价值流动：细究PoS 和 PoL的差异 - 协议层可持续激励调整新范式的案例

Flow of Value: Examining the differences between PoS and PoL - a case for a new paradigm in sustainable incentive alignment at the protocol layer

Flow of Value: Examining the differences between PoS and PoL - a case for a new paradigm in sustainable incentive alignment at the protocol layer

原文(Original Article): https://blog.berachain.com/blog/flow-of-value-examining-the-differences-between-pos-and-pol-a-case-for-a-new-paradigm-in-sustainable-incentive-alignment-at-the-protocol-layer

How does PoS excel and where does it come short? PoS 有何优势，又有何不足？

Ethereum began as an experiment in whether or not a permissionless and decentralized financial system could be built from the ground up, with little to no intermediation from centralizing third parties. Raising over $18 million in its ICO, Ethereum has grown to become the definitive smart contract network, with the most active DeFi community and most on-chain activity relative to its peers. In recent years Ethereum’s dominance has been challenged and questioned by the growing introduction of modular technology and the rapid adoption of alternative L1s.

以太坊最初是一个实验—意在探索是否可以从零开始构建无许可的，几乎不需要中心化第三方中介的去中心化金融系统。以太坊在 ICO 中筹集了超过 1800 万美元，已发展成为权威的智能合约网络，拥有最活跃的 DeFi 社区和(相较同行而言)最多的链上活动。近年来，由于模块化技术的不断引入和替代性 L1 的快速采用，以太坊的主导地位受到了挑战和质疑。

The most popular consensus mechanism for modern blockchains is Proof-of-Stake, with Ethereum being a strong example of how PoS functions at a high level. While Bitcoin has been able to achieve great success with its Proof-of-Work model, the debate isn’t relevant for today’s report. PoW is more dependent on physical hardware, while PoS is more geared towards a token-first model centered around staking which makes it easier for those without expensive hardware to participate.

现代区块链最流行的共识机制是PoS权益证明，以太坊是 PoS 如何在高层次上发挥作用的一个典型案例。虽然比特币凭借其PoW工作量证明模型取得了巨大成功，但这场争论与本报告无关。 PoW 更依赖于物理硬件，而 PoS 更适合以 stake质押 为中心的代币优先模型，这使得那些没有昂贵硬件的人更易参与。

Managing the balance of tradeoffs between security, speed and decentralization, PoS is able to align validators but falls short in rewarding its users - the backbone of any successful blockchain - and its developers, the ones responsible for creating vibrant ecosystems. Validators of Ethereum stake their ETH to participate in the act of approving transactions or creating new blocks, a feature that’s only accessible to those with 32 ETH.

管理安全、速度和去中心化之间的权衡，PoS 能够协调验证者，但在奖励其用户(任何成功区块链的支柱)及其开发人员(即负责创建充满活力生态系统的人)时则有短板。以太坊的验证者抵押他们的 ETH 来参与批准交易或创建新区块的行为，这一功能只有拥有 32 个 ETH 的人才能使用。

Ethereum has done well to grow the largest validator set in all of crypto, with almost 30 million staked at the time of writing, this sum possessing a market value of over $75 billion. Validators maintain the security of the network, putting their staked assets on the line to ensure transactions can be properly validated and included in future blocks.

在所有加密货币中，以太坊在这个方面做得最好—它拥有最大规模的验证者(群)，截至撰写本文时，已质押了近 3000 万个验证器，其市场价值超过 750 亿美元。验证者维护网络的安全，将其质押资产置于其中，进而确保交易可以得到正确验证并包含在未来的区块中。

Because of the inherent risk presented to validators, they earn a bulk of the rewards that come from being selected to validate blocks. Users, on the other hand, are entirely separate from this chain of command, unable to receive proper reward distribution from the protocol level. Even further, protocols and validators within PoS Ethereum are far from aligned, with protocols unable to improve security and validators separated from the benefits provided by protocols.

因验证者面临固有的风险，它们通过被选中去验证区块而获得大部分奖励。另一方面，用户完全独立于这个命令链条，无法从协议级别获得适当的奖励分配。更进一步，PoS 以太坊内的协议和验证者远未协调一致，协议无法提高安全性，验证者与协议提供的好处分离。

Within Ethereum’s PoS model, there is no collaboration between protocols and the validator set, as there simply isn’t a need to align towards a central goal when incentives for validators and protocols are entirely different and detached from each other. Protocols are probably less concerned with the economic security of the chain they’re deployed on than validators are, just as validators are less concerned with the protocols driving activity as long as it proves valuable to them - this is a growing issue that needs to be addressed. There can't be significant collaboration amongst a decentralized set of individuals without communication, something needs to change.

在以太坊的 PoS 模型中，协议和验证者集之间没有协作，因为当验证者和协议的激励完全不同且相互分离时，根本不需要朝着中心目标保持一致。与验证者相比，协议可能不太关心其所部署链的经济安全性，就像验证者不太关心驱动活动的协议—只要它证明对其有价值—这是一个日益严重且亟待解决的问题。如果没有沟通，去中心化的个体之间就不可能进行重大协作，有些事情需要改变。

The utilization of incentives isn’t a new concept, as we first saw this occur in the heat of the Curve Wars, with Convex and Hidden Hand being the two biggest proponents of this system. Berachain would be the first L1 to implement an enshrined bribe system designed to align all parties, taking a variety of lessons learned and folding it into a first-of-its-kind approach in GTM strategy. For the first time ever, validators can diversify their revenue streams and form direct collaborations with the protocols making their work valuable - what good is an ecosystem if there isn’t a sense of teamwork or unity?

使用激励并不是一个新概念，我们第一次看到这种情况发生在曲线战争(Curve Wars)激战正酣时期，Convex和Hidden Hand是该系统两个最大支持者。 Berachain 将成为第一个实施供奉(enshrined)贿赂(enshrined bribe)系统来协调各方的 L1—这吸取了各种经验教训，并将之纳入 GTM 战略的首个方法中。有史以来，验证者第一次可以实现收入来源多元化，并与协议形成直接合作，进而使其工作变得有价值—如果没有团队合作或团结意识，生态系统真的会有什么好处呢？

PoS is able to help blockchains achieve heightened security, but there’s a small issue not often discussed. In the case of Ethereum, the network exists with a single token model, as ETH is used for both staking and paying for transactions on-chain. If you think about it logically, using the same token for security and transactions does not make sense, given how crucial liquidity is to any financial environment. There’s a reason you can’t use fractionalized Starbucks shares to buy a cup of coffee - no one wants to trade in a share of ownership when fiat money is more accessible and offers zero downsides for the same transaction.

PoS 能够帮助区块链实现更高的安全性，但有一个小问题不常被讨论。就以太坊而言，该网络采用单一代币模型，因为以太坊用于链上交易的质押和支付。如果你从逻辑上思考，考虑到流动性对任何金融环境的重要性，使用相同的代币进行安全和交易是没有意义的。你不能使用星巴克的碎片股票来购买一杯咖啡，这是有原因的—当法定货币更容易获得并且同一交易没有缺陷时，没有人愿意交易(同等份额的)所有权。

In the case of Ethereum, users are forced to decide between spending their ETH in order to transact on-chain or staking their ETH to participate in validating the Ethereum network - there’s no option for those that might wish to do both with the same set of funds.

就以太坊而言，用户被迫做出选择，是花掉他们的 ETH 进行链上交易，还是质押他们的 ETH 来参与验证以太坊网络—对于那些可能希望使用同一组资金进行这两种操作的人来说，没有其他选择。

It would make the most sense to offer multiple tokens within a network, mainly to help eliminate any opportunity costs users feel are imposed upon them. While this makes sense in hindsight, this isn’t something the Ethereum team would consider with much significance. Instead, we can build off these inefficiencies and design an economically viable way of managing incentives.

在网络内提供多个代币是最有意义的，主要是为了帮助用户消除被认为强加给他们的任何机会成本。虽然事后看来这是有道理的，但这并不是以太坊团队会考虑的重要问题。相反，我们可以克服这些低效率问题，设计一种经济上可行的激励管理方式。

引入 PoL 作为一种全新的经济模型 (Introducing PoL as a novel economic model)

Building off the shortcomings of PoS, Berachain’s Proof-of-Liquidity presents itself as a novel consensus mechanism built to incentivize all parties, allowing for Berachain’s security and liquidity to scale linearly. When it comes to growing the security of a decentralized network, there shouldn’t need to be any trade-offs made that affect the user experience for marginal security improvements.

克服了 PoS 的缺点，Berachain 的流动性证明本身是一种全新的共识机制，目的是激励所有相关方， 使 Berachain 的安全性和流动性能得到线性扩展。当谈到提高去中心化网络的安全性时，不需要为了边际安全性的改善而做出任何影响用户体验的权衡。

Berachain has pioneered a new model, one that doesn’t sacrifice on security and works to scale liquidity with the network’s stake - a delicate balance that pleases all actors within a blockchain ecosystem. Utilizing a tri-token model, Berachain is able to support the needs of LPs, standard users, validators and protocols. To better understand the balance of trade-offs achieved, we will briefly explain Berachain’s tokens and their respective functions:

Berachain 开创了一种新模式，该模式不会牺牲安全性，而是致力于通过网络权益/质押来扩大流动性—这是一种令区块链生态系统中所有参与者都能满意的微妙平衡。利用三代币模型，Berachain 能够支持 LP、标准用户、验证者和协议的需求。为了更好地理解实现的权衡平衡，我们将简要解释一下 Berachain 的代币及其各自的功能：

- BGT: The Berachain Governance Token is non-transferable and only earned through liquidity provision on Berachain’s native decentralized exchange, BEX. BGT：Berachain 治理代币不可转让，只能通过在 Berachain 的原生去中心化交易所 BEX 上提供流动性来赚取。

- BERA: Berachain’s network token can be used for the payment of transactions, allowing users to spend freely without reducing their capacity to help in network validation thanks to BGT. BERA：Berachain 的网络代币可用于支付交易，允许用户自由支出，而不会因为 BGT 而降低帮助网络验证的能力。

- HONEY: Berachain’s USD-backed native stablecoin, purchasable through a variety of applications or the BEX. HONEY：Berachain 的原生美元稳定币，可通过各种应用或 BEX 购买。

While incentivizing all parties is one of the main draws of Berachain and ideals present within its architecture, it’s important to recognize the priority placed on ensuring validators are treated fairly and properly rewarded. Within the PoL model, value flows directly from the validator set powering Berachain, passing its way through the protocols within the network and ultimately springing from the decisions made by the Berachain user base.

虽然激励各方是 Berachain 的主要吸引力及其架构中的理想之一，但重要的是要认识到必须确保验证者得到公平对待和适当奖励这一优先事项。在 PoL 模型中，价值直接来自为 Berachain 提供支持的验证者集，其通过网络内的协议传递，并最终源自 Berachain 用户群做出的决策。

These users vote with their wallets - they provide liquidity and use the applications they want to, which in turn rewards them with BGT, which is sent to validators who reward these protocols in a positive feedback loop. Instead of PoS systems that close out validators from the user base they spend their time and funds securing, Berachain opens the loop up to all ecosystem actors and ensures the delicate balance of incentives continue moving through this loop.

这些用户用钱包投票—他们提供流动性并使用自己想要的应用，反过来又会收到BGT奖励。BGT 被发送给验证者，验证者在正反馈循环中奖励这些协议。 Berachain 不是将验证者与其花费时间和资金保护的用户群隔离开来的 PoS 系统，而是向所有生态系统参与者开放循环，并确保激励的微妙平衡持续在这个循环中发展。

In traditional crypto systems, LPs are incentivized to provide two-sided liquidity to earn a share of a given pool’s volume, though this doesn’t often work out well in practice due to issues like LVR (loss-versus-rebalancing) or the general volatility of nascent crypto markets on-chain, resulting in difficulty for consistent LP profitability.

在传统的加密系统中，LP 被激励提供双向流动性，进而赚取给定池容量的份额，尽管由于 LVR(损失与再平衡)或一般问题等问题，这在实践中通常效果不佳。新兴加密货币市场的链上波动性，导致 LP 难以持续盈利。

In Berachain’s PoL system, it doesn’t have to be that complicated.

在 Berachain 的 PoL 系统中，它不必那么复杂。

LPs would receive the benefit of BGT distributions, general LP rewards, any applicable rewards from blocks produced and any available validator incentives. By enabling further LP incentivization and providing a backstop in the form of BGT, Berachain is looking to solve problems at the application and protocol layer. If there’s enough of an incentive to delegate BGT and participate in a growing network, it’s natural to assume that liquidity will follow.

LP 将获得 BGT 分配、一般 LP 奖励、所生成区块的任何适用奖励以及任何可用的验证者激励措施。通过进一步激励 LP 并以 BGT 的形式提供后盾，Berachain 正在寻求解决应用和协议层(这两个层面)的问题。如果有足够的动力去委托 BGT 并参与不断发展的网络，那么很自然地，就可以认为流动性会随之而来。

The introduction of an enshrined Berachain ecosystem makes this model more feasible, given the general alignment between protocols that would exist within this collective group. Traditionally, alternative L1s and Ethereum L2s have prioritized ecosystem funds to incentive builders to create applications. All too often, these follow the same trend of reskinned Uniswap and Aave forks. Further into an L1 or L2’s life cycle, more established protocols deploy, bringing a slight liquidity boost and offering more of a marketing kick than anything else. Enshrined ecosystems are a way of aligning a community from day one, rather than having to wait until nine months later after a failed ecosystem fund has made your chain indistinguishable from any of its competitors.

考虑到这个集体组织中存在的协议之间的总体一致性，引入供奉(enshrined)的 Berachain 生态系统使该模型更加可行。传统上，替代 L1 和以太坊 L2 优先考虑生态系统资金，来激励构建者创建应用。很多时候，这些都是套壳/换皮的 Uniswap 和 Aave 分叉。随着 L1 或 L2 生命周期的进一步发展，更成熟的协议得到部署，带来了轻微的流动性提升，实际上营销效果外的提升则很悠闲。供奉(enshrined)的生态系统是从一开始就协调社区的一种方式，而不必等到九个月后，因失败的生态系统基金让你的链与任何竞争对手毫无二致。

Users that delegate their BGT to validators earn a portion of distributed block rewards, along with any potential incentives proposed by validators. In an ideal world, validators and protocols would team up to increase the incentive kickback to users, enabling a further increase in LP participation amongst a larger number of users. While the PoL model is mostly novel in its approach to scaling liquidity and security without compromise, the separation between BERA and BGT is additionally useful in making the act of liquidity provision more appealing. While LPs in traditional DeFi protocols are doing it in a purely profit-driven manner, Berachain makes it beneficial as you’re indirectly gaining governance power.

将 BGT 委托给验证者的用户，可以获得一部分分布式区块奖励，以及验证者提出的任何潜在激励措施。在理想的情况下，验证者和协议将联手增加对用户的激励回扣，从而进一步增加更多用户的 LP 参与度。虽然 PoL 模型在不妥协地扩展流动性和安全性方面十分新颖，但 BERA 和 BGT 之间的分离，让提供流动性的行为更具吸引力。虽然传统 DeFi 协议中的 LP 纯粹是以利润驱动的方式来做这件事，但 Berachain 却让你受益匪浅，因为你还间接获得了治理权力。

汲取过去的教训，建设更美好的未来 (Learning from the past to build a better future)

USV was one of the first to discuss the now infamous fat protocol thesis and its presence within the crypto industry. The basic ideas of this fundamental thesis revolved around the failure of web2 protocols to capture the bulk of the value, letting applications take over and become the largest beneficiaries of the system. Crypto has narrowed the gap between protocol and application layer value consumption, but it still isn’t perfect. If you look even further into the distribution of value present within applications and protocols, the user is often not rewarded proportionally to the immense value they create.

USV 是最早讨论现在"臭名昭著"的胖肪协议论文及其在加密行业中存在的人之一。这篇基础论文的基本思想围绕着 web2 协议未能捕获大部分价值，让应用接管并成为系统的最大受益者。加密货币缩小了协议层和应用层价值消费之间的差距，但它仍然并不完美。如果您进一步研究应用和协议中存在的价值分配，您会发现用户通常不会获得与他们创造的巨大价值成比例的奖励。

Incentives and closed-loop incentive systems in DeFi were beneficial to those that participated in the ecosystem - it was never going to serve as an extendable process beyond niche subsectors of DeFi. Curve governance and the demand for veCRV was never a pertinent issue to the value capture of Ethereum as a base layer, let alone the success of Cosmos or Solana and their respective ecosystems. In the increasingly modular world of blockchains, the concept of open-loop incentive mechanisms is more valuable than ever before. The traditional financial system is immensely difficult to govern over, largely because of how interconnected it is and how every cog plays an important role in the great machine. PoL serves as a potential step improvement towards the first open-loop, extendable incentive system at the protocol level.

DeFi 中的激励和闭环激励系统，对那些参与生态系统的人有利—但它永远不会成为 DeFi 利基(小众)子行业之外的可扩展过程。Curve的治理和 veCRV 的需求从来都不是跟以太坊作为基础层的价值捕获相关的问题，更不用说 Cosmos 或 Solana 及其各自生态系统的成功了。在日益模块化的区块链世界中，开环激励机制(译者注:开环激励就是指不将控制的结果反馈回来影响当前控制的系统)的概念比以往任何时候都更有价值。传统的金融体系非常难以治理，很大程度上是因为它的相互关联性以及每个齿轮在这台伟大机器中均发挥着重要作用。 PoL 是协议层面的潜在改进：第一个开环、可扩展激励系统。

It’s difficult to compare Berachain the L1 to Curve the application, but the concept of closed versus open loops make sense with a little context. Concerning Curve (and veCRV specifically), the ability to gain meaningful or significant governance power was useful if you had skin in the game that pertained to Curve, but it wasn’t relevant if your application wasn’t dependent on the success or failure of Curve.

很难将 Berachain L1 与 Curve 应用进行比较，但闭环与开环的概念在一些背景下就有意义了。对于 Curve(特别是 veCRV)，如果您参与了与 Curve 相关的游戏/博弈，那么获得有意义或重要的治理权力的能力是有用的，但如果您的应用不依赖于Curve 的成功或失败，那么这一切就无关紧要。

Curve’s approach hasn’t remained within the walled gardens of Ethereum - it’s alive and well in Berachain’s architecture. Instead of a single protocol’s emissions being directed to a single pool, an entire blockchain has been built with all of its protocols in mind, where users and validators come together to determine where the value flows to next. This can extend to any smart contract within the network, with these same contracts obligated to return some of this back to BGT stakers in order to preserve the loop.

Curve 的方法并没有停留在以太坊围墙花园内—它在 Berachain 的架构中仍然充满活力。整个区块链不是将单个协议的(代币)释放定向到单个池，而是在考虑所有协议的情况下构建，用户和验证者聚集在一起确定价值下一步流向何处。这可以扩展到网络内的任何智能合约，这些合约有义务将其中一些返还给 BGT 质押者，进而保持循环。

While Curve was heavily integrated across the DeFi ecosystem and was an extremely core piece of the system as we know it, extending veCRV incentives across the entire crypto ecosystem was never a feasible reality. There’s nothing wrong with a closed-loop incentive system, but it is our belief that crypto can benefit largely from prioritizing collaborative open-loop systems that leave the door open to innovation.

虽然 Curve 高度集成于整个 DeFi 生态系统，并且是我们所知系统极其核心的一部分，但将 veCRV 激励措施扩展到整个加密生态系统从来都不是一个可行的现实。闭环激励系统没有任何问题，但我们相信，加密货币可以在很大程度上受益于优先考虑为创新敞开大门的协作开环系统。

As highlighted earlier, modular blockchains are increasingly a core topic of contention and leading the way for blockchain design at all levels of the tech stack. Interoperable VM environments, evolving consensus mechanisms and shared modular building blocks (see: data availability or shared sequencing) are enabling a world where inter-blockchain communication will quickly become the norm. Now is the time to develop open-loop incentive systems and take advantage of this new paradigm of communication.

如前所述，模块化区块链日益成为争论的核心话题，并引领区块链技术堆栈各个层面的设计。可互操作的虚拟机环境、不断发展的共识机制和共享的模块化构建块(请参阅：数据可用性或共享排序)正在使区块链间通信将迅速成为常态。现在是开发开环激励系统并利用这种全新沟通范式的时候了。

While it isn’t entirely clear where value should accrue in this hypothetical (but increasingly likely) multichain world, it’s undeniable that L1s and L2s will need to collaborate more than ever before to accommodate for the increasingly debated issue of fragmented liquidity. Even though a modular blockchain might be technically superior to its monolithic counterparts, there isn’t a standardized way of solving the fragmentation problem and L2s are quickly becoming more competitive towards each other, the exact opposite system of what modularity was supposed to carry the industry towards.

虽然尚不完全清楚在这个假设的(但可能性越来越大)的多链世界中，价值应该在哪里产生，但不可否认的是，L1 和 L2 将需要比以往更多的合作，来适应日益引起争议的流动性分散问题。尽管模块化区块链在技术上可能优于单片区块链，却没有解决(流动性)碎片问题的标准化方法，并且 L2 之间的竞争很快变得更加激烈，这与模块化本应推动的行业系统完全相反向。

When protocol ownership is distributed to users from the beginning, alignment isn’t something that needs to be worked on extensively or slotted in a roadmap for future integration - it’s a core feature, one that’s just as immutable as the blockchain it’s built into.

当协议所有权从一开始就分配给用户时，一致性就不再是需要广泛进行的工作，也不需要被纳入未来集成的路线图中—它成为一个核心功能，就像它内置的区块链一样不可变。

PoS 区块链激励机制的一些示例以及 PoL 如何填补空白 (Some examples of incentive mechanisms across PoS blockchains and how PoL can fill in the gaps)

The blockchain trilemma has said that tradeoffs must be made between security, decentralization and speed. This was the consensus prior to the growth of modular blockchain configurations, which have made it possible for blockchains to accommodate for all three without needing to overengineer complex design choices or limit the behaviors of its core user base. Now that developers are able to integrate functionality like shared sequencing layers, data availability laters or even the offloading of proving to dedicated zk proving markets, the game has changed dramatically.

区块链三难困境表明，必须在安全性、去中心化和速度之间进行权衡。这是模块化区块链配置增长之前的共识，模块化使得区块链能够适应这三种配置，而无需过度设计复杂的选择或限制其核心用户群的行为。现在，开发人员能够集成共享序列层、数据可用性层，甚至将证明“装卸”到专们的 zk 证明市场等—游戏规则发生了巨大变化。

We mentioned how it’s difficult for L1s and L2s to differentiate on community and product offerings alone, and while this is still the case for some aspects of blockchain architecture, it’s my belief that innovation on this front will open the door for further experimentation around economic incentives.

我们提到 L1 和 L2 很难仅在社区和产品提供上实现差异化，虽然区块链架构的某些方面仍然如此，但我相信这方面的创新将为围绕经济激励的进一步实验打开大门。

There’s another type of trilemma that’s less discussed, but arguably far more relevant than ever before - a practical trilemma of sorts between users, developers and capital. With so many L1s and L2s now competing for very similar user bases and use cases, there needs to be a discussion around not only the incentives required to please all three of these parties, but the methodology used to achieve this.

还有另一种类型的三难困境很少被讨论，但可以说比以往任何时候都更加重要—用户、开发者和资本之间的现实三难困境。由于现在有如此多的 L1 和 L2 正在争夺非常相似的用户群和用例，因此不仅需要讨论取悦所有这三个方面所需的激励措施，而且还需要讨论实现这一目标所使用的方法。

It’s easy to look at established blockchains like Ethereum and Solana as examples of mature blockchains representing the best of what we can build, but they’ve grown into this position only through the deliberate effort to make it this far. In terms of their architectures and daily usage, these two chains should be recognized as the pillars of excellence for modular and monolithic blockchains. In terms of culture, Ethereum is quickly becoming viewed as a more established, institutional type of chain that’s experienced its respective waves of degeneracy like DeFi Summer. Solana is fresh into its own phase of degeneracy, viewed almost unanimously as the best chain for memecoins and recognized as a casino of sorts, evident through its growth in daily volumes and impressive cultural rebound. Ethereum’s validator set is the largest in crypto, but Solana has built an enviable and decentralized validator set of its own - both are doing quite well across all of these metrics.

人们很容易将以太坊和 Solana 等成熟的区块链视为成熟区块链应有的样子—它们(似乎)代表了我们可以构建的最好的区块链，然而它们只有通过刻意的努力才能走到现在。就其架构和日常使用而言，这两条链应该被认为是模块化和单片式区块链的卓越支柱。在文化方面，以太坊正迅速被视为一种更加成熟的、制度化的链，它经历了像 DeFi Summer 这样的各种起落的浪潮。 Solana 刚刚进入自己的起伏阶段，几乎被一致认为是 memecoin 的最佳链，并被认为是某种赌场，这一点从其每日交易量的增长和令人印象深刻的文化反弹中可以看出。以太坊的验证者集是加密货币中最大的，但 Solana 已经建立了自己的令人称羡的去中心化验证者集—两者在所有这些指标上都表现得很好。

The other side of the coin is less easily quantifiable. While Solana’s low transaction costs led it to become more popular for memecoins relative to Ethereum, there’s no evidence to support the idea that this was crafted meticulously by the core developer team - this type of activity can only form naturally, and it’s probably the best form of PR you can receive in crypto. Looking at Ethereum and DeFi Summer, there also isn’t any evidence that the Ethereum Foundation actively sought out to attract hundreds of food farms with ridiculous APYs - once again, this occurred quite spontaneously.

不过硬币的另一面不太容易量化。虽然 Solana 的低交易成本使其在 memecoin 中相对于以太坊更受欢迎，但没有证据支持这是由核心开发团队精心打造的想法 - 这种类型的活动只能自然形成，而且可能是您可以通过加密货币获得PR的最好形式。看看以太坊和 DeFi Summer，也没有任何证据表明以太坊基金会积极寻求吸引数百个 APY 极高的食物农场—又一次，这些都是自然发生的。

Berachain stands out as one of - if not the first - blockchains to build with all of this in mind from the beginning. There’s been a collaborative effort between the broader Berachain community and a swarm of passionate developers to align themselves around a central goal, with PoL serving as the overarching north star in this equation. Berachain’s approach isn’t entirely novel or revolutionary on its own, but its deliberate effort to align everyone from the beginning and build out an infrastructure to accommodate for this is what’s so exciting.

Berachain 脱颖而出，即使不是第一个，也是从一开始就考虑到上述所有问题而构建的区块链之一。更广泛的 Berachain 社区和一群充满热情的开发人员之间进行了协作努力，围绕一个中心目标进行协调，而 PoL 则充当了这个等式中的首要北极星。 Berachain 的方法本身并不完全新颖或革命性，但它从一开始就刻意让每个人保持一致，并建立一个基础设施来适应这一点，这才最令人兴奋。

PoL 作为潜在的第一个长期适当协调的共识机制(PoL as the potential first properly aligned consensus mechanism with longevity in mind)

PoL navigates these difficulties, utilizing BGT as its main reward function, separating the emissions and creating a sustainable revenue stream through traditional dynamics of block validation, with incentives used to enable a secondary market atop core PoS functionality. Beyond all of this, one of the most important questions to answer is whether or not Berachain validators and BGT stakers can maintain a properly aligned relationship far into the future - a blockchain’s block space is only as valuable as its demand for it at any given time.

PoL 克服了这些困难，利用 BGT 作为其主要奖励功能，通过传统的区块验证动态分离释放，创造可持续的收入流，并通过激励措施在核心 PoS 功能之上启用二级市场。除此之外，需要回答的最重要的问题之一是，Berachain 验证者和 BGT 质押者是否能够在遥远的未来保持适当一致的关系—因为区块链的区块空间的价值取决于其在任何给定时间的需求。

While this report won’t get into the dynamics of Berachain’s ecosystem, cross-protocol interactions and other topics related to adoption and usage, we can make an argument that Berachain blockspace will be highly in-demand, especially given the recurring issue of Ethereum transaction costs and a lack of originality present across existing blockchains. If you’d like to explore the Berachain ecosystem in greater detail, here’s a link to an excellent report covering the current state of BeraFi.

虽然本报告不会涉及 Berachain 生态系统的动态、跨协议交互以及与采用和使用相关的其他主题，但我们可以认为，Berachain 区块空间的需求量将会非常大，特别是考虑到以太坊交易反复出现的问题现以及有区块链存在成本和缺乏原创性。如果您想更详细地探索 Berachain 生态系统，这里有一个关于 BeraFi 当前状态的优秀报告的链接。

There are a handful of applications that have persisted throughout all of DeFi’s life cycle, but this pales in comparison to the number that have faded away after liquidity mining incentives or have simply seen usage drop off a cliff due to lack of product-market fit. Blockchains offer everything from a secure validator set, ecosystem of applications and obvious utility that’s inherent in blockchain design - this is where Berachain can succeed.

有少数应用在 DeFi 的整个生命周期中持续存在，但这与在流动性挖矿激励措施后逐渐消失或由于缺乏产品市场契合度而导致使用量急剧下降的数量相比，就显得相形见绌。区块链提供了从安全验证器集、应用程序生态系统到区块链设计固有的明显实用性的一切 - 这就是 Berachain 能够成功的地方。

It’s been difficult for crypto to fulfill the fat protocol thesis, but what if the answer was in front of us the whole time? From my perspective, enshrined ecosystems work in favor of a blockchain, developing an aligned set of applications and loyal users that feel comfortable participating in actions like LPing and delegating, knowing the rewards available. The larger number of users you draw into your ecosystem, the more likely it is they’re converted as well.

加密货币很难实现胖协议的论点，但如果答案其实一直就在我们面前呢？从我的角度来看，供奉的生态系统有利于区块链，开发一套一致的应用和忠诚的用户，他们了解可用的奖励，可以轻松地参与 LPing 和委托等活动。您吸引到生态系统的用户数量越多，他们也就越有可能进行转化。

The phenomenon can be examined through the most widespread example of an enshrined ecosystem, this being Apple and MacOS. Those that purchase an iPhone or MacBook are almost immediately sucked into the Apple ecosystem, becoming so dependent on it for everything from cloud storage to iMessage functionality that there isn’t much incentive to leave. Apple’s hardware and software design are not technically superior to its competitors, which doesn’t align with the traditional belief that faster and cheaper blockchains will win out, but it does confirm that there’s real value in offering a superior user experience. Users of Apple products enjoy the UI, ease of access and a variety of other ancillary features available to them.

这种现象可以通过最广泛的生态系统例子来检验，即苹果和 MacOS。那些购买 iPhone 或 MacBook 的人几乎会立即被卷入苹果生态系统，从云存储到 iMessage 功能等一切都变得如此依赖它，以至于基本没有太多动力离开。苹果的硬件和软件设计在技术上并不优于其竞争对手，这与更快、更便宜的区块链将获胜的传统信念不符，但它确实证实了提供卓越用户体验的真正价值。 Apple 产品的用户可以享受用户界面、轻松访问以及各种其他可用的辅助功能。

Going back to the topic of finance more broadly, if you are a financial system of any kind, liquidity is more than likely the #1 factor that goes into crafting a superior user experience. If you are a DEX, you need liquidity for new coins. If you are a lending protocol, you need borrowers to provide the yield for lenders. In the traditional financial system, liquidity is the key to ensuring the stock market continues turning and keeps the global economy running smoothly. Berachain’s enshrined ecosystem is a feature that directly serves PoL, creating an entirely unique flywheel never attempted at the protocol layer.

回到更广泛的金融主题，如果您是任何类型的金融系统，流动性很可能是打造卓越用户体验的第一因素。如果你是 DEX，你需要新币的流动性。如果你是一个借贷协议，你需要出借人为贷款人提供收益。在传统金融体系中，流动性是保证股市持续转向、保持全球经济平稳运行的关键。 Berachain 的生态系统是一个直接服务 PoL 的功能，创建了一个在协议层从未尝试过的完全独特的飞轮。

探索 PoL 的近期未来及其对流动性的影响(Exploring the near future of PoL and its effects on liquidity)

With all of this in mind, you might be asking yourself how PoL will function in reality, and whether or not a system can be self-sufficient in an industry as volatile as crypto. Ignoring the question of incentives at the protocol layer, we’re stuck wondering how Berachain might behave once mainnet is live, when the users start flooding in and breathing life into the network. Where will they choose to provide liquidity? What type of coins will be launched, and which of these will attract the most liquidity? Will meta flywheels emerge amongst Berachain protocols, with alliances forming to further incentivize LPs in the pursuit of more BGT?

考虑到所有这些，您可能会问自己 PoL 在现实中将如何运作，以及系统是否可以在像加密货币这样波动的行业中自给自足。忽略协议层的激励问题，我们一直在想，一旦主网上线，当用户开始涌入并为网络注入活力时，Berachain 会如何表现。他们会选择在哪里提供流动性？将推出什么类型的代币，其中哪种将吸引最多的流动性？元飞轮是否会在 Berachain 协议中出现，并形成联盟来进一步激励 LP 追求更多 BGT？

While most of these questions can’t be answered without a live environment of Berachain mainnet upon, they’re very important to consider. As highlighted earlier, L2s have been very interesting to examine due to the heterogeneity of communities, despite sharing very similar architectures and value propositions. As far as L1s go, most of the activity since FTX’s fallout has been centered in Ethereum and more recently Solana, with very little innovation at the protocol or application layer.

虽然大多数问题，没有 Berachain 主网的实时环境就无法回答，但考虑这些问题非常重要。正如前面所强调的，尽管 L2 具有非常相似的架构和价值主张，但由于社区的异质性，细究 L2 会非常有趣。就 L1 而言，自 FTX 受到影响以来，大部分活动都集中在以太坊和最近的 Solana，在协议或应用层几乎没有创新。

User activity in crypto to-date has been nearly entirely driven by financial pursuits, exemplified by a lack of unique product offerings in the application space despite the numerous advancements in blockchain architecture. We’re becoming increasingly modular, performant and superior alternatives to traditional financial systems, but what will it take to make that great leap? PoL on its own is an impressive step forward in blockchain design, but it wouldn’t be significant without the additional steps taken by the Berachain team to build a complementary structure surrounding it.

迄今为止，加密货币领域的用户活动几乎完全是由财务追求驱动的，尽管区块链架构取得了许多进步，但应用领域缺乏独特的产品就是例证。我们正在成为传统金融系统日益模块化、高性能和卓越的替代品，但如何才能实现这一巨大飞跃呢？ PoL 本身是区块链设计中令人印象深刻的一步，但如果没有 Berachain 团队采取额外步骤围绕它构建互补结构，它就不会那么重要。

There are a variety of promising, unique protocols building atop the primitives offered by Berachain. To give a short list, there’s Gummi, Infrared, Kodiak, Shogun, IVX and many, many more- how might these teams use PoL to their advantage? Are there hidden synchronicities waiting to be unlocked, partnerships or strategic collaborations that can unlock value and create a truly aligned ecosystem? Numerous attempts have been made in recent months to build L1s or L2s with a community-first mindset, though none have succeeded for an extended period of time. It’s disingenuous to market a blockchain as a place of battleground, an arena where your users are forced to compete amongst each other to extract value from a whitelisted group of protocols.

有多种前途光明、构思独特的协议构建在 Berachain 提供的原语(primitives)之上。举个简短​​的清单，有 Gummi、Infrared、Kodiak、Shogun、IVX 等等—这些团队如何利用 PoL 来发挥自己的优势？是否存在等待解锁/解密的隐藏同步性、伙伴关系或战略合作，可以去释放价值并创建真正一致的生态系统？近几个月来，人们进行了大量尝试，以社区优先的心态构建 L1 或 L2，但在很长一段时间内都没有取得成功。将区块链作为战场进行营销是不诚实的，在这个战场上，你的用户被迫相互竞争，进而从白名单协议组中获取价值。

In a world where Berachain launches and PoL becomes a dominant alternative to PoS, there’s immense value in this unified ecosystem where value creation can exist within its own sovereignty. There’s frequent debate over cross-chain interactions, infrastructure and solutions designed to bridge applications to new ecosystems. Despite this, we as an industry are far from a scenario where users can access cross-chain liquidity, with easy access between chains for traditional on-chain activities like making swaps, purchasing an NFT or depositing into a new protocol. What if everything you needed to do was situated on one blockchain, situated within an ecosystem where protocols complement each other and share the pie?

在 Berachain 推出且 PoL 成为 PoS 的主导替代品的世界中，这个统一的生态系统具有巨大的价值，价值创造可以在其自己的主权范围内存在。关于跨链交互、基础设施和意在将应用与新生态系统连接起来的解决方案，经常存在争论。尽管如此，我们这个行业还远未实现用户可以访问跨链流动性、在链间轻松访问传统链上活动(例如进行交换、购买 NFT 或存入新协议)的场景。如果您需要做的一切都位于一个区块链上，位于一个协议相互补充并分享蛋糕的生态系统中，该怎么办？

With all of this in mind, there’s a question to be asked: what might Berachain resemble at the launch of mainnet? How about three months after that, or even three years? It’s difficult to apply traditional forms of fundamental analysis to crypto, but it’s just as difficult to perform any sort of long term analysis due to its unpredictability. There are zero examples out there to gauge Berachain’s success on - what’s been built over the past two years has never been attempted and PoL is a novel concept that’s yet to be tested in the wild.

考虑到所有这些，有一个问题需要问：Berachain 在主网启动时会是什么样子？三个月后，甚至三年后呢？将传统形式的基本面分析应用于加密货币是很困难的，但由于其不可预测性，执行任何类型的长期分析也同样困难。衡量 Berachain 成功的例子为零—过去两年建立的东西从未被尝试过，PoL 是一个尚未在实践中经过测验的全新概念。

This would maybe give traditional financial analysts cause for concern or confuse them, but to crypto natives it’s the opposite. It’s an exciting time to be a user interested in Berachain, a developer exploring a new idea or a supporter of crypto who likes when novel ideas get released into the wild. Simply put, Berachain is fresh, new and ready to surprise the industry. Berachain’s collaborative approach has been highlighted and it’s evident the chain and its community are extremely competitive in the culture category; combining these two ideals prior to the launch of a blockchain has not been done, and hopefully that’s enough of a reason to let go of traditional mental models and explore what everyone is so passionate about.

这可能会让传统金融分析师感到担忧或困惑，但对于加密货币原生人群来说，情况恰恰相反。对于对 Berachain 感兴趣的用户、探索新想法的开发人员或喜欢新想法被广泛传播的加密货币支持者来说，这是一个激动人心的时刻。简而言之，Berachain 是新鲜的、新颖的，并准备好给行业带来惊喜。 Berachain 的群体协作方式得到了强调，很明显该链及其社区在文化分类中极具竞争力；在其主链推出之前将这两种​​理想结合起来尚未完成，但希望这足以成为放弃传统思维模式并探索每个人都如此热衷的事物的理由。