a16z协议专家:未来的代币经济模型设计应该如何?

DeFi之道Publicado em 2022-03-25Última atualização em 2022-03-25

Resumo

代币持有者可能希望可以直接获得他们的经济利益份额。

通常情况下,代币模型包含一个单一用途的代币设计,即一个治理代币传递投票权。
这种情况会改变吗?
未来的代币设计可能会选择融合经济、治理和实用权利,从而开辟一个新的设计空间。这如何做到?

经济模型

对于许多代币,一开始就嵌入了特定的经济权利。但并非所有的代币都具备这个功能(包括许多NFT也没有)。展望未来,代币持有者可能希望可以直接获得他们的经济利益份额。
有不同的方法可以做到这一点。一种是创建一个二级保险池(secondary insurance pool),支持以稳定币计价的主要保险池(primary insurance pool)背后的协议。
主要保险池以稳定币为基础,二级保险池则基于原生代币。

经济模型

用户可以将他们的代币质押到二级池中,并获得稳定币收益作为回报。如果发生任何亏空事件,这些代币将被用于对协议进行资本重组,使其超出主要保险池无法覆盖的范围。

经济模型

你也可以添加特定于协议的实用程序功能。这里可能有无限的表现方式,唯一的实际限制是社区的创造力和用例的实用性。
DeFi的一个示例可能是在债务拍卖中使用原生代币来调整激励机制,持有原生代币的参与者会在他们的中标价上获得折扣。
第二个例子涉及将NFT权利的各个方面整合到传统的可替换代币中:考虑对新社区倡议的访问优先级、为某些行为提供更好的经济激励,等等。
NFT社区已经在做相反的事情了。以@BoredApeYC APE空投为例,它赋予NFT持有人新的权利。这不也可以反过来发生吗?NFT空投 -> 代币持有者。
一个不同的设计途径是为活跃的投票者和代表设立归属池(vesting pools)。我们经常忘记,普通的代币持有者和代表是两类新的利益相关者,他们应该像其他贡献者一样在经济上激励他们做出贡献。

经济模型

另外,代币持有者可能希望动态治理权也能给予他们经济回报。除了通过全民公投对每个提案进行投票外,代币持有者还可以根据协议24个月的财务表现,委托并获得既得代币。
这就激励了授权。代币的授予可以基于投票活动、跟踪性能的特定协议指标等。而为了促进长期参与,代币在一定期限内不能被认领,用户必须在该归属期限内继续投票。
简而言之,代币提供了一个空白的画布,可以结合经济、治理和实用功能,并且在未来几个月内会积极改变。我们正处于发现可以嵌入以创建新功能的最初阶段。

Leituras Relacionadas

From Sand to Chips: Hefei's Semiconductor Alchemy

From Sand to Chips: Hefei's Semiconductor "Alchemy" On July 27, 2026, a memory chip maker from Hefei made history by surpassing the market capitalization of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China on its Shanghai Stock Exchange debut. This marks the culmination of Hefei's two-decade industrial transformation, often summarized in three strategic leaps: "Screen, Chip, Vehicle." The journey began in 2008 with a bold investment in BOE, establishing China's first 6th-generation LCD panel line. The second leap was the "Project 506" in 2016, which gave birth to ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT). With initial backing of 14.4 billion RMB from Hefei's state-owned investment platform, CXMT aimed to break into the global DRAM market, then over 95% controlled by three overseas giants. CXMT achieved a breakthrough in 2019 by producing China's first 8GB DDR4 DRAM chip, employing "generational leapfrog" R&D to catch up. After years of significant losses, the company turned profitable in 2025. A dramatic surge followed in 2026, driven by AI-driven demand and full capacity utilization, propelling CXMT to become the world's fourth-largest DRAM manufacturer. CXMT's success is not isolated. It anchors a dense, localized semiconductor ecosystem in Hefei. Within its vicinity are numerous supporting companies for equipment, materials, and packaging & testing. This cluster has fueled the regional economy, with Hefei's integrated circuit industry output growing over sevenfold between 2016 and 2025. The ripple effects extend beyond high-tech, revitalizing local communities with new businesses and services catering to the influx of workers. For individuals, Hefei offers competitive tech salaries at a significantly lower cost of living compared to major coastal cities, along with improved amenities and shorter commutes. Hefei's story demonstrates two decades of focused, long-term industrial policy, transforming the city from a provincial capital into a trillion-RMB GDP "Double Ten-Thousand" city (10 million people, 1 trillion RMB GDP). It shows how persistence in strategic sectors—turning sand into chips—can redefine a city's economic destiny.

marsbitHá 6m

From Sand to Chips: Hefei's Semiconductor Alchemy

marsbitHá 6m

Some Go Bankrupt, Others Go Shopping: The Counter-Cyclical Acquisition Logic of MoonPay, Circle, and Kraken

During a period of market stress where multiple crypto firms filed for bankruptcy or shut down, three major companies—MoonPay, Circle, and Kraken—pursued strategic acquisitions to strengthen their positions. Their divergent strategies reflect differing dependencies on key unresolved industry questions: which trading platforms, public blockchains, and stablecoins will ultimately dominate. MoonPay, operating at the fiat-crypto gateway, acquired Glide to expand its capabilities in token swaps, cross-chain operations, and financial reconciliation. Its business model is not tied to any single blockchain or stablecoin, allowing it to profit from user activity across various platforms. Circle, facing competitive pressure from the new Open Dollar Standard (OUSD) which could erode its core revenue from USDC reserve interest, acquired nearly a thousand patents from IBM. This move aims to build a competitive moat around USDC by enhancing its enterprise infrastructure, banking integrations, and compliance tools, shifting competition beyond mere interest yields. Kraken acquired Magic Labs' wallet-as-a-service business to deepen its integrated trading platform. The goal is to create a seamless "universal account" where users can trade crypto, stocks, and tokenized assets without leaving Kraken's ecosystem, while also bolstering its own layer-2 blockchain, Ink. These acquisitions highlight a trend where leading firms are consolidating core infrastructure not just for immediate profits, but to secure their futures amid ongoing industry consolidation and uncertainty. The competitive battleground is shifting from basic infrastructure access to superior product integration and ecosystem scale.

marsbitHá 12m

Some Go Bankrupt, Others Go Shopping: The Counter-Cyclical Acquisition Logic of MoonPay, Circle, and Kraken

marsbitHá 12m

The Permanent Underclass: No One Can Answer That 17-Year-Old Child

The article "The Permanent Underclass: No One Has an Answer for That 17-Year-Old" explores the concept of a "permanent underclass" emerging in a future where AI can perform most cognitive and physical labor. This theory, gaining traction in tech circles, suggests that as AI reduces the need for human workers, wages lose importance, and wealth increasingly flows to those who own AI models, compute, and data. The core issue is not temporary poverty but the potential breakdown of the traditional ladder of upward mobility—through labor, bargaining, and asset accumulation—making "underclass" a permanent status. The piece highlights a poignant question posed by researcher Jasmine Sun to AI lab personnel: What advice would you give a typical 17-year-old facing this future? Most had no answer, acknowledging the frightening transition ahead. However, while struggling to advise others, many in the AI field are securing their own positions, shifting from research or policy into labs to gain equity and stand on the "capital" side. This creates a vicious cycle: the more people believe labor's bargaining power is vanishing, the fewer work to rebuild it, accelerating its decline. Common personal survival strategies—learning AI skills, acquiring AI company equity, or pivoting to hands-on, in-person work—are analyzed. The author argues these are largely stopgaps, accessible mainly to the privileged, and may collectively undermine labor's overall position. The fundamental question shifts from "how not to fall behind" to "why must one's survival depend on being needed by capital?" The article concludes that the real solution is not individual adaptation but building a new societal "negotiating table"—new laws, forms of collective bargaining, or redistribution mechanisms (like taxes or public funds) to ensure the wealth AI creates is shared, especially with those displaced. It contrasts tentative institutional responses in China with a potential regulatory vacuum in the US, warning that without such frameworks being established before public frustration boils over, social unrest could follow. The 17-year-old’s dilemma underscores a systemic failure: the architects of this future are buying personal insurance but offering no collective answers.

marsbitHá 20m

The Permanent Underclass: No One Can Answer That 17-Year-Old Child

marsbitHá 20m

Trading

Spot
活动图片