儲備比特幣：對中本聰願景的背叛

儘管有米塞斯、哈耶克和弗里德曼等思想家的理想，但儲備資產鼓勵囤積，造成流通障礙，導致停滯

Bitcoin, cryptocurrency, Web3

比特幣、加密貨幣、Web3

Throughout history, reserve assets have played a pivotal role in shaping monetary systems. From gold bullion sitting in the vaults of the Bank of England (BoE) to the U.S. dollar’s post-Bretton Woods hegemony, the concept of a reserve asset has always carried a double-edged sword. On one side lies the promise of stability and trust while empowering the empire with the most liquid assets; on the other, the creeping specter of corruption, inflation, and economic inefficiency.

縱觀歷史，儲備資產在塑造貨幣體系方面發揮關鍵作用。從英格蘭銀行（BoE）金庫中的金條到布雷頓森林體系後的美元霸權，儲備資產的概念始終是一把雙面刃。一方面是穩定和信任的承諾，同時賦予帝國最具流動性的資產；另一方面，腐敗、通貨膨脹和經濟低效率的幽靈悄悄蔓延。

This was the brilliance of Keynes. He gets rightfully criticized for devaluing the purchasing power of the fiat unit, but few understand that Keynes knew this would be the case. His goal was for the British pound to simply outperform other fiat currencies and drive economic growth in the belief that economic growth would also outpace the devaluation of spending power in the United Kingdom. With few exceptions, he was right. This economic philosophy was transplanted onto the U.S. monetary system with some updates in sophistication, leading to similar outcomes: incredible creation of wealth for people in the U.S., despite the fact that purchasing power of the currency was constantly eroding.

這就是凱因斯的高明之處。他因貶低法定單位的購買力而受到正確的批評，但很少有人明白凱因斯知道情況會如此。他的目標是讓英鎊跑贏其他法定貨幣並推動經濟成長，因為他相信經濟成長也將超過英國消費能力的貶值。除了極少數例外，他是對的。這種經濟理念被移植到美國的貨幣體系中，並進行了一些複雜的更新，導致了類似的結果：儘管貨幣的購買力不斷下降，但為美國人民創造了令人難以置信的財富。

Sounds like I’m a Keynesian, huh? I’m not. The system still has major flaws, but we must at least understand their ideas before we deconstruct them.

聽起來我是凱因斯主義者，對吧？我不是。這個系統仍然存在重大缺陷，但在解構它們之前，我們至少必須了解它們的想法。

As a staunch advocate of sound money and the principles behind the gold standard, I deeply respect systems that prioritize accountability, scarcity, and real economic balance. I’m essentially a classic Austrian on the topic of monetary economics, but the idea has always had a practical limitation of trust in reserve assets for full reserve banking and lending. Essentially, it’s near impossible to trust that the circulating supply of money is always redeemable 1:1 for the reserve asset, and even if you could redeem, why would you want to be illiquid? So we are stuck with trusting the banks, and their incentives tell them to act like Keynesians, even if they are philosophically Austrians.

身為健全貨幣和金本位背後原則的堅定擁護者，我深深尊重優先考慮問責制、稀缺性和實際經濟平衡的製度。在貨幣經濟學這個主題上，我本質上是一個典型的奧地利學派，但這個想法始終對充分儲備銀行和貸款的儲備資產信任有實際限制。從本質上講，幾乎不可能相信流通的貨幣供應量總是可以 1:1 兌換儲備資產，即使你可以贖回，為什麼你會想要缺乏流動性？因此，我們不得不相信銀行，銀行的動機告訴他們要像凱因斯主義者一樣行事，即使他們在哲學上是奧地利主義者。

Reserve assets, in practice, are antithetical to Austrian ideals. Despite the ideals of thinkers like Mises, Hayek, and Friedman, reserve assets encourage hoarding, creating barriers to circulation—leading to stagnation, which then greases the wheels of fractional reserve lending—turning what should be a stable foundation for commerce into an inflationary house of cards.

實際上，儲備資產與奧地利學派的理想是對立的。儘管有米塞斯、哈耶克和弗里德曼等思想家的理想，但儲備資產鼓勵囤積，造成流通障礙，導致經濟停滯，進而推動部分準備金貸款的運轉，將本應是穩定的商業基礎變成了通貨膨脹的房子的卡片。

Satoshi Nakamoto didn’t simply design a digital asset; he engineered a solution to the inherent corruption of opaque reserve systems. Bitcoin offers the sound money properties of gold, the practical accounting style of cash, and the reduced friction of a global, decentralized payment network. When circulated, Bitcoin balances economic incentives naturally. It’s money in its purest form: not a symbol of value trapped in vaults, but value in motion, fueling commerce and productivity, and it can natively be the reserve asset underlying real-world asset tokens—if the network is implemented for scalability that is…

中本聰不僅是設計了一種數位資產；他還設計了一種數位資產。他設計了一個解決不透明儲備系統固有腐敗問題的方案。比特幣提供了黃金的健全貨幣屬性、現金的實用記帳方式以及全球去中心化支付網路的減少摩擦。當比特幣流通時，自然會平衡經濟誘因。它是最純粹形式的貨幣：不是金庫中價值的象徵，而是流動的價值，促進商業和生產力，並且它本身可以成為現實世界資產代幣的儲備資產——如果網絡是為了實現可擴展性而實現的…

Unfortunately, a well-connected cabal of small block “Bitcoin” influencers—led by figures like Samson Mow and Adam Back—are attempting to twist Bitcoin’s original vision. They propose a dystopian system in which Bitcoin becomes a digital reserve asset, akin to gold bars locked away, while a secondary system of fiat inflation, fractional lending, and speculative debt takes place on another network where it is more difficult to audit. Under their scheme, Bitcoin wouldn’t be the revolutionary tool for peer-to-peer commerce Satoshi envisioned but a static asset backing an opaque, centralized financial apparatus, a more technocratic version of the central banking system that we already have.

不幸的是，一個由小區塊「比特幣」影響者組成的小集團——以 Samson Mow 和 Adam Back 等人物為首——正試圖扭曲比特幣最初的願景。他們提出了一個反烏托邦系統，其中比特幣成為一種數位儲備資產，類似於被鎖定的金條，而法幣通膨、部分貸款和投機債務的二級系統則發生在另一個更難以審計的網路上。根據他們的計劃，比特幣不會成為中本聰設想的點對點商業的革命性工具，而是一種支持不透明的集中式金融機構的靜態資產，這是我們已經擁有的中央銀行系統的更加技術官僚的版本。

This isn’t a theoretical danger; it’s happening right now.

這並不是理論上的危險，而是實際存在的。它現在正在發生。

And it’s not just happening in the U.S. Argentina is mining bitcoin, El Salvador, and now Poland looks to be joining the chorus of lambs to the slaughter of the Tetheral Reserve! Oh wait… I haven’t mentioned Tether yet in this article.

這不僅發生在美國，阿根廷也在開採比特幣，薩爾瓦多現在也加入了屠殺 Tetheral Reserve 的行列！喔等等…我在本文中還沒有提到 Tether。

Consider the role of Tether (USDT), the shadowy stablecoin issued by iFinex. The BTC-as-a-reserve-asset model is at the core of their operation. BTC backs the issuance of Tether, which is then fractionally lent out to traders and leveraged to inflate the value of cryptocurrencies on exchanges and fiat-like derivatives. This creates an endless boom-and-bust cycle, where those closest to the issuance—“early adopters” or whales—can front-run the economy with insiders from the exchanges while everyone else struggles to catch up.

考慮 iFinex 發行的影子穩定幣 Tether (USDT) 的角色。比特幣作為儲備資產模型是其營運的核心。 BTC 支持 Tether 的發行，然後將其部分借給交易者並利用槓桿來抬高交易所和類似法定衍生品上的加密貨幣的價值。這造成了一個無盡的繁榮與蕭條循環，那些最接近發行的人——「早期採用者」或鯨魚——可以與交易所的內部人士一起引領經濟發展，而其他人都在努力追趕。

Sound familiar? It should. This is precisely how the central banking system has functioned for over a century. While Samson Mow and his ilk claim to despise central banking, they’re replicating it—just with fewer regulations and even less transparency. The result is not a system of freedom or economic justice, but a hyper-fiat, digital plantation economy where power is concentrated in the hands of a few.

聽起來很熟悉嗎？它應該。這正是中央銀行體系一個多世紀以來的運作方式。儘管Samson Mow和他的同類聲稱鄙視中央銀行，但他們正在複製它——只是監管更少，透明度更低。結果不是一個自由或經濟正義的體系，而是一個超級法定的數位種植園經濟，權力集中在少數人手中。

The sad part is that the idea of the Bitcoin reserve asset

可悲的是，比特幣儲備資產的想法