黄小贱

Meme Season：是否是CZ的新衣。 Meme Season: Is It CZ's New Clothes? 在 Solana cable 被曝光的进程下，过往两周里，从 TST 到 Broccoli ，大家的注意力被CZ的推文所牵引，我不知道为什么每次CZ回归总是有似有神助，但这次的挑战恐怕并不是神助可以解决的。 社区有怒斥MEV体验差的；也有一如既往谄媚让CZ和heyi让其陷入信息茧房的。而现实是在Binance体系的改革就等着有人给出方案，但利益相关方太多，无人发声。 Under the spotlight of the Solana cable revelations, over the past two weeks, from TST to $Broccoli ,everyone's attention has been captivated by CZ's tweets. I don't know why every time CZ makes a comeback, it feels like he has divine assistance, but this time, the challenge might be beyond even divine intervention. The community is divided—some are furious about the poor MEV experience, while others continue to flatter, trapping CZ and Heyi in an information bubble. The reality is that the Binance system's reform is waiting for someone to propose a solution, but with so many stakeholders involved, no one is speaking up. 领导人CZ停留在CEX的版本里并没有玩过Memecoin（这让我们大为震惊），heyi 则让生态非技术小伙伴解决夹子问题（也让我们大为震惊）。 如果我们讨论问题，首先理清楚我们的问题是什么，那么BNB Chain的问题抽象来看是这样的： 1）短期Memecoin：MEV的体验问题（背后的节点利益） 2）中期BNB Chain的定位：BNB的价值锚点只能落回BNB Chain，迫切需求找到链发展的方向而不是“xx有，我也有”。 CZ, the leader, remains in the CEX version and has never dabbled in Memecoins (which shocked us), while Heyi is asking non-technical team members to solve the sandwich attack issues (also shocking). If we want to discuss the problem, we first need to clarify what the problem is. Abstractly, the issues with BNB Chain are as follows: -Short-term Memecoin: The MEV experience issue (and the underlying node interests). -Mid-term BNB Chain positioning: BNB's value anchor must return to BNB Chain, urgently needing to find a direction for the chain's development rather than just copying others. 短期Memecoin：MEV的体验问题（背后的节点利益） Memecoin是注意力经济这话没错，但是为什么ETH Meme无法形成SOL的势态？底层都是链本身的【基建】和【性能】问题，SOL已经证明了追求性能是拿到市场的，Meme也需要一个亚秒出块的高效赌场。 都只看到SOL的繁荣，但是繁荣背后是服务器、RPC、BOT这些产业链上的基建。此刻的BNB Chain 是否能回答清楚上述的基建问题十分迫切。 BNB Chain因为历史原因，目前一共45个节点（21个验证者为Cabinet，其余24个为Candidate）。换句话说就是21个大节点掌握了出块，具备排序权，可以MEV，剩下24个替补队员绝大部分时候都是坐在板凳上的。在MEV领域，这21个节点的上千万USD的盈利能力一直是被垂涎的对象。 Short-term Memecoin: The MEV Experience Issue It's true that Memecoin is an attention economy, but why can't ETH Memes replicate SOL's momentum? The underlying reasons are the infrastructure and performance of the chain itself. SOL has proven that pursuing performance wins markets, and Memes also need a highly efficient, sub-second block production casino. Everyone sees SOL's prosperity, but behind that prosperity lies the infrastructure of servers, RPCs, and bots. It's urgent for BNB Chain to address these infrastructure questions. Due to historical reasons, BNB Chain currently has 45 nodes (21 validators in the Cabinet, and 24 candidates). In other words, 21 major nodes control block production, have sequencing rights, and can engage in MEV, while the remaining 24 substitutes mostly sit on the bench. In the MEV space, the multi-million USD profitability of these 21 nodes has always been a coveted prize. MEV是个中性词汇，只要EVM存在，就存在排序，它就解决不了。MEV只是一个共生的现象，应该让市场自我调节到一个可接受的范畴，今天大家也并没有说SOL的MEV体验很差。 然而，问题的重点是“让市场自我调节”。换言之，市场化会解决一切的问题，像极了自由主义宣导的那样。 但BNB Chain是市场化的吗？ emmm…..或许以前是。 从节点上第21名（最后一名）来看，也是数亿USD账面价值的BNB，对于新人来说，这几乎是一个无法进入的门槛。我们也曾打听过都是什么人在控制这些节点，这其中有BSC的OG们，类似48Club，也有一些在BSC的Infra直接由Binance Delegate过去的BNB。 所以我们一度认为这些排序收入都是实控人CZ自己收走了，直到最近我才得知并没有。之前由于BNB Chain过于垄断，所以我们注意力并未在此。 出于好奇，我们去Dune上看了BNB Chain的MEV数据： dune.com/bnbchain/bnb-smart-… 其中2024年5月后，BEP 322（即提议者-构建者分离机制 PBS）实施，Blockrazor、48Club-pussaint这些基建类Saas化贩卖给套利者后，迅速让整个BSC MEV 区块的渗透率直线拉升，所以应当是体感逐渐变差的过程？ 我们搜到了以下的相关报导： panewslab.com/zh/articledeta… 如何解决这件事的方案非常多，比如扩容提高出块速度，一定程度使得竞价不充分，可以缓解部分；也可以重新设计一个更中心化的架构（等于重做一条链）。 MEV is a neutral term; as long as EVM exists, sequencing rights exist, and it can't be eliminated. MEV is just a phenomenon that coexists with EVM, and the market should self-regulate to an acceptable range. Today, no one is complaining about SOL's MEV experience. However, the key issue is "letting the market self-regulate." In other words, marketization will solve all problems, much like what liberalism advocates. But is BNB Chain truly marketized? Hmm... maybe it used to be. Looking at the 21st node (the last one), it holds billions of USD in BNB, making it nearly impossible for newcomers to enter. We’ve also inquired about who controls these nodes—some are BSC OGs like 48Club, and others are BNB delegated directly by Binance for BSC infrastructure. So, we once thought that all sequencing revenue was pocketed by CZ himself, but we recently learned that’s not the case. Previously, due to BNB Chain's monopolistic nature, we didn’t pay much attention to this. We checked BNB Chain's MEV data on Dune: dune.com/bnbchain/bnb-smart-… After May 2024, with the implementation of BEP 322 (Proposer-Builder Separation, PBS), infrastructure like Blockrazor and 48Club-pussaint, sold as SaaS to arbitrageurs, rapidly increased BSC MEV block penetration. So, shouldn’t the user experience be gradually worsening? We found related reports: panewslab.com/zh/articledeta… There are many solutions to this issue, such as scaling to increase block production speed, which could reduce bidding intensity and alleviate some problems. Alternatively, redesigning a more centralized architecture (essentially rebuilding a chain). 但上述都是表象问题，技术方案可以很多种，相信Binance体系内并不缺这样的人才，起码我知道是有的（只是他们能不能识别且重用的问题，以及未必这些人想去做）。 而核心问题，都不在此，而是这21个掌控出块的节点，和大量躺在功劳簿上并不参与生态的BNB Holder。 利益分配的问题才是问题根本，无人愿意去带头改革前方的利益集团，新人玩家和有能力的玩家由于BNB的价格原因极难参与到出块节点的游戏当中，形成了垄断。 加之PBS的实行，某种程度也让前排垄断集团更集中。 这事我并不知道Binance内部讨论过还是没讨论过，但我认为如果正常上班领薪资的状态，动已有利益蛋糕，且在没有尚方宝剑的情况下，无异于自杀。 我也并不知晓这二位领导人是否还有什么其他原因的顾虑，起码目前看起来，他们的信息茧房非常严重。 我们愿意免费提供Twitter的监测工具给这二位，知道市场真的在发生什么。看起来他们迫切需要从内部外部都找到愿意持续说真话的人，来促进一场改革。 历史上如何杯酒释兵权重新分配筹码和利益的故事数不胜数，相信点到为止，有历史为鉴。 But these are surface-level issues. There are many technical solutions, and I believe Binance isn’t short of such talent—I know they exist. The core issue might not lie here but with the 21 nodes controlling block production and the large number of BNB holders resting on their laurels, not participating in the ecosystem. The root problem is the distribution of benefits. No one is willing to lead a reform against the vested interest groups, and new or capable players find it extremely difficult to join the block production game due to BNB's price. This creates a monopoly, and with PBS in place, it further centralizes power among the top players. I don’t know if Binance has internally discussed this, but I believe that in a normal salaried job, challenging existing interests without a clear mandate is akin to suicide. I also don’t know if the two leaders have other concerns, but it seems their information bubble is severe. We’re willing to offer them free Twitter monitoring tools to understand what’s really happening in the market. It seems they urgently need people, both internally and externally, who are willing to speak the truth to drive a reform. History is full of stories about redistributing power and interests over a cup of wine. I believe there’s a lesson to be learned here. 中期BNB Chain的定位问题 我一直很疑惑究竟这CZ到底是否知晓现在公链的发展格局，我猜测他自从FTX事件后应该疲于应付监管问题。 我在汉阳的采访中看到CZ轻松的状态和两年前截然不同。 看起来似乎他并没有准备好回答这座“城市”定位的问题。 外面能拼性能希望在新的速度下找到新的应用场景dapp（Megaeth/Monad/Sonic）；放弃性能的为了安全的在像RWA靠拢（ETH）；当然还有下场厮杀的Consume Chain希望赛马出大规模应用（所以都去竞争支付。） 而BNB Chain此刻的答案还是xx有，BNB Chain也有。这是一个典型经理人们向上管理的答卷，不是Founder应该给出的答卷。创新才能卓越，Fork只是死的慢。 I’ve always wondered if CZ truly understands the current landscape of public chains. I suspect that since the FTX incident, he’s been busy dealing with regulatory issues. At least from the Hanyang interview, CZ’s relaxed demeanor is starkly different from two years ago. It seems he isn’t ready to answer the question of this "city’s" positioning. Outside, some are pushing for performance to find new dapp scenarios (Megaeth/Monad/Sonic); others are sacrificing performance for security, leaning towards RWA (ETH); and then there are the consumer chains hoping to race towards mass adoption (hence the competition in payments). Meanwhile, BNB Chain’s answer remains: "If others have it, BNB Chain must have it too." This is a typical managerial response, not what a founder should offer. Innovation leads to excellence; fork only delays the deadth. BNB 1000似乎已经是大家在ama里面的惯用喊单，而BNB此刻的价值有多少落在了Launchpool上已经是一个被诟病很久的问题。 随着BNB持续的价格上涨需求，对Launchpool的高FDV变成了先有鸡还是先有蛋的问题。 想改变这一点，又要回到了让BNB的价值回到 BNB Chain上，所以我们看到了Lista、Astherus这些同样具有Binance气质，远离真正市场的BNB系列项目。 BNB的养老现象几乎是个无解的问题，如何平稳的过渡BNB的割据势力换手到新鲜血液如同上述的节点杯酒释兵权，无非是谁有勇气革命，想个方案过度或者暴力接受被dump，焕发新生。 BNB 1000 seems to be the usual rallying cry in AMAs, but how much of BNB’s value is tied to Launchpool has been a long-standing criticism. As BNB’s price continues to rise, the high FDV of Launchpool becomes a chicken-and-egg problem. To change this, BNB’s value must return to BNB Chain, which is why we see projects like Lista and Astherus, which carry Binance’s DNA but are distant from the real market. BNB’s "retirement phenomenon" is almost an unsolvable problem. How to smoothly transition BNB’s entrenched interests to fresh blood, much like the historical redistribution of power, comes down to who has the courage to revolutionize, propose a transition plan, or accept a violent dump to rejuvenate. 如何吸引新的、好的创业者进来不是口号，是一个需要领导人反思的定位问题，战略不偷懒远比战术勤奋重要。 它不是像上下级汇报给社区里的人打半小时电话，它需要回到那个生活状态，回到一无所有的时刻，了解你的用户，了解他们的生活，了解他家的狗。 希望有一天，CZ回到人民群众中去，回到创业的开始去，回到乡村，回到区块链和自由主义吸引我们的那个时刻。 都说Code is Law，可越看越发现，代码里何尝写的不都是人情世故。 Attracting new, talented entrepreneurs isn’t just a slogan—it’s a positioning issue that requires leadership reflection. Strategic diligence far outweighs tactical effort. It’s not about making half-hour calls to the community like a manager reporting to superiors; it’s about returning to that initial state of life, to the moment of having nothing, understanding your users, their lives, and even their dogs. I hope one day, CZ returns to the people, to the beginning of entrepreneurship, to the countryside, to the moment when blockchain and liberalism first captivated us. They say "code is law," but the more I look, the more I realize that what’s written in the code is nothing but human relationships.