Since the beginning of 2018, “blockchain” has rapidly detonated the global market and has been highly sought after by the capital markets. This has caused heated calls from all walks of life. Almost all of the shares of the “blockchain” express car soared and became the “new darling” of the capital market. At the same time, the entire blockchain market under the boom has become a “heartbeat” for many people in the industry.
How the future of blockchain will be? The market will show what kind of situation? What are the problems? How should we be rational?
In response to some problems or puzzles existing in the current blockchain industry, many industry or media friends have had exchanges with me. I will specifically talk about my views here for reference purposes only.
1, bitcoin in the end is not a bubble?
On this issue, let us look back at the “tulip” incident. From 1593, tulips were introduced into Western Europe and the tulip market collapsed in 1637, during which the tulip trading market existed for about 30-40 years. From the perspective of time, people have a hundred years of life, dealing with capital probably for the time of thirty or fifty years. When the length of an asset’s life cycle exceeds that of an individual, let us discuss whether it is a bubble, It is not meaningful.
If bitcoin’s life cycle is long enough to go beyond individual existence. By that time you say that it is a conspiracy or a bubble. Any individual viewpoint or idea will not seem so important to such a long time.
As for whether bitcoin is a bubble or not, we can not deny the viability of bitcoin and its acceptance of the “value” of a huge consensus group behind it. In addition, there are negative aspects of bitcoin, such as “dark net use”, “money laundering” and so on, but this is not the problem of bitcoin itself. Such as chess, it is a positive, educational activities, but also some people used to trick money in the streets, or used to gamble. Even legal coins, some people used to engage in illegal activities. So I think the nature of bitcoin is not so complicated conspiracy exists, the focus is still on the people who use it.
2, bitcoin whether there is real value?
I have had contacts with people in many trades and industries. There have also been some discussions in this area. Some of them think that it is only valuable to have an anchor behind the assets. I think this is not reasonable. Today, the reputation of a person or an institution can exist as a financial derivative. It does not need to anchor an object, such as some of the wealth management software in our mobile phones now, and can borrow through personal credit.
So I think an item is valuable, does not necessarily require anchoring, or require government endorsement. Like the balls, cards, etc. we used to play as children, these items are valuable to children. In the group of children, these items are hard currency and can be exchanged (traded). This is how consensus groups give things The value given.
Therefore, whether a thing is valuable or not lies not in the thing itself, but in the consensus group behind the thing. In this world, the asset value does not necessarily need to endorse the government, the market-oriented behavior can also be given its value, today’s bitcoin is the case.
3, bitcoin can replace the legal status of the currency?
In my opinion, the logic that Bitcoin can replace French coins is not valid. One is the government to determine the right, one is driven by the market-driven valuation, the two are essentially different.
In addition, the values they carry are not the same. Bitcoins carry the values conferred by the community or marketization groups, representing the belief and consensus of the groups behind them, matching the personal interests and values of the holders; and the legal currency carries the values of the state, endorsed by the government and endured Law recognition and protection, but also fit the national conditions and price system of the host country, both to ensure the stability of the national economic system, but also to promote the development of people’s livelihood.
And the role of legal currency in many cases, but also bitcoin can not be replaced. For example, legal currency can achieve the purpose of macroeconomic regulation and control through issuance, Bitcoin can not; at the same time, the legal currency can respond to the economic crisis through the corresponding monetary policy under certain circumstances, while bit can hardly do this.
From these points of view, bitcoin and legal currency are very different ideologically and functionally, so I think it is very hard for bitcoin to replace the position of legal tender.
4, bitcoin and other token whether there is a difference?
Before I talk about this issue, I would like to express my personal position. First of all, it is not to encourage and encourage everyone to participate in this field. It is for everyone to have a rational understanding of what is happening today. We objectively analyze these situations and, before the bubble comes , Professional investors should vote out the money, retail investors should focus on risk control, because there is great asymmetric information, or even suggested not to participate, for iico team to get funding projects should assume the responsibility and trust to help society Create more value than transfer wealth.
From the perspective of the entire market, there are two main types of digital currencies: one is bitcoin, and the other is token with endorsement of actual projects.
For many people, they are digital currencies, no difference. However, from the point of view of value attributes, both have similarities and differences. The common denominator is that both map their faith and consensus behind the group. The difference is that Bitcoin, led by digital currency, highlights the monetary attributes, is a tool for trading, storage and accounting; the latter highlights the value created by the project team in the future, the subject is the future revenue .
So in my opinion, the difference between the two lies in the value of the property.
5, digital currency led by Bitcoin, is creating a new virtual world?
I personally reject the notion of “virtual world,” because this argument seems to me to be a fallacy.
In primordial society, the transactional relationship is achieved by way of barter. With the development of our society, new technical means have changed the medium of exchange, thus changing the mode of transaction, but the essence of the transaction has not actually changed.
Strictly speaking, our assets have actually been virtualized once. From the barter of the original period to the abstract of shells, gold and silver, joss sticks and banknotes, these are the process of asset virtualization. With the development of science and technology, transaction media gradually update the iteration, the modern emergence of banknotes, contracts, warehouse receipts, notes and so on, all of which are value substitutes for asset virtualization and are given transaction attributes. By the Internet age, the number of 0101, represented by computer languages, has become the mainstream value substitute, which in turn is an asset virtualization process.
The same is true for the blockchain and its digital assets. It is no different from the paper money in our pockets and the gold and silver of a few hundred years ago. They are the medium of exchange for tradable transactions and are different “currency” manifestations of different historical stages.
So I think it’s a fallacy that many people call digital things virtual worlds. Today’s world and the world in the past, in essence, no change, the development of science and technology just changed our trading methods and trading medium, did not change the nature of our transactions.
Blockchain technology is a must-have technology. It solves the urgent need of current society for the circulation of digital assets, brings us new ways of value circulation, and poses challenges to our existing social organization. Although it now presents some short-term problems and changes beyond the expectations of society, it will eventually become accepted by the general public as the popularity of new ideas brings the idea that this is in line with historical developments law.
6, some personal views on the situation of blockchain financing
From a different perspective, on the one hand, the current secondary market is flooded with a large number of misappropriated items. The mixed results make it difficult for investors to tell the difference between good and bad items and even derelict bad money. On the other hand, no matter how we look today in this market chaos, there is an objective fact already before us: the blockchain has brought about a global secondary market. This secondary market carries a large amount of assets and no longer needs a centralized organization to maintain the digital asset security. It is entirely carried by an autonomous, distributed technology system.
At present, many projects or enterprises are stimulating communities and developing projects through the power of the secondary market and the funds brought by value investors or speculators. In theory, this is a positive and meaningful thing. After all, no blockchain, there is no such a large secondary market.
From the point of view of the industry as a whole, a commercial ecology prototype maintained by a blockchain technology has formed today. Although it has not been as perfect as our imagination, although there are still many projects in which bubbles still exist, we can not deny that the future possible belt The positive meaning of coming.
7, blockchain technology to bring the biggest change may be what?
The existence of blockchain does bring some new phenomena and changes. Personally think that the biggest change may be mainly in the organizational structure, and even bring about change.
Historically, innovations in science and technology or economic systems have brought about social changes.
In the early part of the last century, because capitalists monopolized the means of production and laborers were unable to carry out their own production, resulting in a disproportion between pay and benefits of laborers and greatly undermining the social and economic development at that time. This was the “alienated labor” phenomenon put forward by Marx .
With the progress of society and technological development, the recent emergence of equity and options and the new economic rules have enabled more workers to participate in the distribution of wealth, enhanced the enthusiasm of workers and the efficiency of social production. In the past year or two, a new kind of technological innovation – the birth of a “shared economy” has once again subverted our social patterns.
The social form before the sharing of the economy is the society controlled by the centralized institution. Any individual must participate in the distribution of wealth, must join a commercial organization and serve for it, and get paid. The business nature of the monopoly is the pursuit of profits, is the expansion of scale, the balance of wealth is tilted to the interests of the organization, the individual’s right to speak minimal. The shared economy is a national incentive model that emphasizes “paid sharing,” and all individuals involved in sharing receive a matching return. Just as Uber connects private owners and passengers, Airbnb connects individual landlords and travelers with accommodation needs. In this process, individuals (service providers and demand-side) are decision-makers and beneficiaries, and the central discourse power is correspondingly weakened, which ultimately affects the distribution of wealth and the structure of social organizations.
Equity options are centered within the scope of incentives to expand and promote the distribution of wealth. In the context of decentralization, the shared economy is encouraged by the general public and promotes a more rational distribution of wealth. From the perspective of the blockchain, it has a broader scope of motivation and connects all the institutions and individuals in the world. At the same time, the blockchain can lower the threshold of trust and share resources and services, so as to form a better and more fair Social organization form. Although the central decision-making body is inevitable in the process, the blockchain can be more transparent and fair.
8, in order to achieve the real standardization of blockchain market?
To borrow Hegel’s famous quote: “Existence is reasonable.” I think the chaos in the current blockchain market is a process that new things must go through.
Take the Internet, at the very beginning of its birth, when the great potential of the Internet was realized by people, a lot of money was blindly put into the network. Capitalists, speculators and retail investors poured in with the tide like today. As a result, the bubble was soaring. Until the bubble burst in 2001, the craze collapsed.
Comparing the development of the Internet, we find that the chaos of profits often comes from the lack of a reasonable system and normative guidance in the market. This is like a child without parents, the imperfect environment for growth, will inevitably lead to its brutal growth. This is not to say that the chaos we have seen so far is reasonable, but rather to say that “barbaric growth” is a stage from birth to growth that has to go through. This is one of the natural attributes of the market. The Internet, The stock market so, blockchain as well.
9, on the policy direction of the future
Starting from September 4, the entire monetary policy circle has become tighter. Various rumors of regulation have also come one after another. Here are some of my opinions. Personally think that September 4 issued a document, to do pretty. Because at that time the brutal growth of the market, there are some uncontrolled, more crazy. But how to go behind, I can not give an accurate judgment.
In my opinion, the global secondary market, its existence has more positive impact on the convergence of capital and circulation of funds. If the secondary market is not completely eliminated, the traditional capital will surely tilt toward the global capital market and the share of the traditional capital market will therefore shrink. As a result, many new startup projects, or projects that require funding, will become more difficult to fund (less well aligned with the healthy development of innovative markets).
However, I believe that with the development of the industry and the market changes in the future, we will launch some better policies at an appropriate time to guide the circulation of funds and the correct flow of funds so as to promote a more rational distribution of funds so as to help those who are genuine Good projects or enterprises, to create more social values and wealth, so that more people enjoy the social dividend brought about by the development of science and technology.
10, the current block chain market how to be positive and healthy development?
“One thousand readers, there are a thousand Hamlet,” and there are different opinions about people who are different about this issue. In my opinion, blockchain technology today does bring about many changes, but there are also many problems. The birth of these problems stems from “information asymmetry” and “lack of professional judgment.”
At present, although there are many projects on the market, the information between the investors and holders of the project is not equal. As a result, many project investors can only blindly follow and vote for candidates. At the same time, the popularity of blockchain knowledge is relatively low, and ordinary people find it hard to make professional judgments in this regard.
Therefore, I think that the future development of the market for blockchain must be realized through the combination of market-driven and government regulation.
In the future, there will certainly be professional “brokers” driven by the market. They will have more professional judgment, be able to take on the responsibility of channeling funds and reconciling the market, solve the information asymmetry in the digital money market, and lack the professional judgment in the market And other challenges, thus helping the entire market toward a more positive and healthy direction. At the same time, the reasonable regulation of policies can reasonably limit the market behavior of “brokers” within the legal framework.
As a result, market-driven makes “brokers” can be a good reminder of the market vitality, policy control control “broker” behavior, to prevent market risk. Market-driven and regulatory policies complement each other and work together to create a positive and healthy market environment.