Back to the Future, Re-recognizing NFTs: The Best Carrier for Asset On-Chain

This article is from Mars Finance, originally titled "Back to the Future, Re-recognizing NFT."

1. Preface

Since the advent of the internet, human society has experienced rapid development, overturning the ways information is produced and transmitted, and changing the direction of civilization's evolution. However, in the decades following this singularity, humanity has been obsessed with patching and repairing the foundations of the internet. Innovations in new protocol standards, programming languages, technical hardware, and network devices have left people exhausted in the search for the next storm that will sweep through civilization. We have not seen a transformation comparable to the birth of the internet for a long time.

Twelve years ago, the birth of Bitcoin and blockchain allowed people to truly own their assets for the first time, making borderless value transfer possible. If the internet is the infrastructure of the information civilization era, then blockchain represents an exploration of the future value society, shifting human civilization from the transmission of information and content to the interaction of assets and values, opening a new upward channel for the evolution of civilization. On the eve of the transformation in the blockchain era, we have witnessed the emergence of numerous native on-chain assets and have seen the frenzy of DeFi, an independent financial system from the real world. Yet, we still cannot achieve the integration of the on-chain and off-chain worlds; assets and values can only circulate in mutually independent systems. The key to solving this problem lies in bringing assets on-chain, and I believe the best asset carrier is NFT.

In the past NFT market, people often limited their focus to its applications based on scarcity, which is the greatest misunderstanding of NFT, stemming entirely from the cognitive confinement brought about by empiricism, viewing the development process of blockchain and NFT through the lens of the laws of the real world.

Every evolution of human civilization is not only a technological evolution but more so an evolution of thought. This article will attempt to break the seal of thought and expand the imagination of the crypto world regarding NFTs from the perspective of "NFT structure."

2. Value Transfer

2.1 Content Transfer

In the past, travel was long and letters were slow; one could only love one person in a lifetime.

Today, technological advancements have made information borderless, and cross-time-zone communication has become commonplace. The internet has become a basic necessity of our society, and the transmission of information over the network has become a necessary component of communication. The logic of internet information dissemination lies in converting different types of traditional information into machine-readable binary data (0/1) through technological means, and then achieving information interconnection through data transmission over the network.

With continuous technological development, the internet has also evolved, from ADSL dial-up to LAN broadband and then to fiber optics, mobile communication has undergone five transformations, and the performance of physical hardware has advanced rapidly with the repeated effectiveness of Moore's Law. The technological innovations in the internet have brought about developments in content transmission, reflected in two dimensions: content form and ideology.

• Richness of Content Forms

The development of content digitization is a process of continuously expanding the amount of information that can be carried. From the early digitization of text to images, audio, and video, the forms of content that the internet can carry and transmit have continually enriched, and the resulting functionality and services have increasingly permeated daily life.

• Shift in Ideology

In the Web 1.0 era, the internet served merely as an information-sharing platform, where content generation and consumption often followed a one-to-many relationship. The discourse power groups and early internet companies dominated the role of content producers, while netizens, as consumers, could only passively accept information from the internet. This stage was akin to the internet's functional replication of traditional information carriers like books and newspapers, without leveraging the unique characteristics of the internet to impart new meanings.

In the Web 2.0 era, the internet shifted from "information sharing" to "information co-creation." The power of netizens on the internet rose from "read-only" to "write," giving rise to concepts like UGC and PGC, effectively decentralizing the subject and discourse power of the internet to individual users, where everyone plays dual roles as both content consumers and producers. This led to an explosion in the volume of internet content, resulting in the demise of portal websites that relied on parameters like PV and UV, and the emergence of community-based internet platforms that prioritize user quality. From the early PC internet's BBS and Blog to today's mobile internet's content production communities like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Quora, all are products of the Web 2.0 era.

In summary, we can say that the development of the internet equals the development of digital content. Over the past few decades, the internet has brought about a revolution in the inheritance of human civilization, but this has also set constraints for the future of the internet. After all, its applications have never truly escaped the realm of content (information) transmission, and there remains a gap between this and one of the important propositions of the Web 3.0 era—the value internet. In other words, while the binary data information transmitted by the internet can generate value, the internet itself cannot carry value itself.

So where does value come from?

In the real world, the best embodiment of value is assets. Real estate, stocks, bonds, and copyrights are all assets, yet these assets have not truly integrated with the internet; there are no "real assets" on the internet. For example, if User A transmits their property deed to User B over the internet, User B only receives an image and does not experience a transfer of the property's value.

To address the development dilemma of the value internet, the simplest idea is to transfer assets into this parallel world of the internet, achieving efficient transmission of real assets online, which can be understood as "assets going online." However, due to issues like the difficulty of asset rights confirmation, this idea is evidently unfeasible. At this point, the support of blockchain technology may provide some new ideas for the transfer of assets.

2.2 Asset Transfer

• Native On-chain Assets

Definition of native on-chain assets: assets originating from the blockchain world, decoupled from real assets, and completely decentralized. For example, BTC and ETH. However, centralized stablecoins like USDT do not fall into this category.

Assets in the real world require legal texts, sales contracts, and protection from regulatory agencies. Similarly, legal loopholes, contract fraud, and institutional malfeasance can cause your assets to evaporate or change ownership in an instant. Native on-chain assets do not need to consider this issue; a decentralized blockchain network can ensure that the ownership and disposal rights of these assets permanently belong to you, with no possibility of any third party forcibly depriving you of your assets.

• Two Stages of On-chain Asset Transfer

From the development path of on-chain asset transfer, there are two stages:

Digital Assetization: This refers to the manifestation of asset attributes of native on-chain assets. For example, current BTC and ETH possess asset attributes, primarily reflected in transfers and transactions in the early stages of development. Subsequently, with the development of DeFi, broader financial activity scenarios such as lending and wealth management have been realized. The stage we are currently in is the period of digital assetization, where the innovations in various tracks of DeFi are building an independent on-chain financial system, allowing native on-chain assets to achieve internal circulation of value within this system. However, this relatively closed development approach is evidently insufficient to shake the foundations of the traditional financial system, and the mere four hundred billion dollars market cap of the crypto market is the highest ceiling for its future development.

Asset Digitalization: This refers to the circulation of real assets on-chain. This is a stage with immense imaginative potential; if all real-world assets with value attributes can be represented on-chain and can circulate freely like native on-chain assets, it would mean that the total economic volume of humanity has directly shifted to the blockchain. Although this idea seems shocking today, under the development trend of blockchain—especially in the direction of NFT—this is entirely achievable. The concept of everything going on-chain may become a new singularity in human civilization following the birth of the internet in 1969.

We can already see in the current blockchain industry that some DeFi projects have sensed the winds of change and are exploring the on-chain integration of real assets. I believe that in the near future, such projects will become increasingly common, and the boundaries between the real world and the crypto world will gradually blur and eventually disappear.

• On-chain Governance

The significance of asset digitalization and going on-chain lies in moving valuable assets from the real world onto the chain, thus achieving actual use cases such as rights confirmation, payment, and circulation of real assets on-chain. However, on our path toward this beautiful vision, there lies a mountain—how to conduct asset evaluation. The current crypto world and the real world are completely isolated, requiring "oracles" to transmit trustworthy off-chain information to the chain, serving as a bridge for communication between the two. Yet, we have not yet found a truly reliable oracle that can provide this service. If the assets or information going on-chain are fraudulent, then going on-chain becomes meaningless; garbage information will not transform into valid information simply because it is on-chain.

Regarding this issue, the mainstream view is to let centralized regulatory agencies assume the role of oracles, evaluating and certifying assets before they go on-chain. This seems to be a "perfect solution" for integrating reality with the chain, but the biggest flaw lies in the regulatory agencies acting as "black boxes."

For example, one of the culprits of the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis was the three major rating agencies: Moody's, Standard & Poor's, and Fitch. They took money from banks and packaged C-rated bonds with A-rated bonds to create B+ rated asset packages. How can we ensure that such historical lessons will not be repeated on-chain? Who will supervise the regulators? Who will oversee human nature?

Centralized verification methods are using traditional empiricism to address the new phenomenon of blockchain, with centralized institutions playing a decisive role, rendering the very act of bringing assets on-chain a false proposition.

In contrast, the crypto world constructed by native on-chain assets, due to the influence of decentralized thinking, tends to lean more toward the emergence of collective wisdom. Governance tokens are distributed among participants, and governance decisions are executed through smart contracts to achieve decentralized governance. This seemingly egalitarian and democratic design is not without flaws; a few capital giants can still easily dominate a large portion of governance tokens and monopolize governance power through substantial capital investment. The Matthew effect and Pareto principle of the real world will reapply on-chain, and many DeFi projects currently in sight operate this way, disguised as a new decentralized financial order while reversing traditional finance.

The so-called decentralized governance today is merely a phased solution reflecting "human governance" on-chain. We can only hope that those holding a large number of governance tokens will provide fair and correct decisions for project development, as their will represents the direction of the crypto world, just as a few people hold power in the centralized real world. At this stage, people merely possess blockchain technology without truly embodying "blockchain thinking." For the crypto world to advance to the next level, the thinking of everyone needs to evolve, allowing on-chain civilization to transition from "human governance" to "rule of law." Code is Law is a thing of the past; only Law is Code represents organizational evolution. Humanity's advantage lies not in intelligence but in "collective wisdom." Are "nations," "money," and "ideals" essential for survival in our current existence? They are not; they are all products of our imagination. The illusion and the real bubble have been indistinguishable since the moment our wisdom was born; only imagination is the core competitiveness.

Therefore, when we contemplate the logic of the blockchain world, we may need to adopt a dialectical mindset, referencing real-world situations. The existence of the on-chain world does not necessarily require compromise with reality. Perhaps it is not the blockchain that moves toward humanity, but humanity that moves toward the blockchain. Sometimes, a great transformation will shatter the old world, and what truly needs to change is the outdated financial system of the past; we should not mistake the direction.

The products of the on-chain world are vastly different from our previous experiences; it should have its own path to follow, rather than merely summarizing our past financial experiences. The old financial system of the previous world was inherently flawed.

3. The Use and Definition of NFT

NFT, or Non-fungible Token, is the relative concept of Fungible Token (FT). The biggest difference between the two lies in "uniqueness" and "divisibility," which makes NFTs more suitable for representing assets in the real world—after all, the evolution of civilization has led to differentiated descriptions of all things. Even a mass-produced consumer product will differ in production date and printing code.

Current perspectives often describe the NFT market as an independent track, focusing on its scarcity, with crypto artworks and game cards as the main avenues for value output. This is actually a very strange phenomenon, much like no one would consider FT as an independent market.

The reason for this misleading statement is that empiricism has limited the imagination of the entire industry. From the brief spotlight of NFTs in 2017 to the slow development in recent years, many have lost their way due to the past popularity of CryptoKitties, forcibly binding NFTs to art, cards, and scarcity in a fixed mindset, without realizing that this is only a small part of NFT's application scenarios.

The future applications of NFTs should be very broad; their existence enriches and refines the breadth and depth of Token usage. Their rise should be subtle and pervasive, with all categories potentially related to them, as NFTs and FTs are complementary and equivalent. Compared to FTs, NFTs should be a broader concept, just as non-standard product transactions in the real world far exceed standard product transactions.

The rise of DeFi in 2020 once again thrust NFTs into the spotlight. The combination of DeFi and NFTs provided a re-education for the market and prompted many to rethink the more valuable future of NFTs. Especially with DEGO, which has adopted the core idea of "structural description," we see NFTs, long shrouded in the veil of "collectibles," returning to their original form.

3.1 NFT Structural Description

• A Leaf

"The value of NFT lies not in its rarity, but in the description of its structure."

Let’s explore how structural description can endow NFTs with new ideas using a leaf as a case study.

No two leaves in the world are identical; every leaf we pick up from the ground is a unique existence. If I own a leaf and find its veins beautiful and unique, I might value it at 2000 yuan, and if you agree with this value and are willing to buy it, then its value is 2000 yuan, stemming from our "consensus." If you believe it is only worth 1 yuan, then our consensus does not match; I either lower the price or wait for someone who shares the 2000 yuan value consensus to buy it.

This is an example of the application of NFT scarcity; currently, crypto artworks often rely on this rough "abstract consensus" to speculate on prices. While it is undeniable that a small number of crypto artworks possess unique artistic charm, most are simply a game of finding a greater fool, where the buyer's intention is limited to finding someone willing to pay a higher price.

If we convert this leaf into a "structure" that wraps assets, adding more attributes beyond the rarity of "abstract consensus," then the description of this structure might be:

• 0. Image: Leaf
• 1. Name: Mulberry Leaf
• 2. Face Value: 10000 USDT + 500 ETH
• 3. Category: Synthetic Asset
• 4. Grade: A
• ……

If we do not consider the premiums brought by 0, 1, and 4 in terms of rarity and practicality, then the reasonable price of this leaf is its "face value." If we consider the first two attributes, its value would exceed the "actual face value." In other words, this leaf has both a base value from its face value and a consensus value with premium potential. The "universal certainty" brought by face value and the inherent "rarity" can allow it to be rationally priced within a controllable range.

If this leaf is an on-chain NFT asset, then the structural description can enrich its value connotation. The first application is the structure that wraps FT crypto assets; for example, minting NFTs using BTC and ETH forms an asset package, akin to an index fund that wraps multiple stocks in the real world. If we further endow this NFT with functional value (e.g., DeFi mining) or bind it to a piece of artwork, then its value would exceed the face value of the FT spent on minting.

Corresponding to the real world, the best example is the "school district housing" unique to China. Houses of the same area and floor may have drastically different prices simply because they are located in different school districts. Here, the area and floor represent the base "face value," while the geographical location and school district attributes trigger the "consensus value" that leads to premium pricing.

• NFT Blind Boxes

Blind boxes—most people buy them for the "blind" aspect, while a small portion buys them for the "box."

Many people compare blind boxes to figurines and models, although their nature is similar. However, buying a blind box is not just about getting the cute toy inside; the greater joy lies in the moment of opening the box and peeking inside to see if the toy is the one they wanted.

As we all know, rarity adds value; the value of an item is not solely determined by its cost but also by its rarity. Each series of blind boxes typically has one or two highly sought-after models that are relatively scarce, and with some people's intentional speculation, these models can often sell for 50% more than their original price! Not to mention that each series may also have extremely rare "mystery models," which can be sold at even more outrageous prices.

CryptoKitties, launched in 2017, is considered the pioneer of NFTs. Its only drawback lies in its intrinsic value; its scarcity can be entirely guaranteed by decentralized consensus algorithms. Displaying an image of a kitten and claiming it is a rare cat generated with a one-in-ten-thousand or one-in-a-hundred-thousand probability is indeed true; no one can fake it. Saying it cannot be copied means it truly cannot be copied—the ERC721 standard is also public, and there are no issues with counterfeiting.

Even the game's creators cannot violate the algorithm's rules and secretly generate numerous rare cats for profit. However, traditional blind boxes, produced by a centralized company, have their so-called "rarity" entirely guaranteed by the company's reputation. If the price of a rare blind box reaches ten thousand or even a hundred thousand times, the producers would anticipate that there would be no better market conditions, and as the bubble is about to burst, they could easily manufacture a large number of rare blind boxes in the workshop and sell them for profit.

For instance, the scarcity of CryptoKitties is simulated natural scarcity, akin to stones in the ground or fish in the water. Once the development team sets the probabilities, it becomes a smart contract on the Ethereum chain, and the development team cannot easily modify it. In contrast, the scarcity of blind boxes is artificially manufactured, like someone deliberately narrowing a wide water pipe to a finger's width and selling water drop by drop, claiming they will always keep it fair without secretly letting water out for anyone.

What effect would introducing structural design to NFTs have?

In 2020, DEGO and Aavegotchi endowed intrinsic value based on the foundation laid by CryptoKitties, preserving scarcity while addressing the issue of use cases. Especially DEGO, which made good use of "structural thinking," organized an unprecedented "shovel drawing" event.

During the event, players needed to complete tasks designated by the official. Upon completion, they could mint an NFT shovel wrapped with a random number of DEGO for free. These NFTs possess structural attributes, where the number of wrapped tokens determines the "base value," and the "level" determines the mining efficiency of the NFT shovel, serving as additional value for premium pricing.

Due to the random differences in "face value" and "level," this event became an NFT "blind box" draw. Higher face value NFTs theoretically have higher base pricing and premium potential, driving players to continuously draw blind boxes out of curiosity and speculative psychology, thus becoming creators and contributors to the NFT world. Moreover, these NFTs will not depreciate due to mass production; the lower-level shovels produced later will also have more use cases, such as "minting," "synthesizing," and "forging," etc.

With the introduction of "structural thinking," the value of DEGO NFTs is no longer merely "scarcity," but rather allows NFTs to descend from an unreachable castle in the air to more practical application scenarios.

3.2 Application Ideas for NFT Structures

• nToken Rights Proof

cToken is an interest-bearing token launched on Compound V2, serving as proof of the assets deposited by users in Compound. Initially, cTokens were used by Compound to simplify the user experience of earning interest in the on-chain lending market.

Before the introduction of cTokens, lenders needed to lock funds in a pool to earn interest. Thus, funds locked in the lending market could only be used after being unlocked, and withdrawing would also reduce the amount available for borrowing. After the introduction of cTokens, this side effect was avoided, as funds on the Compound platform would circulate in the public market as cTokens, not affecting the locked funds within the platform, and thus not reducing the amount available for borrowing.

If we replace the common FTs in DeFi with NFTs, that is, using NFTs as collateral for lending, wealth management, or liquidity mining, then a rights proof similar to cToken (tentatively named nToken) could be generated alongside the minting of NFTs. It shares similar advantages with cTokens; when NFT assets are within a certain protocol, users can hold nTokens to gain more benefits in other protocols without needing to unlock them, or directly trade them. Corresponding to the real world, this is akin to User A's house being mortgaged in a bank and directly transferring to the bondholder, User B.

Of course, nTokens can also unleash more imagination, exploring more application possibilities beyond cTokens. For example, since nTokens are generated alongside NFT minting, could multiple nTokens be combined to form new asset combinations to capture more value?

• Creating a Differentiated Value Distribution System

In Compound, through factors like the number and duration of cTokens held by users, we (or smart contracts) can indirectly assess their participation, contribution, and understanding of the product. However, the dynamic information that FTs can accommodate is limited. If cTokens are presented in the form of NFTs with a "structural" approach, more dimensions of data can be added, allowing smart contracts to use this as a basis for allocating differentiated yield coefficients and governance weights to different users.

Similarly, NFTs can also reshape LP Tokens for AMM-type DEXs. Taking Uniswap as an example, the yield for liquidity providers is only related to the amount of funds invested. Whether they are veteran players or newcomers, loyal followers or speculators, everyone is equal before the rules. This superficial equality can instead enhance the capital monopoly effect, inadvertently harming the interests of genuine contributors. If LP Tokens are presented in the form of NFTs, adding a time dimension to calculate extra weight based on the duration of liquidity provided, similar to coin age in PoS, it would allow consensus-driven players to receive higher rewards, and governance tokens would be distributed more to players with governance capabilities.

The mining power partition and speculation penalty mechanism currently used by DEGO is a preliminary exploration of a differentiated value distribution system. If future DeFi can present multiple factors related to user yield and power—such as mining power, LP Tokens, and governance rights—in the form of NFTs, the entire governance system of the DeFi world will undergo a dramatic transformation, with the capital-dominated landscape being completely replaced by consensus.

• Introducing the Bond Pool Concept

Although NFTs are Non-fungible Tokens, contracts can set an "NFT framework" beyond the "NFT standard." Assuming that under the same "NFT framework," this framework can become a "pool," NFTs pledged within it can transform into "bonds" generating FTs, allowing NFTs to be traded in bulk like FTs, thus solving the long-standing liquidity issue of NFTs.

For example, various consumer goods in the real world are NFTs, such as iPhones. Even if they are all iPhone 12s of the same color, size, memory, and even from the same Foxconn factory, each phone has a different IMEI, akin to the phone's ID. If there is an "NFT framework" that specifies certain important and secondary parameters, it would enable bulk purchasing of iPhone 12s in one go.

• Expandability of GameFi Assets

GameFi refers to gamified finance, and in the future, DeFi monetary policy may trend more toward gamification, with users' assets becoming equipment used in DeFi games.

We can gain some insights from existing blockchain games that use NFTs, where different types of assets often exist, such as game characters, character accessories, weapons, weapon accessories, pets, etc. These assets can be mapped in contracts as assets of different "categories," leading to more segmented game scenarios. For example, a threshold can be set in the game, requiring players to hold assets categorized as "Character 1" and "Pet 1" to enter a designated dungeon.

Building on this, it is feasible to delve deeper into introducing "GameFi thinking" into the real-world financial market, where such categorization is also applicable.

In the real world, banks categorize various types of assets. For instance, in the ABS scenario, there are multiple "categories." Asset securitization can be divided into real estate securitization, accounts receivable securitization, credit asset securitization, future income securitization, bond portfolio securitization, and so on. Banks make various reasonable allocations based on different asset categories and risk exposures. We can classify different types of securities into different "categories," similar to the "equipment" system in GameFi, with banks writing rigid entry or repayment clauses into contracts in advance. With the help of smart contracts, all participants can freely allocate in a fair, just, and open manner.

3.3 Future Use Cases for NFTs

• Separation of Ownership and Usage Rights

As a structure, NFTs carry more application attributes due to their composite value. If the oracle solution matures sufficiently, it may eventually achieve the on-chain NFTization of assets, expanding the application boundaries of NFTs once again. Real-world goods, real estate, and other assets could find application scenarios on-chain, such as property leasing, product trials, and pawn of precious metals. These applications differ from peer-to-peer asset transactions, as they do not involve the transfer of ownership but rather grant other users limited usage rights.

Tracing back thousands of years of historical civilization development, humanity has established a relatively complete legal system off-chain. In terms of civil property rights, we delineate asset ownership and usage rights through written contracts.

Smart contracts, which restore laws through code without human intervention, allow us to embed contracts directly into NFTs, giving rise to a new regulatory path. Balancing justice, efficiency, and fairness, we can achieve the rule of code.

Currently, there are NFT standards claiming to support the separation of ownership and usage rights, but they often lack the parameter of "time." In other words, when NFT owners grant usage rights to other users, they cannot specify the duration of use. This issue renders the separation of ownership and usage rights a mere concept, as seen in the BCX-NHAS-1808 NFT standard launched by Cocos-BCX for blockchain games.

• NFT Pawning

In the real world, pawning refers to obtaining funds by pledging valuable assets, with the obligation to repay the principal and interest before the due date to reclaim the asset. If the principal and interest are not repaid in time, the asset belongs to the pawn shop. Applying this logic to the crypto world is akin to over-collateralized lending, but the difference lies in the interaction between individuals and the platform's fund pool in lending, while pawning can be a peer-to-peer transaction. When User A initiates a pawning request, the smart contract transfers the usage rights of the NFT to the pawn shop or to individual User B accepting the pawning business. User A receives a certain amount of funds based on the value of the assets wrapped in the NFT. If User A fails to repay the principal and interest by the due date, the ownership of the NFT will transfer to the pawn shop or User B.

• NFT Leasing

Leasing is extremely common in the real world, such as traditional rental businesses and shared economy products like shared bicycles, power banks, and electronic devices. Taking rental housing as an example, User A has an idle property, which has been confirmed on-chain and generated an NFT wrapping that property. Through the smart contract, relevant information such as the property's location, rent, and lease terms is set. When User B wants to rent the property, they need to pay a deposit and rent to obtain the usage rights of the property NFT. If there is a failure to pay rent during the lease, User B's usage rights will be revoked. If rent is paid continuously, User B's usage rights will be reclaimed at the end of the lease, and the deposit will be returned.

4. The Leap from Information Society to Value Society

The application of the internet has changed the way information is transmitted and civilization is inherited. People's behaviors of communicating, producing content, acquiring knowledge, and spreading ideas have all been integrated into binary code, resulting in the modern information society characterized by a data explosion.

The emergence of blockchain has revealed more possibilities for the generation and transmission of value. We have witnessed the journey of a Bitcoin from non-existence to digital assetization, and we are exploring the infinite value prospects of asset digitalization. This evolution is rooted in the technological advancements that have spurred an evolution of thought, prompting us to no longer be content with the stable yet mundane social, economic, and financial systems of the present. Starting from the thought anchor of "NFT+," we gaze at the deeper cosmos.

This transformation of assets and values will not only evolve from information interconnection to value interconnection but will also, under the support of blockchain, drive human society to transition from a centralized information society to a decentralized value society. The result will be a new on-chain governance system and value distribution method, where assets and values will no longer be confined by laws or human governance within narrow territories, but will achieve absolute privatization and free circulation on a borderless basis, creating a higher-dimensional human civilization through governance based on collective wisdom.

With the introduction of structural descriptions to NFTs, we are already close to this future. Perhaps after the centenary of the internet, we will break down the barriers between on-chain and off-chain, achieving widespread asset on-chain integration, where the value on-chain will occupy the majority of human economic volume. At that time, the constraints of centralized institutions on civilization will significantly weaken, society will embrace blockchain, and humanity will step into a new world.