使用它或失去它：比特幣的長期前景取決於其用戶

每當圍繞比特幣長期前景走向負面方向的擔憂浮出水面時，常見的拒絕態度就是“好吧，告訴我們接下來該怎麼做。”

Whenever concerns about Bitcoin’s long-term prospects’ going in a negative direction, a common refrain of dismissal is “Well tell us what to do about it then.” This is used to dismiss all concerns of regulation leading to regulatory capture, deeper involvement of certain entities leading to higher risks to the consensus process, of any type of failure mode that involves Bitcoin’s censorship resistance and ability to enable freedom eroding really.

每當擔心比特幣的長期前景走向負面方向時，常見的拒絕態度就是“好吧，告訴我們接下來該怎麼做。”這被用來消除所有對監管導致監管捕獲的擔憂，某些實體的更深層次參與導致共識過程的更高風險，以及涉及比特幣審查制度阻力和真正使自由受到侵蝕的能力的任何類型的失敗模式。

“Well what’s your plan?”

“那你的計劃是什麼？”

Use Bitcoin. Bitcoin consensus orbits around two important variables, economic actors and miners. Economic actors decide whether a set of consensus rules has value by deciding whether to honor their side of a transaction based on whether it is valid according to their consensus rules. Miners decide which set of consensus rules they will mine within, choosing the one that presents the highest value to them.

使用比特幣。比特幣共識圍繞著兩個重要變數：經濟參與者和礦工。經濟參與者透過根據交易是否有效來決定是否尊重自己一方的交易，從而決定一組共識規則是否有價值。礦工決定他們將在哪一套共識規則中進行挖礦，並選擇對他們來說價值最高的一個。

Users who actually use Bitcoin, that is to transact and operate businesses, services, and other protocols to make use of blockspace, gain an influence through both mechanisms. A set of consensus rules needs two things, users who will value it, and miners who will mine it. Users buying blockspace attract miners with more revenue beyond what the block subsidy creates. To the degree that fees make up miners' revenue, users who generate those fees have that much proportionate “power” of a sort over miners. They decide in the event of a disagreement over consensus rules which side to give that revenue to, meaning miners would have to follow those rules to earn it.

實際使用比特幣的用戶，即交易和運營業務、服務和其他協議以利用區塊空間的用戶，透過這兩種機制獲得影響力。一套共識規則需要兩件事，一是重視它的用戶，二是會挖掘它的礦工。購買區塊空間的用戶吸引礦工的收入超出了區塊補貼所創造的收入。就費用構成礦工收入的程度而言，產生這些費用的使用者對礦工擁有相當的「權力」。如果對共識規則有分歧，他們決定將收入分配給哪一方，這意味著礦工必須遵守這些規則才能獲得收入。

The threat of institutional adoption and regulatory encroachment very much do present a risk to Bitcoin in the long term if people simply stop doing anything with bitcoin but hold it. In that type of environment, regulations can come down on miners and brokers and very much influence events around consensus changes. They can attempt to veto useful and valuable changes, and try to push useless or damaging ones.

從長遠來看，如果人們停止使用比特幣做任何事情而是持有比特幣，機構採用和監管侵犯的威脅確實會對比特幣造成風險。在這種環境下，監管可能會針對礦工和經紀商，並對圍繞共識變化的事件產生很大影響。他們可以嘗試否決有用且有價值的變革，並嘗試推動無用或有害的變革。

So what do we do to counteract that? We actually use Bitcoin for more than holding and investing. That is why scalability is so important. Because it allows more people to directly interact with the system in that way, to directly exert their influence. The more we actually use Bitcoin, the more influence users collectively have to exert in the future over consensus.

那我們該如何應對呢？實際上，我們使用比特幣的目的不僅僅是持有和投資。這就是為什麼可擴展性如此重要。因為它可以讓更多的人透過這種方式直接與系統交互，直接發揮他們的影響力。我們實際使用比特幣的次數越多，用戶在未來對共識施加的集體影響力就越大。

If Bitcoiners relegate bitcoin to nothing more than an asset to hold, something to let sit idle, then we will eventually lose it. We will lose our say and influence in the markets bitcoin facilitates, we will lose our influence over the consensus rules that miners choose to mine, we will lose it all.

如果比特幣支持者將比特幣僅僅視為一種可以持有的資產，一種可以閒置的資產，那麼我們最終將失去它。我們將失去對比特幣所促進的市場的發言權和影響力，我們將失去對礦工選擇挖礦的共識規則的影響力，我們將失去一切。

Bitcoiners need to be active, not passive. We need to transact, we need to build more businesses, consume more blockspace. With payment networks like Lightning or Ark, uncensorable derivatives markets using DLCs, even dumb things like Ordinals and Inscriptions. The demand for blockspace needs to come from distributed and diverse sources, not just massive institutions and companies easily subjectable to regulatory and government influence.

比特幣持有者需要主動，而不是被動。我們需要交易，我們需要建立更多的業務，消耗更多的區塊空間。有了像 Lightning 或 Ark 這樣的支付網絡，使用 DLC 的不受審查的衍生性商品市場，甚至像 Ordinals 和 Inscriptions 這樣愚蠢的東西。對區塊空間的需求需要來自分散式和多樣化的來源，而不僅僅是容易受到監管和政府影響的大型機構和公司。

Bitcoin is very much a “use it or lose it” thing. I’d rather not see it lost to people who actually care about freedom due to apathy.

比特幣在很大程度上是一個「使用它或失去它」的東西。我不想看到它因為冷漠而被那些真正關心自由的人所失去。