It’s been 20 days since the 1024 conversation in the vibration industry. If the incident has brought about changes in the industry, then the relevant impact is mainly reflected in the aspect of “mental support” – the controversial blockchain in the past has finally become a relative in the eyes of the mainstream society. Formal industry. Practitioners in the blockchain industry no longer need to smack their identity in people's eyes. However, from now on, in addition to some opportunities in the consulting industry because of the high degree of information asymmetry, the expected dividends in the entire industry – such as large-scale financing and high-paying jobs are not reflected.
Why is there such a situation? An important reason is that because the blockchain is still a concept that exists more on paper, and how to build related infrastructure, there is no clear development idea in the industry, let alone built in various Decentralized applications above the infrastructure. In this regard, we can refer to the history of the development of the 5g network – although it was included in the development schedule of major technology companies as early as 2013, but it has become a hot topic of publicity, or 5g in 2018 After the introduction of international standards, until then, upstream infrastructure builders, as well as downstream technology research and development teams, began to really pull out real money to pay for 5g.
In 2019, there are already a variety of 5g mobile phones and related traffic packages. Although the related accessory products are still immature, it at least illustrates one thing, that is, an industry dividend. In many cases, it is not immediately apparent after the relevant concept is proposed, but will be gradually released after the relevant standards are clarified, because the use of funds is the most efficient only on the predetermined route. Otherwise, Throwing more money may only play a role in trial and error, and it will not have much effect on product development.
- DCEP VS Libra, the outpost of the digital economy under the new "big game"
- What is bitcoin fork? Can you profit from the fork?
- Booking becomes the seventh member of the Libra Association
- Zhu Jiaming's latest sharing: Understanding the evolution of blockchain paradigms from a futuristic perspective
- Bitcoin investment from an asset allocation perspective: is Bitcoin speculative or a safe-haven asset?
- What is the experience of buying coins, buying a house, and buying shares?
The blockchain industry in the past few years is a typical case – from the concept that was first proposed in 2015 to nearly five years later, in the absence of any industry development standards, billions of dollars of funds have been picked up. In this field, as the outside world has seen, the industry has not produced too many achievements and progress that are worthy of pride. This is probably why the current social capital is very cautious about investing in the blockchain industry.
First, the necessary conditions for the release of blockchain opportunities: the formulation of technical standards
But the question is, why has the blockchain industry delayed the introduction of industry standards so far? After all, it has been several years since the official departments of various countries have expressed their support for the development of related technologies. The most important reason for this situation is that the upper level still does not want to understand what kind of industry the technology can be used in.
This problem is not solved, and the formulation of industry standards cannot be discussed. For example, people now know that 5G network technology is to serve the Internet of Everything. Therefore, the goal of the 5g network standard is to solve several obstacles in the current development of the Internet of Things through the following technical features: low power consumption, large bandwidth, and multiple connections. Low latency. All industry standard details are developed around these sub-goals.
On the contrary, blockchain technology is not so smooth. Although everyone knows that this technical solution is indeed good, the past can be concentrated in the credibility of the public trust department for horizontal diffusion and vertical sinking. But in the current economic and technological background, what kind of scenario can this technology be used for, whether it is enterprise-oriented or personal? Is it used in the financial industry or in the non-financial industry?
At present, there is still no unified calibre in the upper level. The most obvious aspect of this entanglement is that while mainstream public opinion requires that blockchain technology can empower non-financial real economy, while financial scenes are defined as blockchain technology. Focus direction. In the financial industry, on the one hand, it strictly supervises all kinds of certificates including Bitcoin and Ark, but on the other hand, it is interested in the official digital currency, but what kind of scene should the official digital currency be applied to? Underneath, it has never been able to give a clearer statement. This actually shows that people don't think about the blockchain technology that should be mainly used in what kind of scene. If this problem is not solved, the blockchain industry will not be able to formulate a clear-cut industry standard as much as 5g, let alone release the wealth opportunity close to its volume.
However, although the upper layer has always been vague about the application scenarios of blockchain technology, considering the factors of various aspects, even if China wants to apply blockchain technology in non-financial fields, research on digital finance and digital currency It is also a hurdle that it can never go around. This is not only because finance and currency are currently the most digitized and most likely segments of convergence with blockchain technology; more importantly, the research on blockchain assets is now evolving into an armament. competition. The pressure on the digital international currency, including Libra and the US dollar stable currency, has forced the central bank to make relevant actions. The recent DCEP, which has suddenly started to be screened, is a typical example.
But the problem is: Unlike the Internet of Everything, infrastructure like finance is too sensitive to the stable development of the economy. If you are not careful, it is very likely that it will lead to a very serious social crisis. In fact, we can see from the relevant news that even if the digital power grid causes a large-scale power outage due to network problems, the negative effects are often short-term, at least not for an economy. The prosperity and decline, but if several large financial companies have problems, the negative effects are likely to be deep and far. The typical case is the 2008 international financial crisis.
This determines one thing: in the process of formulating relevant standards for the blockchain, the relevant departments have to consider more factors, and the future industry standard launch may face more twists and turns. In a nutshell: blockchain and financial industry standards have fewer technical constraints, but the administrative threshold is high. The standard administrative threshold for its combination with the non-financial industry is lower, but the technical constraints are higher. Considering that for the relevant upper-level institutions, the development of technology is often uncontrollable, and administrative adjustments are often controllable. Therefore, before the wealth opportunity of the blockchain industry is released, the upper-level institutions will certainly seek the formulation of industry standards, especially the blockchain financial track. With this action, it is the most worrying point of many people in the currency circle. – That is, after the regular army entered the market, the squeeze on the living space of the so-called "blockchain aborigines".
Then the question comes: Which track is most likely to be subject to strict regulatory control?
Second, the necessary conditions for the development of blockchain standards: supervision of the exchange
Undoubtedly, for the regulatory authorities, the digital currency, which now includes various altcoins, is a particularly troublesome and untimely bomb. This is not only because they are easy to take away the funds that are really dedicated to the development of blockchain technology, but more importantly: these altcoins have caused too much trouble for social stability in the past few years. The reputation of the blockchain industry has also caused some damage.
After the development of the past few years, many people who have questioned the supervision of the industry have now become staunch supporters of the regulatory authorities. It can be said that the supervision of the blockchain industry is imperative, and it is already the consensus of the industry. But the question is how to supervise? The issue of the currency itself is uncontrollable. Its threshold is too low and can be carried out all over the world, almost completely uncontrollable. Just like a person rumored to pirated movies online, this matter, no one can really control it.
With reference to the regulatory experience of other industries, we have reason to believe that the relevant departments will certainly not spend too much time on the trivial matters of the currency control, but will increase the control in another link – that is, as a sale Intermediary exchanges, after all, the issue of the currency itself is only an arbitrage route, and only the price generated above, the currency talent can be realized from it. It’s just like a person uploading pirated movies online is just a way. His real purpose is to get the attention on the traffic website. If the trading platform refuses to send the money, the thing will become Meaningless.
It should be pointed out that although the number of exchanges has been almost equal to the number of project parties, at first glance, the regulatory difficulty is no less than that of the project side, but it is different from the project party that is relatively free and can be operated in a decentralized community. Exchanges are generally more localized. Different from the underlying public chain, which is relatively vague and good, because the quality of service has a clear evaluation criteria, in order to ensure efficient operation, the trading platform must exist in the company's system. At the same time, in order to attract investors and large customers, social networks including founders often need to be active in China. Although there are not many exchanges that play cross-border strategies, there are not many successful ones like the currency security. Most of them who put guns around the world and give up their localization strategies can only be marginalized. For example, once the cloud currency.
In this way, it is almost certain that the exchange rate of the currency circle will be a subdivision track that the regulatory authorities will strictly control before introducing the industry standard of the financial blockchain. The specific control measures are still unknown. It may be that by supporting the regular army similar to BAKKT, the grassroots exchanges will be marginalized or even dying through commercial competition. It may also be through simple and rude administrative supervision and licensing. The way to achieve a one-size-fits-all approach. But no matter which method, these exchanges are now likely to be fierce in the future.
For ordinary currency practitioners, the most direct result of this regulatory trend in the future of the blockchain industry is that their voice in the industry will decline and it will drop very rapidly, for very Simplicity: It is as if most of the live network reds are finally running to sell goods, as long as they are the blockchain institutions that people can think of, lacking mature business models, including public chains, self-media, and even selling Machines, from companies, capital, brick-moving, to individual practitioners, have recently begun to move toward the exchange. A previous statistic showed that nearly half of the practitioners in the entire currency circle have gathered in the exchange field, and as the trend of other tracks continues to increase, the above trend is expected to intensify. The consequence of this kind of employment structure is that these elite practitioners gathered in the field of exchanges are likely to be “one-pot” with the concentration of supervision on the exchanges, and thus the influence in this industry. The power has fallen sharply and even completely marginalized. This is obviously a situation that people in the old currency circle are not willing to see.
However, as the author mentioned in the previous article , this is a general trend that does not shift with their will, because the blockchain aborigines have earlier cognitive advantages over the mainstream elite, mainly based on The cognitive asymmetry between the blockchains. In the past few years, they have not been able to use their resources to create new products and technologies, and have not been able to reopen new cognitive gaps with the outside world. It can be said that these old industries are in the regular army. The fate that was squeezed and even out after entering the game has been personally finalized by themselves in the past two years.