#BTC资金流动性 【In the era of Bitcoin financialization, who can define the rules?】

As Bitcoin evolves from digital gold to productive capital, a silent struggle has begun—contending for the discourse power of trillion-dollar capital efficiency.

There is a question worth pondering: If a universal collateral protocol not only addresses the actual needs of coin holders but also becomes a reference standard for the industry, how valuable would it be?

**Three Perspectives to Understand the Essence of Protocol Upgrades**

First, let's talk about what holders care about most — **how capital flows**. In traditional methods, BTC needs to go through numerous intermediaries to generate returns. But what if we could use native BTC as a primary collateral asset, achieving a separation of ownership and usage rights? Then holders could activate its financial properties while retaining ownership of the asset. This would rewrite the rules of the game.

Secondly, it is **the reliability of returns**. The path from stablecoins to interest-bearing stablecoins requires automated execution and clear data flows. This is not a simple technology, but it defines how Bitcoin interest should be generated – equivalent to setting a safety benchmark for the entire ecosystem.

Finally, there is **the transparency of risk control**. Large funds will not enter the market blindly; they require institutional-level protections such as dynamic over-collateralization and fully transparent clearing mechanisms. Whoever establishes this standard holds the key to the next wave of capital entering the market.

**From product providers to standard setters**

How important is this leap? Imagine this – when a certain protocol becomes the industry reference, the coin-holding community no longer passively accepts the rules, but collectively participates in the rule-making. Voting rights, ecological sharing rights, priority access rights, behind these rights is substantial control over the entire Bitcoin financial ecosystem.

In simple terms, this is a transition from being defined to defining in return. It is about reclaiming the power of discourse from institutions back to the community.

**A deeper question**

When the moat of a protocol upgrades from "product competitiveness" to "standard discourse power," its valuation logic will change completely. It is no longer simply a matter of locked-up volume or transaction fees, but rather how widely this standard can influence the ecosystem. The liquidity revolution of Bitcoin has just begun; whoever defines the standard will take the lead.