1 - Is decentralization and privacy a necessity, isn't the government trying to make everyone transparent?

The way I understand the decentralization of the crypto ecosystem has two meanings:

One is the fundamental, technical decentralization as described in the Bitcoin white paper—using decentralization to prevent single points of failure;

The other is the extended meaning, referring to using decentralization to minimize "credit reliance," reduce credit risks, and thus establish a neutral, trustworthy platform.

Both points are essential in many contexts technically and practically.

I also believe that privacy is a necessity and an inevitable requirement of human society when it reaches a certain stage of development.

The government certainly wishes for everyone to be transparent—but it hopes that all those under its jurisdiction are transparent, as this makes governance easier and allows for timely handling. However, when it comes to individual people, even those within the government, it returns to human nature; they too wish for their information and behaviors to be private, as transparent as possible.

This is a matter of human nature.

In business, the demand for privacy is even more essential. The protection of trade secrets and privacy is a core requirement in modern economic society.

This makes privacy an everlasting necessity, yet it will always be a game of cat and mouse and will continue indefinitely.

2 - The biggest problem and current situation in the crypto industry is: the highway is built, but no cars are coming. So at least for now, there is no proof of its necessity.

I do not believe the problem in the crypto industry is "the highway is built, but no cars are coming." I think a more accurate statement is: a multi-lane road has been built, but currently, only a few lanes are being used.

"At least for now, there is no proof of its necessity"—I have written several articles introducing the application of stablecoins in South American countries. In those scenarios and countries, the stablecoins birthed by the crypto industry are not dispensable, not just icing on the cake, but are truly a genuine public necessity.

3 - Value projects are also harvesting tools.

A person sees the world through a certain lens, and the world will ultimately respond to that person in corresponding ways.

If one sees the world as a zero-sum game of life and death, constantly plundering each other, then one day they will fall to someone else's scythe, no matter how adept they were at scything others before.

If one believes the world is symbiotic and capable of winning together, then they too will inevitably grow and thrive along with the world.

4 - AI stocks may indeed have higher multiples, but the uncertainty is too great to commit heavily; BTC's 15x, if truly understood in its significance, is a highly certain 15x, which can yield good returns.

Regarding this viewpoint, Duan Yongping has also said something similar (the essence being): investing 5% in an asset and investing 20% in an asset are fundamentally different.

Investing 5% is more like experimenting, tasting something new, tentatively laying out, merely satisfying an investor's curiosity and exploratory desire, and does not count as serious investment at all.

Investing 20% is completely different. For a serious investor, it reflects that their understanding of the asset they are investing in has reached a substantial level, and they believe this asset can provide a relatively high return that satisfies them.

Speculative layouts rarely lead to significant wealth transformations. True wealth transformations come from heavy, serious investments.

Thus, many times, having the courage to invest 20% seriously in an asset that has a high level of certainty, even if the returns are relatively limited, is better than finding a hundredfold coin by randomly investing 5%.

Duan Yongping also shared another story from around him:

A friend of his had been telling him for years how great and how promising Bitcoin was. One day, Duan Yongping curiously asked his friend: since you have such confidence in Bitcoin and are so optimistic, what is your investment in Bitcoin?

The result was that his friend said, about 1% or so.

This is quite ironic.

If his friend truly believed in Bitcoin, it would be impossible to only invest 1% in it. If he only invested 1%, it shows he did not really believe in Bitcoin but was just participating in the trend without conviction.

Such a person will ultimately only be a passerby in Bitcoin, or the wealth brought to him by Bitcoin will be very limited.

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。