RGB++协议的意义与Nervos生态发展

The author's source triggered a wave of community peace and decline after going online last night. In the final analysis, there are two reasons: one is that expectations don't match with reality, and the other is that people don't understand the agreement well. Let's talk about where the expected mismatch is and where the deviation of the understanding of the agreement is. Why did I go to the following details more firmly after seeing the mood of the community last night? First of all, what everyone expected to achieve was not a new tool, but a second asset with consensus, and then everyone started playing with a bang. To make money in the market is such that some people will want to restrict the deployment of assets. However, this is obviously impossible, because the standard of agreed assets is open, and this centralized restriction is meaningless. Even if you don't do it, others will make open tools and an infrastructure will do this centralized restriction. I think it is fatal. Besides, in fact, the consensus on the second asset has been formed, but it is not as expected that the consensus was formed from the beginning, but that the website was opened to the list. This difference in expectation has led to emotional production and market decline. The second point is also more crucial. Everyone has not yet felt the meaning of the agreement. Last night, it reminded many people of the time when Kuang was cut. Many people understood that they were playing from the second-floor ecology, so they thought why it would cost so much to cast assets on Bitcoin's main network. Isn't this a wasted design? However, in fact, the purpose of the agreement itself is to serve the main network assets by means of comparison. The strong consensus of special currency is to distribute assets and then bring the main network capital production capacity to the isomorphic chain safely. At present, we only have to play to realize programmability, but obviously it is difficult for everyone to understand this process under the current gameplay. There are two main reasons. First, we are not aware of the isomorphic binding process. This process is really not well understood, but I think it is quite clear that it is marked on the browser. When you click on a transaction in the transaction history of wallet, you will find that there are at least two isomorphic links. Click on this transaction, and you will see the isomorphic details in the browser, which will mark the main network of the package and witness information. The second and most important reason is that the current ecological infrastructure is so inadequate that you can't even play after isomorphic assets are on the second floor, which leads to the fact that everyone's sense of body is no different from the inscription. There is no follow-up gameplay, which will take a little time to develop slowly, and it may take at least one month to wait until the foundation appears. This can also answer a question of some people, that is, why do you have to fight assets from the first floor? Why don't you fight directly before there is a simple consensus that there are so many original assets? Do you want to fight first, you can fight? Otherwise, ecological construction will almost start from the beginning. Finally, why do I still have confidence? It is simple that the fundamentals have not changed, mainly due to short-term emotions, and the consensus on the second asset has been formed yesterday, so there is a saying that the fundamentals are fine, friends. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=54684