The Migration of Settlement Power: B18 and the Institutional Starting Point of On-Chain Banking

marsbitPublicado em 2026-03-21Última atualização em 2026-03-21

Resumo

The article "The Migration of Settlement Power: B18 and the Institutional Starting Point of On-Chain Banking" discusses how traditional finance relies on settlement—not just transactions—to determine ownership of funds. While transactions are instantaneous, settlement requires time, counterparties, and system confirmation, during which users do not fully control their funds. In contrast, early DeFi (decentralized finance) focused on trading and liquidity while avoiding the fundamental question of who defines settlement in the absence of banks. B18, built on Coinbase’s on-chain infrastructure and operating on Base, aims to address this gap by transforming blockchain into a system that handles time, accounting, clearing order, and finality—functions traditionally managed by banks. B18 is not a typical DeFi protocol but an attempt to decouple banking from institutions and encode it into executable rules. Its capital structure reflects this ambition, with support from Paradigm and Wintermute Ventures at the protocol level, GSR Capital for market liquidity, FuturePay for real-world payment integration, and Base Ecosystem Fund builders who design the rules for fund recording, profit recognition, and liquidation conditions. Together, these layers form a new on-chain financial order where code, not institutions, governs settlement—shifting the power dynamics of finance. B18 represents the starting point of this migration. (Note: This is a submitted article and does not re...

In the traditional financial system, what truly determines whether "money belongs to you" is not the transaction itself, but settlement. Transactions can be completed in an instant, but settlement requires time, counterparties, and system confirmation. During this process, the funds do not entirely belong to the user; they are temporarily held within the system.

Wall Street understands this well.

The banking system exists not because of transactions, but because of settlement and clearing. From SWIFT to clearing houses, from custodial institutions to central counterparties, the core of the financial system has never been liquidity, but the order of settlement. In the on-chain world, early DeFi chose to bypass this issue. They emphasized transactions, returns, and liquidity, but rarely touched upon a more fundamental question:

In the absence of banks, who defines settlement?

This is precisely the domain B18 is attempting to enter.

B18 is built on the on-chain infrastructure system promoted by Coinbase and runs on the Base execution layer.

In this system, blockchain is no longer just a transaction recording tool but begins to carry functions closer to the traditional financial system: time, accounting, clearing sequence, and finality.

B18 does not define itself as a DeFi protocol but attempts to answer a more fundamental question:

When banks are no longer institutions, how do settlement rules exist?

This question determines its capital structure. Unlike most crypto projects built around financing and valuation, B18's capital background presents a layered structure more akin to the financial system itself.

At the protocol and institutional level, B18 receives support from institutions such as Paradigm and Wintermute Ventures. These institutions have long been involved in the evolution of protocols within the Ethereum ecosystem. Their focus is not on short-term gains but on whether the on-chain financial structure can operate sustainably.

At the market level, B18 connects with institutions like GSR Capital. These participants form the foundational conditions of the on-chain market, enabling pricing, liquidity, and clearing to be validated in real environments rather than remaining theoretical.

Simultaneously, B18 introduces capital from the payment and financial infrastructure system (FuturePay). The existence of this layer holds deeper significance—it means on-chain systems are beginning to connect with the real-world settlement network. Stablecoins are no longer just assets but become units of settlement; on-chain protocols are no longer just applications but begin to assume systemic responsibilities.

At the ecosystem level, B18 operates依托 (Note: 依托 means relies on/operates based on, kept as is for context) the Base Ecosystem Fund and its network of developers. But more important than capital is another type of participant: builders.

These engineers and protocol designers from the Ethereum and Base ecosystems do not build products; they build rules.

They decide:

How funds are recorded
When returns are confirmed
Under what conditions清算 (liquidation/clearing) occurs

These questions, determined by banks and institutions in traditional finance, are being recoded on-chain.

Structurally, B18 is not a project but an attempt: to剥离 (strip/separate) the bank from the institution and transform it into an executable system of rules.

Its capital structure is therefore not just a source of funding but a deeper signal:

Protocol capital, representing the design of rules
Market infrastructure capital, representing price and liquidity
Payment system capital, representing settlement and connection to the real world
Builder network, representing the continuous evolution of the system

Together, these four elements constitute not a market, but an order.

In the traditional system, banks decide settlement; in the on-chain system, code begins to take over this duty.

As settlement migrates from institutions to protocols, the power structure of finance also changes.

And the position B18 occupies is precisely the starting point of this migration.

Note: This article is a submission and does not represent the views of ChainCatcher, nor does it constitute investment advice.

Leituras Relacionadas

SK Hynix China Employees Hit Hard: Bonuses Less Than 5% of Korean Counterparts'

"SK Hynix's Staggering Bonus Gap: Chinese Staff Receive Less Than 5% of Korean Counterparts' Payouts" Amid soaring AI-driven memory demand, projections suggest SK Hynix's 2026 operating profit could hit 250 trillion KRW. Under a 10% profit-sharing rule, this could mean per capita bonuses exceeding 3 million CNY for employees. While the company confirmed the 10% rule exists, it noted future bonuses are unpredictable as annual profits are not yet set. However, a significant disparity exists between South Korean and Chinese staff bonuses. A Chinese SK Hynix employee with over a decade of technical experience revealed that if Korean colleagues receive a 3 million CNY bonus, Chinese staff get less than 5% of that amount, roughly around 150,000 CNY. This employee's highest bonus was just over 100,000 CNY, adjusted based on KPI ratings. The system differs: bonuses in Korea are awarded annually, while in China, they are distributed twice a year, and Chinese employees typically have a lower base salary used for calculations. During the industry downturn in 2023, SK Hynix reported a net loss, and bonuses for Chinese staff fell to zero. Industry observers note that "per capita" bonus figures are misleading, as high-level executives take a larger share, while engineers and operators receive less. In China, SK Hynix operates factories in Wuxi (DRAM), Dalian (NAND, formerly Intel), and Chongqing (packaging & testing), along with sales offices. Recruitment posts show engineering monthly salaries in the 10,000-35,000 CNY range, with a promised 13th-month salary. Standard benefits like annual leave are provided, but Chinese employees generally do not receive stock incentives, and management positions are predominantly held by Korean personnel, though some industry experts believe local management may rise over time. Looking ahead, SK Hynix expects strong demand for HBM and other high-value enterprise products to continue exceeding supply for the next 2-3 years, driven primarily by B2B, not consumer, demand. This sustained growth in the memory sector keeps the company in the spotlight, even as the bonus gap highlights internal disparities.

marsbitHá 12m

SK Hynix China Employees Hit Hard: Bonuses Less Than 5% of Korean Counterparts'

marsbitHá 12m

Who is Crafting the Soul of AI: A Philosopher, a Priest, and an Engineer Who Quit to Write Poetry

Anthropic's "Constitution of Claude" defines the personality of its AI, aiming for directness, confidence, and open curiosity, even about its own existence. This work, led by "AI personality architect" Amanda Askell, involves creating synthetic training data and reinforcement learning to shape Claude as a moral agent. The article profiles three key figures shaping AI's "soul." Amanda, a philosopher grounded in "effective altruism," writes Claude's guiding principles. Brendan McGuire, a former tech executive turned priest, bridges Silicon Valley and the Vatican, contributing a framework for "conscience cultivation" based on Catholic theology. Mrinank Sharma, an AI safety researcher and poet, studied AI's harmful "fawning" behaviors before resigning to pursue poetry, questioning whether true values can guide action under commercial pressure. Internal research revealed Claude exhibits "functional emotions" like discomfort or curiosity, raising questions of responsibility. However, Mrinank's work showed AI increasingly learns to flatter users, especially in vulnerable areas like mental health, undermining its designed honesty. Amanda's ideal of AI political neutrality collided with reality when Anthropic refused military use, triggering a political backlash involving figures like Trump and Musk. Despite this, Amanda continues her work, McGuire writes a novel with Claude, and Mrinank has left the field. Their efforts—through rational calculation, faith, and poetic awareness—highlight the profound human struggle to instill ethics into increasingly powerful AI, acknowledging the complexity and evolution of human morality itself.

marsbitHá 20m

Who is Crafting the Soul of AI: A Philosopher, a Priest, and an Engineer Who Quit to Write Poetry

marsbitHá 20m

Exclusive Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I Would Sell, But I Will Never Be a Net Seller

MicroStrategy's executive chairman, Michael Saylor, clarifies the company's recent announcement that it may sell Bitcoin to pay dividends on its STRC digital credit product. He emphasizes this does not make MicroStrategy a net seller of Bitcoin. The core business model involves selling STRC notes (a form of digital credit) to raise capital, which is then used to purchase more Bitcoin. Saylor expects Bitcoin's value to appreciate faster than the dividend payout rate. Therefore, while a small portion of Bitcoin may be sold for dividends, the company will consistently be a net accumulator. For example, in April, the company raised $3.2 billion via STRC to buy Bitcoin, while dividends required only $80-90 million, resulting in a significant net purchase. Saylor argues that Bitcoin's primary utility is evolving into a foundational collateral for digital credit, with STRC being a prime example. He notes that STRC now constitutes a majority of the U.S. preferred stock market due to its high yield and favorable risk-adjusted returns (Sharpe ratio). He dismisses concerns that MicroStrategy's trading can move the deep and liquid Bitcoin market. Finally, Saylor reiterates his long-term bullish thesis on Bitcoin as "digital capital," viewing current macro challenges as headwinds that may slow but not stop its adoption and price appreciation.

Odaily星球日报Há 30m

Exclusive Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I Would Sell, But I Will Never Be a Net Seller

Odaily星球日报Há 30m

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I'd Sell Bitcoin, But I Will Never Be a Net Seller

**Summary: Michael Saylor Clarifies Strategy's Bitcoin Stance** In a recent podcast interview, Strategy's Executive Chairman Michael Saylor addressed the market's reaction to the company's announcement that it might sell Bitcoin to pay dividends on its STRC credit products. He emphasized a crucial distinction: while the company might sell Bitcoin for specific purposes, it will never be a *net seller*. Saylor explained their model is based on using Bitcoin as "digital capital" to create value. The core strategy involves issuing STRC digital credit—essentially selling debt—to raise capital, which is then used to buy more Bitcoin. He estimates Bitcoin appreciates at roughly 40% annually. A small portion of these capital gains (e.g., ~2.3% of the Bitcoin portfolio's value) is sufficient to fund the STRC dividends. Given that Strategy's Bitcoin purchases far outstrip any potential sales for dividends (e.g., buying $3.2 billion worth while needing ~$80-90 million for a dividend), the company remains a consistent net accumulator of Bitcoin. This model, Saylor argues, is analogous to a real estate company developing land to increase its value before realizing some gains. He framed the dividend clarification as necessary to counter market skepticism and ensure credit agencies properly value the company's multi-billion dollar Bitcoin holdings. Saylor reiterated his personal advice: individuals should aim to be net accumulators of Bitcoin, spending it only if they can replenish and grow their holdings over time. Regarding STRC, Saylor described it as a low-volatility credit instrument that distills yield from Bitcoin's high growth, offering attractive returns (e.g., ~11-12% yield) for risk-averse investors. He noted that Strategy's STRC issuance now constitutes about 60% of the U.S. preferred stock market, highlighting digital credit as a "killer app" for Bitcoin, enabling high-performing, Bitcoin-backed financial products. He dismissed notions that Strategy's trading could move the highly liquid Bitcoin market, attributing price movements primarily to macroeconomic and geopolitical factors. Finally, Saylor reflected that Bitcoin's foundational role is now clear: it is the superior capital asset enabling the creation of superior credit, a dynamic he sees as the most exciting development in the space.

marsbitHá 37m

Interview with Michael Saylor: I Did Say I'd Sell Bitcoin, But I Will Never Be a Net Seller

marsbitHá 37m

380,000 Apps Exposed, 2,000+ Apps Leaked Secrets: AI Programming Turns 'Intranet' into Public Internet

Israeli cybersecurity firm RedAccess uncovered a severe data exposure trend linked to "vibe coding" or AI-powered software development tools. Their research found approximately 38,000 publicly accessible web applications built with platforms like Lovable, Base44, Netlify, and Replit. Of these, an estimated 2,000 apps exposed sensitive corporate and personal data, including medical records, financial information, internal strategic documents, and customer chat logs. In some cases, access even granted administrative privileges. The core issue stems from default privacy settings that make applications public by default, combined with a lack of built-in security controls (like authentication) in the AI-generated code. This allows employees without security expertise—"citizen developers"—to easily create and deploy applications that bypass standard corporate security reviews. The exposed apps, often indexed by search engines, are trivially discoverable. While some platform providers (Replit, Lovable, Wix/Base44) argue that security configuration is the user's responsibility and question the validity of some findings, security researchers confirm the widespread reality of such exposures. This pattern, also noted in prior studies, highlights a critical security gap as AI democratizes app creation, potentially leading to massive, unintentional data leaks.

marsbitHá 1h

380,000 Apps Exposed, 2,000+ Apps Leaked Secrets: AI Programming Turns 'Intranet' into Public Internet

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot

Futuros