Host: BMAN, ABCDELabs
Guests: Jeff, Merlin Chain; Ryan Chow, Solv Protocol; CharlieHu, Bitlayer; Stan, B²Network
This episode is a Twitter Space organized by ABCDE Labs. The content of the article does not represent the views of Wu Shuo. Listen to the podcast on Xiaoyuzhou:
https://www.xiaoyuzhoufm.com/episodes/66376ca603bcdd73a9944fb2
Listen on Youtube:
https://youtu.be/-8uCUBRanxE
BMAN: Merlin's TGE was over a week ago, and Jeff must have mixed feelings in the past 10 days. Can you share your thoughts with us?
Jeff: First of all, I think it may be the bridge in and out of our assets. In fact, the preparation was not sufficient before, such as now BTC, BRC-20, NFT, including ETH, USDT, Manta, and many other assets. So, in the process of bridging in and out, the complexity is also very high. To be honest, at the beginning, most chains were relatively cautious about their own challenges. But we may have done Web2 in the past, and it was more wild, putting in any protocol, which led to problems in bridging in and out now. As for BTC, the bridging in and out is already very stable. I looked at the on-chain data, and in the past month, there have been approximately 78,000 BTC bridged in, and also more than 70,000 BTC bridged out, so the overall liquidity is very good. I believe that there are very few exchanges in the world that can have so many BTC entering and exiting. However, for NFT, runes, and assets like Manta, Tron, and now we have also connected assets like MODE, and some Layer3, including recent discussions with Linea, there are too many assets that actually exceed our control. So, if you want to do everything at the beginning, you will find that the user experience will be greatly discounted. I think this is the first feeling.
The second feeling is that we have discovered the advantages and disadvantages of the so-called fair launch. When we started playing Bitcoin last year, everyone believed in the concept of a fair launch, and we saw that BRC-20 and BRC-420 were actually fair launches, with no whitelist, no invitation system, and no rules restrictions, and everyone just went for it. Then you will find that the performance is actually quite average today. Last year, we thought that ORDI might be 100 or 1000, but now you will find that the entire market's pullback is very obvious in terms of ORDI and SATS. As for runes, it actually uses two methods, the first is the pre-runes method, which is to first distribute NFTs to everyone, then trade them, and then distribute coins to everyone. The other is the pre-mint form, and runes have specially introduced the pre-mint form, so many coins are pre-minted.
You will find that the advantages and disadvantages of a fair launch are quite obvious. For example, for Merlin's token, within 6 to 12 months, at least in the first six months, all the tokens are actually airdropped to users, and its selling pressure will be very high. After everyone receives the airdrop, once the market goes down, you will see BTC go from over 70,000 to nearly 60,000, and many people predict that it will break 50,000, break 60,000 to 50,000, or even lower prices. So, in the entire market downturn, you will find that the market pressure of tokens with a fair launch will be relatively high.
So, these are my feelings. I think being too aggressive in a product will lead to bearing the consequences of being too aggressive. The second is the launch mechanism, where the market is filled with user tokens, and the liquidity brings about a significant selling pressure. Of course, you will see that among all the new coins on OKX, including Merlin's trading volume, it has been consistently high for the past ten days, which also indicates that the market is actively trading this token. As for what will happen next, let's wait and see.
BMAN: There are already dozens of Layer2 solutions for Bitcoin. How can you differentiate and stand out among these Layer2 solutions?
CharlieHu: Thinking back to September, last year, countless people were FUDing Ordinals. "Ordinals is dead" has become a very interesting meme and catchphrase. Every time I think about that time, I feel that when everyone is FUDing you, it's actually a signal of the bottom. If you persist, you may be able to push forward, and there is definitely such a process.
Now, Bitcoin Layer2 is indeed in a very interesting process. Just two months ago, everyone was discussing, I remember when I was in Denver, everyone had a feeling that there are now over 100 Bitcoin Layer2 solutions. But if you think about it carefully, you will find that there are really significant advancements, including a vibrant community, and some projects with unique strategic approaches, probably less than 10 names. And I have always believed in a principle, that the projects that can truly drive this industry, whether in technology, product design, or the match between the market and the product, may indeed be in the single digits. So, how to gain the share of developers and the market, in English, it's called mind share, which is a critical space in the cognitive domain, because people actually can't remember more than 10 Bitcoin Layer2 solutions, so differentiation is very important.
Differentiation has three aspects. The first is technological differentiation, whether it's in terms of security, scalability solutions, or some special points in the development environment. Bitlayer is pushing two technological stacks. The first is BitVM, which we should be one of the earliest teams in Asia to research BitVM, and now one of the teams that has made the most contributions globally, probably in the top three. In the SHA256 upgrade, with 3 commits, and two grants from the official BitVM team, there has been a lot of progress, not just waiting for the traditional BitVM, but actually doing this.
The second is DLC. This is a very underestimated technology. This is a technology proposed by an MIT professor, which is very helpful for building decentralized cross-chain bridges. We are combining DLC and BitVM to push the construction of this bridge, and there are already many detailed features coming out, and our engineering team will release them later, and many details are also in our original technical white paper. This is the technological aspect. The second is product innovation. In this regard, Merlin has made many interesting innovations for the Bitcoin track, and we are also looking at different product routes from different tracks, especially in the DeFi sector of Bitcoin. From the DeFi Summer in 2020 that I personally experienced, whether from the perspective of an investor, a retail investor, or a developer, many Layer2 DeFi projects on Ethereum are exploring new narratives and mining new TVL and new assets. The TVL of the Bitcoin ecosystem can be activated, and new DeFi-like gameplay and asset operations in the Bitcoin ecosystem, as well as various scenarios, can be developed. There are three types of TVL, some are called possibly not so real TVL, real TVL that is not being used, and real TVL that is actually being used. This is a gradual process. Real TVL that is actually being used, where assets can be utilized, and the efficiency of using these assets to the maximum extent, requires various good scenarios.
No matter if it's Bitcoin's stablecoin protocol DEX, Uniswap v2, v3, or various assets like money market credit, including various structured financial products, and products like Yu'ebao, there are many products in the DeFi world. I think there will be many new DeFi gameplay in the Bitcoin world, and I think this is worth looking forward to in 2024. To a certain extent, on the landing level, for example, if BitVM really wants to be fully implemented on a large scale, ZK proof written to the Bitcoin layer will definitely land faster, and this is what we are exploring now. In terms of product differentiation and competition in the Bitcoin Layer2, and finally, in terms of culture, there is a phenomenal infrastructure project this year, as everyone knows, which is BeraChain. BeraChain has done very exaggerated cultural activities in Dubai, and also in Denver, and Dubai has taken it to another level. I think cultural output and cultural occupation of people's minds, as well as a large community stickiness, and attracting various developers and users, is a very exaggerated project, and we are also learning from their founder's practices and their marketing practices in some dimensions.
Bitlayer has put a lot of effort into the racing, the entire acceleration, and the branding of the Bitcoin engine. Our leader board ranking determines the F1-style gameplay, and we are also exploring culture to truly consolidate a public chain that can play with culture, in order to gather various consensus communities' long-term users. It's not just about airdropping some tokens and then moving on to the next ecosystem. So, in summary, there are three aspects: infrastructure technology, product innovation and application scenarios, and differentiation in terms of culture.
Stan: Many points that Charlie mentioned, I also agree with. In fact, the demand for Bitcoin is very high, and the liquidity of Bitcoin, how miners can find a place for their Bitcoin and how to earn interest, the demand for this has always been very high. But the infrastructure of Bitcoin itself is very, very backward. Like Charlie just mentioned, Bitlayer is built on BitVM. BitVM was a very inspiring paper in the second half of last year, and it gave us a lot of inspiration. But if it really wants to be implemented, I think it will take a long time, so we (B² Network) are actually some architectures on DA, and we don't want to do a general computation on the Bitcoin layer like BitVM all at once, but we want to solve how to verify ZKP on the Bitcoin layer first.
So, I think our core differentiation point is to solve some very painful pain points, plus propose a modular architecture. If we really want to metaphorize the entire Bitcoin ecosystem as a large computer, we want it to be able to expand and execute more general computations. I think, just like a traditional blockchain, we will divide this architecture into three layers, namely the execution layer, the DA layer, and the consensus layer. DA is data availability, for example, the execution layer, like our b² rollup, and like Merlin Chain, can be infinitely horizontally scalable, and we can have many such rollups.
As for the DA layer, there has actually been a lack of mature solutions in the Bitcoin space. We have implemented DAS through B² Hub. We have also seen other projects, such as Nubit, they will also do their own DAS. At the same time, our DA also combines decentralized storage. This layer is not about us doing it alone, but we want everyone to come together to record the final data index and some proofs on the Bitcoin network.
The last layer is the consensus layer, and this is a point that all Builders trust very much about Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is the strongest consensus in the entire crypto field, a gathering place for consensus. With such a large gathering of miners and computing power in Bitcoin, its consensus layer is very powerful. The consensus layer occurs on the Bitcoin layer, combined with some off-chain mechanisms, we can use commitment verification and challenge mechanisms, and then let the Bitcoin layer verify whether the transactions on our Layer2 are real and whether anyone is acting maliciously.
Based on this architecture, I think we want to push this architecture to the market, and it's not a closed-door architecture, and we also hope that everyone can come and see, and use our two products. Just now, I mentioned one of our rollups, which is actually an EVM-compatible rollup with Bitcoin as gas, and its performance is now completely comparable to Ethereum's Layer2 in terms of user experience and so on. Because of this architecture, the final settlement of Layer2 transactions occurs on Bitcoin, and we are not a sidechain, and our security does not depend solely on ourselves, we hope that security can depend as much as possible on Bitcoin.
Our second product, our DA layer, has solved the pain point problem I just mentioned. We want to solve ZKP's commitment verification to achieve the purpose of security dependence on Bitcoin. Because you see, Ethereum's DA is actually to make Ethereum's Layer2 cheaper and more efficient. But Bitcoin's DA, if there is no Bitcoin's DA, our rollup cannot be established. Then the rollup is a fake rollup, so Bitcoin's DA is a necessity. This is some of our features, and we also hope to use these two products to prove the feasibility and security of modularly expanding Bitcoin, and in the future, other Builders can also join this architecture and expand Bitcoin in their own way.
BMAN: How do you view the pattern of the Bitcoin ecosystem in the East and the West? Who has the advantage in the Bitcoin ecosystem in the East and the West? How will the Bitcoin ecosystem in the East and the West differentiate in the future?
Ryan Chow: From Solv's perspective, we are a team that has developed in Asia, but we have a lot of in-depth cooperation with the public chain ecosystems in the East and the West. So, I'll briefly talk about our feelings. I think overall, the Bitcoin ecosystem is indeed divided into several modules. I think the first module is obviously the current modules like Merlin and runes. In the early days, from the Eastern Merlin to the Western runes, I found that many people in the East are also willing to participate. So, we will see a certain degree of competition in this area. There are some new assets related to the Bitcoin ecosystem with a certain Western cultural bias that are beginning to emerge, and I think this is actually a situation of a variety of flowers blooming. I think overall, there will be both Eastern and Western, and I even think that there will slowly be some assets that both the East and the West are willing to accept, because we also see more and more Western users using the OKX Web3 wallet, as well as various other infrastructures like Merlin, and various other infrastructures we have built, such as Unisat, and so on. I think this is very obvious, that first of all, infrastructure needs to form a unity, and then in this unity, new assets can be developed on the upper layer. Otherwise, I think there will be some development on their own, and there will be a certain degree of fragmentation in the underlying infrastructure.
Secondly, I think in the entire Bitcoin Layer2, we see that in the West, there will actually be some BTC Layer2 infrastructures like Botanix and Bob, but I think overall, in terms of the concept of technological innovation and the construction of the ecosystem, I think Asian projects are more comprehensive.
The first is called "paved way," paving the way first. And actually, there are many inspirations and a lot of user education from other Western projects, especially in user education, I have a particularly deep feeling. It is clear that a large number of retail investors in the Bitcoin ecosystem are mainly Asian users, and the emergence of L2 in the East is mainly aimed at educating these new users. Now, the L2 from the West is looking to continue this wave and attract a large number of Asian users to develop their ecosystem. This demand and trend are quite evident.
In terms of technological innovation, I believe that both the East and the West have their own advantages. Especially, the founders of L2, such as Botanix and Bob, have shown deep thinking and innovative mechanisms that are not inferior. I think everyone has made a lot of innovations, so at this stage, it is often about packaging concepts and how to make the market better and faster to accept our innovative mechanisms. Because the underlying technology mechanisms are very good, both the East and the West have them, but in terms of promotion from an English-speaking perspective, some chains in the West do have a natural advantage, as they are constantly discussed in the European and American circles. Compared to that, our opportunities to speak in the European and American circles will definitely be fewer, so I think there is indeed a certain difference.
But ultimately, I believe that the main user group is Asian retail investors. This is why we have seen that in the past, many Western DeFi ecosystems rarely came to Asia to hold large-scale events, but now many L2 projects from the West are frequently coming to Asia, especially Hong Kong, to hold a large number of BTC-related ecosystem events. We can see that now the funds and users are all in Asia.
Here I can also add an interesting piece of information. I know that some projects that want to do Bitcoin L2 have a very difficult time when they seek support from Western institutions to obtain BTC funding because many institutions require extensive audits and considerations for compliance. So, it often takes a long time, and in the end, they may only get a few hundred or a couple of hundred bitcoins. In Asia, as we all know, a miner may have a few thousand bitcoins.
So, I think in terms of legitimacy, both the East and the West have their own advantages, and in this regard, I think there is no significant disadvantage on Bitcoin compared to Ethereum. But in terms of the user base and the amount of funds, I think Asia really has a huge first-mover advantage. This is very similar to the early development of Binance and OKX, which were initially based on the Asian market and then expanded globally. So, in this regard, I actually have more confidence in these Asian L2 projects from my perspective. Because I am not involved in L2, I am just expressing a third-party perspective.
We will also see some very basic infrastructure, such as Babylon's restaking infrastructure. I think that from a Western perspective, it often has a good effect. In the case of Babylon, their restaking infrastructure requires a very high level of discourse and brand tone. From this perspective, they found a professor from Stanford and then started promoting in Europe and America, which has indeed been a successful approach. Recently, I have seen that this model still has a certain level of popularity, so this is also a factor. Finally, in terms of the application layer, I think Solv strictly belongs to the application layer, which is a liquidity infrastructure, or what you might call a Bitcoin Yu'ebao. I think at this layer, everyone's level of innovation is indeed the same, and at the same starting line, at this point, it is about who has the largest TVL, the strongest global brand, global users, and who has more opportunities to reach users on exchanges earlier, I think they will gain a significant lead in TVL.
We will also see many Asian application layer products related to Bitcoin grow rapidly and continue to have a significant impact in the West. Recently, I have particularly felt that many of our Solv users actually started in Asia, including many Japanese users, so there is a large number of Asian users participating. But now, on the Western side, there are a large number of institutions and participants in the BTC ecosystem, and they are still very FOMO. From the application layer perspective, it does make them more inclined to participate or support, I think this is not very strong. Because it is the East, because it is the West, there will still be some barriers.
CharlieHu: First of all, the terms "East" and "West" have many dimensions. First, there is the geographical location of the East and West, with Asia in the eastern hemisphere and the Western hemisphere having different time zones. Then, in terms of culture, I think that the Chinese community is present all over the world, and many teams, such as Babylon and Nubit, including many older projects, actually have a significant influence in the United States. 80% of our first-round investors are from Europe and the United States, and we also hope to focus on Asia and then expand overseas.
I think the Bitcoin ecosystem has entered the 2.0 version in the second half, and it will definitely not only be played by the Asian community alone. From the asset side, last year, 70-80% of BRC-20 users were from China and Southeast Asia, and now it is possible that runes have been led by Europe and the United States. But Asia is also catching up, and I think it will not lag behind. This is a process of integration and progress between the East and the West. As for Layer2, it goes without saying, because Layer2 is actually driven by many developers. I think we should start from the ICO in 2017 to the DeFi Summer in 2020. In 2017, many Chinese projects were quite successful, and some are still in the top 50 in terms of market value, and at least a few are still in the top 100.
Then there are Chinese founders, Chinese communities, and Chinese technical teams. In the DeFi Summer of 2020, this wave was a bit behind, and there are two reasons, which we can analyze further. Ethereum's DeFi Summer in 2020 saw many good projects from Europe and the United States, for two reasons. First, their understanding of financial product design is indeed quite deep, and second, their relationship with the Ethereum Foundation is quite close. At that time, the Ethereum Foundation was mainly focused on Europe and the United States, and there was a bit of a disconnect in Asia, so many people with strong financial engineering and financial product design capabilities from China and the Chinese community did not enter the DeFi space as builders in the first wave. The first wave, from Uniswap to various other projects such as yield farming, and later DYDX, were not from Chinese teams. Later, with BSC, Polygon, and even other public chains, many Chinese teams appeared, many of whom forked early blue-chip projects on the Ethereum layer. The Bitcoin ecosystem is different because DeFi has gone through a whole year of cycles, including the sedimentation of the bear market, and many products have been iterated and tested on multiple chains. So now, many Ethereum or other POS strategies for DeFi, and projects like NFT, are already very experienced and have been through one or two bull and bear cycles.
They are actually very mature in terms of product development. Teams like Solv, which was established in 2021, have already accumulated a lot of product experience. These types of Chinese teams are actually very capable. They have very experienced overseas teams in product design and operational capabilities, as well as overseas channels and KOLs. This accumulation is completely on par with so-called Western teams. Because in the end, every team, after designing the product and validating the concept, needs to push it to the market. Those channels and various KOLs around the world are part of a fair competition process. If your product is good and your terms are better, people will be willing to cooperate with you.
In fact, every market has people willing to cooperate with you, and they won't pick whether you are Chinese or Western. Moreover, in terms of valuation, many Western Layer2 projects we see, whether it's Layer2 or various application layer projects, have relatively high valuations, and I think we will not lose to them in this aspect. On the one hand, we will not lose in terms of valuation, and on the other hand, we will not lose in terms of speed. We also have cost advantages. Our engineers and operations teams are more dedicated, and we are faster, so our costs are relatively lower. I think we have advantages in these areas.
As for what was mentioned earlier about Bob, I know a lot about their situation, and I won't go into the details of 2019. Many teams were the earliest to do something in the Polkadot or Ethereum ecosystems, maybe not very successfully, and now they see the opportunity in Bitcoin and come from overseas teams. When I was in Denver and Dubai, I met Alex and Dominic, and they also mentioned that they started with Polkadot in 2018 and 2019, then moved to Ethereum, and now they are in the Bitcoin ecosystem. So, we should think that our real competitors should be like BeraChain and Blast. They are constantly FUDing the so-called imaginary enemies, which I think is quite meaningless because they actually have many problems themselves, I think this is an area.
Secondly, the teams in the Bitcoin ecosystem, Western teams, and Eastern and Western teams are merging. I think the Hong Kong Bitcoin Conference should be a good opportunity for the integration of the strongest teams from the East and the West. I don't think it will be a division, but rather more integration. Many capital and institutions will also go to Hong Kong. Many people from institutions actually understand China very well, so I think there is no absolute division between the East and the West, only choices.
Some asset custody in the East may use Cobo or Starfire, while overseas, they are more likely to choose something like Coinbase. These are just brand preferences. But in terms of first principles, for some principles of Bitcoin, including security in Layer2 networks, decentralization, and DA, there is still a certain degree of consensus between the East and the West. I actually think that the most divided recently is Ethereum and Bitcoin, which is quite interesting. We are trying to reach various Ethereum communities, including the most core and final rounds of activities, sponsoring them, and trying to make various Ethereum developers aware of the opportunities in the Bitcoin ecosystem, and bring their experience, resources, and users to the Bitcoin ecosystem. I think this is something we at Bitlayer should do, and it is also to bring incremental value to the ecosystem. Simply focusing on retaining old users is not our main goal, and our geographical location is not limited. We are reaching out in various regions, and our users are not only focused on Asia.
BMAN: Today's topic is about how to unite the strength of the Chinese people to consolidate the Bitcoin ecosystem, because the Bitcoin ecosystem has always originated from the Chinese and the East. So, the most important thing today is how all the Bitcoin builders present can collaborate together.
Jeff: It can be said to be the East and the West, but because the East and the West represent different values and styles of doing things, it certainly does not have a good or bad, high or low distinction, but the market's impression of them is definitely different. I think this layer of window paper can be pierced. The market has higher requirements for projects from the East, especially for Chinese projects, because in the eyes of Westerners, Easterners may not be as trustworthy, and in the eyes of Easterners, Easterners may not be as trustworthy either. So, they look at you under a microscope, right? For example, as we have always said, regardless of the quantity of airdrops, the rules of airdrops, the circulation quantity, or the staking mechanism, unlocking mechanism, bridge time, bridge cost, and all other dimensions, if you look at it, you will find that everyone is really looking at you under a microscope, not just a magnifying glass.
But aside from that, I think first of all, the Bitcoin ecosystem is quite suitable for the Chinese to come together, whether it's for trading or for building. Because in this ecosystem, there is no god, anyone can come and do something, and no one will judge them. But in other ecosystems, you will find that I believe anyone who has really developed or worked on applications knows that in any other ecosystem, there is definitely a god, no matter who that god is, but there will definitely be such a person. So, you will find that it becomes a political game. For example, I have been in the Web3 entrepreneurship for a year, and I think the biggest feeling is that Web3 is more centralized than WEB2. It has become a matter of pleasing the god, listening to the divine decree, and executing the divine decree very well. At this point, you will find that the Chinese are definitely further away from the Western gods, so you will find that some really good projects done by Chinese in Ethereum are actually more about how to say, doing the groundwork, doing some critical industry chain positions that you cannot get, so you can only do some things that Chinese are good at, such as making some tools and doing things that they are not willing to do.
But Bitcoin is different. Now you will find that this is a level playing field, and because the Chinese, I participated in Ordinals quite early, so everyone naturally has this community, users, and assets here, and it is relatively easy to start and, for example, many projects in our developer ecosystem are now being dug by many chains to deploy them.
Of course, we also tell all developers that we now welcome everyone to do multi-chain deployment. Why? Because the industry is very early, and an application may gain different takeaways from different user ecosystems on different chains, and may also accumulate different resources, and ultimately, it will contribute to the entire ecosystem and make the Bitcoin ecosystem bigger. Because if after a year, the market value of the entire Bitcoin ecosystem has not exceeded 10 billion, that would be very sad.
But if we can all make it bigger together, then the overall market value of the entire ecosystem will increase, and the entire narrative will change, and whether it's the Chinese who are starting Bitcoin businesses or the white people, everyone's overall discourse power will also be greater. Because now, for many overseas, like I heard a podcast a few days ago, many top institutions or individuals in the food chain overseas have a very mocking attitude towards doing Layer2 in the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Of course, this can be very understandable, because many people also had a mocking attitude towards Ethereum back then. Because vested interests always look down on new things. Just like the people in Bitcoin at the time thought, why do you need to do smart contracts in Ethereum? Why do you need to be so smart? You don't need to be so smart, Crypto is digital gold. Why do you need to be so smart, it's better to buy Litecoin. So you will find that the first wave of vested interests did not get on board, so now new vested interests have emerged, and they will mock how Bitcoin does Layer2, right? You are a fake Layer2.
I actually think I don't know if it's intentional or if they are just arrogant enough, because the term Layer2 itself is a created term. If you had said the term Layer2 5 or 8 years ago, the OGs of Bitcoin might have mocked you, saying that no one uses Layer1, so why Layer2? Now that they have control over the narrative of Layer2, they will again feel that Bitcoin does not have Layer2, or that Bitcoin itself does not need Layer2. Just like last year, many people mocked Ordinals, and today they mock Runes in the same way.
So, the history of the world is actually constantly repeating, although each repetition is not exactly the same. I think today's developers, whether from the East or the West, definitely need to move forward together. But indeed, I think that even though I said it so grandiosely, in the process, everyone will inevitably have a sense of competition, and I think that's okay. The sense of competition makes everyone demand more from themselves. When you do something, you will say, let's see how our competitors are doing it, and we definitely can't be worse than them. I think this attitude is definitely okay, as long as it doesn't lead to internal competition and vicious competition. Only then can the entire industry move forward, in my opinion.
Stan: Actually, the dominance of the West should mainly be in the previous cycle, also because of the entire Ethereum, DeFi Summer, and some later major technological innovations, which may have come from some innovations within Ethereum itself. So, to some extent, Ethereum has become a kind of orthodoxy and mainstream. And they have actually led many mainstream narratives. And seeing many professors from top Western universities, as Ryan mentioned earlier, they actually come out to further strengthen these narratives. This is also a characteristic of this cycle's Eigen Layer and Babylon. But actually, I have always felt that, especially for Bitcoin, our advantages are still very obvious, that is, miners and exchanges are still largely of Eastern background, and the core audience of Bitcoin is mainly in the Asia-Pacific region. In terms of asset volume, user volume, and liquidity, the East has more advantages, including large mining companies like Bitmain. And these other advantages are difficult to replace. So, under this background, when we build, we definitely need to make good use of these advantages.
So, coming back to us, our project and some of the things we are doing technically, we as Chinese, or just a few teams led by Chinese, definitely need to do a good organic integration. I think making the product more modular, more combinable, and being able to interface with each other can also avoid reinventing the wheel and be able to reuse each other's strengths. For example, we plan to announce our POS tomorrow, and this protocol is actually a composable protocol, and we don't plan to issue invoices ourselves, so third parties can also issue invoices. I think protocols like this should be opened up, and everyone can use them as a basis, or if they think ours is not good, they can take the contract code and develop their own, which is also okay. I think as long as everyone can maintain a state of cooperation, combination, and communication with each other, the entire field of Chinese Bitcoin builders can continue to move forward.
Actually, I also went to Dubai this time, and there were many feelings at TOKEN 2049. First of all, looking at how Dubai as a city rose, I was also constantly looking at their history, and there were a few key factors. First, their geographical location is very good. I think I'll just give an example, although this example may not be very good, but I'll take the example of how the city of Dubai rose in the first half of the century. It may inspire us as a Chinese Layer2, how to move forward. Dubai, first of all, has a very strong strategic geographical location. It is at the intersection of the East and the West, and actually, Bitcoin itself in the Crypto field is also such a strategic hub, so Bitcoin builders naturally occupy such a strategic position. Then, Dubai itself wants to emphasize its free economic policy, so I think projects in the Bitcoin Layer2 space can also do more trade and asset circulation, which is very important. And thirdly, Dubai has made a lot of investments in infrastructure. I think now the entire Bitcoin ecosystem, we may collectively support some very good builders who are doing infrastructure, wallets, accounts, abstractions, etc., and build them into world-class facilities like airports and ports. Dubai has some very iconic buildings, like the Burj Khalifa, which has become a landmark and can attract people from various other ecosystems and other geographical locations. So, I am especially looking forward to whether it's Merlin, BitLayer, B^2, or maybe CKB didn't come today, but I think there will always be some Burj Khalifas growing in everyone's ecosystem, just like Arbitrum used to have GMX, where every public chain can actually create its own benchmark application.
Projects like Merlin and Bitlayer are currently preparing for these collaborations, and we are also jointly supporting some very excellent builders. I may have used the example of Dubai to compare it to a chain, which is a blind analogy, because in the Web3 field, if a chain or a project can have a user base of tens of thousands, it is actually a very powerful ecosystem. So, we are really still very, very early, and at this point, there is no need to differentiate between you and me, because if you look at Bitcoin, I think it really is the first stop for Web3 to enter the Web3 field. As an engineer, the first lesson we learn about blockchain is definitely Bitcoin, definitely POW, definitely UTXO. So, whether it's on the internet or in traditional finance, its influence is always there, and it is also the first place where the public hears about Crypto and Web3.
You see, a child's first question to his father is definitely "Dad, do we have Bitcoin?" He won't ask "Dad, do we have Ethereum?" So, I think we should make good use of this advantage of entry, and the market is really huge. If we make our products composable, able to be reused by each other, then we can push Bitcoin forward together.
Ryan Chow: From my perspective, I think in fact, we are actually forming a group and collaborating, and in terms of purpose, in my opinion, it's about how we can come together to better serve all these users. Because I actually think that in the end, if we can seize a very large market share in the Bitcoin ecosystem, or even dominate it, the fundamental point is that we can really serve users very well, that is, we can meet all the needs of users very well. For example, like Ethereum and Lido, when Ethereum did POS, that's when Lido appeared. Basically, you can also say that Lido and Ethereum formed a group, because Lido came from the Ethereum Foundation, but on the other hand, it is also because Ethereum has a foundation, which understands the needs of large Ethereum holders, and even this design is to collect feedback from large Ethereum holders and make it. At this point, there are projects like Lido, and they are very clear about what the user needs are, probably a year earlier than everyone else, and at this point, when they prepare and make products, they will definitely better meet the market's needs, or meet the real user needs.
I have repeatedly emphasized that users are in Asia, and that includes the early development of exchanges, users are in Asia. Because in Asia, doing exchange products now, it's definitely Binance, OKX, and Huobi that have done the best before, that's very obvious. Similarly, in the Bitcoin ecosystem, I think everyone doesn't have as strong a sense of orthodoxy and ideology as Ethereum, and I prefer to call it an exploration of user needs, a deep understanding within the community, and the ability to translate it into specific products.
I think whether it's the Solv of the application layer or the infrastructure, being able to understand what the market needs and then being able to iterate to meet those needs, at this point, the entire market will also adopt. This is what I think is the biggest significance, so I think BMAN and ABCDE Labs, everyone should organize and regularly communicate, and then look at the trends of users and the entire market's development, and naturally find their own position by looking at the real pain points and demands of the market.
Just now, I think B^2, this brother, also spoke very well. It's about the overall angle, and how to enter, and how everyone can serve the different needs of users. I think these are typical examples of a deep understanding of users, and the conclusions we can draw. So, I am quite confident about this point.
The user market is currently in Asia. But of course, I think Binance is also targeting Europe, the US, and the global market, as well as various markets in Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia. I think we are actually starting from Asia and also serving more users in other regions. But it's just that the current standard setters and rule makers are actually more likely to be in Asia. So, as we radiate out from here, I think we can still create something great.
One more point is that I can actually see a clear divergence between the East and the West in terms of the pain points and demands in the market. The fact is that many Asian users are often very willing to trust centralized custody solutions, such as Cobo, Bitmain, and others, which use centralized trust as the underlying endorsement and technical mechanisms to serve as a custody framework. I think this has been fully verified as feasible in Asia. But indeed, in many cases, this model may not be feasible for Western users, because Western users actually hope for completely decentralized mechanisms, completely decentralized Bitcoin cross-chains, or custody, or mapping solutions. So, in this regard, I can actually see a very clear divergence. And I think this doesn't necessarily mean that only Westerners can do this, or that only Europeans and Americans can create completely decentralized Bitcoin mapping solutions. I think that we are currently seeing many attempts in Asia, and there is also an opportunity to create such solutions. If we can do it, then first of all, I think that an Asian project, which is definitely more inclined towards large Asian miners and users, will definitely be able to capture the Asian market. At the same time, some real demands from the West, we can explore together what these demands are, and then put them into Asian projects, and how we can better serve them, so that ultimately users from both the East and the West can be brought in. I think it ultimately comes down to user needs, which is a very important point. Ideology is important, but I think it is not insurmountable. I think the success of Binance, Bybit, and OKX in various aspects actually proves this point. So, overall, the significance of coming together is to explore the real needs of the market, and then we can iterate to create better products. I am quite confident about this point.
BMAN: I think that the major Chinese projects should not only communicate, but also support and promote each other. I have a very deep feeling that recently, I saw a chart showing that Indians have dominated this cycle again. In the previous cycle, it was also dominated by Indians, from Polygon, to some large funds, and this cycle is even more so, like Eigen Layer, AAVE, and the AI project, all of which are Indian, and even the founder of Polygon has started a new project. Many projects are done by Indians, including the co-founder of BeraChain, who is also Indian. What I can see is that Indians are very united, and they have even taken over the entire Silicon Valley.
You see, even the CEO of Microsoft is now Indian, so I am quite emotional. Actually, since 2013, the Chinese have basically dominated Crypto, but now, if you look at it, the most FUD against Merlin comes from the Chinese, and I'm really puzzled as to why there is FUD, right? And if you compare the various airdrop programs, Merlin is the most generous, giving out 20% of the tokens for a fair launch. Then look at Eigen Layer, how much did they give for the airdrop? It's all very stingy, including various recent airdrop programs.
But why do the Chinese FUD themselves the most? And why can't we come together to create our own track? This is something that I feel very emotional about, so I would like to propose temporarily that ABCDE is willing to help, to lead, to organize some top Chinese projects to exchange tokens after TGE, and then use a portion of the tokens to organize a fund specifically for the Chinese Bitcoin ecosystem and projects.
It's quite difficult for the Chinese in this cycle, I can deeply feel that, as Jeff said, Chinese projects are scrutinized by users, exchanges, and various VCs, and no one likes Chinese projects, and the Chinese themselves don't like their own projects. At least, I think that as Chinese founders, we can come together and do something together. After the TGE of this project, we can exchange some benefits with each other, and collaborate to create a fund specifically for the Chinese Bitcoin ecosystem. I hope that all the Bitcoin ecosystem projects invested by ABCDE can come together to support each other. At least, we Chinese should not FUD ourselves, we Chinese should come together like the Indians, and even more united than them. Because the Indians have already dominated two cycles. What do the Indians have? Actually, their population is not the largest in the Crypto community, they don't have the most exchanges, and they don't have top funds, but why can the Indians dominate in every ecosystem, and have these top-tier projects? Actually, the most fervent supporters of the Indians are actually the Chinese, like BeraChain, EigenLayer, and so on. How much money have the Chinese invested in them? How much TVL have they contributed? So why do the Chinese support the Indians and not the Chinese? This is very confusing to me. Yes, so as someone who has been in the industry for over a decade as a Chinese Crypto investor, I think it's quite painful that we Chinese should indeed learn from the Indians.
CharlieHu: I have a little bit of experience on this topic, not to say authority, because I am probably the closest to the Indian among the builders here. I have two points of view. First, the Indians do have things worth learning from, and I have always had this perspective, that in some areas where we can't compete, we should learn, not necessarily join, but learn, and then surpass them. Indeed, as you said, the Indians are also, jokingly referred to as "bros". In fact, many projects, including when Polygon was called Matic, when I joined them, they were actually looked down upon by many people, they were looked down upon by Americans, and they did not achieve much in the American capital circle, including Eigen Layer, their success comes from being at Stanford, if he wasn't a professor at Stanford, he might not be anything. And AAVE actually came about because the previous boss of Polygon's team ran out of tokens. They thought that DA's Celestia was inexplicably successful, so they had the opportunity, and many of their successes definitely have a factor of unity.
The second point is definitely about their insights into the market and their ability to capture alpha, which is indeed very keen. I have a feeling about this. Starting last year, there were many small alpha groups among the Chinese, with about 30 people, very refined, not adding people randomly, because if there are too many people, they wouldn't dare to spread various passwords, including various opportunities, primary opportunities, secondary opportunities, and sharing with each other. The number of these alpha groups in the Chinese community is increasing, which I think is a good thing. In India, there are many market opportunities that do not come from Twitter, but from private sharing among people. In this regard, I think our Bitcoin ecosystem has actually done quite well. Another point I can share is that I recently felt that many important positions are actually held by Chinese people, although they may not be purely Chinese, meaning they are not native to mainland China, some may be from Hong Kong, some may be born in Taiwan, and some may have grown up in the United States, and some may be ABCs (American-born Chinese). They may not be Chinese citizens, but they have their own integration points into Western culture, and even have some very sharp points to penetrate and have a strong product design.
I can give a few examples. In other ecosystems, some of the top projects actually have Chinese faces. For example, the founder of Jupiter is a Malaysian Chinese, and several product managers at SushiSwap are actually ABCs. The partners of Uniswap and Paradigm also have Chinese people. Yes, of course, they may not be what we define as purely local Chinese, and our integration and communication with them is actually very limited. Actually, many of the important positions in the crypto industry are already held by Chinese people, although they may be second or third generation, including many of the founders of accelerators in the Bitcoin ecosystem who often work in China are also ABCs. I think we actually have seamless opportunities to prove that those Westerners are wrong, at least from my own experience.
They think that Chinese people cannot create a powerful Layer 2, cannot create good technical infrastructure middle layers, and cannot achieve a large TVL. To do DeFi projects worth hundreds of billions, I think this is the best time to prove them wrong, because Bitcoin does not have the same kind of orthodoxy as Ethereum. Maybe Chinese faces, especially men, are not liked by V God, V God likes Chinese girls, jokingly. So maybe it's difficult to compete in terms of orthodoxy, but Bitcoin doesn't need that. Hal Finney has passed away, Satoshi Nakamoto cannot be found, we don't need to lick so-called people like Luke. They don't have much influence in this community, so I think in the end, it's still about products, growth, and ultimately, data speaks, which is the most direct thing in the Bitcoin space. And in this regard, our cost advantage, our speed, our efficiency, and our ability to capture opportunities, actually have a great chance of success, and the Indian's unity is also relative. We see many successful people supporting each other, but there are also many who look down on each other.
Sandeep once said to me that he actually doesn't like most Indian projects, he is a survivor in a bloodbath. Most people who stay in India actually have no chance to be on the main stage, so I think I have a relatively good mindset about this. I think the unity of the Indians is also a survivor bias. If Sreeram wasn't a professor at Stanford, he wouldn't have achieved what he has today, and if Azura wasn't the CTO of Polygon, he might not be anything. So as long as we have an opportunity, a foothold to support each other, there is still a chance in this wave.
BMAN: In the Bitcoin ecosystem, there have been many different asset protocols in the past six months, including the latest protocol, Runes. I want to ask everyone if they have any relative layouts about Runes in their own ecosystems, and what is their view of the Runes protocol? Will it replace BRC-20, or even have a longer and more significant development?
CharlieHu: Personally, I am very optimistic about Runes, although the user experience is very poor. I think Casey has also been FUDed these days, it's his turn to be FUDed. This is a joke, and it's Westerners who are FUDing him. He is an extremely arrogant German, and on September 12th last year, a few of his words made me feel that the Bitcoin layer cannot continue like this. So either it's off-chain scaling, or it's opportunities and applications for second-layer scaling. Of course, I don't take sides, Domo also has its own issues, but these two people who are pushing for standards in the industry have their value, and we respect them very much, but they also have their personality flaws, I won't say more about that. Runes assets are definitely very popular in the West, from Denver to Dubai, these Degen, these speculative and sensitive people are discussing this topic.
On the halving day, a bunch of Indians and a bunch of people from Dubai were using dozens of computers to deal with the Runes, and no one went to the party, I think this is quite interesting, but it turned out that they all burned their bitcoins. This inexplicable incident caused a lot of trouble, and the user experience is currently very poor. I think it's similar to last year, so we can pay attention to the entire asset, many explosive protocols have not yet emerged, and we are still in the early stage, in a stage of exploration. Many people have taken up some tickers, preparing to release some MEMEs, essentially it is still a MEME asset protocol. Casey has also started to promote it, I think his influence is unquestionable, and he actually came to Hong Kong this time hoping to find some consensus between the East and the West. XVerse is pushing him over, and he actually has a relatively distant feeling towards Asian culture and the Asian community. And we at Bitlayer are doing two things, we are exploring at the tool layer, we must first support the assets of Runes to the second layer, for example, to improve their user experience by 100 times, including trading volume, providing liquidity, these are definitely things that need to be done, there are relatively few things that can be done at the first layer, and the experience is definitely worse, being able to go to the second layer is definitely to pursue better returns and a better experience.
We are also collaborating with teams like RunesTerminal for this purpose. RunesTerminal is our first officially announced overseas ecosystem project. We have had quite a bit of communication with them. Recently, I have seen many tool layer projects related to Runes coming out, many of them in Dubai, but I think it's still early, and there are no truly killer-level projects yet. Not calling it killer-level, but something that is particularly popular, like Sats and Rats last year, which were very popular at the BRC-20 level, and had a great influence, these kinds of assets have not yet emerged, I have been in communication with some teams that were quite successful in launching inscriptions last year, and they are also biding their time. I think we are still in a state of eager anticipation, there is no particularly awesome project yet, and even Runestone by Leonidas cannot be considered, although it is a very good pilot.
Can the first generation entrepreneurs of Runes and the first generation inscriptions, whether in China or overseas, continue their glory in the Runes circle? I am taking a wait-and-see attitude, and I hope that this wave will bring some new builders with new, good product designs and good DeFi solutions accumulated over the years on Ethereum, and some NFT solutions to empower the first layer of the Bitcoin ecosystem. The Bitcoin ecosystem should not only be about a group of people like Leonidas continuing to do their thing. This is something I don't want to see, and I am also exploring to attract various senior builders from other ecosystems. Runes is an asset, and the consensus on this asset target is already there, so doing well in applications on this, improving the user experience, I think that's the most practical thing. ```
Ryan Chow: From the perspective of Solv, since we are focused on DeFi and primarily on the liquidity layer of Bitcoin, we haven't participated in Runes from a protocol perspective, but personally, I have bought some. Overall, I have found it quite interesting, but I am definitely not as professional in this area as Charlie and Jeff.
Let me briefly share my thesis. I have actually approached some supporters of Solana who are involved in meme activities, and I first asked them about their overall status. Because Runes is an asset initiated in the West and is somewhat like a meme, I communicated with them to understand their views on the recent Solana memes and their thoughts on inscriptions and runes in the BTC ecosystem. The feedback I received was quite optimistic. They are somewhat like Solana and, strictly speaking, also belong to a kind of community unity.
Projects like BOME, and a few recent memes like BONK, are things they or their friends have been involved in, and they have reached a consensus within their circle that assets similar to meme-like runes in the Bitcoin ecosystem are very imaginative, and they are very bullish on these assets. So, I think they have diverted most, or at least more than half, of their funds from Solana memes to these rune assets, which I think is a very positive signal.
BMAN: I have also speculated on memes, and I can feel the enthusiasm of this community gradually shifting towards Runes, which I find quite interesting.
Jeff: I might just pour a little cold water. I think first of all, whether it's Runes or BRC-20, it's just a protocol for issuing fungible tokens, just like ERC-20. After ERC-20 came out, no one really cheered for a fungible token protocol anymore, because we already have ERC-20 for issuing tokens. The reason why there is so much attention now is because there has never been a token issuance protocol on Bitcoin before.
So from BRC-20 last year to Runes this year, there is a shift in attention, and people think this is something very cool and new, which is normal. But in the long run, I think I may need to correct my previous judgment. I used to think that Runes would not have a big impact on BRC-20, but I think I may have been wrong about that, right? If I was wrong, I need to look into it. Why? I think the main reason is that the number of good tokens that can be speculated on is decreasing, but Runes has a longer digit, so it gives developers a relatively broad space. Secondly, because it has the function of pre-minting, many projects have undergone significant changes in their operations. And because Runes is a protocol led by overseas entities, early projects like RSIC and Runestone have received a lot of attention overseas, and the rest of the community is also more willing to accept and buy into it, so its momentum is very good at the moment.
As for the point about the second layer of Bitcoin today, I think its challenges and opportunities coexist. Of course, this is just today's view. The challenge is that people on the first layer are not very willing to transfer assets similar to runes to the second layer. Because trading rune assets on the first layer is not so inconvenient at the moment, there may be some costs, but most people are trading very hot tokens. Users may think that paying $50 for a $3000 or $5000 trade order is acceptable. I don't know if anyone here is using the Rune bridge, but because there are already some runes inside, and the bridge for runes has not been built yet, I personally think that users on the first layer are not very willing to trade runes on the second layer. It doesn't hurt them, and there is a natural distrust of things like bridges, which I think is normal. Similarly, many people are not willing to transfer BRC-20 to the second layer. In short, either the token is already dying, and I won't sell it on the first layer, and I can't sell it on the second layer. Or the token is already listed on an exchange, so I'll bridge it to the exchange. This is the situation.
But I think the opportunity is that you will find that just as BRC-20 tokens have come over, the runes will also follow the same path. What does that mean? It means that there will definitely be some top tokens that are traded very high, and then they will be listed on centralized exchanges, and a large number of tokens, like ORDI and SATS today, will exist in centralized exchanges and become a meme in centralized exchanges that people can speculate on. Because the user base on the chain and the user base on the exchange are very non-overlapping, this user base will have a full turnover, and eventually the token will become a token on the exchange. Many of the large holders who pledged ORDI to us before actually don't use Uniswap at all, because the entire process of buying this token was completed on the exchange.
But after these top tokens are listed on centralized exchanges, the remaining tokens will have a very obvious liquidity drought, because it is very difficult to speculate on the middle and tail tokens on the first layer. Its entire trading efficiency, including the efficiency of asset distribution, leads to very high early costs. For example, the cost of issuing tokens is already in the millions of dollars, at least for 10 tokens like BRC-20. This cost is actually a cost in the user's mind. So in the secondary market, its liquidity needs to be very good to make up for these costs and continue to rise. So you will find that today, apart from ORDI and SATS, many other communities have encountered quite significant problems, and their liquidity is very poor. So where is the opportunity on the second layer? You will find that whether it's Solana memes or Base memes, the entire process of asset issuance, such as who participates, whether everyone participates in crowdfunding, or whether it's an airdrop, the entire participation process is very smooth and the cost is very low.
Secondly, it builds pools on top, that is, DeFi. DEX has been through a lot of trials and tribulations, so it proves to be the best way to issue tokens. So if you build a pool on the second layer, the price can quickly rise. Of course, it can also quickly go to zero, which we see every day, but it can also quickly rise, and even the early meme tokens on Merlin, for example, will rise very quickly. And at this point, more people who issue these meme tokens will think that if they issue on the first layer, they will either pay hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in costs, or the users will pay hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in costs. And you will find that BRC-20 has already verified that this model is inefficient, so this may be the opportunity for runes on the second layer. Of course, everything is still quite early today. We have recently been incubating runes and working with OKX Venture to take a look at it.
Overseas or in Asia, I think there are definitely many things that developers can build. But if Runes ends up following the same path as BRC-20 in the end, and if we in the Layer2 do not provide help or empower it, I personally think it would be quite regrettable.
BMAN: On the opcode side, there is a recent OP_CAT, which is providing the ability to combine script fragments for UTXOs. So I want to ask everyone, what kind of improvements do you think the impact and variable ability of the entire Bitcoin ecosystem will bring? And do you think it will have a significant impact on the overall development of Layer2 in the future?
Jeff: Let me briefly say that this can be sugar-coated, it will have a very significant impact on the entire ecosystem. But I think the occurrence and effective implementation of this will take a relatively long time to scale up. Of course, it is a smart contract that can run a certain amount on Bitcoin, and it is definitely helpful for the entire ecosystem, including Layer2. But I believe that in reality, its development cycle and cost structure may not provide much help to the ecosystem in the short term.
Now, for any Bitcoin Layer2 that involves a large amount of fund custody, fund security is definitely the most important part. When we went live in February, many people thought that the funds were not safe, and there were bugs in the deposit and withdrawal process. Including the fact that many funds are on Merlin, there are desires for attacks from bad actors and hackers.
So how to do this well? We hope to find a balance between stability, security, and intelligent efficiency. Recently, we have seen many projects working on rune bridges and runestone bridges, and we have looked at their solutions, and to be honest, they are quite risky. This also applies to many developers, including the audience here, if you are working on rune bridge development or chain development, for example, like the fact that Rune currently only has one index, Unisat, and everyone uses its indexer. And as you know, the indexer for BRC-20 often has some small issues, not fatal, but small issues. But if the bridge itself has a liquidity custody mechanism where your first-layer runes exist, and the entire bridge process is instantaneous, we are almost done with the rune bridge now, whether it should be delayed or instantaneous? For example, we have delayed it for three days, which I think is quite fast for a Layer2 official bridge, but of course, users will definitely think it's not fast enough. So many projects, when they are doing an instantaneous bridge, essentially hand over all the decisions to the machine. Because there is no multi-party indexing capability, but once there is a problem with the middle index, or if there is a deviation in the bridge information, the entire machine will execute your runes, and there may be bugs in the middle because the technology itself is not yet perfect. Before going live, Casey even fixed a bug because of the imperfect protocol and indexing, resulting in a loss of funds. Currently, we have tens of millions of dollars, over thirty to forty million dollars of Dog runes on the chain. So I think that in many cases, when the technology is not mature, we still need to prioritize stability and security. Many projects are now trying to promote this real-time and fast concept, but personally, I still have many concerns as a developer.
CharlieHu: This is an interesting dynamic in the Bitcoin community, or it's a debate between different factions. The radicals hope that OP_CAT will be approved as soon as possible, and many things that cannot be done now can be done, but this will certainly bring some security risks to a certain extent, and may even sacrifice some of Bitcoin's existing basic principles, so this will definitely be opposed by some Bitcoin OGs, including those with laser eyes.
Recently, I have observed that in the Bitcoin community, a technical OG, now there are five people maintaining the core report code of Bitcoin, and they have bypassed a few of them to start pushing this matter. I think this is like a joke, a rebellion in the community. I think this rebellion has some meaning, and there may be some actions before the Bitcoin conference in the United States in July.
For us doing BitVM, our view has always been consistent, that is, the best way for the Bitcoin ecosystem is to do something without hard forks and soft forks, so we proposed RGB++, and use CKB as a smart contract platform to do such things.
I believe that although the Bitcoin ecosystem has fallen to this extent, I think Bitcoin is the future of the entire industry, it is a very free and pioneering space and platform. I think the Layer2 in the East, especially ABCDE, has invested in many projects, and there are EVM and UTXO, and I think we can do many different things, rather than catering to Western capital. We often liken CKB to being persistent in UTXO, but our ideas are very different from those of Bitcoin Maximalists overseas. And we think of ourselves as Eastern heretics, with some ideological differences. I think that if people in the East, or even overseas, who recognize this path, unite, we can do a lot of things. And we see that the EVM track is also very strange, some of us are already at the forefront, but overseas still doesn't buy it, and everyone can promote their own, which already indicates many things.
I think at this time, we need to be more firm in our confidence in the Bitcoin ecosystem, and not to distinguish between Chinese and overseas, I think those biases should be put aside, and this is the best opportunity for us to do public chains.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
