Nocturn宣布停摆,为何隐私项目的征途如此艰难?

Odaily星球日报Опубліковано о 2024-01-24Востаннє оновлено о 2024-01-24

Анотація

现阶段种种因素下,合规性>隐私性的战略推进才好持续落地。

原文作者:Haotian(X:@tme l0 211 

编者按: 1 月 23 日,Vitalik Buterin 参投的隐私协议 Nocturne 在 X 平台发文表示,其即将关闭 Nocturne V1,并转向应用程序领域开发。为何隐私类项目如此命运多舛?究竟谁能扛起隐私赛道的加密圣杯?对此,加密分析师 Haotian 在 X 平台上发文解读了隐私项目落地推进的可能性原因,Odaily星球日报整理如下:

时隔三月,此前 @VitalikButerin 参投的隐私 infra 项目 @nocturne_xyz 宣布停摆了,团队将转变方向投入其他新产品。继 Tornado 被处罚,交易所下架隐私币之后,原本以为隐私项目有望链上环境跑出来,现在看来,还是太乐观了。Why,不赘言,简单评述下可能性原因。

1)在主流社会对公链、数字钱包、去中心化交易所等「去中心化的产物」尚难用理性认知接纳的背景下,再给去中心化嵌套一层「隐私」应用场景,很难不成为合规和审查重灾区。

在此背景下,隐私类项目会被视为恐怖融资、洗钱等非法行为的帮凶,会受到「重点关照」,尤其是在各个对 Crypto 监管强势的国家,很容易被视为敌对存在。基于此背景,那些受 VC 驱动的项目,有力顶着扛政府审查的目标坚守做项目么?团队扛不住压力放弃的概率很大。

2)当下隐私类项目会构建一个独立的「黑盒」环境,用户可将资产转入黑盒,然后通过黑盒内的 Stealth 地址以及 Commitment Tree,ZK,等进行 Token 混淆,通常黑盒池子规模越大,用户量越多,隐私构建条件就越成熟,但这类方案处理合规问题的方式通常是,黑名单筛选以及 proof of innocence 等方法,这解决入金问题很容易,但倘若出金后和赃款链路有染,就会带来非常大的麻烦。

3)关键是,为了达成这种底层架构的资产交易环境切换,常用的隐私解决方案都是构建一套隐私交易机制,然后用户先得 deposite 到隐私环境,然后才能完成一系列的后续操作。这使得平台方一方面要承担筛查一切可能非法交易的技术挑战,另一方面还得面临用户发展慢资金池难做大的运营惨淡压力。不仅要头悬利剑不能被监管查处出任何差错,还要向广大用户解释平台的公平公正(抗审查),现阶段后者会更难吧。

围绕这个问题,我和同属隐私赛道 @ZKTNetwork 的 Madao 老师交流了意见,都一致认为,一个严谨的隐私产品在实践环境会非常复杂,一些隐私团队碍于研发压力选择半路跳车的可能性也有;

4)Nocturne 在声明中说到 layer 2 和 AA 账户抽象必须要先于隐私应用场景发生。很多人意识不到究竟为啥,因为 layer 2 和 AA 是 Mass Adoption 实现的基础 infra,这句话的潜在深意是,在大规模应用场景到来之前,隐私问题解决方案更容易成为「作恶」者的帮凶,而非解决真正的隐私需求问题。这句话的逻辑不难理解,毕竟存量市场的用户更多看重的是行业 DApp 应用的金融属性,而隐私问题并非第一性问题。

5)在我看来,隐私类项目要解决的合规问题一定要先于隐私问题本身,也就是务必得有个阻截非法资产流通的万全之策在先,在此基础上再谈用户需求端的隐私问题。待 layer 2 市场的人群大规模扩大后,基于 layer 2 构建的 layer 3 应用环境下,会走出一个监管和市场用户综合认可度都很高的隐私解决方案。毕竟在应用环境下,监管更好渗透,资金更好隔离,用户更好管理,到时候隐私应用会成为大规模用户连接链上环境的可选入口项,主流市场的用户偏好会带动隐私类 DApp 的市场壮大。

与其指望隐私带来 Mass Adoption,不如 Mass Adoption 之后再推进普及隐私更现实?

总之,隐私交易赛道本质上也有一定的「正统性」牵引力量,现阶段种种因素下,合规性>隐私性的战略推进才好持续落地。究竟谁能扛起隐私赛道的加密圣杯,这注定是一条艰难的征途。

Note:隐私赛道属于小众且敏感的领域,Vitalik 提到的另一个项目 @Railway 会不会受影响呢?

原文链接

Пов'язані матеріали

Behind the AI Scorecards Lies a Chinese 'Question Setter'

Behind the AI scorecards that dominate industry discussions—benchmarks like MMLU-Pro, MMMU, and MMMU-Pro—stands a Chinese-Canadian researcher: Wenhu Chen. As an assistant professor at the University of Waterloo and founder of the TIGER Lab, Chen has become a key "exam-setter" for evaluating large language and multimodal models. Chen first gained broader recognition with MMLU-Pro, a more challenging and stable update to the popular MMLU benchmark. As top models like OpenAI’s o3 began achieving near-perfect scores on the original MMLU, it became difficult to distinguish their true capabilities. MMLU-Pro introduced more complex reasoning questions, expanded answer choices, and filtered out ambiguous or simple items, effectively reintroducing differentiation among state-of-the-art models. His work on MMMU addressed the evaluation of multimodal models, requiring them to integrate visual information (like charts, diagrams, or tables) with textual knowledge across diverse academic subjects. Even the strongest models initially scored only around 56-59%, highlighting significant room for improvement in genuine multimodal reasoning. MMMU-Pro further refined this by preventing models from bypassing visual cues. Chen’s research focus has long been on complex information understanding and reasoning. His background—including a PhD at UC Santa Barbara, research at Google/DeepMind on Gemini, and now a role in Meta’s superintelligence lab—provides deep insight into model development and their potential weaknesses. His TIGER Lab also builds models (e.g., for video understanding and generation), ensuring his evaluation benchmarks are grounded in practical challenges. While AI headlines often spotlight company leaders and product launches, Chen’s work exemplifies the critical, behind-the-scenes contributions of researchers crafting the rigorous standards that define and drive progress in AI capabilities.

marsbit20 хв тому

Behind the AI Scorecards Lies a Chinese 'Question Setter'

marsbit20 хв тому

STRC Unpegged by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Turning?

STRC, the perpetual preferred stock of MicroStrategy, is experiencing a persistent de-pegging from its target par value of $100, with the discount recently widening to over 11%. This de-anchoring challenges the core design of STRC, which was intended as a stable, income-oriented security operating near $100. As a crucial funding engine for MicroStrategy's Bitcoin acquisition strategy, STRC's price reflects market confidence in the company's entire capital model. The company's "capital flywheel" relies on issuing STRC at or above $100 via an At-the-Market (ATM) program to raise cash for buying Bitcoin, thereby boosting company equity and theoretically supporting STRC's value. A monthly adjustable dividend mechanism was designed to maintain this peg. Despite raising the dividend to 11.5% and increasing payment frequency, the de-pegging persists. Market concerns extend beyond technical factors like leveraged arbitrage unwinding. Analysts point to MicroStrategy's limited cash reserves relative to its ~$1.7 billion annual dividend obligation for preferred shares. While the company counters that its vast Bitcoin holdings could cover decades of payments, this argument hinges on the potential need to sell Bitcoin—a shift from its longstanding "hodl" narrative. The company's recent sale of a small amount of BTC, framed as a test, amplified these liquidity and strategy concerns. If STRC remains discounted, impairing MicroStrategy's ability to raise cheap capital, fears may grow that the company could sell more Bitcoin to meet obligations. This scenario could transform MicroStrategy from a major market buyer into a potential seller, posing significant downside risk for Bitcoin. The re-pegging of STRC is thus a key indicator for the health of MicroStrategy's capital structure and its market impact.

Odaily星球日报33 хв тому

STRC Unpegged by 11%, Can Strategy's Perpetual Motion Machine Keep Turning?

Odaily星球日报33 хв тому

Silicon Valley's Most Sought-After New Role Has Emerged

Silicon Valley's New Most Wanted Job: The Rise of the Forward Deployment Engineer The AI industry is witnessing a significant shift. The focus has moved from developing cutting-edge models to deploying them effectively within enterprises. This has made the "Forward Deployment Engineer" (FDE) a critical and highly sought-after role at major firms like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. For the past three years, the industry prioritized model scientists. However, companies are now facing a harsh reality: purchasing powerful AI tools does not guarantee productivity gains or organizational change. The biggest hurdle is not the technology itself, but integrating it into complex legacy systems, workflows, and corporate cultures. This includes challenges like data silos, compliance requirements, and internal resistance. The FDE role, pioneered by Palantir Technologies, addresses this "last-mile" problem. FDEs are deployed on-site with clients for extended periods. Their job is to deeply understand the client's specific organizational structure, processes, and pain points, then tailor and implement the AI solution accordingly. They combine skills in technology, project management, and organizational change. A clear signal of this trend emerged in May 2026 when three AI giants made major moves. Anthropic launched a $1.5B joint venture for enterprise deployment. OpenAI formed an independent deployment subsidiary, DeployCo, with over $4B in commitments and acquired a deployment consultancy. Google Cloud's CEO publicly announced a large-scale recruitment drive for FDEs. This shift represents a fundamental change in the software business model: from selling tools to selling guaranteed outcomes. FDEs are the agents of this change, responsible for delivering a working system within the production environment, not just a demo. Real-world cases, such as challenges at Goldman Sachs (compliance barriers) and Target (internal cultural resistance), illustrate that the primary obstacles to AI adoption are organizational, not technical. An FDE's value lies in navigating these human and procedural complexities to facilitate a successful "AI migration." In essence, as core AI technology becomes more accessible and affordable, the true premium is shifting to the human expertise required to understand organizations and drive change—making the FDE role pivotal for the next phase of the AI revolution.

marsbit34 хв тому

Silicon Valley's Most Sought-After New Role Has Emerged

marsbit34 хв тому

When the World Cup Collides with Agents: From Web2 to Web3, How Are Wallets Evolving into Agentic Wallets?

World Cup as a Catalyst for Agentic Wallets: From Web2 to Web3 This article explores how the World Cup provides a real-world scenario for observing the evolution of digital wallets from simple asset managers towards "Agentic Wallets"—intelligent, AI-powered interfaces. Using the example of prediction markets like Polymarket, it illustrates how AI Agents can lower the barrier to Web3 interaction. Instead of navigating complex DApps, users can express intent in natural language (e.g., "I think Portugal will win") within platforms like Discord or web pages. The Agent then interprets this intent, finds the relevant market, and seamlessly guides the user through the on-chain transaction via their wallet. The core shift is from wallets as mere "function menus" for signing transactions to "intent interpreters" that understand user goals. The article highlights parallel developments in traditional finance, such as Mastercard's "Agent Pay" and WeChat Pay's AI tests, which focus on granting AI controlled, authorized, and auditable payment capabilities. This underscores a broader trend of AI entering the financial layer. However, the article emphasizes that the primary challenge for Agentic Wallets in Web3 is not automation but establishing clear security boundaries. Unlike traditional systems with chargebacks, on-chain transactions are often irreversible. Therefore, future wallets must ensure users retain ultimate control and comprehension. They need to transparently communicate an Agent's permissions, spending limits, authorized durations, and provide easy ways to pause or revoke access. The World Cup experiments represent early steps toward wallets that are not just applications but ubiquitous, intelligent interfaces that simplify Web3 while keeping users securely in control.

marsbit1 год тому

When the World Cup Collides with Agents: From Web2 to Web3, How Are Wallets Evolving into Agentic Wallets?

marsbit1 год тому

Options Don't Work in DeFi? Vitalik Might Not Agree

For years, the prevailing view has been that options struggle to gain traction in DeFi due to complexity, fragmented liquidity, and lack of natural demand compared to products like perpetual futures. However, a recent algorithmic stablecoin design proposed by Vitalik Buterin presents a different perspective, using options not as a standalone trading product, but as foundational infrastructure for other financial instruments. In this design, one unit of ETH is split into two components: a "stable" side (P) that retains value up to a specified strike price, and an "upside" side (N) that captures all appreciation above that strike. Combined, they always equal one ETH, eliminating debt, margin, and liquidation risks inherent in typical collateralized debt position (CDP) stablecoins. The stable component essentially mimics the payoff of a covered call option. To function as a stablecoin, this structure requires continuously rolling deep in-the-money calls, which introduces challenges like rollover slippage, predictable transaction flow vulnerable to front-running, and persistent liquidity needs. A core hurdle is finding consistent buyers for the leveraged ETH upside exposure (N). While it offers leverage without funding rates or liquidation, it must compete with simpler alternatives like direct call options or perpetuals. The system's scalability depends on a sustained demand for this specific form of leverage. The author draws parallels to their experience with Rysk, where earlier versions of DeFi options protocols struggled. The breakthrough came with Rysk V12, which aligns incentives: asset holders generate yield by selling covered calls against their holdings, while market makers efficiently acquire the desired option exposure. This demonstrates that options can find product-market fit when embedded as a risk distribution and pricing engine within structured products, stablecoins, or yield-generating assets, rather than marketed as a complex direct trading instrument. Vitalik's proposal reinforces this architectural approach—using fully collateralized, non-custodial, and physically settled options as a fundamental building block. The real opportunity for options in DeFi may lie not in becoming the next perpetual swap, but in powering the next generation of on-chain financial products.

marsbit2 год тому

Options Don't Work in DeFi? Vitalik Might Not Agree

marsbit2 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片