|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
作为对欧洲央行(ECB)最新反比特币论文的回应,一篇题为“挑战欧洲央行比特币分析中的偏见”的新学术论文已经发表。
An academic paper titled “Challenging Bias in the ECB’s Bitcoin Analysis” has been published in response to a recent working paper by European Central Bank (ECB) officials Ulrich Bindseil and Jürgen Schaaf. The paper offers a comprehensive critique of the ECB officials' analysis of Bitcoin (BTC).
一篇题为“挑战欧洲央行比特币分析中的偏见”的学术论文是为了回应欧洲央行 (ECB) 官员 Ulrich Bindseil 和 Jürgen Schaaf 最近发表的工作论文。该论文对欧洲央行官员对比特币(BTC)的分析进行了全面批评。
The original ECB paper, titled "Bitcoin: A speculative asset with limited intrinsic value and significant risks," portrays BTC as a speculative asset with limited intrinsic value and significant risks. It criticizes BTC's volatility, lack of productive contribution and wealth concentration, while advocating for Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) as a superior solution for modern financial systems, as previously reported by Bitcoinist.
欧洲央行最初的文件题为《比特币:一种内在价值有限且风险重大的投机资产》,将 BTC 描述为一种内在价值有限且风险重大的投机资产。正如 Bitcoinist 之前报道的那样,它批评 BTC 的波动性、缺乏生产性贡献和财富集中度,同时主张央行数字货币(CBDC)作为现代金融体系的卓越解决方案。
The rebuttal, authored by Murray A. Rudd, together with co-authors Allen Farrington, Freddie New and Dennis Porter, systematically addresses and refutes the key assertions made by Bindseil and Schaaf.
这篇反驳由默里·A·拉德 (Murray A. Rudd) 与合著者艾伦·法林顿 (Allen Farrington)、弗雷迪·纽 (Freddie New) 和丹尼斯·波特 (Dennis Porter) 共同撰写,系统地阐述和反驳了宾德塞尔和沙夫的关键主张。
Here's a summary of the main points raised in the rebuttal:
现将反驳中提出的要点总结如下:
1. Political Lobbying Influence: Bindseil and Schaaf argue that the industry's lobbying exerts disproportionate influence, skewing regulatory policy in its favor. However, the rebuttal counters this by highlighting the decentralized nature of Bitcoin. “not have a CEO, legal or marketing departments, or lobbyists: it is a neutral, global, leaderless protocol. Bitcoin advocates typically operate without the institutional backing enjoyed by the corporations that dominate the crypto industry,” the authors write.
1. 政治游说影响:Bindseil 和 Schaaf 认为,该行业的游说施加了不成比例的影响,使监管政策向对其有利的方向倾斜。然而,反驳通过强调比特币的去中心化性质来反驳这一点。 “没有首席执行官、法律或营销部门或游说者:这是一个中立的、全球性的、无领导的协议。比特币倡导者通常在没有主导加密货币行业的公司所享有的机构支持的情况下运作,”作者写道。
They point out that traditional financial institutions spend far more on lobbying than the nascent industry noting that in 2023, crypto-related lobbying expenditures in the US constituted less than 1% of financial sector lobbying expenditures.
他们指出,传统金融机构在游说方面的支出远多于新兴行业,并指出,到 2023 年,美国与加密货币相关的游说支出仅占金融部门游说支出的不到 1%。
2. Wealth Concentration: Addressing the claim that ownership is highly concentrated among a small number of large players, the rebuttal emphasizes that this view overlooks the widespread dispersion of BTC holdings. “Institutional and exchange wallets represent the holdings of diverse investors rather than single entities,” the authors explain. They note that many of the largest wallets belong to exchanges like Coinbase and Binance, as well as ETF issuers like BlackRock and Fidelity, who hold BTC on behalf of millions of users.
2. 财富集中:针对所有权高度集中于少数大型参与者的说法,反驳强调这种观点忽视了比特币持有量的广泛分散。 “机构和交易所钱包代表了不同投资者而不是单一实体的持股,”作者解释道。他们指出,许多最大的钱包属于 Coinbase 和 Binance 等交易所,以及 BlackRock 和 Fidelity 等 ETF 发行人,他们代表数百万用户持有 BTC。
The authors also challenge the notion that wealth concentration in coins is inherently unfair. “They imply that any form of inequality is unjust, yet fail to explain why this applies—a free market for Bitcoin has been available to all since its inception,” they write. “Unlike the vast majority of cryptocurrency tokens (‘altcoins’), Bitcoin had a fair and public launch. There was no pre-launch distribution of Bitcoin, no ‘founder shares,’ and no venture capital backers purchasing Bitcoin at a discount.”
作者还对“财富集中在硬币上本质上是不公平的”这一观点提出了质疑。他们写道:“他们暗示任何形式的不平等都是不公正的,但却无法解释为什么会出现这种情况——比特币的自由市场自诞生以来就向所有人开放。” “与绝大多数加密货币代币(‘山寨币’)不同,比特币的发行是公平且公开的。没有比特币的预发行,没有‘创始人股份’,也没有风险投资支持者以折扣价购买比特币。”
3. Lack Of Productive Contribution: The ECB paper asserts that BTC's rising price creates positive consumption effects for holders but does not increase overall productivity or economic growth. The rebuttal disputes this by highlighting BTC's significant role in driving financial innovation and efficiency. “Bitcoin functions as a technological protocol, similar to the TCP/IP protocol that underpins the Internet, enabling the development of new financial services,” they argue.
3.缺乏生产性贡献:欧洲央行文件声称,比特币价格上涨为持有者创造了积极的消费效应,但并没有提高整体生产率或经济增长。反驳强调了比特币在推动金融创新和效率方面的重要作用,对此提出了质疑。他们认为:“比特币作为一种技术协议发挥作用,类似于支撑互联网的 TCP/IP 协议,从而促进新金融服务的开发。”
The authors also emphasize the impact in developing regions, particularly in the remittance market. “For countries that derive a large proportion of their GDP from remittances, slashing transaction costs could have dramatic impacts among the poorest households, who are traditionally excluded from banking services,” the paper notes.
作者还强调了对发展中地区的影响,尤其是汇款市场。该文件指出:“对于国内生产总值(GDP)很大一部分来自汇款的国家来说,削减交易成本可能会对传统上被排除在银行服务之外的最贫困家庭产生巨大影响。”
4. Bitcoin Wealth Redistribution: Bindseil and Schaaf suggest that Bitcoin’s price appreciation results in wealth redistribution, benefiting early adopters at the expense of non-holders and latecomers. The rebuttal counters that this argument disregards the voluntary nature of BTC markets, where participants freely choose to enter based on their own assessment of the asset’s potential.
4. 比特币财富重新分配:Bindseil 和 Schaaf 认为,比特币价格上涨会导致财富重新分配,让早期采用者受益,但以非持有者和后来者为代价。反驳者反驳说,这种论点忽视了比特币市场的自愿性质,参与者可以根据自己对资产潜力的评估自由选择进入。
“Like early investors in stocks or venture capital, Bitcoin’s early adopters assumed significant risk in exchange for potentially high returns—an inherent feature of markets for emerging technologies,” they explain. They also highlight the broader implications of inflation, which redistribute wealth from savers to debt holders through inflationary policies. “Bitcoin’s fixed supply and deflationary characteristics counteract this erosion, offering a long-term store of value,” they assert.
“就像股票或风险投资的早期投资者一样,比特币的早期采用者承担了巨大的风险,以换取潜在的高回报——这是新兴技术市场的固有特征,”他们解释道。他们还强调了通货膨胀的更广泛影响,即通过通货膨胀政策将财富从储户重新分配给债务持有者。他们断言:“比特币的固定供应和通货紧缩特征抵消了这种侵蚀,提供了长期的价值储存。”
5. Lack Of Intrinsic Value: The ECB paper claims that Bitcoin lacks intrinsic value and cannot be priced using traditional asset valuation models. The rebuttal argues that this narrow definition ignores the role that scarcity, decentralization, and utility as a store of value play in asset valuation.
5.缺乏内在价值:欧洲央行文件声称,比特币缺乏内在价值,无法使用传统的资产估值模型进行定价。反驳认为,这种狭隘的定义忽视了稀缺性、去中心化和作为价值储存手段的效用在资产估值中所发挥的作用。
“Bitcoin operates similarly to gold, providing an alternative store of value, particularly in periods of monetary instability,” they state. They further assert, “Their argument is fundamentally flawed: they claim BTC cannot be considered money because it cannot be valued as a security, whereas the reality is that it cannot be valued as a security precisely because it is money.”
他们表示:“比特币的运作方式与黄金类似,提供了另一种价值储存手段,特别是在货币不稳定时期。”他们进一步断言,“他们的论点从根本上来说是有缺陷的:他们声称比特币不能被视为货币,因为它不能被视为一种证券,而事实是,它不能被视为一种证券,因为它是货币。”
6. Bitcoin Is A Speculative Bubble: Addressing the assertion that BTC’s price movements are indicative of speculative bubbles, the rebuttal points out that volatility is a characteristic of emerging technologies. “Bitcoin’s price appreciation is driven by its scarcity, adoption, network effects, and recognition of its utility as a hedge against fiat currency de
6. 比特币是投机泡沫:针对比特币价格走势表明投机泡沫的说法,反驳指出波动性是新兴技术的一个特征。 “比特币的价格升值是由其稀缺性、采用率、网络效应以及对其作为对冲法定货币的效用的认可所推动的。
免责声明:info@kdj.com
所提供的信息并非交易建议。根据本文提供的信息进行的任何投资,kdj.com不承担任何责任。加密货币具有高波动性,强烈建议您深入研究后,谨慎投资!
如您认为本网站上使用的内容侵犯了您的版权,请立即联系我们(info@kdj.com),我们将及时删除。
-
- Aptos (APT) 逆市调整,TVL 创历史新高,飙升 8%
- 2024-10-24 10:20:01
- Aptos (APT) 表现出色。而整体市场在过去24小时内小幅回调了1.92%
-
- SUI 最近的复苏以暴跌告终,这就是发生的事情
- 2024-10-24 10:15:01
- SUI(第一层区块链 Sui 的原生代币)最近的复苏令加密货币市场大吃一惊,它经历了七个月的挣扎,创下了新的价格高点。
-
- Bonk 加密货币:社区驱动的力量彻底改变数字货币交互
- 2024-10-24 10:15:01
- 在不断发展的数字货币格局中,Bonk 加密货币已成为一个有趣的参与者,引发了加密货币爱好者的好奇和猜测。