The goal should be clear by now
请问您代表ckb项目吗，是项目的什么角色，ckb只做链上金库了？没明白，刚才不是在说fiber吗，现在很清楚的是啥？完全不清楚啊
1 Like
This conversation would be better in a chat room, please join nervos nation or let me know where I should find you. I appreciate the discourse
Apologies for being so quick with the replies, your questions deserve full thought out answers, I do look forward to having the conversation in chat somewhere.
兄弟，你是谁啊？为什么要私聊或者进群，有什么不能说的吗，我只是想了解一下项目的重点和未来计划，这个应该是公开信息吧？不想冒犯，这个有点诈骗的既视感，LOL
1 Like
Understandable, if you notice this looks like messages in a chat room. Conversation should be public but this is not really forum style, it’s chat style.
I want to provide good answers to you and I think we are benefitting from talking like this but it’s not really suited to the forum.
I lead the Nervos Foundation team, we focus on public goods grants, content, education etc.
Hi 关于Fiber的最新情况，可以关注
You can find the latest information of Fiber from
- Fiber官网 https://www.fiber.world/
- 推特 https://x.com/@FiberDevs
- Ecosystem Biweekly Updates中如果Fiber有最新开发进展也会涵盖同步，比如
- Fiber团队也会在Talk发布一些文章，阐述情况 Fiber: Protocol-Complete, Network-Tested - Development Status, Challenges, and 2026 Outlook，或者介绍新的工具 Fiber Network Dashboard
The Fiber team also posts some articles related to progress and new tools
我想可能因为翻译的原因产生了一些小误会
I think there might have been some minor misunderstandings due to translation issues.
Love and peace, guys
1 Like
抱歉，我以为只是名字叫matt，论坛里我看至少有两个matt，那matt - nervos foundation excutive director，感谢你的回复。
你也应该看到我提的建议，20年前后关注ckb到现在，我至少可以清楚的回忆出当时的不可能三角，layer2，rgb++等不同的战略路线，包括什么阶段实现什么。我近来特别疑惑，特别是刚才你提到fiber，如果我没有记错，fiber是24年的核心，当时也提出了一些路线图，我个人也看好这个方向，特别是和crypto支付，稳定币等强相关，就更别提现在还有ai这么庞大的潜在用户。
为什么现在ckb就没有一个更高的或者基金会层面的规划呢？光是说一个fiber和ai我想是不够的，目标是什么。
我发这个帖子，是想提醒和建议团队，看上去繁荣的grants和dao并没有给生态带来什么实际的结果，吸引人才是好事，但是怎么让他们留下来且做出有影响力且持续的项目才是更重要的，而这些都需要团队做一定的规划么。
我不太清楚ckb的财务状况，如果很好，那很可惜没有反馈在价格上，如果不太好，就更不应该分散行动。
2 Likes
感谢信息，我记下了，不过看完还是不知道要做什么，至少不知道重点是什么
2 Likes
I’ve been particularly puzzled lately, especially regarding Fiber, which you mentioned earlier. If I remember correctly, Fiber was a core focus in 2024, and some roadmaps were proposed then. I personally am optimistic about this direction, especially given its strong relevance to crypto payments and stablecoins, not to mention the huge potential user base of AI.
Fiber was initiated in 2024 and it has taken some time to mature. Now with the very surprising rise of agents and market validation of things like x402, Fiber has a use case beyond just “scalable payments”.
There are different paths to pursue, right now all are interesting directions, machine-to-machine payments, man-machine intermediated use cases like fiber audio player ( GitHub - RetricSu/fiber-audio-player · GitHub ), and more boring things like making channel management for user-friendly.
Why doesn’t CKB have a higher-level or foundational plan right now? Just talking about fiber and AI isn’t enough; what are the goals?
The goal has been consistent, to grow the ecosystem. A foundational plan is beyond the scope of this post, it exists but the expression of it (across the board, to contributors and to community) has a lot of room for improvement.
There is a communication gap and there is very good reason why you feel there is no foundational plan, please give a bit of time for this gap to be closed.
Your questions here have been noticed and caused some conversations about it, just give a little time to resolve this issue.
I’m posting this to remind and advise the team that the seemingly thriving grants and DAOs haven’t brought any real results to the ecosystem. Attracting talent is a good thing, but how to retain them and get them to create impactful and sustainable projects is more important, and the team needs to do some planning for this.
I can understand the motivation behind this message based on the events of the past, however I want to highlight that the development you’re seeing now is fundamentally different from the past.
In the past, a direction was chosen, the direction was heavily marketed and newcomers were incentivized to come into the ecosystem. Through this process some incredible people did stick around through each cycle, but as you are making clear here, many did not.
This time (due to the rise of AI) is different, many of the people who are submitting proposals have been in the community for many years and are able to do so much more now with the tools.
The amount of learning required for people new to CKB is much lower as well. In the past developers could choose other chains because they were easier to develop on and there was a quicker path to monetization. CKB can now compete on technical merit, and in time broaden the minds of crypto devs about “how a blockchain should be” and “what a blockchain can do” .. hopefully in time we can provide a more interesting answer to society about “what is crypto good for?”
I’m not very clear about CKB’s financial situation. If it’s good, it’s a pity that it’s not reflected in the price. If it’s not good, then it’s even more inappropriate to diversify its operations.
The project is well-funded through the second halving. If you are concerned about situation after that, I have mentioned the on-chain treasury and there will be plenty of discussion about this in due time, I ask you to please keep this topic focused on the adoption and ecosystem growth questions you have raised.
also..haha
7 Likes
感谢回复。如果我理解没有问题的话，咱们主要采用社区开发者自己发展的模式。和之前感受到的非常一致。LOL
我的疑问没有解开，还增加了疑惑。
AI 是全行业的生产力红利。当 CKB 的开发门槛降低时，其它链的开发门槛降得更低，相较之下我们的竞争力在哪里**。** AI的背景下，吸引顶级开发者留存的核心壁垒到底是什么。
相反，顶级开发者，不管是追求改变世界或暴富，会因为看不到明确的战略进攻方向而离开。
Fiber的进展看起来更像是一个现状，不是目标，我看你在另一个帖子里回复会继续讨论，相信也意识到这个问题。战略是说：在资源有限的情况下，为什么选这个而不选那个？预期的市场是什么？目前的回复本质上是“有什么做什么”，不是“为了达成目标而做什么”。
EOS当时标榜技术绝对领先（我很不喜欢这个项目），也是类似只要我把地基造好，开发者自然会来的观点。发展到一半，没有给出清晰的生态应用路径，而是通过各种 Grant 资助了一堆毫无生命力的dapp，最后大量开发者流失到以太坊 L2。
多年的研究让我感觉到这段时间项目似乎迷失了，或者在改换路径，从一个投资者的角度我找不到对项目有更多判断方式。
舟舟给的链接我看了，包括基金会的x，也确实没有找到什么有价值的战略信息，都是现状。
发起这个帖子也是想了解咱们是不是在dao或者spark中找到一些思路来推进战略。
另外我看去年有不少关于web5的内容和帖子，我不太清楚是不是基金会的战略，这个方向的优点我认为仅次于fiber，不是说想象空间，而是难易程度稍难，这个时代AI是需要本地数据的，本地应用的门槛降低了，有了本地的数据能提供更佳服务，我也请项目方能认真思考，毕竟未来都是面向AI服务了。
所有这些讨论，我仅从自己的本行研究出发，我习惯了公开询问，ckb我也理解为一个上市公司，所以Matt先生你私聊的好意我心领了。自己除了是持币人，也是爱好者，我希望ckb能好起来。
另外还是表达我的观点，如果想团结更多的人，就需要方向和目标。
如果有战略的时候我再研究给出个人思考，这里不占用大家公共资源了，感谢各位回复。
5 Likes
applications on account model chains are held back by lack of flexibility and difficulty in creating secure applications, CKB has been held back by challenges of building on top of a very flexible and high assurance substrate.
AI is more of a game-changer for CKB’s challenges than it is for other chains’ challenges. If I can deploy on any chain with the press of a button, I’m going to go for the one that offers the most powerful solution (putting aside the motivation of immediate financial gain).
The reason that everyone is obsessed with tps in the account model domain is because after years of struggling with limitations and security issues they are side-stepping them to reframe the problem they are facing. This is why “blockchains are for stablecoin payment” is the dominant narrative and no one is experimenting with novel contract mechanism design. The well of creativity is dry, while CKB is full of innovative possibilities waiting to be discovered.
2 Likes
经济驱动发展，技术一定是为场景构造，要么是现有场景，要么是未来可能会出现的场景，一定不能再是我们技术有多好，没有人用，没有任何意义
1 Like
本来不想回复了，因为始终没有回应我关心的战略路线和目标。作为多年的市场研究人员，想对matt先生说，作为ckb的1号位（不知道是不是），回答显然是不合格的，我对项目运营情况更加忧虑。
我不是技术出身，但我知道技术的好坏取决于场景，账户模型天然适合交易场景，虽然不那么去中心化，但是追求tps既是满足场景需要，也是发展中解决问题。我不认为在账户模型下的技术人才都是没有眼光的。
UTXO模型有其优势，应该有独特的场景，我想请问在这条路径上只是说有一个美好的未来这种诗意的表达就够了吗，CKB怎么推动大家构建有护城河的场景？
另外我完全不喜欢通过贬低同业来显示自己优势的回答，至少从很多方面，eth和sol等其它公链有我们可以学习的地方。不过我早上翻了一下您的x，大部分精力不应该去公开贬低eth或者Vitalik的某些路线，既不能给ckb带来良好的口碑，也没有让人信服案例。
关于AI能力，这就是一个懒政，原来门槛高，现在门槛低，所以生态就起来了，没有商业引导和聚焦，即使是真的有对的方向，也完全会迷失在锤子找钉子的过程中？我质疑的就是申请预算的生态起来了，结果和方向怎么规划，完全没有。
我想说，与其有时间盯着别人哪些做的不足冷嘲热讽，不如改进自己，做好规划，不然显得格局太低。
I suppose this is from “5 years to re-think rollups, 1 day to embrace channels”
It’s not disparagement. It’s confirmation of the work we have invested heavily in. Read how you wish. Today was a monumental day for market validation of channels and I make no apology for being loud about it.
If you can find a word of mine where I have disparaged Vitalik, I would be quite surprised.
You will not like this answer, but our path cannot be planned and I have seen too many times the error in trying to plan it. While justified, it is not a strategy fit for our task. The goal is to build something that stands without anointed leaders, thrives without kings.
I will be gracious with your misreading of my intentions and get back to work.
3 Likes
老铁，我可以和你打赌，99% 他们做的一切没有任何用，不用幻想了，没有大资本支持，靠这些小散户搞点东西，能有啥人用呢
This is a warning about disparaging others’ work on the forum. Please do not let it happen again.
不要误会，我没有在说他们项目不好，我只是在阐述一个担忧，没有资本加持，构建的项目怎么保证能够被大规模用上
If it is engineered well, it will be able to be used at any scale
设计得当是否包含商业模式设计，如果不包含，技术能做到，不代表一定会被使用这是两件事情哈