民族国家可以用自己的战俘网络与比特币战斗吗？

在关于X的讨论中，Jason Lowery辩论了可重复使用的工作证明（RPOW）网络的生存能力和未来，尤其是国家是否存在

Astronautical engineer and Major in the US Space Force, Jason Lowery, recently engaged in a discussion on Reusable Proof-of-Work (RPoW) networks, specifically addressing the possibility of nations attempting to create competing proof-of-work systems.

宇航员工程师和美国太空部队的少校杰森·洛里（Jason Lowery）最近对可重复使用的工作证明（RPOW）网络进行了讨论，专门解决了试图创建竞争性工作证明系统的国家的可能性。

The conversation was initiated by a question from Rabbit Hole Investor (@rabbitholeinvst) directed at Lowery, who is also the author of the “Softwar” thesis that highlights Bitcoin’s critical role in US national security.

对话是由针对Lowery的Rabbit Hole Investor（@rabbitholeinvst）的问题发起的，Lowery也是“软件”论文的作者，该论文突出了比特币在美国国家安全中的关键作用。

Can Nation-States Counter Bitcoin With Their Own PoW Network?

民族国家可以用自己的战俘网络对抗比特币吗？

Rabbit Hole Investor asked Lowery, “Do you see a future where other reusable proof of work networks are created for other applications?” In response, Lowery shared some questions he earlier received from the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy.

Rabbit Hole Investor问Lowery：“您是否看到了为其他应用程序创建其他可重复使用的工作网络证明的未来吗？”作为回应，Lowery分享了他早些时候从白宫科学技术政策办公室收到的一些问题。

While he stated that predicting the future with absolute certainty is not possible, he shared his intuition that there will be one dominant RPoW network that gains universal acceptance, similar to how TCP/IP became the global standard for data transport.

虽然他说是无法确定的，但他分享了自己的直觉，即将有一个主要的RPOW网络获得普遍接受，类似于TCP/IP如何成为数据运输的全球标准。

According to Lowery’s assessment:

根据Lowery的评估：

This was one of the questions I received from the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy. […] My intuition is that a single dominant Reusable Proof-of-Work (RPoW) network will emerge as the primary standard—much like how TCP/IP became the universal protocol for data transport […] In RPoW, network size directly translates to security. […] This consolidation of all RPOW applications into one RPOW network […] is a game-theoretic necessity.

这是我从白宫科学技术政策办公室收到的问题之一。 […]我的直觉是，单个可重复使用的工作证明（RPOW）网络将成为主要标准，就像TCP/IP如何成为RPOW中数据传输的通用协议[…]，网络大小直接翻译安全。 […]将所有RPOW应用程序整合到一个RPOW网络中[…]是游戏理论的必要性。

He elaborated on how RPoW’s security scales with computational power and energy expenditure, creating a “reinforcing cycle” that naturally drives participants to migrate to the largest and most secure network.

他详细阐述了RPOW的安全性如何使用计算能力和能源消耗，创造了一个“加强周期”，自然会驱使参与者迁移到最大，最安全的网络。

Lowery pointed to what he calls “Mutually Assured Preservation,” where even adversarial nation-states (e.g., NATO and BRICS) would effectively become “frenemies” on the same RPoW network. According to his assessment:

Lowery指出了他所说的“相互保证的保存”，即使在同一RPOW网络上，即使是对抗性的民族国家（例如，北约和金砖国家）也将有效地成为“ Frenemies”。根据他的评估：

The cost of attacking either side increases to such an extent that they become ‘frenemies,’ each strengthening the security of the other’s interests on the same network.

攻击双方的成本增加到使它们成为“狂热者”的程度，每个人都在同一网络上增强了对方利益的安全性。

Lowery’s stance leans strongly toward Bitcoin as the dominant RPoW protocol. While he does not label himself a “Bitcoin Maximalist,” he makes it clear that Bitcoin is the de facto global PoW standard due to market forces and network effects.

Lowery的立场强烈倾向于比特币作为主要的RPOW协议。尽管他没有标记自己是“比特币的最大主义者”，但他明确表示，由于市场力量和网络效应，比特币是事实上的全球战俘标准。

Thomas Young, Managing Partner at RUMJog Enterprises, further probed Lowery’s thesis by asking about individual Bitcoin ownership and the monetization potential for BTC in a world where nation-states treat the network as “The Standard.”

Rumjog Enterprises的执行合伙人Thomas Young通过询问个人比特币所有权和BTC的货币化潜力，进一步调查了Lowery的论文，在这个世界上，民族国家将网络视为“标准”。

Young’s question specifically explored whether individuals can practically own privately-held BTC and if interested nation states would “rent” privately-held BTC to misattribute or create diversification or prefer owning their BTC.

扬的问题专门探讨了个人是否可以实际拥有私有的BTC，以及感兴趣的国家是否将“租用”私人持有的BTC以误解或创造多元化或更喜欢拥有其BTC。

In response, Lowery shared his belief that if Bitcoin becomes a global unit of account, its purchasing power will naturally increase as humanity grows more productive. This development, in his view, renders the pursuit of chasing yield obsolete, as Bitcoin itself becomes the ultimate yield.

作为回应，洛里（Lowery）表示相信，如果比特币成为一个全球账户单位，随着人类增长的生产力，其购买力自然会增加。在他看来，这一发展使追求追逐产量过时了，因为比特币本身成为最终产量。

However, he also raised a cautionary flag regarding the promises of yield in a future scenario where governments might carry out executive orders to seize custodial BTC.

但是，他还提出了一个警告旗，内容涉及在以后的情况下，政府可能会执行执行命令以扣押BTC。

According to Lowery’s assessment:

根据Lowery的评估：

If I were a nefarious president or nation, I’d lure people into giving up self-custody of their BTC by dangling the promise of yield… Then, with a simple executive order, I’d nationalize NYDIG, Coinbase, and MSTR’s Bitcoin… This is why I don’t own MSTR. MSTR’s Bitcoin is a future president’s honeypot… When the next EO6102 inevitably comes, it will be widely supported.

如果我是邪恶的总统或国家，我会通过悬挂产量的承诺来诱使人们放弃对BTC的自我顾客……然后，通过简单的行政命令，我将NYDIG，Coinbase和MSTR的比特币国有化……这就是为什么我不拥有MSTR的原因。 MSTR的比特币是未来总统的Honeypot……当下一个EO6102不可避免地到来时，它将得到广泛的支持。

Another user asked Lowery whether sovereign entities might create their own networks—for instance, sidechains or drivechains pegged into the main Bitcoin network—under their sovereign control.

另一位用户询问Lowery在其主权控制下是否可以创建自己的网络（例如，锡德卡因或挂钩到主要比特币网络）的网络。

In response, Lowery highlighted the contrasting centralization aspects of Proof-of-Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS) protocols.

作为回应，Lowery强调了工作证明（POW）和股份证明（POS）协议的对比中心化方面。

According to Lowery’s assessment:

根据Lowery的评估：

If the goal is sovereign control over a network, then PoS is a far better design than PoW […] A nation (or any entity) could simply pre-mine the tokens, distribute them to itself, and implement a vote-based PoS system […] This structure would ensure that control remains centralized […] while still maintaining the (false) appearance of a decentralized system.

如果目标是对网络的主权控制，那么POS比POW […]一个国家（或任何实体）可以简单地预先设置令牌，将其分配给本身并实施基于投票的POS系统的设计要好得多。 […]这种结构将确保控制保持集中[…]，同时仍保持分散系统的（错误）外观。

He acknowledged the possibility of a nation creating an RPoW network with centralized administrative control but considers this approach more complex and less efficient compared to a straightforward proof-of-stake system for achieving centralized governance.

他承认有可能建立一个具有集中行政控制的RPOW网络的可能性，但与直接实现集中式治理的持有证明体系相比，这种方法更加复杂，效率更低。

As the conversation progressed, Lowery maintained his line of argument, suggesting that game-theoretic pressures—both among individuals and nation-states—tend to favor consolidation around a single, most secure PoW network.

随着谈话的进行，Lowery保持了他的论点，这表明游戏理论的压力（无论是个人和民族国家之间）倾向于围绕一个，最安全的POW网络而倾向于合并。

He argues that Bitcoin’s sheer scale and deeply-

他认为比特币的纯粹规模和深度 -