DePIN:颠覆互联网格局,赋能用户掌控未来

比推Pubblicato 2024-09-29Pubblicato ultima volta 2024-09-29

近些年来,少数几家科技巨头在互联网上攫取了过多的控制权,严重威胁了我们的数据隐私和数字安全。最近的CrowdStrike事件中,一次小小的故障引发了大规模的网络中断,这不仅是一次警钟,更是警示我们面临着一个更大、更深层次的问题。但解决办法已经出现:去中心化物理基础设施网络(DePIN)。DePIN为我们提供了一种全新的方式,将物理世界与区块链相连,彻底突破当前集中式系统的弊端。

DePIN网络巧妙地将传感器、物联网设备、计算机、智能手机等物理设备与去中心化的区块链网络相连接。用户通过分享数据、提供资源或帮助维持系统运转,可以获得数字资产的奖励,这种机制改变了长期以来数字世界中单方面控制和剥削用户的现象。过去,中心化的中介机构从用户数据中牟取巨额利益,而用户却几乎没有从中受益。DePIN则彻底打破了这种局面,让用户真正成为其所依赖基础设施的利益相关者。

images.png

简单来说,DePIN的理念就是将物理基础设施分布式化,并奖励为网络做出贡献的用户。无论是分享驾驶习惯、车辆性能数据,还是出租硬盘空间、共享网络带宽,或是通过气象传感器提供实时环境数据,这些贡献都能够为用户带来回报。与其将你的数据拱手让给科技巨头来牟利,DePIN让你不仅可以参与,还能从中获益。

现实应用场景

如今,基于DePIN的项目已经在重新定义我们日常生活的方方面面。以地理定位为例,区块链网络如GEODNET正推动定位精度达到厘米级别,给农业、建筑和无人机操作等领域带来了巨大的潜力。农民可以前所未有地精确管理作物,建筑项目的精度将大幅提升,无人机也能够以极高的精准度自主导航——而这一切都依赖于由个人贡献和受益的网络。

maxresdefault.jpg

此外,像WiFi Map这样的社区驱动型互联网接入项目,拥有全球1.5亿个活跃热点,不仅为人们提供了新的上网选择,更是对传统电信垄断的有力挑战。与此同时,DIMO允许人们收集、使用并货币化其车辆数据,同时向开发者提供专用API,以便为保险、车辆维护和车队管理等应用场景开发解决方案。

另一个例子是Witness Chain,一个DePIN证明系统,已吸引超过50亿美元的委托质押资金,正在努力将彼此孤立的DePIN经济体统一起来。这个网络让不同的DePIN项目共享它们的物理位置、网络容量和其他数据,从而构建一个端到端的去中心化基础设施供应链。

其他DePIN项目,如移动网络运营商XNET,正在努力为全球29亿仍然处于离线状态的人群提供可靠的网络连接。XNET利用市民宽带无线电服务(CBRS)和运营商级Wi-Fi的预留带宽,构建了一个由去中心化社区运营的网络,这些社区通过共同的区块链协调运作。

同样,像Filecoin这样的存储网络允许人们使用自己的空余存储空间,打造一个比传统云存储更具韧性、效率和用户友好的替代方案。这种转变不仅让服务变得更加普及和负担得起,还赋予用户控制权,同时使闲置资源得以有效利用。

去中心化不仅在改善访问,还在民主化我们高度互联的数字世界的核心。

What_is_Decentralized_Physical_Infrastructure_Networkspng_934c850154.jpeg

挑战在哪里?

当前的去中心化存储解决方案可能在成本效率上尚未与集中化的替代方案相媲美,但这是一个暂时的问题,而非不可逾越的障碍。随着数据压缩技术和消费级硬件的进步,去中心化云存储将达到与集中化方案同样高效的“甜蜜点”。

技术本应具有反脆弱性。由于单点故障而导致的大规模宕机不仅是令人不便的,更是对当前系统的严重指控。但这个问题同样可以解决,关键在于我们需要真正去中心化数字基础设施的所有方面,包括区块链系统中常被忽视的证明者。

开源工具将推动这一变革。像Plonky3这样的零知识证明工具已经被用来创建证明者和其他关键基础设施,项目如Fleek则利用这些工具来支持高效的去中心化证明者。

DePIN的时机不仅仅是现在,它早该到来。它重塑数字世界的潜力不仅令人兴奋,而且对未来一个自由开放的互联网至关重要。我们必须立即行动,把握这一机遇,建设我们应得的去中心化未来。

说明: 比推所有文章只代表作者观点,不构成投资建议

Letture associate

Retail Investors' 'Lead Brother' Serenity vs. Newly Minted Stock God Leopold: How Are the Two Top Hunters Mining AI's 'Physical Limits'?

The article profiles two prominent figures, Serenity and Leopold Aschenbrenner, who are gaining attention for their unconventional investment strategies focused on the physical constraints of the AI boom, moving beyond mainstream software narratives. Serenity, an anonymous online trader, advocates a "shiso leaf" theory. He targets small-cap companies with monopolies on critical, overlooked components in the AI hardware supply chain, such as specific semiconductor materials. His deep, technical analysis of bottlenecks in areas like co-packaged optics (CPO) has reportedly yielded massive returns, though his anonymity and focus on illiquid micro-cap stocks pose significant risks for followers. Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI researcher, founded a multi-billion dollar hedge fund. His macro thesis argues that physical infrastructure—power grids, land, data centers—is the true bottleneck for AI growth, lagging far behind chip production. Consequently, his fund employs an infrastructure arbitrage strategy: heavily investing in storage and compute infrastructure companies while placing massive bearish bets (put options) against major semiconductor stocks, betting their valuations will correct as physical constraints become apparent. While their methods differ—Serenity drills into microscopic supply chain details, while Leopold takes a macroscopic, infrastructure-focused view—both share a core belief: the real power and investment alpha in the AI era lie in controlling scarce physical resources, not just software. The article concludes by noting the inherent risks in both approaches, such as liquidity issues for micro-caps and timing risks for macro bets, but suggests they signal a broader market re-evaluation of AI's foundational assets.

marsbit3 h fa

Retail Investors' 'Lead Brother' Serenity vs. Newly Minted Stock God Leopold: How Are the Two Top Hunters Mining AI's 'Physical Limits'?

marsbit3 h fa

Who Will Make Money in the Age of Agents?

In the Agents era of blockchain, traditional value capture theories face challenges. The "Fat Protocol" theory, dominant since 2016, suggested protocols capture most value as their tokens are essential for network use. However, the proliferation of interchangeable L1s, L2s, and modular layers has eroded protocol scarcity and pricing power. Conversely, the "Fat App" theory posits that applications capturing user relationships (like wallets and exchanges) become the primary value layer by controlling distribution and transaction flows. This aligns with the current "Great Repricing" cycle. Agents disrupt this logic. As software users, they lack brand loyalty, prioritize cost and efficiency, and switch between platforms seamlessly. This undermines the front-end UX moats that "Fat Apps" rely on. The article explores several potential futures: 1. **Headless Applications:** Current leading apps could strip their front-ends and become backend API infrastructure for Agents, preserving their role. 2. **Protocol Resurgence:** If integration becomes trivial, Agents might bypass aggregators and interact directly with protocols, reviving "Fat Protocol" dynamics. 3. **Pricing Power Collapse:** Agents' rational, frictionless routing could commoditize the entire stack, compressing margins toward cost and leaving little profit for intermediaries. 4. **Unprecedented Activity:** Agents may enable new, high-frequency, machine-to-machine economic activities, expanding the total value pie even if margins are thin. 5. **A New, Unnamed Model:** Historically, major tech shifts (like the internet's attention economy) create unforeseen business models. The Agents era may spawn entirely new ways to capture value. The most likely outcome is a coexistence where "Fat Apps" continue to serve human users valuing UX, while a separate, Agent-driven economy emerges governed by different rules—where loyalty is based on factors like liquidity, latency, and settlement guarantees rather than brand.

marsbit4 h fa

Who Will Make Money in the Age of Agents?

marsbit4 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片