At the end of the previous two articles, a reader mentioned a well-known project in the RWA ecosystem called Ondo.

This project has been around for a long time, but it has recently gained significant attention, mainly because the project team is preparing to launch its own Layer 1 blockchain, Ondo Chain.

This blockchain is specifically designed to support the RWA business of financial institutions.

The developers of this chain include traditional financial institutions and internet giants such as BlackRock, PayPal, Franklin Templeton, and Google Cloud.

More importantly, this blockchain is a so-called "hybrid chain":

Its nodes are entirely permissioned. In other words, which institutions are qualified to become nodes is entirely decided by this alliance organization. In terms we are more familiar with, it is an alliance chain.

Seeing this, I was reminded of a question raised by a classmate about four years ago during a blockchain course (the gist was):

We say Bitcoin is a blockchain because we can freely download its wallet, accept transfers from anyone, and transfer to any wallet.

If it doesn't have these characteristics, how can I know if a network is truly a blockchain?

For example, if Taobao, which we currently use, officially insists that it runs on a blockchain, and Taobao points are the tokens on this blockchain, how can I distinguish it?

I remember my response at the time was roughly:

Only those that possess characteristics such as "decentralization," "permissionless," and "censorship-resistant" are, in my view, true blockchains. Anything lacking these characteristics is not a blockchain, regardless of what others call them "chains."

There is also a simpler way to determine whether it is a blockchain:

If one day the U.S. government deems the XX system a security threat, and can immediately find the person or organization responsible for that system, then summon that person or organization for questioning, and under the directive of that person or organization, the system can be completely shut down a month later.

Any system with such characteristics, in my view, is not a blockchain.

Do you all remember the incident when Facebook's stablecoin was halted at the last moment?

The same reasoning applies; technically, the U.S. government could also control Ondo Chain immediately.

So, using this standard to evaluate Ondo Chain, I believe it doesn't qualify as a blockchain; it remains a traditional centralized distributed system, just a system composed of several nodes.

In its system, authorized nodes can completely intercept transactions and blacklist addresses. What assets can be traded on it and who can trade what assets will be strictly limited.

Let’s think a bit broader: in this tightly controlled "blockchain" with a strong U.S. background, would funds from certain countries dare to enter this system for trading?

Because even if they can enter trading, if one day the U.S. government demands to block the assets of certain countries in this "blockchain," those countries would have no recourse.

Therefore, from the perspective of the liquidity of financial assets, such a system has too many restrictions, far less attractive than the boundless free world I imagine.

Only assets that operate with utmost decentralization, censorship resistance, and can be used by both good and bad actors are the common assets of all humanity, and only such platforms can be shared by all humanity.

Only such assets and platforms can attract the broadest liquidity and gain the widest consensus.

In this regard, Bitcoin and Ethereum are the best examples:

On one hand, the U.S. plans to treat Bitcoin as a national reserve, while on the other hand, our neighbors to the north and northeast, who are at odds with the U.S., also regard Bitcoin as an important financial asset.

On one hand, global builders are engaging in DeFi on Ethereum, while on the other hand, our northeastern neighbor is also using DeFi on Ethereum for various financial operations.

If RWA platforms and RWA projects are permissionless and censorship-resistant, regardless of whether they can bring significant returns, at least I would be curious about them and have a considerable interest.

But if platforms like Ondo are the future mainstream RWA platforms, and if the ecosystem on such platforms is the future mainstream RWA ecosystem, then my interest in such platforms and such a track is very faint. I certainly wouldn't think that such a track and such assets hold any special significance for retail investors.

Participating in projects on such platforms offers no freedom, and one has to worry about the issues of converting crypto assets to fiat; I might as well open an account with a financial institution outside the mainland to buy financial assets. Although it's troublesome and not as free, at least there are no legal issues, and I don't have to worry about fiat conversion problems.

Some online believe that for this reason, Ethereum's track has lost one more than expected, but I precisely think that this "centralized" track is not Ethereum's track at all, nor is it the track of the entire crypto ecosystem. Such a track is not very difficult for centralized technology to compete with.

The tracks that crypto technology should compete in must be global, facing all of humanity's crypto projects.

In response to another reader's comment:

I still firmly hold onto Ethereum, and my confidence in it has not changed.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。