How does lBank CEO Eric He see about NFT?

# 第一次对话

#First dialogue

**Johnny**：Eric好，请问你割过韭菜吗？

**Johnny * *: Eric, have you ever done a rug-pull, please?

**Eric**：在这个市场，要看你如何定义「割韭菜」。如果高价卖一个币就是「割韭菜」的话，这个市场上所有人做的都是零和游戏，也就是说所有人赚的钱一定是别人亏的。作为一个行业的「既得利益者」，我觉得每个「既得利益者」都是割韭菜的一方。

**Eric* *: The answer depends on how you define “leek cutting” in this market. If selling a coin at a high price is a rug-pull, everyone in the market is playing zero-sum games — that is to say, everyone earns the money another loses. As one of “vested interests” in an industry, I think that every person with vested interest pulls the rug.

**Johnny**：如果是一个零和游戏，我觉得这很残忍。这个游戏没有为集体创造更多价值，让大家分更大的蛋糕，而是大小固定的蛋糕，被你这样的「既得利益者」分走了。在我心中，我会把你定义成为森林里的狮子，是个强者。你会这样看待自己吗？

**Johnny*: I think such a zero-sum game is cruel. This game does not create more value for the group and then let everyone divide a larger cake. The size of the cake has been fixed and and a large part was obtained by “vested interests” like you. In my heart, I will see you as a lion in the forest, a strong man. Do you think of yourself like this?

**Eric**：我不觉得我在森林里是一个狮子这样的角色。整个区块链，我会觉得它最有趣的一点是，我们所有的财富其实都是靠认知来获取的。比如说比特币这件事情。去年年底年会上，我跟一个同事打赌，一位小姑娘。我跟她说，2021年比特币一定会涨到10万美金。**我有这个坚信，有这个认知。**那个时候一枚比特币不到两万美金。我们赌一套房。那我获得这套房子是通过狮子的强迫还是通过猴子的智慧？所以我不认为这个森林里面强者是狮子。我认为强者所有能认知到区块链价值的人。

**Eric* *: I don’t think I’m a lion in the forest. The most interesting thing about blockchain is that we earn all our money by means of knowledge. Take bitcoin, for example. At the annual meeting at the end of last year, I bet with a colleague, a little girl. I told her that the value of a bitcoin will definitely rise to $100000 in 2021. **I believe it. I know it. **At that time, the value of a bitcoin was less than $20000. We bet on a suite. Did I get the suite through a lion’s coercion or a monkey’s wisdom? I don’t think the strong in this forest is a lion. I think the powerful ones are all those who know the value of blockchain.

**Johnny**：你把这个比较残忍的游戏表述得稍微不那么残忍了一些。我觉得认知或者智商上的一种碾压，本质与物理上的碾压差不多，可能稍微柔和一点，但当这个事情结束，受损方依然还是很难受。但有一点，我认同你。一旦参与游戏的双方对规则达成一致，那就愿赌服输。你有没有觉得NFT也是一个新的机会？一个「割韭菜」的新机会？

**Johnny* *: In your description, this is a less cruel game. I think that being overwhelmed by knowledge or intelligence advantage is almost the same as physical rolling, but may be slightly softer. However, when the game is over, losers still feel very uncomfortable.

I agree with you about one thing — once both parties to the game agree on the rules, they will lose. Do you think NFT is a new opportunity? A new opportunity to do a rug-pull and take advantage?

**Eric**：看我们怎么定义「割韭菜」这个事情。我刚才说，所谓「割韭菜」，是在零和游戏里，认知多的一方，通过认知获得了游戏的胜利，变成既得利益者。但在目前的NFT赛道，举个例子，我们看到很多的加密艺术品，他们有天价。

**Eric* *: The answer depends on how we define a rug-pull. As I have just mentioned, a rug-pull is that in zero sum game, the knowledgeable party wins the game. People make use of their knowledge and becomes a vested interest. But at the current NFT field, for example, we see a lot of cryptographic art works with high prices.

最近刚拍卖成功的一幅画《5千天》，拍出6900万美元这样的天价。这里面其实没有利益受损方。花了6900万就是人，他觉得这幅画对他来说就值这么多，他出这个钱是他心甘情愿的。卖这幅画的人，这个画家接受采访的时候说：“如果我知道我的画能买那么贵，我就好好画。” 你们可以去看下，他的第一天的作品，就跟我小学时候学画画时的水平差不多。所以他也没有想到他的画可以卖这么贵，然后最后卖出去了，他也非常开心，非常乐意这件事情。

Recently, a successful painting, called 5000 Days, has been auctioned for $69 million. There are no losers in this. To the one who paid such a sum of money, the painting is worth so much for him. He was willing to pay the money. As for the artist who sold the painting, said in an interview: “if I know that my paintings are so expensive, I will draw them well.” You can go and see his first art work, and you will find out that it is just like a very simple painting I learnt to draw when I was in primary school. He hadn’t thought his painting could be sold so expensive, and when it was sold out at last, he was very happy about it.

发现没有？在NFT的赛道里面，如果是只对这样高昂的NFT的产品而言，买方，我会觉得我是心甘情愿的；卖方，我也觉得诶，我也很乐意。所以，它是一个双方都乐意为之付费的一个场景。没有谁收割了谁，而是说我们为自己的认知买单。

You see? In NFT field, for such expensive NFT products, as the buyer, I am willing to buy; as the seller, I am willing and glad to sell. So it’s a scenario where both parties are willing to pay for it. No one takes advantage of another — we pay for our own knowledge.

**Johnny**：我有一个稍稍不同的感觉。我作为一个屁民，我走进赌场，我也想玩一玩，娱乐娱乐。但是我赌输了之后还是很难受。我事后会觉得赌场的设计在引诱我不断地赌。为什么这么说呢？因为我得到消息，那个人花6900万美金拍下了《五千天》的人，又做了一个项目叫B20，并且发行了项目代币。

**Johnny*: I have a slightly different feeling. As an ordinary man, I go into the casino. I want to play and have some fun. But I will still be very sad after losing. I will think that the operation of the casino is tempting me to keep gambling. Why did I mention such a scenario? That’s because I got the news that the man who spent $69million buying 5000 Days made another project called B20, and issued the project’s tokens.

我觉得他刻意地拍下《五千天》，以此来营造这样的一个概念和泡沫，然后再通过B20的方式去收割更多的人，因为他吸引大家眼球。大家会说：“哇塞这样一幅画，居然能够卖这么多钱！” 就像你说的，第一幅画还不如你小学时候画的，那我就觉得这里边儿很危险。我的感觉是，我嗅到了那个认知比较高的猴子的味道。

I think he bid $69 million for “five thousand days” on purpose — he attracted everyone’s attention, in order to create such a concept and economic bubble and then use B20 to take advantage of more people. People are surprised that such a painting could be sold at such a price. After all, it is even not as good as that you drew in primary school. So I think this is a dangerous situation. I can sense a monkey with a more knowledge here.

**Eric**：其实很有意思。稍微纠正一下，B20是这幅画 — — 《五千天》 — — 之前就有的代币。这幅画是什么东西，是这个作家，他拿他最早的二十幅画，打了个包，发行了一个治理代币叫B20。这个作者在当中只享有百分之二的权益，更多的归代币发行方，因为发行方已经把他的画买下来了。这幅画的价值，随着这个作者的价值和作品的价值不断上涨，也水涨船高。B20最低的时候几美金一枚，到最高的时候涨到20美金一枚。你刚才说你已经嗅到了这个风险，所以B20这个代币是不是应该涨十倍？但是这件事情并没有发生。B20从20美金跌倒了14美金。

**Eric* *: This is really interesting. Correction — B20 is a token that existed before this painting called 5000 Days. Where is this painting from? This writer bundled up his first twenty paintings and issued a governance token called B20. The author has only 2% of the rights and interests, and more of it belongs to the issuing party of the token, because the issuer has bought his paintings. The value of the painting, along with the value of the author and the value of the work, is rising. A B20 is worth less than ten dollars at the lowest point and 20 dollars at the highest point. You said you sense a risk, so should the value of a B20 be ten times higher? But it didn’t happen. Instead, its value fell from $20 to $14.

其实我们会发现，认知这件事情，学习起来是很快的。很有趣的事情是，这个买家买了画之后，告诉全世界，这幅画就是我买的。所有的信息都是透明的，在区块链世界没有任何东西可以隐瞒，大家都是掌握一样的信息。第一手的信息都是同步获取的，所以在这种情况下，那当大家的认知可以达到同一个同样的一个层级，B20这个代币想要割韭菜，结果把自己割了。

In fact, we will find that it is very fast to learn to gain knowledge. It’s interesting that after buying the painting, the buyer could tell the world that he had bought the painting. All the information is transparent, and there is nothing to hide in the blockchain world. Everyone has the same information. The first-hand information is obtained synchronously. So in this case, when everyone’s knowledge reach the same level, although B20 token issuers want to take advantage of others, they finally got exploited.

在2020年之前，区块链就是讲故事。我们会讲一个特别动听的故事，我们讲区块链和人工智能，讲区块链和大数据，讲区块链和物联网，所有比较吸引人的概念，好像套上一个区块链，它就会变得特别牛逼，然后就发行一个代币，然后把代币炒到天上去。某某人说：”我们要all in区块链，我们要梭哈区块链。” 所以才会有区块链不眠3点钟，你会发现全世界都在奶区块链这种东西。但区块链到底能干吗？那会儿没人知道。

Blockchain means storytelling until 2020. We would tell a particularly interesting story. We will talk about blockchain and artificial intelligence, blockchain and big data, blockchain and Internet of things. All of these were attractive concepts, as if everything combined with blockchain would become particularly compelling. Then we would issue a token and hype it up. Someone said, “we want all in blockchain, we want the suoha blockchain.” That’s why many people were staying up all night to study blockchain. People from all over the world were studying blockchain. But wha is blockchain capable of? No one knew then.

区块链只是个概念，水中花镜中月，在那边野蛮生长，也不知道涨到哪里去，结果啥都没有。那些项目到现在都死了，那些项目有人获得了财富，有人失去的财富，都发生了。那会儿是区块链早期，但是到了2020年，整个区块链不一样了，现在讲究做事情，要真正拿出大家都喜欢的东西。

Blockchain is just a concept, something intangible. It developed fast, but only into nothing. All those projects failed. Some gained money, while others lost money. That was the early stage of blockchain. From 2020, the whole blockchain industry is different. Now, we should pay attention to practical things, something everyone likes.

举个例子，我喜欢篮球，所以我愿意花几万美金甚至几十万，甚至上百万，就买我喜欢的球星的那一秒。我一直在想，如果NBA可以推出来一个麦迪时刻，35秒13分这个场景的话，1000万美金甚至更多，我都愿意为之掏钱，我就是想这个时刻来属于我。这是NBA官方承认的。这个就是NFT背后的逻辑，我愿意为之付费，不是你来骗我，不是你来割我，而是我愿意。

For example, I like basketball, so I would like to spend tens of thousands of dollars or even hundreds of thousands, or even millions, on a short while of the star I like. I am always thinking that if the NBA could launch a McGrady moment (35 minutes and 13 seconds of this scene) , even with a price of 10 million dollars or more, I would like to pay for it. I just want to belong to me, which would be officially acknowledged by the NBA. This is the logic behind NFT. I am willing to pay for it and not taken advantage by others.

**Johnny**：说实话，我看麦迪时刻，看着我就感动了，我不需要拥有它，可能因为我穷。你看你打赌，赌注都是一套房。我打赌，一部手机我都不敢赌。

**Johnny**：To be honest, when I watched the McGrady moment, I also got moved. But I don’t need to have it, maybe because I am poor. You bet on a suite, but I won’t even bet on a cell phone.

**Eric**：是的，我很认同你的逻辑。我们会说，现在NFT更多的是一个贵族的游戏，一个你情我愿游戏。什么意思？就像你刚才说的，你听到麦迪时刻就会很感动，但是你不愿意为它掏这么多钱。但对这个行业来说，行业增长非常迅猛。比如Defi的项目，大家要把钱质押进去，我们叫TVL（总共质押的价值）。在2020年的时候，可能是几亿美金，到现在一个项目就可能承接几十亿甚至上百亿美金的资产规模。大家的财富增长很快。所以，如果说在这个行业赚钱是件容易的事情，你对财富不会那么苛求，你会愿意追求些其他的东西。就像比尔盖茨，每天睁开眼睛，数个数就是几千万在手里。对他来说，花几百万买一套房子是天经地义的，但我就会觉得上海的房价还是高。所以，我们属于不同的层级，我们会有不同的表现。

**Eric* *: Yes, I agree with your. Current NFT is more of a noble game, a game both parties are willing to play. What does it mean? As you said, you’ll be moved to watch McGrady’s moment, but you don’t want to pay so much for it. However, this industry is growing very fast. Take the project of Defi, as example. We pledged our money, which was called TVL (the total value of pledge). In 2020, it might be hundreds of millions of dollars, and now a project may involve an asset scale of billions or even tens of billion dollars. Everyone’s wealth is growing rapidly. So if it’s easy to make money in this industry, you won’t be so demanding about wealth, and you’ll be willing to pursue something else. For example, Bill Gates can spend tens of millions easily everyday. It’s natural for him to spend millions of dollars on a house, but I’ll think that Shanghai’s house prices are still high. So, we belong to different levels and we will have different performances.

NFT好的是，它不会强制你消费。现在和之前最大的不同是，以前的人比如薛蛮子和李笑来，他们会给你讲故事。他们讲一个好像特别动听的故事来打动你。但是NFT不跟你讲。它就问你，你喜不喜欢？你爽不爽？你不爽？那你就一边看着看别人玩就行了。它不用你怎么怎么样。你并不是他的目标用户。他的目标用户可能就是几百个人，几千个人。这些人愿意为之付费，这些人爽了就行了。

The advantage of NFT is that it won’t force you to spend money. The biggest difference between now and the past is that people like Xue Manzi and Li Xiaolai would tell you seemingly pleasant stories to impress others but NFT doesn’t so so. It asks whether you like it or not, whether you are feeling good, whether you’re happy? If not, then you can just watch others play. It doesn’t require you to do anything. After all, you are not its target user. Its target users may be hundreds of people, thousands of people. These people are willing to pay for it, and they are happy. This is enough for NFT.

刚才咱们说的都是NFT艺术品的例子。NFT还有一种应用，就是游戏。我记得那会儿玩《魔兽世界》，里面可能一个坐骑要买到几百块。我每买一次坐骑，可能就被我父母噼里啪啦一顿干，就凭什么你买一个坐骑，就虚拟产品，你要花这么多钱？但是我觉得我坐骑好看，漂亮，愿意为之付费，对吧？

We’ve just talked about examples of NFT art works. There is another application of NFT — games. I remember playing world of warcraft, where one of the rides might cost hundreds of dollars. Every time I bought a ride, I would got beaten up by my parents. They didn’t understand why I bought a rider — a virtual product which cost much money. But I thought I was good-looking with it in the game. I was willing to pay for it. You know what I mean?

如果说有一天暴雪告诉我说，你这个坐骑只有你有，别人都不会有，你觉得大家愿意为之付多少钱？现在国产一个小游，随便一个玩家就要充几万块钱，甚至更多的钱，那为了一个游戏的道具，大家花更多的钱，这是我愿意的事情。就你别管！随着我们年龄的变化，80后有80后认知，90后有90后的认知，00后会有00后的认知。我们永远不要用过去的眼光来看待现在的新兴事物。

If one day Blizzard told me that only I had this ride and no one else would have it, how much do you think I would like to pay for it? Now, even in a simple game made in our country, many players will pay tens of thousands yuan, and even more money for a game prop. This is something people are willing to do. It’s none of others’ business. As we grow older and older, we find out that there are post-80s mindset , post-90s mindset and Post-00 mindset. We should never look at the emerging things with a conservative mindset.

**Johnny**：我还有一个新的问题：NFT目前更多的是与数字货物或数字货品绑定在一起，比如说数字艺术。我们给梵高的《星空》或《向日葵》做NFT，好像意义不大。再比如说，当年我们玩那个传奇的屠龙刀，因为它本身就是个代码，是个数字的东西。有没有可能NFT能够与实物货品，就是真实世界的物品挂上钩，有没有这种可能性？

**Johnny* *: I have another question. NFT is more tied to digital goods or digital goods, such as digital art. It makes little sense if we do NFT for Van Gogh’s star sky or sunflower. As for things like the dragon butcher knife, a game prop in the game called Legend, they are codes and digital things. Is it possible that NFT can relate to real goods?

**Eric**：如果是这样的话，那会特别有一个特别重要的因素。前段时间，在整个NFT里面发生了很有趣的事情，有一个艺术家，是传统的艺术家，街头艺术家，专门画画的。他个人的喜好是我画出来画，去拍卖，拍完了之后我把这幅画给碎了，用碎纸机碎了。在NFT里面，同样的，他的一幅画，他的一些爱好直接用火烧了，烧了之后告诉大家，这幅画现在只有NFT，只有链上有，找其他地方不存在的。那这个东西为什么？我要告诉大家，在NFT里面已经不用再担心这幅画的所有权了。我们要记得，在整个区块链里，代码即法律，代码告诉你这幅画是谁的就是谁的。为什么说现在还有很多传统的东西没有办法到这边来。举个例子，我有套房，这是房产中心给我的证明，对吧？这是国家认定的一个东西，但是如果说我把它NFT了，没有用，因为国家不承认这件事情，房产中心不承认这件事情，所以这套房哪怕说我通过电商转移给了你，国家不会认可，他们觉得这套房还是我的。

**Eric* *: if we want to do so, there will be a particularly important factor. Previously, something interesting happened in the NFT field. There is an artist, a traditional artist, a street artist, who specialized in painting. He likes to do this: he draws the painting, goes to the auction, and after the picture is sold, he destroys the picture and breaks it into small pieces with a paper shredder. Similarly, in NFT, some of his favorite are directly burned with fire. After burning, he can tell others that the burned painting is only in NFT and no one can find it in other places. I want you to know that there is no need to worry about ownership of the painting in NFT. We remember that throughout the blockchain, code is law, and the code tells you who owns the picture. And why is there still a lot of traditional things that can’t come into NFT. For example, I have a suite, which is proved by the Property Center, right? This is a thing recognized by the state. But if I put it NFT, the ownership cannot be proved, because the government does not recognize this matter and the property center does not recognize it. so even if I transfer it to you through e-commerce, the government will not recognize the transfer of ownership. They still think it is mine.

所以，我们需要的是一个强有力的第三方，当它可以对实物进行所有权认定，并且和区块链这个事件进行绑定的时候，这件事情才可能发生。我觉得这件事情离我们已经越来越近了，因为NFT背后是区块链，而区块链这个技术的应用越来越广泛。

So what we need is a strong third party, which can identify and designate the ownership of an object. And the identification and designation should happen only when we bind a real object to blockchain. I think this is getting closer to us because blockchain is supporting NFT and blockchain technology is more and more widely used.

For YouTube Vedio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgRj8yZjFYk

Click here to download for iOS or Android

LBank community

Weibo： https://www.weibo.com/LBank01

Telegram： https://t.me/LBank_cn

Twitter: https://twitter.com/LBank_Exchange

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LBank.info

Official: https://www.lbank.me/

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lbank