比特币。

Their zero fee recurring buys are a proven way to build wealth with Bitcoin, and you can now supercharge them and buy up to a 100% more Bitcoin if the price is dipping at the time of your order.

这是以更低价格增持比特币的利器，未动用资金还可赚取3.75%的比特币利息。

It's a great tool to buy more Bitcoin at lower prices, and while your cash is waiting to be deployed, you earn 3.75% interest on it paid in Bitcoin.

River以安全为核心构建，是美国唯一提供储备金证明的比特币交易所。

River is built to last with security at its core and is the only Bitcoin exchange in The US with proof of reserves.

要开户，请访问river.com/wbd，购买时最高可获得100美元的比特币奖励。

To open an account, go to river.com/wbd and earn up to a $100 in Bitcoin when you buy.

网址是river.com/wbd。

That's river.com/wbd.

本期节目由Bitcoin Mina赞助播出。

This episode is brought to you by Bitcoin Mina.

12月，我将与10,000名比特币爱好者一同前往阿布扎比参加Bitcoin Mina大会。

On December, I'll be in Abu Dhabi for Bitcoin Mina along with 10,000 other Bitcoiners.

大会阵容豪华，有200多位演讲者分享来自全球的比特币见解与创新。

There's an amazing lineup of over 200 speakers sharing Bitcoin insights and innovation from all over the world.

若想享受终极VIP体验，包括专属社交活动及高端餐饮，请购买鲸鱼通行证，鲸鱼之夜派对甚至包含冲浪项目，所以你知道我肯定会去。

And if you're looking for the ultimate VIP experience with exclusive networking plus premium food and drink, then grab the Whale Pass, and the Whale Night Party even includes surfing, so you know I'm gonna be there.

门票现已开售。

Tickets are on sale now.

结账时使用代码WBD可享所有票种9折优惠。

Use code WBD to get 10% off at checkout on all past types.

官网是mina.b.tc，使用代码WBD可享9折。

The website is mina.b.tc, and use code WBD for 10 off.

是啊。

Yeah.

2017年时我还是比特币新手。

So I was quite new to Bitcoin in 2017.

我2016年入圈，但涉足不深，当时只是勉强跟上了区块大小争论的尾声。

I got I got in in 2016, but I was pretty light touch, and I I was just following along sort of the tail end of the block size wars.

直到Bitfinex推出期货市场后，我才真正看清实际需求所在，从而对市场走向有了信心。

And it wasn't really until Bitfinex launched that futures market, and you could actually see where real demand was that I felt any kind of confidence in in which way this was gonna fall.

我觉得很有趣的是，我明显看到你在推特上试图建立这些期货市场，并试图怂恿人们跟你对赌。

And I find it funny that I I've obviously seen you on Twitter trying to build these futures markets and trying to sort of goad people into betting you.

人们称其为法币游戏，但我觉得人们要么忘了，要么不明白这在2017年曾是个非常重要的市场动态。

People are calling it like fiat games, but, like, I I think people either forget or don't understand that this was a really important dynamic in 2017.

我觉得这是比特币圈的一种现象——人们有时会把‘法币’这个词套用在保险上。

I think it's a thing that people in Bitcoin do, where the term fiat I get in sometimes with insurance.

保险就是法币。

Insurance is fiat.

问题是，保险比法币早出现几千年。

It's like, well, insurance predates fiat by thousands of years.

抱歉。

Sorry.

我的意思是，保险这个概念比法币货币出现得早得多。

Like like, this predates fiat currency as a concept.

你不能把不喜欢或不理解的东西都称为法币。

You can't just call things you don't like or don't understand to be fiat.

词语的词源学意义不是这样随便定义的。

That's not how the etymology of words even mean anything.

对吧？

Right?

期货市场也是，我认为这是个非常重要的观点。

The futures market too, I think this is a really important point.

我要再次强调，目前唯一能经济性地表达意愿、向矿工表明分叉前哪条链更有价值的方式就是期货市场。

I'll hammer it home again is that the only way today you can economically express interest to wanna signal to miners that this is the chain that has more value before the fork happens is a futures market.

如果你今天购买比特币，你就是在经济上同时支持两条链。

If you buy Bitcoin today, you're economically supporting both sides of the chain.

如果你想做空非UASF链并通过经济手段支持UASF链，期货市场就是途径。

If you wanna actually short the non UASF chain and economically signal and support the UASF chain is a futures market.

归根结底，矿工追求的是利润最大化。

And miners, at the end of the day are profit maximizing.

这就像人性自私和逐利一样根深蒂固。

That's just as baked into, like, being selfish and and maximizing.

这就是比特币的运作方式。

That's just how Bitcoin works.

如果你真想有效发声并影响共识，这是至关重要的一点。

And if you're going to actually, want to try and meaningfully sway your voice and consensus, that's an important thing.

否则就会重蹈比特币现金分叉的覆辙——虽然这与期货市场无关。

Because otherwise, you're gonna have happen is like when Bitcoin Cash forked off, which is unrelated to the futures market.

当时UASF即将激活，于是比特币现金就分叉了。

But UASF was gonna activate, and so Bitcoin Cash forked off.

人们直接把比特币现金链上的币卖掉，换成了更多比特币。

People just took their Bitcoin Cash chain, sold it, and bought more Bitcoin.

嗯。

Mhmm.

所以回避期货市场并不能解决问题。

So, like, avoiding the futures market doesn't solve the problem.

如果发生链分叉，他们将会基于自身利益自由进行经济交易，无论你是否乐意。

If the chain split hap like, the will freely economically transact in their own self interest whether you like it or not.

你希望期货市场存在，是因为你想避免混乱的分裂，而链分叉在离婚时可以通过经济信号提前明确预示。

You want the futures market to exist because you want to avoid a messy breakup and a chain split in a divorce it could be clearly economically signaled ahead of time.

UASF（用户激活软分叉）是市场不确定性事件。

UASFs are a market uncertainty event.

期货市场为此带来了价格确定性。

Futures markets bring price certainty to that.

对吧？

Right?

这不是赌博。

It's not gambling.

这很有趣，因为正如我在此表明的，我高度确信这不会发生。

It's interesting too because, as I've signaled as I said here, I have very high conviction that it's not, that it's not going to happen.

所以对我来说，我不太认为这是赌博。

So for me, I don't view it much as gambling.

我认为这是确定的事。

I view it as a certainty.

我一直非常公开透明地表示——这也是市场信号的另一个特点——有很多人会在推特上作秀。

And I've been very publicly transparent for there are a lot and this is the other thing too with a market signal.

尤其在当今大语言模型时代，人们只需几行代码就能制造巨大的社会影响力，这种不对称性尤为明显。

A lot of people will posture on Twitter, especially in the world and day now of, like, large language models and, like, the asymmetry of people can kind of, like, with a couple of lines of code make a really big social imprint.

LLM代币实际上无法参与期货市场，因为你需要比特币。

The LLM tokens can't actually participate in the futures market because you need Bitcoin.

对吧？

Right?

所以实际上持有比特币就是你表达这一观点的方式。

So actually having Bitcoin is how you actually express this.

我，我在链上构建了一个期货市场，虽然我们不需要深入讨论，但它使用了Taproot和OP_NOTIF操作码，还有不同的时间锁。

I, I built in on chain futures market, which we don't have get into, but it uses taproot and it uses op not if, and you have different time locks.

所以你可以在没有托管方的情况下，无需信任地验证并表达一个非链上期货市场，而且我已经完全开源了它。

So you can, without a custodian, trustlessly verify and express a nonchains future market, and I totally open sourced it.

所以任何人都可以自由使用，并在上面开发有趣的功能。

So anyone can go run off and, like, have fun building on it.

这个机制能运作的原因是，如果比特币按现状继续存在，那些币就会被冻结。

And and the reason that works is because if Bitcoin, as we know right now, is to continue to exist, then those coins get frozen.

没错。

That's correct.

简单来说，链上合约的运作方式主要有两种支出路径。

So the way the the on chain contract works is that to simplify it, there's two main spending paths.

一种是违反BIP444规则的支出路径，这个路径会在五月到期。

You have a spending path which violates the rules of BIP four four four, and that expires, let's say, in May.

另一种是遵循BIP444规则的支出路径，然后...抱歉。

And then you have a path that follows the rules of BIP four four four that, and then I'm sorry.

我知道这不是官方名称，但这样称呼很符合传播学规律。

I know it's not officially called that, but it's just very catchy memetically to call it that.

所以如果UASF未被强制执行的那一方在五月到期，而强制执行UASF的那一方则在六月到期。

So if the UASF the the side that the UASF is not enforced and that expires in May, and then the side that enforces the UASF expires in June.

如果你认为UASF客户端会生效，那你就不在乎我能提前一个月动用资金，因为这些交易将因共识无效，毕竟我有个‘选择退出’的选项在里面。

Now if you think the UASF client's gonna work, you don't care that I can spend the money sooner a month before you because those will be consensus invalid because I have an opt not if in there.

这是一种无需信任的方式，你能在链上最终确定并结算，同时明确表达你的意向。

So it's a way you can actually on chain trustlessly, finalize and settle knowing that you can actually express your interest.

而且你还能暗示赔率。

And you can also can imply odds.

对吧？

Right?

所以我最初的提议是：我出1个比特币，别人也出1个，这样就是五五开的赔率。

So my initial proposal was, I'll put up 1 Bitcoin, someone else puts up 1 Bitcoin, and then you have a fifty fifty odds.

我可以出2个比特币而你出1个，这意味着你只需要在33%的情况下判断正确，从数学上就能成立。

I could put up 2 Bitcoin and you put up 1 Bitcoin, which then means you only need to be right 33% of the time, right, mathematically for it to express.

目前还没人接受我的提议。

No one has taken me up on it yet.

很多人会说，这根本就是赌博。

There's been a lot of, well, that's gambling.

对此我的回应是：我信心十足，而且想现在就卖出UASF币。

And to that, I say, it's like, I'm very highly confident, and I wanna be able to sell the UASF coins today.

我非常希望今天就锁定卖出价。

I would love to lock lock in a sell today.

我不想等到上交易所后再折腾UTXO，还要面对区块产出的各种不确定性。

I don't wanna have to wait to get on exchange and and move UTXOs around then and deal with all the uncertainty of block production.

我今天就想卖掉它们。

I just wanna sell them today.

因此我试图提前拉动需求，但我觉得很多支持UASF的人并不赞同这点，因为这是个关键环节。

And so I'm trying to pull the demand forward, which I think a lot of the people who are on the side of the UASF aren't a fan of because this is an important piece.

如果你要推动UASF，就需要投入全部精力——提交到开发者邮件列表、写成BIP提案，还要试图让矿工激活并完成升级。

If you promote, you wanna do a UASF, and you put all this effort and put it on the developer mailing list and on a BIP, and you're trying to get miners to activate and trying to do update.

即便行动失败，你也不会损失任何比特币。

If the effort fails, you haven't lost any Bitcoin.

你实际上是在非对称地消耗网络资源、时间以及人力，试图协调一个充满敌意的争议性用户激活软分叉。

You get to kind of, like, asymmetrically attack the networks, the resources, the time, and resources of people to try and coordinate a hostile, contentious user activated soft fork.

但如果最终彻底失败无人响应，一切停滞，你只能灰溜溜地回到主链——反正你半枚比特币都没损失。

But then if it all fails and no one minds on it and, like, just everything just stops and you you come back with your tail between your legs back onto the main chain, you haven't lost any Bitcoin.

所以这件事本质上...期货市场其实正在给出经济成本评估。

So it's something that anyone so the futures market is actually putting an economic costing.

哦？你真觉得这事能成？

Oh, you really believe this is gonna happen?

干就完了。

Let's do it.

BIP提案者Dayton Ohm原则上同意与我合作，但尚未敲定具体细节。

So the proposer of the BIP, Dayton Ohm, has agreed in spirit, but not formal details on doing this with me.

不过我还没找到其他合作者。

I haven't found anyone else, though.

我认为如果除我之外无人响应，这就是个非常疲软的经济信号。

And I think that's a very weak economic signal if no one else because I'm willing to.

至于外部...其实我还没主动寻求过支持。

And inbound, people have I haven't asked for it.

有人来找我说，嘿。

People have come to me saying, hey.

我有30个比特币、50个比特币，甚至愿意押上100个比特币来打这个赌。

I have 30 Bitcoin, 50 Bitcoin, a 100 Bitcoin I'm willing to put into this bet.

现在我手上有本UASF区块链的卖单簿，但赌局另一侧完全找不到市场流动性——这说明至少比特币现金还能以0.25、0.2或0.1的价格卖出。

So I now have an order book of people that wanna sell the UASF blockchain, and I can't get any market liquidity on the other side of the bet, which actually shows you that, like, at least at least with Bitcoin Cash, you were able to sell it for, like, 0.25, zero point two, zero point one.

我甚至觉得你连0.001的价格都卖不出去。

I don't even think you're gonna be able to sell it for 0.001.

这条链在市场上根本找不到任何经济需求。

Like, there's just no economic demand on the other side looking for this chain at all.

好吧。

Alright.

所以你本质上是在让人们用真金白银押注比特币的未来？

So you're just basically trying to get people to put their money where their mouth is and and bet on the future of Bitcoin.

不过戴顿已经原则上表示愿意参与。

But, like, you've had so Dayton said he'll do it in principle.

还有其他人响应吗？还是说目前只有他一个？

Have you had anyone else, or is it literally just him?

我记得你还点名了机械师和卢克。

Because I know you called out Mechanic and Luke as well, I think.

对。

Yeah.

然后他们就在推特上拉黑了我。

And then they blocked me on Twitter.

好的。

Okay.

有意思。

Interesting.

那么如果这个不能作为软分叉通过，你觉得他们会怎么做？

So if this doesn't go through as a soft fork, what do you think they're gonna do?

你认为他们会选择硬分叉，还是夹着尾巴回来尝试其他方案？

Do you think they will hard fork, or do you think they'll just come back tails between the legs and try something else?

这是个有趣的问题。

It's an interesting question.

我觉得两种可能性都存在。

I could see both possibly happening.

Luke长期以来一直主张通过硬分叉改变工作量证明算法，以消除挖矿中心化问题。

Luke, for a long time, has championed the idea of a hard fork to change the proof of work algorithm to remove the centralization of mining.

他并没有表达要解雇矿工的意思。

He hasn't expressed fire the miners.

对吧？

Right?

这可以说是Luke长期持有的非主流观点——与其他开发者相比显得标新立异，但他始终认为这就像是真正的核按钮选项。

This has been a long held, I would say, heterodox sorry, unorthodox opinion Luke's had compared to other developers, but that's something he's been always thought would be kind of like the real nuclear button.

不过这确实需要硬分叉才能实现。

Would would require hard fork, though.

问题在于你实际上必须解雇现有矿工，否则如果继续使用同一条链，你不过是另一个使用相同哈希算法的比特币现金或比特币SD罢了。

The problem you would have to basically fire the miners because otherwise, if you're using the same chain, you're just another Bitcoin Cash or Bitcoin SD where you're using the same hashing algorithm.

而且非常容易，人们可以重组并攻击网络，这可不是什么好局面。

And very trivially, people can just reorg and attack the network, and that's not a great place to be.

那么这有可能吗？

So is it possible?

是的。

Yeah.

不过我不知道他们打算怎么做。

I don't know what they're gonna do, though.

这很有趣，因为我也听到过一些传闻。

It's interesting because I've also heard rumors.

我之前不确定这些传闻是否属实。

I don't know if these are true before.

不过我想补充说明的是，Ocean的法律团队正在四处接触其他矿工，试图通过法律手段警告他们不要支持当前的比特币链。

I like, I just wanna caveat that, though, that there's like, the Ocean legal team are going around to other miners trying to kind of legally warn them against supporting the current Bitcoin chain.

是的。

Yeah.

这些传闻我也听说过。

So those are rumors I have heard as well.

我现在正在邮件列表里查找相关内容。

I'm actually pulling it up here on the mailing list.

就在这里，我正在调取。

I'm pulling it up right here.

在邮件列表里，稍等片刻，我记得有人发表过类似评论，说Ocean或与Ocean有关的人确实在联系矿池。

So on the mailing list, if you give me a second, I think the someone had made a a comment to that effect that that someone was you like, someone at Ocean or people associated with Ocean were actually talking to mining pools.

我从未参与过那些对话，而且我也不在矿池工作，所以这也只是我的个人推测。

I have never sat in on any of those conversations, so it's I don't work in a mining pool, so it's just speculation on my part too.

但据我理解，确实存在某种压力。

But that is my understanding of it that there's been a pressure.

需要澄清的是，这种压力并非针对UASF。

And to be clear, the pressure hasn't been for the UASF.

根据我的理解，到目前为止的压力只是不要运行核心版本30。

The pressure up to this point from my understanding was just not running core version 30.

所以我不清楚这个提案是否改变了什么，但我觉得有必要提醒大家注意这一点。

So I don't know if that's changed anything with this proposal, but it's something I would say is relevant to keep in mind.

嗯。

Yeah.

看起来不太妙，我觉得。

Not not a good look, I don't think.

我是说，谁知道这是不是真的呢？

I mean, who knows if that's true?

但如果是真的，那确实不太好看。

But if it is, certainly not a good look.

抱歉。

Sorry.

我现在有确切的引用了。

I I have the exact quote now.

Greg Maxwell在邮件列表中说：'另一个你未提及的问题是，在你提出这个提案之前，Nathan，我收到了一份会议记录，其中指出Ocean Mining才是这个提案的真正作者，并将以虚假身份提交以掩盖他们的参与。'

Greg Maxwell on the mailing list, said, another issue which you have not mentioned is that prior to you making this proposal, Nathan, I received minutes from a meeting which noted that ocean mining was the true author of this proposal and would be presenting it under a false identity in order to conceal their involvement.

这就是Greg说的。

So that is what Greg said.

而Nathan的回应是，你成了某些谣言的受害者。

And Nathan's response was, you've fallen victim to some false rumors.

虽然我与一些Ocean员工有直接联系，BIP最初也是由他们中的一员起草的。

Though I'm in direct communication with some Ocean employees, and the BIP was originally drafted by one of them.

我与Ocean没有任何关联。

I am not affiliated with Ocean in any way.

所以你自己判断吧。

So take that for what it is.

好的。

Okay.

而且我也知道Mechanic已经公开否认了这一点，并表示这与Ocean无关。

And and I I also know that Mechanic has come out and outright denied that and said that this isn't anything to do with Ocean.

所以，我不想过多猜测，因为我们确实不知道。

So, I mean, I don't wanna get too far into, like, the speculation because we just don't know.

Mechanic在他某个视频中说的某件事让我觉得奇怪，我想确认我是否理解错了。

There's something that Mechanic said on one of his videos that I found strange, and I I wanna see if I'm misunderstanding this.

但他当时在讨论由于v30现在可以包含且已经被包含的交易。

But he was talking about the transactions that can be included and have been included in because of v 30 now.

他举的例子之一像是某个比特币开发者的AI生成色情视频被上链。

And one of the examples he used was, like, some AI generated porn video of a Bitcoin dev being put on chain.

我想Marathon矿池挖出那个区块时，他们包含了那笔交易。

And I think Marathon with a pool that mined that block well, they included that transaction.

他说如果这笔交易仍通过Slipstream进行，他们本会拒绝处理。

And he said that if this was still going through Slipstream, they would have refused that as a transaction.

再说，谁知道这是否属实，但这是他声称的。

Again, who knows if that's actually true, but that's a claim that he made.

但这似乎与他试图通过Datum和Ocean实现的一切背道而驰。

But it that seems very counter to everything he's trying to do with Datum and Ocean.

监管矿工如何组织区块模板的想法？

The idea of being policing how miners organize their block templates?

对。

Yeah.

没错。

Yeah.

我同意。

I agree.

据我理解，Ocean和比特币挖矿去中心化以及实际模板生成的整体方案...

If the entire the from my understanding, with Ocean and decentralizing Bitcoin mining and the actual template generation.

对吧？

Right?

为不熟悉的人解释下：比特币矿池运作方式通常由矿池的一个节点组织区块，然后将区块头发送给所有矿工。

So for those that aren't familiar, the way Bitcoin mining pool works is you usually have one node at the mining pool that organizes the block, and then they send the block headers to all the miners.

你不需要在本地保存完整区块。

You don't need the full block on your ace.

ASIC矿机甚至不会查看完整区块。

The ASIC actually doesn't even look at the full block.

它仅查看区块头，其中包含与执行实际挖矿哈希操作相关的所有信息的承诺。

It just looks at the header of the block, which has all of the commitments to all of the information that's relevant for doing the actual mining hashing operation.

你与Datum和Ocean的任务问题在于，你有一个节点负责组织，比如让我仅获取Mara约5%的哈希率。

You the mission with Datum and Ocean would be the problem is is that you have one node that organizes, like let me just take, like, Mara's, like, 5% of the hash rate.

因此5%的哈希率由一个节点为其完成所有工作。

So 5% of the hash rate has one node doing all of the work for it.

Mara可能略有不同，因为他们拥有自己的矿池，并且完全掌控自己的基础设施。

Mara is probably a little different because they have their own mining pool, and they own all of their own infrastructure.

你和我都无法注册使用Mara的矿池。

You and I cannot go sign up to use Mara's pool.

这完全是他们内部的运作。

It's all their own internal stuff.

所以或许像占据网络约25%份额的Foundry会是更好的例子，那里有一群矿工，或者像占17%左右的Antpool。

So maybe like a foundry that's at 25% roughly of the network would be a better example where have a bunch of people that are mining and, or Antpool, which is, like, like, 17%.

于是就有了像Antpool这样的存在。

So you have, like, Antpool.

有一群人负责组织交易。

You have a bunch of people that go and organize transactions.

但在Antpool的所有挖矿活动中，实际上是由一个Antpool节点在组织区块模板。

But, like, all of the mining in Antpool, there's, like, one Antpool node that's actually organizing the block templates.

这个想法是，如果你要构建区块——如果你想实现去中心化，就不应该强调和庆祝区块空间市场的瓶颈点，这与整个使命相矛盾。

And the idea would be if you're making block like, if you're trying to decentralize it, you wouldn't wanna be, emphasizing and celebrating choke points of kind of the the block space market kind of contradictory to the whole mission.

我大体上同意这点，但很确定如果mechanic在场，他会对此有不同见解。

I'd generally agree with that, but I'm quite sure if mechanic was on the pod, he would have his own color down on that.

我是说，如果你想再来上节目，修理工，你可以的。

I mean, if you wanna come on the pod again, mechanic, you can do.

我想知道我们能不能稍微思考一下？

I wanna know can we get a little bit think boy for a minute?

为什么你认为这种文化战争在过去几年里如此深刻地波及到比特币领域，而现在似乎还在加速发展？

Why do you think this sort of culture war has both come to Bitcoin in such a meaningful way over the last couple of years and then seems to just be accelerating at this point?

我认为这其中混合了他们视角下的真诚关切。

I think there is a mix of earnest concern that and earnest is from their perspective.

比如，我认为卢克长期以来一直真诚地持有这种对比特币的观点和立场。

Like, I would say Luke earnestly has consistently held this perspective and position in Bitcoin for a long time.

还有很多人盲目追随他，没有完全理解第二、第三级的影响和其他事情。

And you have a lot of people cargo culting following him, not fully understanding second, third order ramifications and things.

我和许多其他人不同意卢克的观点。

Myself and many other people disagree with Luke.

我认为很多人在区块大小战争之后才接触比特币。

The I think a lot of people were came to Bitcoin after the block size wars.

所以他们读到这些时，几乎就像在听篝火旁传颂的口述历史——这就是我们为比特币网络所做的。

So they've been reading about it almost like hearing, like, like, oral history passed down by a fire of, this is what we did to take the Bitcoin network.

我们运行节点，我们运行客户端。

We ran the nodes, and we ran the client.

《比特币号角》实际上发表了一篇有趣的文章，叫《比特币++葛底斯堡》。

And the Bitcoin Bugle actually put out a funny article, which was Bitcoin plus plus Gettysburg.

葛底斯堡，我知道你不是美国人，但葛底斯堡就像是...

So Gettysburg, I know you're not from America, but Gettysburg is a, like,

我知道葛底斯堡。

a I know Gettysburg.

内战。

Civil war.

是啊。

Yeah.

就是在搞些内战重演，比如战役之类的。

So doing, like, civil war reenactments of, like, battles.

我觉得现在的情况是，我们正在搞一场关于区块大小战争的真人角色扮演。

And I think that's what's happening is we're kinda having, we're doing a live action role playing of, like, the block size war.

大家就像是在集结起来重演这段历史，像肌肉记忆一样，但参与者大多是2017年不在场的人。

We're gonna, like, everyone's just trying to, like, rally together and reenact it, like, like, a muscle memory thing, but it's it's mostly people who were not here in 2017.

所以我觉得这里面有点社交地位游戏的味道。

So I think there's a bit of, like, a social status game.

我还看到有人说'我在反抗这个系统'。

I've also seen I'm rebelling against the system.

比特币玩家天生就爱唱反调，具有叛逆精神。

Bitcoiners are naturally disagreeable and rebellious to begin with.

这种叛逆现在被集中到比特币运作机制的治理问题上。

That is being focused internally around the governance of how Bitcoin works.

他们本来就对比特币的运作方式不满。

And the they were already discontent with how Bitcoin was working.

而第30版协议给了他们机会，让争论焦点从技术层面转向治理问题。

And then version 30 gave them an opportunity to make this not about how Bitcoin technically works, but about a governance issue.

这些核心意图正在破坏比特币作为货币的功能，我们需要夺回网络控制权。

So those meanings at core are doing things that are destroying Bitcoin as money, and we need to take back the network.

所以我认为很大程度上是这个问题。

So I think it's a lot of that.

而且这也像是为了博取社交影响力的互动手段。

Like and it's also just like social clout bait engagement too.

你发布这些东西。

You post this stuff.

就能获得大量关注和眼球效应。

You get a lot of, like, eyeballs, a lot of attention.

这就像是，你知道的，价格走势平淡。

It's kind of just like, you know, the price is flat.

目前还略有下跌趋势。

It's trending down a little bit.

这只是让大家保持关注度的把戏。

This is just something to keep everyone occupied.

说实话，我并不认为这是个真正严重的威胁。

Like, genuinely, like, I don't view it as a big credible threat.

我还没见到任何矿池公开支持它。

I haven't seen a single mining pool come forward with it.

也没见到任何企业声称他们在运行USF客户端。

I haven't seen a single business come forward saying they're running the USF client.

你看，虽然你们编写并发布了USF代码，但要真正实现必须得到矿工和网络经济参与者的认可。

Like, this is not like, yes, you write code and you've released the code for a USF, but you have to actually have the miners and the economic actors of the network agree with it.

否则，你我明天就可以起草一份USF协议，丹尼。

Otherwise, you and I, Danny, could write a USF tomorrow.

这并不意味着它有任何意义。

That doesn't mean it means anything.

对吧？

Right?

我只是还没看到足够的需求来真正推动一次成功的UASF。

And I just haven't seen the commensurate demand to actually facilitate a successful UASF.

也许值得探讨他们那边实际需要什么条件，因为我们确实还没深入讨论过这个问题。

Maybe it's worth getting into what is actually needed on their side to do this because we've we've not really talked about that.

显然，仅靠卢克和世界运作机制是不够的。

Like, obviously, the Luke and mechanics of the world running this isn't enough.

他们到底需要什么？

What do they actually need?

他们需要算力支持，还需要经济参与者来强制执行。

They need hash rate, and they need economic actors to enforce this.

比方说直白点，如果Coinbase的节点不运行这个，他们就会接受任何拥有最多算力支持的区块。

For example, if Coinbase's node just to be blunt, if Coinbase's node isn't running this, they're gonna accept whatever block has the most hash rate and work.

假设Coinbase突然表态支持这项行动，突然你就有了200多万比特币声明不接受另一条分叉链，这意义重大。

Now if Coinbase hypothetically came forward and said, we want to support this effort, all of a sudden now you have 2,000,000 plus Bitcoin that are saying, we will not accept the other fork, which is a meaningful thing.

你会希望企业站出来表态支持这项行动，用经济需求来表明立场，对吧？

You would want businesses to come forward and say that they want to support this effort for the economic demand, right, that they're signaling for.

你还需要网络中有一定数量的节点运行这个协议，以确保交易能正常传播。

You're gonna want a reasonable set of nodes across the network that are also running this to make sure the transactions propagate.

这是其中的一个重要部分。

That is an important part of this.

你需要哈希率，因为矿工才是真正投入资金推动比特币区块链状态前进的人。

And you need hash rate because the miners are the ones that are actually spending the capital to advance the state of the Bitcoin blockchain.

如果没人愿意在你的分叉上建设，你就会分叉，然后陷入停滞。

And if no one's gonna build on your fork, you're you're gonna fork, and then you're gonna stagnate.

因为原本每十分钟就能获得100%哈希率的区块，现在只能得到1%，这意味着找到一个区块需要六小时而非十分钟。

Because instead of having a 100% of the hash rate blocks every ten minutes, you get 1%, which means that, you know, it'll take you six hours to find a block instead of ten minutes.

对吧？

Right?

所以你希望这一切发生时不会出现——这其实也是个非常重要的点。

So you would want this to all happen without there be this is actually a really important point too.

你希望在激活前达成这种协调一致，这就是为什么需要信号机制。

You want this alignment and agreement prior to the activation, which is why you would want signaling.

你可以通过节点发送信号。

You could signal with your node.

矿工可以表明他们将支持这个方案。

You can stick miners could signal that they're gonna support this.

这样做的原因是，假设这种情况持续了四五十个区块。

And the reason why you want that is, let's say this happens for forty, fifty, 60 blocks.

Coinbase会回滚六七小时的链上交易和所有提现记录吗？

Is Coinbase gonna roll back their chain six, seven hours and all those withdrawals?

因为他们绝对不会。

Because they're not gonna Absolutely not.

对。

Right.

对。

Right.

我们之前经历过链分裂。

We we've had chain splits before.

早在2013年，比特币网络曾因一个漏洞宕机了大约三四十个区块，但我们最终成功重组了链。

Back in 2013, there was a bug where the Bitcoin network was down for, thirty, forty blocks, and we were able to reunify the chain.

但现在的比特币规模已经大不相同了。

But, like, Bitcoin's a lot bigger now.

所以我认为这种情况极不可能发生。

And so, like, it's I I think it's very unlikely.

明确地说，即使发生这种情况，比特币也不会消亡。

Bitcoin wouldn't die, to be clear, if this happened.

对吧？

Right?

如果你持有比特币，而且是十年期的深度冷存储，这个事件对你毫无影响。

If you're holding Bitcoin, you're holding it for, like, ten years, like deep cold storage, this action doesn't impact you at all.

即使出现组织过度的情况，也完全不会困扰你。

Like, even if there is an over org, it doesn't bother you at all.

只有这次重组期间流动的资金会受影响。

Just the funds that are moving during this reorganization.

所以他们需要算力支持。

So they need hash rate.

他们需要经济支持，而且现在就要。

They need economic support, and they need that now.

因为他们提议在大概83天内就启动。

Because they're proposing to activate in, like, eighty three days.

这速度快得惊人。

That is incredibly fast.

这非常、非常激进。

That's very, very aggressive.

通常至少会给一年时间来尝试组织这些事情。

Usually, at least a year is given to try and organize these things.

更不用说他们的代码还没有最终确定。

Let alone they're not final with the with with the code yet.

实际的最终激活客户端代码还没有完全完成。

The actual final activation client code isn't totally done.

所以，他们还没准备好，未成年人、企业以及这些公司的DevOps团队不会直接拿到现成代码。

So, like, they're not, minors and businesses and, like, the DevOps teams at these companies aren't gonna be like, oh, here's the code.

不可能说让我快速加载到云基础设施上就能立即运行。

Let me just load it up into my cloud infrastructure real quick and get running.

对吧？

Right?

他们会想看看你到底改了哪些代码，这又是个问题——因为这个UASF客户端是基于未构建版本开发的，意味着你无法将这个功能干净地移植到比特币核心上，而真正的经济需求都在那里运行。

They're gonna wanna look at what code are you actually changing, which is a problem too because this UASF client is based on top of a not built, which means you can't cleanly patch on this feature into Bitcoin Core, which is where all of the real economic demand is running.

所以这又增加了工程阻力。

So that's additional engineering friction.

其中一个主要批评是代码没有得到适当审查，因此本质上你必须逐行检查每一段代码。

And one of the big criticisms of not being that the code isn't reviewed properly, so essentially, you have to go through and review every single line of code.

是的。

Yeah.

没错。

Exactly.

确实如此。

Exactly.

所以他们需要支持，而且是现在就需要。

So they need support, they need it now.

他们需要算力支持。

They need Hashrate support.

他们需要商业支持。

They need business support.

他们需要期货市场。

They need a futures market.

他们需要真正愿意押注比特币的人，通过买入UASF币种卖出非UASF币种来表明立场。

They need people who are actually willing to put Bitcoin up on the other side of the bet to signal that they wanna buy the UASF coin and sell the non UASF coin.

现阶段要实现成功，这三者缺一不可。

And they need all three of those for this to be successful at this point.

因为如果缺少其中任何一项，区块链要么会停滞不前，要么会崩溃，人们就会在市场上抛售它。

Because otherwise, if they miss any of those, the chains are either gonna stagnate or the chain's gonna go, and people are just gonna market dump it.

届时矿工们就会转回另一条链，因为继续挖这条链对他们来说不再划算。

And then the miners are gonna switch back over to the other chain because it's not gonna be worth it to them anymore to mine it.

对吧？

Right?

因为他们通过区块补贴挖矿每个区块只能获得3个比特币。

Because they only get 3 Bitcoin per block for mining it in the block subsidy.

如果大家都按你希望的那样行动，UASF链上的人就会开始转移代币只为抛售砸盘，矿工们就不会再在那里挖矿了，因为3个比特币可能只值0.03个比特币之类的。

And if everyone's you like, it activates and everyone on the for the UASF chain is moving coins around just to sell them to crash the price, The miners aren't gonna mine there anymore because the 3 Bitcoins gonna be worth 0.03 Bitcoin or whatever.

对吧？

Right?

嗯。

Mhmm.

所以他们需要所有这些条件——需要期货市场、需要矿工支持、还需要经济节点业务支持。

So they need all of these things to actually they need a futures market, they need mining support, and they need economic node business support.

单就这个问题而言，这其实是个无法回答的问题，但作为方向性指引，你认为那些曾高调支持Knott's的人里有多少会支持这次软分叉？

Just on this sort of this is an impossible question to answer, but as a kind of a directional answer, how many of the people who have been sort of very vocally supportive of Knott's do you think are also gonna be behind this soft fork?

因为我确实看到一些曾是Knott's强力支持者的人公开表示反对这个软分叉。

Because I've definitely seen some that have been very big Knott's proponents say they're not in support of the soft fork.

是的。

Yes.

我认为很多支持knots的人是因为不认同比特币核心团队的治理方式，他们自然不会支持UASF。

I think that a lot of people who were supportive of knots because they disagreed with the software governance of Bitcoin Core are not in favor of a UASF.

所以这就像...你从一开始就...因为那些没运行knots的人对现状很满意，毕竟他们用的就是默认客户端。

So it's already a you're starting from a because no one who is people who are not running knots are fine with things as is because that's the client they're running.

他们很乐意运行比特币核心的默认客户端。

They're they're fine running the default client of Bitcoin Core.

那些负责运行节点的人，就是你们这群愿意为此付出的人，而我认为这终将导致分裂。

The people who would run knots, that would be your contingent that would be willing to fork over this, and that I think is gonna fracture.

目前根本无法直接判断或知晓。

There's no way to directly tell or know at this point.

一旦有了最终的UASF客户端，你就能运行它并向网络发送信号。

Once there is a final UASF client, you will be able to run that and signal to the network.

我不仅仅是一个NOTS节点。

I'm not just a NOTS node.

我是一个UASF节点。

I'm a UASF node.

但话说回来，我觉得很多出于各种原因对比特币开发现状有异议的人，都不会接受UASF。

But, again, like, I think a lot of people who have for whatever reason, have their own disagreements of how Bitcoin development is going are not gonna be okay with the UASF.

所以具体走向还有待观察。

So that's to be seen on how where for that.

我觉得这非常有趣。

I find it really interesting.

整件事最耐人寻味的地方，其实是这些被闹剧煽动起来的人的心理状态。

Like, the thing that is most interesting about this is kind of the the psychology of the people that have been stirred up by all this drama.

你觉得这是不是源于人们高估了自己对比特币的重要性？

Do you think it comes down to people thinking they're more important to Bitcoin than they are?

显然，运行节点很重要，但主要是对你自己重要，对别人没那么重要。

Like, obviously, running a node matters, but it matters to you far more than anyone else.

运行节点只对你自己有意义。

Running a node only matters for you.

运行节点是一种自私的行为。

It's a selfish endeavor to run a node.

你运行节点大概是因为你在发送和接收比特币。

The the node you you run a node presumably because you are sending and receiving Bitcoin.

可能一年才一次。

That could be once a year.

也可能是每五年一次。

It could be once every five years.

甚至可能每五分钟就一次。

It could be once every five minutes.

你运行节点是为了验证交易。

You're running a node because you're validating transactions.

你在验证被发现的区块及其中包含的交易是否遵循共识规则。

You are validating that the blocks that are being found and the transactions that are in those blocks are following the rules of consensus.

除此之外，你的节点影响力会迅速衰减到几乎为零。

Everything after that, your the influence in what your node has very quickly compresses to almost nothing.

嗯。

Mhmm.

如果不是这样，就会变成类似权益证明或AWS证明——谁能在网络上启动最多节点谁就能主导投票。

And if it wasn't that way, it would be almost like a proof of stake of proof of AWS who can spin up the most nodes on the network to, like, do voting.

比特币不是民主制度。

Like, Bitcoin's not a democracy.

比特币是无政府状态。

Bitcoin is anarchy.

规则至上，而非统治者，且规则由共识决定。

It is rules, not rulers, and the rules are consensus.

对吧？

Right?

正因如此，我认为至少就你提到的观点而言，那些自视甚高的人，其实误解了他们的节点角色。

Which is why I think at least, to your point on, like, people believing they're more important, I think they would just misunderstand the role their node has.

它是网络规则的终极守护者。

It is a supreme guardian of the rules of the network.

除此之外，它按设计无法对网络外部产生过多影响。

Beyond that, it can't it can't influence much outside of it by design.

要成为抗审查的货币，就必须如此——如果我能通过自己节点或同伴们的节点施加压力、左右网络组织方式，那我就能审查交易了。

To be censorship resistant money, you necessarily because if I could run stuff on my node or a bunch of my buddy's nodes and actually, like, put serious pressure on how the network gets organized, then I'd be able to censor transactions.

对吧？

Right?

所以比特币的这种不对称性很特别：它既是去中心化无需许可的网络，又具备这些特性。

So it's just kind of like the asymmetry of Bitcoin as a central decentralized permissionless network that you have these properties.

因此我认为或许需要些教育和赋能，让人们理解节点的真正用途。

So I think maybe it's a little bit of education and enablement for people to understand what their node's actually for.

我得说UASF运动至少是逻辑自洽的。

I will say that the UASF effort is at least consistent.

UASF是节点如何在共识层面对全网发号施令的方式。

A u a UASF is how a node can boss the rest of the network at the consensus level.

从这个意义上说，它在意识形态上是连贯的，但要真正改变比特币，这虽必要却并不充分。

So in that sense, it's ideologically consistent, and it is necessary but not sufficient to actually change Bitcoin.

我想提一下我看到的一条推文。

I wanna bring up a tweet I saw.

其实我在和Marty、Huddl以及Eric Kason做的节目里展示过这个，这是BitPayne发的。

I've actually I pulled this up on the show I did with Marty and Huddl and Eric Kason, but this is from BitPayne.

我认为这确实概括了我对整个事件的主要担忧之一。

And I think this, like, this really summed up kind of one of my big concerns about this whole thing.

是的。

Yeah.

好的。

Okay.

我觉得这部分是最关键的。

This is the part that I think is the most relevant.

一旦你承认政府有权打击非法内容，他们就会开始要求审查所有他们不喜欢的金融交易。

It's once you grant the state that you can take efforts to mitigate illegal illicit material, they'll start demanding it, including for money monetary transactions they don't like.

如果你接受了全社区都有道德义务进行审查的观点，那你就毫无立足之地了，一切都完了。

If you've accepted that you have a community wide moral imperative to censor, you don't have a leg to stand on, it's all over.

对我来说最大的担忧就是，如果这种'C SPAM'的说法真的流行起来，政府机构多久之后就会开始要求我们审查这些交易？

And, like, to me, that's the big concern here is that if if this kind of, like, C SPAM narrative C SPAM narrative gets any real traction, then how long until some government agency set starts saying we have to censor these transactions?

没错。

Right.

我同意。

I agree.

我同意这个基本前提：如果你开始在道德层面判断比特币区块链中字节编码是否可接受，这将是个非常危险的滑坡，不需要太多想象就能实现。

I agree with that base premise is that if you start providing this moral layer in which how bytes are encoded in the Bitcoin blockchain of being acceptable or not acceptable, it's a very slippery slope that doesn't require much leaps in imagination to do that.

根据我的理解，为对方立场辩护的观点是：这与你无关，我们并非在限制比特币作为货币进行交易的道德用途。

Now to steel man from my understanding, the other side of the argument is that this is not about you we are not gating the moral use of Bitcoin as money for monetary transactions.

我们是在道德层面上限制非货币用途的案例。

We are we are morally gating nonmonetary use cases.

他们会主张在货币与非货币用途之间划清界限——我们将道德化并排除所有非货币用途，但所有货币用途都会被保留。

And they would they would argue that they're drawing a line at monetary versus nonmonetary that we will moralize and push out all the nonmonetary stuff, but everything that is monetary will be held.

我仍要提出：你现在已经移动了切斯特顿的栅栏，并使争论的任何部分都带上了道德色彩。

I would still put forward that you have now moved Chesterton's feds and made moral any part of the argument.

甚至在论点中引入道德警告，就已经是在改变边界，违背比特币迄今为止的运作方式。

To even introduce a moral caveat to the argument is now moving of, like, the boundaries and how Bitcoin has worked up to this point.

我认为你正在倒退，并为那些想攻击网络的人提供了可乘之机。

And I think you're regressing and seeding ground to people who'd wanna attack the network.

是的。

Yeah.

而且我甚至认为，货币类与非货币类交易在这里根本不匹配。

And I I don't even think, like, the money sort of non money transactions don't even match in this.

关键在于你证明了你能做某些事。

It's that you're proving that you can do something.

对。

Yeah.

我认为哈德尔先生有条推文说得很到位：最看涨的信号是他们UASF尝试失败了，这反而证明了比特币的抗审查性。

I I think mister Huddl had a really good tweet where he said the most bullish thing is they failed the UASF attempt to show how censorship resistant Bitcoin is.

即使那些最权威的开发者——恰好也是矿池协议的CEO们——（试图干预）

That even if, like, some of the most predominant, like, developers who are also happen to be CEOs of of mining pool protocols.

对吧？

Right?

就像，可以看作，你知道的，投入这么大努力去推动规模，而如果它们失败了，反而会对比特币作为一种无法被法律框架和道德框架所胁迫的协议的抗审查韧性非常利好。

Like, could be seen, you know, having this big, like, effort to be able to push the scale and having them fail would be pretty bullish for the censorship resistant kind of resiliency of Bitcoin as a protocol that can't be cajoled and pressured using these, like, legal, framings and moral framings.

这很有趣，因为大概一年多以来，反对方一直在声称Core、你、Shinobi以及所有这些人对比特币发起了攻击。

It's interesting because probably for over a year now, the not side of this argument have been claiming that Core and you and Shinobi and all all these people have been, like, attacks on Bitcoin.

呃，Shinobi就是比特币核心开发者，不过确实如此。

Well, Shinobi is Bitcoin Core, but yes.

他既是比特币核心开发者，也是Adam Back。

He's he's Bitcoin Core, and he's Adam back.

但当然了。

But Of course.

就像，他们一直声称你是在攻击比特币。

Like, they've been claiming that you're, like, an attack on Bitcoin.

你认为这真的存在对比特币发起攻击的风险吗？

Do you think this poses the risk of actually being an attack on Bitcoin?