英格兰银行（Bank of England）针对系统性稳定币的监管计划，为个人账户设定了 2 万英镑上限，为企业账户设定了 1,000 万英镑上限，这实际上是在市场尚未成长之前就扼杀了它的发展空间。 此外，发行方将被迫把 40% 的储备金 存放在央行且不得计息，只有 60% 可以配置在英国国债等有收益资产中。这使得英镑支持的稳定币在效率、竞争力和吸引力上都明显落后于全球其他稳定币。 更糟的是，英国财政部（HM Treasury） 很可能会复制这一做法，从而让英国成为最不具吸引力的稳定币发行地之一。 这项政策非但不能扩大全球对英镑的使用，或支持英国政府债券市场，反而会起到相反的效果。 最大的受害者是谁？——英国及其消费者。 这又是英格兰银行一次误导性的决策，我们必须再次为金融自由而奋斗。 The Bank of England’s plan for systemic stablecoins sets a £20,000 cap per individual and a £10 million cap per firm, effectively choking the market before it can grow. Issuers would be forced to keep 40% of reserves unremunerated at the central bank and only 60% in yielding assets like UK government bonds. That makes pound-backed stablecoins inefficient, uncompetitive and unattractive compared with global alternatives. Even worse, HM Treasury is likely to copy this approach, turning the UK into one of the least appealing places to issue a stablecoin. Instead of boosting the pound’s reach or supporting government gilts, the policy does the opposite. The biggest losers? The UK and its consumers. This is another misguided move by the Bank of England, and again we have to fight for freedom.
Stani.ethFounder & CEO, AAVE
观点原文
英格兰银行（Bank of England）针对系统性稳定币的监管计划，为个人账户设定了 2 万英镑上限，为企业账户设定了 1,000 万英镑上限，这实际上是在市场尚未成长之前就扼杀了它的发展空间。
此外，发行方将被迫把 40% 的储备金 存放在央行且不得计息，只有 60% 可以配置在英国国债等有收益资产中。这使得英镑支持的稳定币在效率、竞争力和吸引力上都明显落后于全球其他稳定币。
更糟的是，英国财政部（HM Treasury） 很可能会复制这一做法，从而让英国成为最不具吸引力的稳定币发行地之一。
这项政策非但不能扩大全球对英镑的使用，或支持英国政府债券市场，反而会起到相反的效果。
最大的受害者是谁？——英国及其消费者。
这又是英格兰银行一次误导性的决策，我们必须再次为金融自由而奋斗。
The Bank of England’s plan for systemic stablecoins sets a £20,000 cap per individual and a £10 million cap per firm, effectively choking the market before it can grow.
Issuers would be forced to keep 40% of reserves unremunerated at the central bank and only 60% in yielding assets like UK government bonds. That makes pound-backed stablecoins inefficient, uncompetitive and unattractive compared with global alternatives.
Even worse, HM Treasury is likely to copy this approach, turning the UK into one of the least appealing places to issue a stablecoin. Instead of boosting the pound’s reach or supporting government gilts, the policy does the opposite.
The biggest losers? The UK and its consumers.
This is another misguided move by the Bank of England, and again we have to fight for freedom.
DeFi
相关观点
- 转 代币回购并不是灵丹妙药。 公司（或 DAO）应当在手上有多余现金、并且认为自身资产被低估时，才考虑进行回购。 例如，Tim Cook 的原则是：如果你相信自己的资产被低估，就应该买入它。但 Apple 的第一优先级永远是投资自身业务。 只有在业务投资之后仍有多余现金，并且他们认为自家股票是当前最好的投资选择时，才会进行回购。 首要前提永远是：业务本身要赢。 这条原则适用于任何资产。 价格的核心驱动因素始终是： * 用户采用（adoption） * 市场主导地位（market dominance） * 有说服力的叙事（compelling narrative） 回购可以： * 传递信心信号 * 减少流通中的股份/代币数量 * 但它本身并不创造价值。 因此，回购不应成为核心战略，而只能作为补充手段。 对于代币来说，如果新发行进入市场的供给超过回购规模，回购的效果会被大幅削弱。 许多加密公司容易陷入一个误区：只为加密原生用户优化，而忽视了95% 潜在投资者根本不关心代币经济学（tokenomics）。 大多数买家： * 从未听说过“加密推特（crypto Twitter）” * 不会研究复杂的回购机制 他们真正关心的是：产品是否好用、故事是否容易理解 此外，由于很少有项目在长期维度上真正走出加密泡沫， 大多数加密资产至今仍然呈现高度同涨同跌的走势。 在一个项目能够吸引不依赖整体加密市场的用户和资本之前，它就很难被独立定价，在这种情况下，回购是否真的能推动价格，依然是个疑问。 Token buybacks are not a magic bullet. Companies, or DAOs, should do buybacks when they have extra cash and think their asset is cheap. For example, Tim Cook’s rule is if you believe your asset is undervalued, you should buy it. But Apple’s first priority is always to invest in its own business. Only when cash is left over, and they believe their stock is the best available investment, do they buy it back. The priority is a winning business first. This applies to any asset. The primary drivers of price are adoption, market dominance, and a compelling narrative. Buybacks can signal confidence and reduce the number of shares/tokens outstanding, but they do not create value on their own. They also should not be a plan in themselves, but supplemental. For tokens, buybacks are even less effective when new supply hitting the market outweighs the repurchases. So many crypto companies get caught up optimizing for the audience of crypto-native buyers, forgetting that 95% of potential investors do not follow tokenomics. Most buyers have never heard of crypto Twitter. They respond to products that work and stories they can understand. Also, most crypto assets still trade directionally together because very few projects have broken out of the crypto bubble on longer time horizons. Until a project can attract users and capital that do not depend on the broader crypto market, it will not be valued independently of it and it’s hard to say if buybacks will move the needle.Stani.eth · 2026/01/04
- 经过四年时间，我们终于可以分享这一消息：美国证监会（SEC）已正式结束对 Aave 协议的调查。 这一过程对我们的团队而言付出了巨大的努力和资源，对我个人作为创始人来说亦是如此——我们必须全力保护 Aave、本协议生态，以及更广泛的 DeFi 领域。 过去几年里，DeFi 承受了不公平的监管压力。如今我们很高兴能把这一切放在身后，迈入一个全新的时代：开发者终于可以真正去构建金融的未来。 DeFi 终将胜出。 After four years, we are finally ready to share that the SEC has concluded its investigation into the Aave Protocol. This process demanded significant effort and resources from our team, and from me personally as the founder, to protect Aave, its ecosystem, and DeFi more broadly. DeFi has faced unfair regulatory pressure in recent years. We’re glad to put this behind us as we enter a new era where developers can truly build the future of finance. DeFi will win.Stani.eth · 2025/12/16
- 会议日程安排平台（如 Calendly、Google Calendar 等）应该提供 25 分钟而不是 30 分钟、55 分钟而不是 60 分钟的会议时段，依此类推。 大多数会议最后几分钟往往并没有实际价值，而这些工具内置的时间限制能够帮助人们更自然地结束通话。 在连续会议之间，多出 5 分钟的缓冲时间，会显著提升生产力和整体生活质量。 Meeting-scheduling platforms (Calendly, Google Calendar, etc.) should start offering 25-minute slots instead of 30, 55 instead of 60, and so on. The final few minutes of most meetings rarely add meaningful value, and built-in time limits from these tools make it easier to wrap up calls naturally. That extra 5-minute buffer between back-to-back meetings can make a significant difference in both productivity and overall quality of life.Stani.eth · 2025/12/11
- 英国的“金融促销（Financial Promotions）制度”正在扼杀稳定币： 英国一直宣称希望在加密和金融科技领域成为全球领导者，但它的“金融促销”监管框架正在做着相反的事情。 这个名字听起来像是与广告相关，但实际上它与广告几乎没有关系，而是把最基础的数字货币产品变得极难供英国用户使用。 这一制度本来是为了阻止地铁上那些误导性的加密广告，但如今却把所有加密资产一视同仁——包括稳定币在内，而稳定币本应像数字英镑或数字美元一样稳定，却被当成所有剧烈波动的代币一样监管。 这种看法已经完全过时，也没有认识到稳定币的实际运作方式，或它们在支付、结算和日常金融中正变得多么重要。 由于这种“一刀切”的监管框架，为英国用户构建稳定币产品变得不必要地困难：大量的长问卷、强制 24 小时冷静期，以及各种阻碍，甚至在用户只是想做一个简单的“充值余额”操作之前都会横亘在前。 这让用户体验变得缓慢而笨拙，而本应像使用任何现代金融科技应用一样简单顺畅。同时，它也让英国开发者更难、更昂贵地提供透明、合规且世界级的稳定币产品，更不用说那些内嵌 DeFi 功能的创新产品了。 这一制度不仅没有鼓励创新，反而在主动惩罚创新。 结果完全可以预料： 用户流向海外产品，创业者不愿意在英国构建业务，而英国正在一个它本可以真正领先的领域失去优势。 “金融促销”制度不仅需要微调，它需要的是彻底改革——甚至完全废除，用一个现代、支持创新的监管方式来取代，一个可以分清“投机性交易”与“核心数字金融基础设施”的制度。 如果英国真的想在未来金融中保持领先，它就必须停止亲手阻碍未来的发展。我鼓励整个行业团结起来，推动一个更具理性、更加友好的创新监管框架，否则更多的人才和进步将继续流向别处。 行动的时机，就是现在——再拖就太迟了。 The UK’s Financial Promotions regime is killing stablecoins: The UK keeps saying it wants to lead in crypto and fintech, but its “Financial Promotions” regime is doing the opposite. The name sounds like something about advertising, but, in reality, it has very little to do with adverts and a lot to do with making basic digital money products very difficult to use for UK users. It was meant to stop misleading crypto ads on the tube, but instead it now treats every crypto asset the same, including stablecoins, which are designed to behave like digital pounds or dollars, as if they’re all volatile tokens. That view is out of date and fails to recognise how stablecoins actually work or how essential they’re becoming for payments, settlement and everyday finance. Because of this one-size-fits-all framework, building stablecoin products for UK users has become needlessly difficult. Long questionnaires, mandatory 24-hour cooldown periods and constant friction before a user can do something as simple as topping up a balance. This creates a slow, awkward experience for something that should feel as straightforward as using any modern fintech app. It also makes it far harder and more expensive for UK builders to offer transparent, compliant and world-class stablecoin products with embedded DeFi. Instead of encouraging innovation, the regime actively punishes it. The result is predictable. Users drift toward overseas products, founders hesitate to build in the UK and the UK loses ground in a field where it could genuinely lead. The Financial Promotions regime doesn’t just need minor adjustments. It needs a complete reform, or scrapping altogether, in favour of a modern, innovation-friendly approach that understands the difference between speculative trading and essential digital financial infrastructure. If the UK truly wants to lead in the future of finance, it has to stop holding that future back. And I encourage the entire industry to come together and push for a more sensible, innovation-friendly approach before even more talent and progress move elsewhere. The time to act is now until its too late.Stani.eth · 2025/11/28