RWA 爆火能否推动金融行业走向民主、平等交易的未来?

Panews2023-07-20 tarihinde yayınlandı2023-07-20 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

当 RWA 在各地如火如荼地铺开应用建设时,我们还需要关注各类安全审计问题,解决技术认知不足的现实挑战。

近期 RWA 的爆火引来对链上金融交易感兴趣人士的共同关注。RWA 作为将传统市场中的资产通过虚拟数字资产形式实现映射上链的典型例子,为传统金融行业在熊市下实现提质增效开拓了全新路径。事实上,RWA 正起源于金融行业民主化、平等化的诉求,也能够弥合链下与链上资产交易之间的对接沟壑。正当 RWA 在各地如火如荼地铺开应用建设时,我们还需要关注各类安全审计问题,解决技术认知不足的现实挑战。
TinTinWeekly 第 21 期活动由 TinTinLand 社区经理 Tracy 主持,活动邀请到了 Solv Protocol 联合创始人孟岩[email protected]核心成员王泽华、UWEB(University of Web3)校长于佳宁与关注 Web3 数字资产存储与管理的观众朋友们相聚直播间,共同探讨 RWA 如何通过去中心化金融构建真实世界资产的未来。


精彩观点

  • RWA 爆火离不开传统金融行业的发展需求,是传统金融与 Web3 双向奔赴的结果
  • RWA 助推虚拟资产世界平等化、民主化,响应大众对资产交易公开、安全的愿望
  • 解决行业监管难题、消除能力与资源不对称,终能实现 RWA 发展目标
  • 链上与链下资产无缝对接,成为控制 RWA 安全风险的重要一环

RWA 将真实世界资产纳入 Web3,
带动传统金融交易互动
源于金融行业诉求,具备拉动资产潜力
RWA 的突然爆火是一个非常值得寻味的事情。这种爆火来源于双方市场的需求,像 Crypto 希望能够获得在熊市当中获得更稳定的、更安全的收益,就会寻求 RWA 这样的资产形式。而在这背后,推动 RWA 风潮兴起的正是传统金融领域的工作人士,在传统金融世界里,大家讨论更多的是涵盖各种方向上的真实世界资产,包括所有债券、债务、账款等纳入 Web3 的问题。可以看到,正是因为 RWA 具备拉动传统金融世界发展的潜力,才使其被“众星捧月”寄予发展厚望。

Web3


去年 11 月,由 BCG 发布的重要报告称:RWA 和通证化在 2030 年的时候会带来一个 16 万亿美元的市场。“RWA 的发展目标是建立下一代全球金融基础设施,它认为世界上所有资产都应被通证化,所有被通证化的资产都应被放到一条央行链上。这样的发展目标可以促活传统金融交易,提高资产交易的速度和流通量”,孟岩老师概括道。
保障资产权益属性,满足社会大众期盼
“RWA 的突然爆火是传统金融与 Web3 双向奔赴的结果,传统资产有流通性、国际化的需求,这导致了它们有寻求上链的想法”,王泽华老师指出 RWA 的爆火主要是保障了资产管理的权益属性。当我们思考资产的权益属性时,一个是权益;一个是权利。在传统世界里,我们思的是考能不能把这些资产变成链上通证,然后再放到国际化市场上运作,RWA 就是解决这样一个现实需要的选择。或许在未来的 2-3 年内,大量跟 RWA 相关的基础设施、监管法则、开发技术,以及真正的 RWA 资产会到来。

Web3


过去传统金融行业在所谓低利率的环境下躺着挣钱,确实不需要提质增效的思维,但如今熊市的阴影还未消散,大众一直在盼望着能够带动金融行业发展的全新利器问世。事实上,RWA 就是这样一个能够助推虚拟资产世界平等化、民主化发展,满足社会大众对资产交易透明公开、顺畅安全愿望的技术选择。如果未来 RWA 能让更多资产在区块链上流转起来,那么全世界人民参与金融行业的普惠性目标就有望实现。
RWA 发展远景光明灿烂,
道路却是暗礁险滩
事有两面,与 RWA 爆火相对应的是背后突出的发展难题和困境挑战。正如孟岩老师说的那样,“RWA 发展的远处前景是一片光明,但近处却是各种暗礁险滩。”
凝聚行业共识,才能克服监管挑战
目前 RWA 面临最大的挑战无疑是监管。传统金融机构在非常热情和积极地凝聚 RWA 共识,然而各国的监管机构行事却非常拖沓。监管机构的反应滞后、不紧不慢和金融圈渴望突破与创新的激情之间存在较大的落差,这对于行业发展而言是一个很大的挑战。像链下资产对接的难题,确保平台资金的安全性、透明性归根结底就是监管问题。

Web3


此外,不少地区还面临着能力跟资源的不对称。掌握 RWA 真实世界资产的人不掌握技术,甚至也不了解区块链十多年来所形成的观念;掌握知识性、软件技术的人手上却没有传统世界的金融资产。这种资产和能力之间的不对称如若难以弥合,也会阻碍 RWA 实现更高阶的资产上链。由此我们可以看到,形成大规模的 RWA 发展共识,达成政府、用户、金融人士之间的默契才能聚集更多资金、技术资源,加快资产上链进程。
关注安全风险,提前预警技术问题
正是因为当前监管机构的响应和布局存在疏漏之处,技术人士与社会大众更需直面 RWA 隐藏的应用风险。比如链上资产和链下资产对接的过程,对接部分包括智能合约的验证、项目资产的审计,但目前处理这些过程的技术操作并没有完全以全流程透明的方式展现出来。尤其是刚刚起步的 RWA 项目,何时进行安全审计取决于服务范围的大小,链下资产价格是否无缝、及时地对接到链上?这就是控制 RWA 安全风险的重要一环。这种安全审计应该拥有全局性视野,规划精密的安全审查制度。

Web3


对此,王泽华老师提出了两大亟需关注和解决的技术方向:一方面,加强对黑客的防范与攻击,提高黑客的作恶成本;另一方面,提高审批制度和技术的安全性,提前修补可见漏洞。
鼓励发展中国家建设 RWA,
搭建合作桥梁
在东南亚、中东、亚洲等区域,当地对于 RWA 建设新一代金融系统有着强烈的愿望。这种热切的发展欲望对于 RWA 来说是一个机遇,但欲望背后是依旧需要弥合的数字鸿沟(数字鸿沟指在全球数字化进程中,不同国家地区之间,由于对信息、网络技术拥有、应用程度以及创新能力的差别而造成的信息认知水平两极分化的趋势)。
“非洲地区对 RWA 以及在央行、数字货币、用区块链来构造下一代金融基础设施的事情上跟发达国家、中国的想法态度差别很大。虽然非洲地区既没有一个漂亮的货币体系和金融管理体系,也没有像中国拥有非常发达的移动互联网和移动支付体系,但他们热衷于寻找建设 RWA 的机会”,孟岩老师根据亲身体验感慨道。

Web3


非洲人民非常渴望使用 RWA 建立新一代金融系统,但是本地金融科技专家、企业家对区块链的了解和认知水平非常之低。“他们不了解主要的区块链技术和优势,也不明白具体的链上资产交易原理和步骤。光有行动的热情,却难有科学的思考,这样的投资大概率是会失败的”,直播间的嘉宾老师们说道。
事实上,不仅是非洲、东南亚等地,在世界各个非发达国家地区都存在着或多或少的技术认知困境,首要的解决路径就是大规模地铺开技术宣传,无论是新闻报道、课程活动,还是线下项目产品路演都可以帮助他们建立起对于这个行业的基础认知。同时,有关行业人士和政府部门、投资专家若能建立起良好的合作关系,利用政府的资源力量、投资者的金融实力进一步普及 RWA 技术红利,那么相信其蓬勃发展的未来就在不远的前方。

İlgili Okumalar

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

Facing massive paper losses exceeding $90 billion each amidst a sharp market downturn, "Digital Asset Treasury" (DAT) giants Strategy and Bitmine find themselves in a precarious position, but with different underlying risks. Strategy, heavily invested in Bitcoin (BTC), faces significant financial strain. Its strategy relies heavily on debt, including convertible notes and preferred stock (STRC) requiring substantial dividend payments. With its cash reserves dwindling and BTC offering no staking yield for cash flow, Strategy's high leverage makes it vulnerable. A continued price decline could force asset sales to meet obligations, potentially creating a negative feedback loop. Its market value has already fallen sharply. In contrast, Bitmine, an Ethereum (ETH) holder, appears on firmer financial ground. It primarily funds its purchases through equity offerings (like ATM programs), avoiding debt pressure. It also generates income by staking a large portion of its ETH holdings. While not immune to market drops and shareholder dilution concerns, Bitmine maintains more flexibility, recently announcing a new preferred share offering to raise further capital. The core divergence lies in their financing: Bitmine uses equity (investor money), while Strategy uses debt (borrowed money). Consequently, Bitmine currently faces less immediate liquidity pressure than Strategy, which must navigate the dual challenge of servicing debt/dividends and a declining core asset (BTC) price.

marsbit6 dk önce

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

marsbit6 dk önce

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

AI Bubble: Where It Really Is and Who's Swimming Naked This analysis dissects the AI industry not as a single entity but as a five-layer pyramid, arguing that bubbles are concentrated in specific tiers, not uniformly distributed. **Key Distinction from the 2000 Dot-com Bubble:** Unlike 2000, where companies had stock prices before revenue, today's leading AI players have massive, contract-backed revenue driving their valuations. Core infrastructure demand is real, with every GPU running at full capacity for paying customers. **The Five-Layer Pyramid & Bubble Assessment:** * **L0 (Fab/Manufacturing) & Top L4 (Leading AI Apps): NO BUBBLE.** Companies like TSMC, NVIDIA, major cloud providers (Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon), and top AI labs have real revenues and orders. Supply is tightly constrained by TSMC's disciplined capacity control and physical limits like power/land for data centers, preventing a supply glut. * **L1 (Memory): BATTLEGROUND.** Sky-high HBM margins could signal a new structural cycle or a classic "boom before bust." The oligopoly of three major players may enforce supply discipline, making this a high-stakes bet. * **L2 (Interconnect/Optical Modules): BUBBLE TERRITORY.** Companies like Lumentum and AAOI have seen stock surges (4-10x) far outpacing revenue growth. This hardware segment has lower physical barriers to expansion than fabs, allowing speculation. It mirrors the 2000 bubble's epicenter—optics. * **L3 (Infrastructure/"GPU Landlords"): VULNERABLE.** GPU leasing companies profit from the current compute shortage but own no long-term moat. Their business model relies on a temporary bottleneck that will ease as big tech expands and new tech (e.g., potential space-based data centers) emerges. * **L4 Long Tail (VC-backed Startups): STRONG BUBBLE SIGNALS.** VC funding concentration in AI is twice that of the 1999 peak. Many startups with little revenue use the valuation logic of successful giants to justify their own, creating high risk of a "valuation crunch" when funding dries up. **Critical Risks to Monitor:** 1. **GPU Depreciation & Accounting:** Companies extending the assumed useful life of GPUs artificially boost profits. The true economic life depends on future generational leaps from NVIDIA. 2. **"GPU Credit" & Off-Balance-Sheet Leverage:** Emerging structures where shell companies borrow to buy GPUs and lease them out (with chipmakers sometimes investing) move debt off major balance sheets. This echoes the "vendor financing" of 2000 and the securitization risks of 2008, though currently small-scale. 3. **TSMC Abandoning Caution:** If the primary supply bottleneck (TSMC's conservative capacity planning) breaks, runaway supply could trigger a bust. 4. **Algorithmic Efficiency Breakthrough:** A major leap in software efficiency could drastically reduce the need for raw compute hardware, undermining the investment thesis. **Conclusion:** The AI boom is expensive and has frothy areas, but its core is underpinned by real demand and physical supply constraints. The bubble risk is layered: most present in optical components, GPU leasing, and the long-tail startup ecosystem, while the foundational chip manufacturing and leading application layers remain relatively solid—for now.

marsbit18 dk önce

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

marsbit18 dk önce

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

"Standing in the Light: Understanding the Optical Module and CPO Industry Chain" This article analyzes the critical role of optical communication technology, specifically optical modules and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO), as the "nervous system" for modern AI data centers. With exponential growth in AI computational demands (e.g., NVIDIA's Vera Rubin architecture), traditional electrical interconnects using copper cables face severe bottlenecks in bandwidth, power consumption, and signal integrity over distance. The core function of an optical module is to act as a "translator," converting electrical signals from chips into optical signals for transmission over fiber (and vice-versa). Key internal components include lasers, modulators, photodetectors, drivers, and DSP chips. The industry is currently transitioning from 800G to 1.6T modules. However, the future lies in CPO. This next-generation technology integrates the optical engine directly with the switch ASIC/XPU on the same package substrate, drastically reducing power consumption (by ~3.5x according to NVIDIA), overcoming bandwidth density limits, and minimizing signal attenuation compared to traditional pluggable modules. Key challenges for CPO include advanced packaging capacity (dominated by TSMC), thermal management, repairability, and standardization. The article details the broader technology landscape, including Near-Packaged Optics (NPO, a pragmatic intermediate step), Linear-drive Pluggable Optics (LPO), Optical I/O (OIO for chip-level integration), and Optical Circuit Switches (OCS). A comprehensive CPO industry chain is mapped, highlighting shifting power dynamics: * **Architecture Definers:** NVIDIA, Broadcom, and Marvell now hold greater influence. * **Advanced Packaging & Manufacturing:** TSMC is central; Fabrinet is a key EMS player. * **Lasers ("The Heart"):** A strategic bottleneck. EML lasers are led by Lumentum and Coherent (both receiving major NVIDIA investments). CW lasers, favored for CPO/silicon photonics, see strong Chinese players like Source Photonics and Sicoya. * **Silicon Photonics Chips:** The mainstream path for CPO engines, with key players like Broadcom, Intel, Marvell, and China's Accelink. * **Fiber Connectivity Components:** A major new, high-growth market created by CPO, including Fiber Array Units (FAU), Polarization-Maintaining Fiber (PMF), and MPO connectors. Companies like Tianfu Communication and US Conec are leaders. * **Fiber & Cable:** Experiencing a super-cycle (e.g., Corning, Yangtze Optical Fiber). * **PCB/Substrates:** Requiring advanced materials (e.g., Shengyi Tech). * **DSP & SerDes:** Functions are integrated into switch ASICs in the CPO era (e.g., Broadcom, Astera Labs). * **Optical Module Makers:** Transitioning from standalone module suppliers to providers of optical engines and NPO/LPO solutions while riding the current pluggable boom (e.g., Zhongji Innolight, Eoptolink). The investment timeline is segmented: Short-term (2026-2027) features the "last feast" for pluggable modules and CPO's initial rollout. Medium-term (2027-2029) will see CPO expand and NPO peak. Long-term (2029-2032+) involves CPO/OIO penetration into intra-rack scaling. In conclusion, optical interconnects are fundamental to AI infrastructure. The competitive landscape sees US firms leading in architecture and high-end chips, TSMC in advanced packaging, and Chinese firms holding strong positions in modules, connectivity components, CW lasers, and fiber/cable. The future belongs to companies that can navigate the technological shift from "selling shovels" (modules) to "building highways" (CPO/OIO infrastructure).

marsbit28 dk önce

Standing in the Light: A Comprehensive Guide to the Optical Module and CPO Supply Chain

marsbit28 dk önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片