![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/2/22346cc6b68632a98fe4edb6d5d557193851bff5.png\")
image395×338 36.1 KB
I have already seen a couple of DAO votes where hidden profiles unnecessarily cast doubt on legitimacy.
\nSee for example: [DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign - #26 by d3fus7.bit
\nSo my question is: Is there any good reason for allowing hidden profiles on Nervos Talk? Is allowing hidden profiles doing something positive for the well-being of the platform?
\nPhroi
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24237, "post_number": 2, "topic_id": 10243, "topic_title": "Is there any good reason for allowing hidden profiles?", "topic_slug": "is-there-any-good-reason-for-allowing-hidden-profiles", "author": "ArthurZhang", "created_at": "2026-05-10T16:34:46.478000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T16:34:46.478000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/is-there-any-good-reason-for-allowing-hidden-profiles/10243/2", "content_text": "I think anonymous voting itself is not the issue. The issue is whether an anonymous vote should be socially interpreted through a reputation-based forum. When DAO voting is embedded in Talk, this ambiguity is almost built into the design.", "content_html": "I think anonymous voting itself is not the issue. The issue is whether an anonymous vote should be socially interpreted through a reputation-based forum. When DAO voting is embedded in Talk, this ambiguity is almost built into the design.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24238, "post_number": 3, "topic_id": 10243, "topic_title": "Is there any good reason for allowing hidden profiles?", "topic_slug": "is-there-any-good-reason-for-allowing-hidden-profiles", "author": "phroi", "created_at": "2026-05-10T17:32:15.916000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T17:32:15.916000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 2, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/is-there-any-good-reason-for-allowing-hidden-profiles/10243/3", "content_text": "Broader, irrespective of voting, does it makes sense to have hidden profiles on Nervos Talk? What good does it bring to us?\nHaving a public history attached to an account gives a perspective on the bias / technical abilities of said person / entity. Remove that and you remove context for the Community to interpret what’s happening.\nAccount activities are public, let’s keep their summary public\nPhroi\nPS: Not advocating against throwaway accounts, just against the ability to hide public activity summaries", "content_html": "Broader, irrespective of voting, does it makes sense to have hidden profiles on Nervos Talk? What good does it bring to us?
\nHaving a public history attached to an account gives a perspective on the bias / technical abilities of said person / entity. Remove that and you remove context for the Community to interpret what’s happening.
\nAccount activities are public, let’s keep their summary public
\nPhroi
PS: Not advocating against throwaway accounts, just against the ability to hide public activity summaries
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 } ] }, { "topic_id": 10239, "title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239", "created_at": "2026-05-09T04:51:41.673000+00:00", "last_posted_at": "2026-05-10T13:47:08.048000+00:00", "category_id": 65, "tags": [], "posters": [ "Original Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Most Recent Poster" ], "recent_posts": [ { "post_id": 24206, "post_number": 12, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "baclaire", "created_at": "2026-05-09T18:57:45.911000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T18:57:45.911000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 11, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/12", "content_text": "In my opinion you have already shown love for CKB in your previous videos, I think you should be supported on this. I also think you should be open to ideas that makes the video last long in value.we need video that can be used as reference", "content_html": "In my opinion you have already shown love for CKB in your previous videos, I think you should be supported on this. I also think you should be open to ideas that makes the video last long in value.we need video that can be used as reference
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24208, "post_number": 13, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Bitcoin_Renegade", "created_at": "2026-05-09T21:38:42.660000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T21:38:42.660000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 9, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/13", "content_text": "3600 organic YouTube views in 6 months\n12600 organic X views in 6 months for videos\n6000 organic X views in 6 months for posts\nNow I might not have the most followers or the biggest reach but my biggest asset is loyalty and trust as well as not the amount of views but the quality of viewers. I have already brought people into the CKB community to events and plan to have quality engagement on top of reaching the most wide audience possible. Thank you for your feedback and I hope this helps!", "content_html": "3600 organic YouTube views in 6 months
\n12600 organic X views in 6 months for videos
\n6000 organic X views in 6 months for posts
\nNow I might not have the most followers or the biggest reach but my biggest asset is loyalty and trust as well as not the amount of views but the quality of viewers. I have already brought people into the CKB community to events and plan to have quality engagement on top of reaching the most wide audience possible. Thank you for your feedback and I hope this helps!
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24209, "post_number": 14, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Bitcoin_Renegade", "created_at": "2026-05-09T21:40:32.970000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T21:40:32.970000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 12, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/14", "content_text": "What are you thinking education and tutorial videos or like interviews. Because i mainly report news and updates", "content_html": "What are you thinking education and tutorial videos or like interviews. Because i mainly report news and updates
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24210, "post_number": 15, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "PRWNCE_AMMAR", "created_at": "2026-05-09T23:08:19.737000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T23:08:19.737000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/15", "content_text": "I think you deserve a chance as I know You build a strong whole ecosystem around X , Telegram , Open Chat , Discord and of course on YouTube . Also a building a dapp plus you have your own community. Viewership and making a genuine commented community is two different think and you have a loyal members plus You have a team for social media which have ability to increase the engagement results …!!!", "content_html": "I think you deserve a chance as I know You build a strong whole ecosystem around X , Telegram , Open Chat , Discord and of course on YouTube . Also a building a dapp plus you have your own community. Viewership and making a genuine commented community is two different think and you have a loyal members plus You have a team for social media which have ability to increase the engagement results …!!!
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24214, "post_number": 16, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "d3fus7.bit", "created_at": "2026-05-10T04:13:14.510000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T04:18:43.301000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 2, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/16", "content_text": "Also, aren’t there any rules for newly registered users? There are 4-5 here who were registered yesterday…", "content_html": "Also, aren’t there any rules for newly registered users? There are 4-5 here who were registered yesterday…
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24219, "post_number": 17, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Bitcoin_Renegade", "created_at": "2026-05-10T08:17:50.792000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T08:17:50.792000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 16, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/17", "content_text": "I would like to know more about that because I am curious if I should bring people in from social media or just let the vote happen here. I really was hoping to bring in more people to possibly not only vote for me but participate in future discussions.", "content_html": "I would like to know more about that because I am curious if I should bring people in from social media or just let the vote happen here. I really was hoping to bring in more people to possibly not only vote for me but participate in future discussions.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24220, "post_number": 18, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "iAnkou", "created_at": "2026-05-10T08:23:06.625000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T14:39:47.459000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/18", "content_text": "You barely have any following. 500$ per month for videos that generate up to 500 views is extremely high. What is your reasoning behind this? I understand the need for marketing but how would videos that generate “200 to 500 views” as per your quote, would help here?\nI don’t see any value that this will bring. I don’t see any targets mentioned, just “x amount of videos per month”. But when those videos bring almost no audience, what’s the point behind it?\nEdit: I am asking a genuine question and my post gets flagged for “inappropriate language”. I suspect foul play here", "content_html": "You barely have any following. 500$ per month for videos that generate up to 500 views is extremely high. What is your reasoning behind this? I understand the need for marketing but how would videos that generate “200 to 500 views” as per your quote, would help here?
\nI don’t see any value that this will bring. I don’t see any targets mentioned, just “x amount of videos per month”. But when those videos bring almost no audience, what’s the point behind it?
\nEdit: I am asking a genuine question and my post gets flagged for “inappropriate language”. I suspect foul play here
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24224, "post_number": 19, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "d3fus7.bit", "created_at": "2026-05-10T09:09:01.375000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T09:09:01.375000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 17, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/19", "content_text": "Bringing new people here is not bad in itself. Whether their vote should have any weight in deciding on proposals is another question, there must be clear rules. @zz_tovarishch should know, he can explain the rules to us : )", "content_html": "Bringing new people here is not bad in itself. Whether their vote should have any weight in deciding on proposals is another question, there must be clear rules. @zz_tovarishch should know, he can explain the rules to us : )
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24225, "post_number": 20, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Yeti", "created_at": "2026-05-10T09:33:50.226000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T09:33:50.226000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 17, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/20", "content_text": "Yeah, it’s a tricky one. You have your own community and I think it’s ok that they support you. At the end of the day, it’s the voting that counts. If the community lets unwanted (not saying yours is) proposals get voted in just because some new users pumped the proposal up to voting stage, then it’s our own fault.\nBut it’s new users like this who joined up, clicked on the heart and then left without spending even one minute looking at the forum, so they obviously have no interest in CKB itself. This is where it starts looking like manipulation which isn’t good for you, I’m not saying you have played a part in it, it’s just the look of it.\nimage395×338 36.1 KB\nBut as far as your proposal goes, I had a look at your latest livestream and it was pretty good.\nIt’s so hard to know whether there’s a real payback for this sort of thing, but I think the funding amount is fine for 18 livestreams, seems reasonable to me and it looks like you’ve been putting in some work for a while already so your not just popping up out of nowhere.\nBut you should edit your first post and put links to your social media and youtube accounts so everyone can have a look at what you are offering.", "content_html": "Yeah, it’s a tricky one. You have your own community and I think it’s ok that they support you. At the end of the day, it’s the voting that counts. If the community lets unwanted (not saying yours is) proposals get voted in just because some new users pumped the proposal up to voting stage, then it’s our own fault.
\nBut it’s new users like this who joined up, clicked on the heart and then left without spending even one minute looking at the forum, so they obviously have no interest in CKB itself. This is where it starts looking like manipulation which isn’t good for you, I’m not saying you have played a part in it, it’s just the look of it.
\n\nBut as far as your proposal goes, I had a look at your latest livestream and it was pretty good.
\nIt’s so hard to know whether there’s a real payback for this sort of thing, but I think the funding amount is fine for 18 livestreams, seems reasonable to me and it looks like you’ve been putting in some work for a while already so your not just popping up out of nowhere.
\nBut you should edit your first post and put links to your social media and youtube accounts so everyone can have a look at what you are offering.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24226, "post_number": 21, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "zz_tovarishch", "created_at": "2026-05-10T09:35:31.522000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T09:35:31.522000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 19, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/21", "content_text": "Hi 按照目前DAO 1.0的规则，一个提案在通过前需要经过两个阶段\nCKB Community Fund DAO Rules and Process\nPhase 1: Discussion Stage — on Nervos Talk(Discourse)\nThis phase has two primary purposes:\nAllow sufficient time (one week) to help the community fully understand the proposal’s content and budget and enough time to allow the community to discuss and give the proposer suggestions and comments for changes.\nTest the proposal’s popularity and whether certain community members are interested in the topic.\nPassing conditions:\nIf the proposal post accumulates 30 likes (hearts) within one week, it will be considered to have passed the Discussion Stage.\n之后是基于metafore的投票\nCKB Community Fund DAO Rules and Process\nPhase 2: Voting Stage — on Metaforo\nAfter the Discussion Stage has passed, if the submitter wishes to continue to move the proposal forward, then the proposal can be moved to Phase 2: the Voting Stage. In this stage the community members will finally vote on the proposal and decide whether the proposal will pass or not.", "content_html": "Hi 按照目前DAO 1.0的规则，一个提案在通过前需要经过两个阶段
\n\n之后是基于metafore的投票
\n", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24227, "post_number": 22, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Yeti", "created_at": "2026-05-10T09:39:19.461000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T09:39:19.461000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 21, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/22", "content_text": "I think he’s questioning whether new users can (or should) be able to even help a proposal get to the voting stage to begin with.\nI’m sure this has happened in the past and hearts were removed, but I think this might have been users who where creating multiple accounts, I’m not sure if it was just because they were new.", "content_html": "I think he’s questioning whether new users can (or should) be able to even help a proposal get to the voting stage to begin with.
\nI’m sure this has happened in the past and hearts were removed, but I think this might have been users who where creating multiple accounts, I’m not sure if it was just because they were new.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24228, "post_number": 23, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Bitcoin_Renegade", "created_at": "2026-05-10T09:40:05.693000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T09:40:05.693000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 18, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/23", "content_text": "The Reason that this is called a campaign is because its not just content creation but a community building initiative. A long term dedication to the CKB community and a presence on multiple platforms", "content_html": "The Reason that this is called a campaign is because its not just content creation but a community building initiative. A long term dedication to the CKB community and a presence on multiple platforms
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24229, "post_number": 24, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "zz_tovarishch", "created_at": "2026-05-10T09:54:25.342000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T09:54:25.342000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 22, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/24", "content_text": "理解对这块的担忧\n目前的规则下，没有条款是关于何种用户的点赞才算有效。按照无禁止即可为的原则来看，可能不应该认为新用户的点赞无效\n不过，论坛投票阶段的目的是信息同步和情绪测试，且有metafore投票作为最终环节，所以问题可能并没有那么严重", "content_html": "理解对这块的担忧
\n目前的规则下，没有条款是关于何种用户的点赞才算有效。按照无禁止即可为的原则来看，可能不应该认为新用户的点赞无效
\n不过，论坛投票阶段的目的是信息同步和情绪测试，且有metafore投票作为最终环节，所以问题可能并没有那么严重 ![\":grinning_face:\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/images/emoji/apple/grinning_face.png?v=15\" "\\":grinning_face:\\"")
Yeah, I agree. Where would we draw the line if we start removing those votes.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24232, "post_number": 26, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "d3fus7.bit", "created_at": "2026-05-10T11:56:38.817000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T12:02:37.256000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/26", "content_text": "(post deleted by author)", "content_html": "(post deleted by author)
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24234, "post_number": 27, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Bitcoin_Renegade", "created_at": "2026-05-10T13:27:40.304000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T13:35:48.245000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 20, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/27", "content_text": "I will go ahead and edit the proposal with the correct info", "content_html": "I will go ahead and edit the proposal with the correct info
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24235, "post_number": 28, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "Bitcoin_Renegade", "created_at": "2026-05-10T13:35:04.539000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T13:35:04.539000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 22, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/28", "content_text": "Yes and I want real users here not spam. I want to be an example for others so lets do this the right way. I’ve heard the stories of people taking advantage of the DAO. Im immersed in the community and want Nervos to succeed. So lets do this", "content_html": "Yes and I want real users here not spam. I want to be an example for others so lets do this the right way. I’ve heard the stories of people taking advantage of the DAO. Im immersed in the community and want Nervos to succeed. So lets do this
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24236, "post_number": 29, "topic_id": 10239, "topic_title": "[DIS] Bitcoin Renegade CKB Media Campaign", "topic_slug": "dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign", "author": "neon.bit", "created_at": "2026-05-10T13:47:08.048000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T13:49:31.787000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-bitcoin-renegade-ckb-media-campaign/10239/29", "content_text": "Thanks for this proposal @Bitcoin_Renegade. You have a long history of contribution to the community which is very commendable.\nMy position on purely social media oriented proposals is outlined here: On Funding Social Media Activity via the Community Fund DAO\nSome of the questions raised pertain to how effective the proposed activity is likely to be and how this can be quantified.\nGiven you’re also involved in more in-person activism in recent times, would you consider adding this element to your proposal with details about specific activities that you would do? Ideally something that does not require significant additional overheads that could be conducted in your local area (maybe a CKB meetup and onboarding session?). I think that will an extra dimension of assuredness to your proposal.", "content_html": "Thanks for this proposal @Bitcoin_Renegade. You have a long history of contribution to the community which is very commendable.
\nMy position on purely social media oriented proposals is outlined here: On Funding Social Media Activity via the Community Fund DAO
\nSome of the questions raised pertain to how effective the proposed activity is likely to be and how this can be quantified.
\nGiven you’re also involved in more in-person activism in recent times, would you consider adding this element to your proposal with details about specific activities that you would do? Ideally something that does not require significant additional overheads that could be conducted in your local area (maybe a CKB meetup and onboarding session?). I think that will an extra dimension of assuredness to your proposal.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 } ] }, { "topic_id": 10008, "title": "Spark Program | Ckb-probe: Deep Observability Tool for CKB Nodes Based on Aya Kernel eBPF/ckb-probe：基于 Aya 内核 eBPF 的 CKB 节点深度可观测性工具", "slug": "spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb", "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb/10008", "created_at": "2026-02-26T07:25:51.446000+00:00", "last_posted_at": "2026-05-10T08:48:47.638000+00:00", "category_id": 49, "tags": [ "In-Progress", "Spark-Program" ], "posters": [ "Original Poster, Most Recent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster" ], "recent_posts": [ { "post_id": 24204, "post_number": 55, "topic_id": 10008, "topic_title": "Spark Program | Ckb-probe: Deep Observability Tool for CKB Nodes Based on Aya Kernel eBPF/ckb-probe：基于 Aya 内核 eBPF 的 CKB 节点深度可观测性工具", "topic_slug": "spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb", "author": "clair", "created_at": "2026-05-09T18:36:52.392000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T18:50:17.646000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb/10008/55", "content_text": "ckb-probe 测试结果可用性说明\n背景\nckb-probe 的 P1~P4 性能评估和 Case Study 均从已同步的数据快照启动（tip 约 2000 万+），\n属于批量恢复 + 追赶同步，而非从创世块开始的真正 IBD（Initial Block Download）。\n本文档说明：为什么测试结果仍然有效，以及哪些措辞需要修正。\nP1~P4：全部可用\nP1~P4 测量的是 ckb-probe 对节点的附加影响，不依赖于同步阶段的性质：\n指标\n测量目标\n是否依赖 IBD\n可用性\nP-1 CPU ≤ 3%\nprobe 附加 CPU 开销\n否\n有效\nP-2 RSS ≤ 50 MB\nprobe 内存占用\n否\n有效\nP-3 丢失率 < 0.1%\nBPF 事件传输可靠性\n否\n有效\nP-4 退化 < 1%\nprobe 对同步速度的影响\n否\n有效\n理由： 高峰期 30 分钟内批量写入约 32 万块（~10K blocks/min），\nRocksDB 操作密度和 I/O 压力与真正 IBD 的热阶段量级相当，\n足以验证 probe 在高负载下的开销表现。\nCase 1：数据可用，标题需修正\nCase 1 采集的 RocksDB 操作模式（GET 109.7 QPS、PUT 4.3 QPS）、\n延迟分布、异常检测均为真实观测，数据有效。\n但标题\"IBD 写入模式分析\"不够准确——实际只同步了 197 块\n（tip 20,851,949 → 20,852,146），属于短时追赶同步而非完整 IBD。\n修正为：“追赶同步写入模式分析”。\n修正的措辞\n位置\n原文\n修正后\nCase 1 标题\nIBD 写入模式分析\n追赶同步写入模式分析\nCase 1 正文\n处于活跃 IBD 阶段\n处于活跃追赶同步阶段\nP-3\npeak ~13K/sec (IBD phase)\npeak ~13K/sec (批量写入高峰期)\nP-4\n两次 IBD 间隔 9.5 小时\n两次测试间隔 9.5 小时\n结论\n测试数据和结论均可用。高峰期的批量写入在 I/O 特征上与 IBD 高度相似，\n能够有效验证 ckb-probe 的性能指标。报告中的 “IBD” 将替换为更准确的术语，\n避免与严格定义的 IBD 概念混淆。", "content_html": "ckb-probe 的 P1~P4 性能评估和 Case Study 均从已同步的数据快照启动（tip 约 2000 万+），
\n属于批量恢复 + 追赶同步，而非从创世块开始的真正 IBD（Initial Block Download）。
\n本文档说明：为什么测试结果仍然有效，以及哪些措辞需要修正。
\nP1~P4 测量的是 ckb-probe 对节点的附加影响，不依赖于同步阶段的性质：
\n| 指标 | \n测量目标 | \n是否依赖 IBD | \n可用性 | \n
|---|---|---|---|
| P-1 CPU ≤ 3% | \nprobe 附加 CPU 开销 | \n否 | \n有效 | \n
| P-2 RSS ≤ 50 MB | \nprobe 内存占用 | \n否 | \n有效 | \n
| P-3 丢失率 < 0.1% | \nBPF 事件传输可靠性 | \n否 | \n有效 | \n
| P-4 退化 < 1% | \nprobe 对同步速度的影响 | \n否 | \n有效 | \n
理由： 高峰期 30 分钟内批量写入约 32 万块（~10K blocks/min），
\nRocksDB 操作密度和 I/O 压力与真正 IBD 的热阶段量级相当，
\n足以验证 probe 在高负载下的开销表现。
\nCase 1 采集的 RocksDB 操作模式（GET 109.7 QPS、PUT 4.3 QPS）、
\n延迟分布、异常检测均为真实观测，数据有效。
\n但标题\"IBD 写入模式分析\"不够准确——实际只同步了 197 块
\n（tip 20,851,949 → 20,852,146），属于短时追赶同步而非完整 IBD。
\n修正为：“追赶同步写入模式分析”。
\n| 位置 | \n原文 | \n修正后 | \n
|---|---|---|
| Case 1 标题 | \nIBD 写入模式分析 | \n追赶同步写入模式分析 | \n
| Case 1 正文 | \n处于活跃 IBD 阶段 | \n处于活跃追赶同步阶段 | \n
| P-3 | \npeak ~13K/sec (IBD phase) | \npeak ~13K/sec (批量写入高峰期) | \n
| P-4 | \n两次 IBD 间隔 9.5 小时 | \n两次测试间隔 9.5 小时 | \n
测试数据和结论均可用。高峰期的批量写入在 I/O 特征上与 IBD 高度相似，
\n能够有效验证 ckb-probe 的性能指标。报告中的 “IBD” 将替换为更准确的术语，
\n避免与严格定义的 IBD 概念混淆。
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24215, "post_number": 56, "topic_id": 10008, "topic_title": "Spark Program | Ckb-probe: Deep Observability Tool for CKB Nodes Based on Aya Kernel eBPF/ckb-probe：基于 Aya 内核 eBPF 的 CKB 节点深度可观测性工具", "topic_slug": "spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb", "author": "clair", "created_at": "2026-05-10T05:47:35.881000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T05:47:35.881000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb/10008/56", "content_text": "ckb-probe WSL2 兼容性修复\n问题\n在 WSL2 上运行 ckb-probe 的 rocksdb 子命令,所有指标显示为 0(GET/PUT/TXN_COMMIT QPS 全 0),但 BPF 程序的 run_cnt 显示它每秒被触发 5 万–7 万次。即 uprobe attach 成功、程序在跑,事件却没产生有效输出。\n修复策略\n把 uprobe 路径上的 PID 过滤从\"BPF 程序内 hashmap 查找\"改为\"内核级 attach-time PID 过滤\"。uprobe attach 时直接告诉内核只让目标 PID 触发,BPF 程序内不再做 PID 检查。\n改动\n1. ckb-probe-ebpf/src/main.rs — 移除 uprobe 路径上的 BPF 内 PID 过滤\n三个函数中删除 is_target_pid() 调用:\nuprobe_entry_with_size —— 去掉 if !is_target_pid() { return; },直接走 UPROBE_START 写入\nrocksdb_transaction_put_cf_entry —— 去掉 if is_target_pid() 包裹,无条件累加 PUT_PENDING_BYTES\nrocksdb_transaction_commit_entry —— 同上,无条件 snapshot/clear PUT_PENDING_BYTES\n2. ckb-probe/src/commands/rocksdb.rs:267,271 — attach 时传内核级 PID 过滤\n// 前\nuprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, None)\nuretprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, None)?;\n// 后\nuprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, Some(current_pid as i32))\nuretprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, Some(current_pid as i32))?;\naya 的 UProbe::attach 第 4 参数对应 perf_event_open(2) 的 pid 字段(实际是 TGID),内核只让该进程的所有线程触发 uprobe。\n两步缺一不可\n只改 attach 不动 BPF 代码: BPF 程序内仍调用 is_target_pid(),仍走 hashmap lookup → WSL2 上仍全 0\n只删 BPF 内过滤不改 attach: 系统级 attach 会接收所有同 ELF 进程的事件,语义不严谨\n合在一起后,WSL2 上能用,原生 Linux 上行为等价 —— attach-time PID 过滤是 Linux uprobe 的官方机制。\n验证结果(WSL2)\n模式\n结果\n默认 table\nGET 11k QPS / P99=98μs,PUT 8.5k QPS,TXN_COMMIT 1.2k QPS,ITER_NEW 1.2k QPS\n--histogram\n4 个 op 的 log2 延迟分布全部正常显示\n已有测试结果的处理\n由于核心采集路径(BPF 程序内过滤逻辑 + uprobe attach 方式)发生了修改,之前在旧版本上跑的 case 1、case 2 分析和 P1–P4 测试需要在新版本上重新跑一遍,以确保数据准确、结论可信。\n48h 稳定性测试不受影响 —— 该测试关注的是长时间运行下 ckb-probe 自身的资源占用和稳定性,与采集到的具体业务指标值无关,本次修复不引入新的资源开销或长稳风险,无需重跑。\n后续\n工具仍在持续迭代中。后续会根据实际使用情况继续补充测试用例、修复发现的各类 bug、完善功能等", "content_html": "在 WSL2 上运行 ckb-probe 的 rocksdb 子命令,所有指标显示为 0(GET/PUT/TXN_COMMIT QPS 全 0),但 BPF 程序的 run_cnt 显示它每秒被触发 5 万–7 万次。即 uprobe attach 成功、程序在跑,事件却没产生有效输出。
把 uprobe 路径上的 PID 过滤从\"BPF 程序内 hashmap 查找\"改为\"内核级 attach-time PID 过滤\"。uprobe attach 时直接告诉内核只让目标 PID 触发,BPF 程序内不再做 PID 检查。
\nckb-probe-ebpf/src/main.rs — 移除 uprobe 路径上的 BPF 内 PID 过滤三个函数中删除 is_target_pid() 调用:
uprobe_entry_with_size —— 去掉 if !is_target_pid() { return; },直接走 UPROBE_START 写入rocksdb_transaction_put_cf_entry —— 去掉 if is_target_pid() 包裹,无条件累加 PUT_PENDING_BYTESrocksdb_transaction_commit_entry —— 同上,无条件 snapshot/clear PUT_PENDING_BYTESckb-probe/src/commands/rocksdb.rs:267,271 — attach 时传内核级 PID 过滤// 前\nuprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, None)\nuretprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, None)?;\n\n// 后\nuprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, Some(current_pid as i32))\nuretprobe.attach(Some(symbol), 0, &binary, Some(current_pid as i32))?;\naya 的 UProbe::attach 第 4 参数对应 perf_event_open(2) 的 pid 字段(实际是 TGID),内核只让该进程的所有线程触发 uprobe。
is_target_pid(),仍走 hashmap lookup → WSL2 上仍全 0合在一起后,WSL2 上能用,原生 Linux 上行为等价 —— attach-time PID 过滤是 Linux uprobe 的官方机制。
\n| 模式 | \n结果 | \n
|---|---|
| 默认 table | \nGET 11k QPS / P99=98μs,PUT 8.5k QPS,TXN_COMMIT 1.2k QPS,ITER_NEW 1.2k QPS ![\":white_check_mark:\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/images/emoji/apple/white_check_mark.png?v=15\" "\\":white_check_mark:\\"") | \n
--histogram | \n4 个 op 的 log2 延迟分布全部正常显示 | \n
由于核心采集路径(BPF 程序内过滤逻辑 + uprobe attach 方式)发生了修改,之前在旧版本上跑的 case 1、case 2 分析和 P1–P4 测试需要在新版本上重新跑一遍,以确保数据准确、结论可信。
\n48h 稳定性测试不受影响 —— 该测试关注的是长时间运行下 ckb-probe 自身的资源占用和稳定性,与采集到的具体业务指标值无关,本次修复不引入新的资源开销或长稳风险,无需重跑。
\n工具仍在持续迭代中。后续会根据实际使用情况继续补充测试用例、修复发现的各类 bug、完善功能等
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24223, "post_number": 57, "topic_id": 10008, "topic_title": "Spark Program | Ckb-probe: Deep Observability Tool for CKB Nodes Based on Aya Kernel eBPF/ckb-probe：基于 Aya 内核 eBPF 的 CKB 节点深度可观测性工具", "topic_slug": "spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb", "author": "clair", "created_at": "2026-05-10T08:48:47.638000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T08:48:47.638000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 56, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/spark-program-ckb-probe-deep-observability-tool-for-ckb-nodes-based-on-aya-kernel-ebpf-ckb-probe-aya-ebpf-ckb/10008/57", "content_text": "WSL2 环境兼容性说明\n简要说明\n暂不建议在 WSL2 上使用 ckb-probe 进行任何实际测量或测试。 请在原生 Linux 环境(裸机或真实 VM)上运行。\n影响范围\n子命令\nWSL2 上行为\n是否可用\nrocksdb(含 --histogram / --slow / --json)\nuprobe 路径已通过内核级 attach-time PID 过滤绕开\n可用,但仍不建议作为正式测试环境\nsymbols\n不涉及 BPF\n可用\ncheck 的环境检查 / attach 测试\n不依赖 hashmap lookup\n可用\ncheck 的 live event 采集(kprobe/tracepoint)\n依赖 BPF 内 hashmap PID 过滤,在 WSL2 上失效\n数据不可信\n为什么 rocksdb 子命令\"能跑\"也不建议在 WSL2 上用\n虽然 rocksdb 子命令通过内核级 attach-time PID 过滤绕开了 hashmap 路径、看起来工作正常,但 WSL2 仍然不适合作为测试环境,原因如下:\n未来代码改动可能再次踩坑。 任何新加的 BPF 内 hashmap lookup(无论是新功能还是 bug fix)都可能在 WSL2 上静默失效,且失效现象很隐蔽 —— 不报错、不崩溃、只是数据全 0 或缺一部分。debug 成本极高。\nkprobe / tracepoint 路径已经不可用。 check 子命令的 live event 采集、未来可能引入的系统级监控功能都受影响。WSL2 上的\"全 0\"不能区分是被监控对象真没事件,还是 hashmap 路径吃了。\n性能数据不可对比。 WSL2 跑在 Hyper-V 之上,有虚拟化开销;而且 BPF 子系统在 Microsoft fork 内核上的具体实现细节未知,与 mainline kernel 的性能特征可能有差异。任何 P-1 / P-3 / P-4 类的开销测量结果都不能代表生产环境。\n稳定性测试无意义。 48h 长稳测试在一个 BPF 行为已知异常的内核上跑,即使通过也不能证明在生产 mainline kernel 上稳定。\n推荐环境\n环境类型\n是否推荐\n说明\n物理机(裸机)Linux\n推荐\n主要目标环境\nKVM / VMware / VirtualBox 等真实虚拟化 + mainline kernel\n推荐\n行为与裸机一致\n云厂商 VM(AWS / GCP / Azure 等)+ mainline kernel\n推荐\n同上\nDocker 容器(host 是 mainline Linux)\n视配置\n需要 --privileged 或合适的 cap,且 host 内核必须 ≥ 5.8 带完整 BPF 支持\nWSL2\n不推荐\n见上述说明\nWSL1\n不支持\n无 BPF 子系统\n内核与权限要求(原生 Linux)\nLinux kernel ≥ 5.8\n/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux 存在(CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF=y)\nroot 或 CAP_BPF + CAP_PERFMON(部分子命令还需 CAP_SYS_PTRACE)\nCONFIG_UPROBE_EVENTS=y、CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS=y、CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS=y\n如果必须在 WSL2 上调试 ckb-probe 自身\n仅限开发场景(改 ckb-probe 代码、跑编译、测 CLI 行为):\n可以用:cargo build、cargo xtask build-ebpf、ckb-probe --version / --help、ckb-probe symbols、ckb-probe check 的环境检查部分\n谨慎用:ckb-probe rocksdb —— 修复版能跑,但得到的 QPS / 延迟数据不要写入任何正式报告或对比基准\n不要用:ckb-probe check 的 live event 采集结果、任何 P-1~P-4 性能测试、48h 稳定性测试、Case 1/2 分析\n已知历史问题与修复\nckb-probe 已在 uprobe 路径上做了 WSL2 兼容性修复(改用内核级 attach-time PID 过滤,绕开 BPF 内 hashmap 路径)。但这只是缓解,不解决根本问题:\nkprobe / tracepoint 路径无法走 attach-time PID 过滤(它们是系统级 attach),只能继续用 BPF 内 hashmap,在 WSL2 上仍失效。\n未来新增功能若依赖 BPF 内 hashmap lookup,需要为每条新路径单独考虑 WSL2 兼容方案,工程负担重。\n因此项目维护层面将 WSL2 标记为非支持环境,所有正式测试与发布验证都在原生 Linux 上进行。", "content_html": "暂不建议在 WSL2 上使用 ckb-probe 进行任何实际测量或测试。 请在原生 Linux 环境(裸机或真实 VM)上运行。
\n| 子命令 | \nWSL2 上行为 | \n是否可用 | \n
|---|---|---|
rocksdb(含 --histogram / --slow / --json) | \nuprobe 路径已通过内核级 attach-time PID 过滤绕开 | \n 可用,但仍不建议作为正式测试环境 | \n
symbols | \n不涉及 BPF | \n 可用 | \n
check 的环境检查 / attach 测试 | \n不依赖 hashmap lookup | \n 可用 | \n
check 的 live event 采集(kprobe/tracepoint) | \n依赖 BPF 内 hashmap PID 过滤,在 WSL2 上失效 | \n![\":cross_mark:\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/images/emoji/apple/cross_mark.png?v=15\" "\\":cross_mark:\\"") 数据不可信 | \n
rocksdb 子命令\"能跑\"也不建议在 WSL2 上用虽然 rocksdb 子命令通过内核级 attach-time PID 过滤绕开了 hashmap 路径、看起来工作正常,但 WSL2 仍然不适合作为测试环境,原因如下:
未来代码改动可能再次踩坑。 任何新加的 BPF 内 hashmap lookup(无论是新功能还是 bug fix)都可能在 WSL2 上静默失效,且失效现象很隐蔽 —— 不报错、不崩溃、只是数据全 0 或缺一部分。debug 成本极高。
\nkprobe / tracepoint 路径已经不可用。 check 子命令的 live event 采集、未来可能引入的系统级监控功能都受影响。WSL2 上的\"全 0\"不能区分是被监控对象真没事件,还是 hashmap 路径吃了。
性能数据不可对比。 WSL2 跑在 Hyper-V 之上,有虚拟化开销;而且 BPF 子系统在 Microsoft fork 内核上的具体实现细节未知,与 mainline kernel 的性能特征可能有差异。任何 P-1 / P-3 / P-4 类的开销测量结果都不能代表生产环境。
\n稳定性测试无意义。 48h 长稳测试在一个 BPF 行为已知异常的内核上跑,即使通过也不能证明在生产 mainline kernel 上稳定。
\n| 环境类型 | \n是否推荐 | \n说明 | \n
|---|---|---|
| 物理机(裸机)Linux | \n 推荐 | \n主要目标环境 | \n
| KVM / VMware / VirtualBox 等真实虚拟化 + mainline kernel | \n 推荐 | \n行为与裸机一致 | \n
| 云厂商 VM(AWS / GCP / Azure 等)+ mainline kernel | \n 推荐 | \n同上 | \n
| Docker 容器(host 是 mainline Linux) | \n![\":warning:\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/images/emoji/apple/warning.png?v=15\" "\\":warning:\\"") 视配置 | \n需要 --privileged 或合适的 cap,且 host 内核必须 ≥ 5.8 带完整 BPF 支持 | \n
| WSL2 | \n 不推荐 | \n见上述说明 | \n
| WSL1 | \n 不支持 | \n无 BPF 子系统 | \n
Linux kernel ≥ 5.8
\n/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux 存在(CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF=y)
root 或 CAP_BPF + CAP_PERFMON(部分子命令还需 CAP_SYS_PTRACE)
CONFIG_UPROBE_EVENTS=y、CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS=y、CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS=y
仅限开发场景(改 ckb-probe 代码、跑编译、测 CLI 行为):
\n 可以用:cargo build、cargo xtask build-ebpf、ckb-probe --version / --help、ckb-probe symbols、ckb-probe check 的环境检查部分
谨慎用:ckb-probe rocksdb —— 修复版能跑,但得到的 QPS / 延迟数据不要写入任何正式报告或对比基准
不要用:ckb-probe check 的 live event 采集结果、任何 P-1~P-4 性能测试、48h 稳定性测试、Case 1/2 分析
ckb-probe 已在 uprobe 路径上做了 WSL2 兼容性修复(改用内核级 attach-time PID 过滤,绕开 BPF 内 hashmap 路径)。但这只是缓解,不解决根本问题:
\nkprobe / tracepoint 路径无法走 attach-time PID 过滤(它们是系统级 attach),只能继续用 BPF 内 hashmap,在 WSL2 上仍失效。
\n未来新增功能若依赖 BPF 内 hashmap lookup,需要为每条新路径单独考虑 WSL2 兼容方案,工程负担重。
\n因此项目维护层面将 WSL2 标记为非支持环境,所有正式测试与发布验证都在原生 Linux 上进行。
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 } ] }, { "topic_id": 10241, "title": "Morph Channel：一种 CKB Cell 模型下的通道 / 工厂讨论方向", "slug": "morph-channel-ckb-cell", "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/morph-channel-ckb-cell/10241", "created_at": "2026-05-10T06:49:51.265000+00:00", "last_posted_at": "2026-05-10T08:38:20.113000+00:00", "category_id": 45, "tags": [], "posters": [ "Original Poster, Most Recent Poster", "Frequent Poster" ], "recent_posts": [ { "post_id": 24216, "post_number": 1, "topic_id": 10241, "topic_title": "Morph Channel：一种 CKB Cell 模型下的通道 / 工厂讨论方向", "topic_slug": "morph-channel-ckb-cell", "author": "ArthurZhang", "created_at": "2026-05-10T06:49:51.341000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T06:51:22.144000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/morph-channel-ckb-cell/10241/1", "content_text": "这是一份我想提出的社区讨论稿。它想讨论的不是 “yet another Lightning”，也不是要和 Fiber 比高低，而是一个更贴近 CKB Cell 模型的问题：\n如果资金锚点稳定不动，只让签名状态证据在争议时移动，CKB 能不能表达一种更干净的通道和通道工厂结构？\n一句话版本：\n钱不动，状态动；业务资产不付手续费，费用由 sponsor 支付；只有最终结算时才真正移动通道资产。\nimage1802×474 46.1 KB\n思想来源\n这个方向借鉴了几条成熟线索。\nLightning 给出的基本直觉是：大多数支付留在链下，但合作失败时，链上必须能执行最新余额。[1]\neltoo 给出的直觉是：争议期内，较新的签名状态应该能压过较旧的状态。[2]\nChannel factory 的直觉是：共享一组链上资金，可以在链下承载很多子通道，不必每条通道都单独上链 funding。[3]\nCKB 的特殊之处在于：Cell 本身就是状态对象；脚本可以检查状态变化；cell_deps 可以读取上下文；since 可以表达相对等待时间。[4][5][6]\n多资产部分必须尊重 CKB 的现实：capacity、存储占用、xUDT 数量和手续费资金不是一回事，不能混成一个余额。[7][8]\n这里需要很谨慎地说：Morph 不是 Bitcoin eltoo 的移植。Bitcoin eltoo 原本依赖 Bitcoin sighash 层面的变化；Morph 借的是“较新状态胜出”的思想，但用 CKB 的 Cell、脚本和相对等待时间来表达。\n核心模型\nimage1920×1347 212 KB\nMorph 把一条通道拆成三层。\n第一层 是稳定资金锚点。它保存通道身份、参与者、资产信息和结算规则。正常状态推进时，这层不动。\n第二层 是状态证据。它记录“现在谁持有多少、处于什么阶段、使用哪套挑战期规则”。争议时移动的是这层。\n第三层 是费用赞助。它只负责支付单边发布交易的手续费，不属于通道资产。\nimage1250×1530 59.6 KB\n这就是全文最重要的拆分：\n通道资产证明“钱属于这个通道”。\n签名状态证明“现在该怎么分”。\n赞助费用证明“这笔链上交易谁来付手续费”。\n把这三件事混在一起，单边退出就会变得很难推理。\n为什么手续费要单独付\n通道参与者签名时，只应该签“通道状态是真的”。他们不应该签具体手续费、钱包找零、选了哪几个 sponsor inputs。\n原因很实际：单边关闭时，手续费可能变了，钱包可用 Cell 也可能变了。如果通道状态签名绑定了这些钱包细节，就会出现一个尴尬情况：状态是真的，但交易发不出去，或者需要对方重新签名。\nMorph 的做法是把费用层拿出来：\nimage1524×672 34.6 KB\n这样，状态包可以复用，交易体可以重建。\n这点对 tx-pool 竞争尤其重要。如果旧状态先上链，较新状态的挑战交易不一定能沿用原来的交易体。挑战者或 watchtower 应该能针对当前还活着的状态 Cell 重新组装交易，只复用“较新状态是真的”这份证据。\ncell_deps 不是权威本身\ncell_deps 很适合给脚本提供只读上下文，但它不是自动的权威证明。\n通道状态必须绑定正确的资金锚点。可以绑定具体的 funding outpoint，也可以绑定一个不可变的通道 genesis identity。关键是不能只说“我读到了一个长得像通道描述的 Cell”。\n否则，攻击者可能引用一个看起来描述相同、但并不是这条通道真正资金锚点的 Cell。\n这条规则可以用人话概括：\n只读引用负责“让我看到它”，通道身份绑定负责“确认它就是正确的那个”。\n两方通道为什么先用明文\n两方通道的状态通常很小：双方余额、少量待完成支付、超时条件和关闭脚本。\n第一版没有必要把这些东西全 Merkle 化。明文 witness 有几个好处：\n容易审计；\n容易调试；\n链上看到 force close 时，开发者能直接看懂发生了什么；\n对小状态来说，proof system 不一定更便宜。\n这不是说隐私不重要，而是说两方通道第一版应该优先清楚、便宜、可验证。\nimage1718×252 27.4 KB\n通道工厂为什么不能只靠明文\nFactory 的情况不同。\n一个 factory 可能包含很多参与者、很多子通道和很多局部退出路径。如果每次只处理一个局部分支，却要暴露并验证整个 factory state，那就不太像一个可扩展设计。\n因此 factory 更适合用 commitment + proof：\n链上只看这次被触碰的局部状态；\n未相关的参与者和子通道不需要暴露；\n子通道可以先作为 committed state 存在，之后再 materialize 成真实 CKB cells。\nimage1660×1056 46.3 KB\n当然这里也不能过度承诺。Proof mode 不默认更便宜。只有当 factory 总状态足够大，局部 proof 的验证成本低于暴露完整状态时，它才值得。Proof size、交易大小和 CKB-VM cycles 必须测。\nFactory coordination 也不应该假装已经解决。第一版可以保守一些：只要求本次受影响的人对本次触碰的状态签名。Threshold、delegation、committee 这些可以以后再讨论。\n挑战期按 CKB-原生 风格设计\n这个设计不假设亚秒确认，也不假设很快的最终性。\n争议流程应该按 CKB 的确认行为设计：\nimage1458×1208 66.7 KB\n挑战窗口至少要考虑：\n等多少确认后才认为某个状态值得响应；\nfinalization 的 relative since 应该多长；\nwatchtower 多久检查一次；\n主网手续费波动和重组容忍度。\n最短安全挑战期不是论文里的常数，而是 CKB 上的产品参数。\n多资产里，存储押金和余额要分开\nCKB 上最容易出错的地方，是把所有东西都叫“余额”。\n实际上至少有三层：\nimage1906×858 47.8 KB\n这三层必须分开。\n手续费资金是普通钱包资金。它可以换、可以加、可以找零。\n通道 reserve 是为了让通道 Cell 存在而锁住的 CKB capacity。它属于通道，但不能被悄悄拿去付手续费。\n业务资产是用户真正关心的余额，包括 CKB 业务余额和 xUDT 数量。xUDT 还必须遵守自己的 type script 规则。\n一句更强硬的话是：\n如果一个通道实现允许 channel-owned capacity 悄悄支付 publication fee，那它的 accounting model 已经不干净了。\nWatchtower 不应该托管通道资产\nWatchtower 的角色不是保管资金，也不是惩罚对方。\n它只需要在看到旧状态上链时，帮用户发布较新的状态证据。\n它需要的东西包括：\n最新状态编号；\n最新签名状态；\n能发布状态的 witness 或 proof；\n费用赞助策略，或者它自己的 sponsor cells。\n它不需要拿到通道资产的控制权。\n结论\nMorph Channel 的核心不是复杂脚本名，也不是一套新 runtime。\n它真正想表达的是一个很 CKB 的通道对象模型：\n资金锚点稳定，状态证据移动，手续费独立支付，多资产分层守恒，factory 只在需要时验证局部状态。\n参考资料\n[1] Joseph Poon and Thaddeus Dryja, The Bitcoin Lightning Network: Scalable Off-Chain Instant Payments.\n[2] Christian Decker, Rusty Russell, and Olaoluwa Osuntokun, eltoo: A Simple Layer2 Protocol for Bitcoin.\n[3] Conrad Burchert, Christian Decker, and Roger Wattenhofer, Scalable Funding of Bitcoin Micropayment Channel Networks.\n[4] Nervos RFC 0002, CKB Cell Model.\n[5] Nervos RFC 0022, CKB Transaction Structure.\n[6] Nervos RFC 0017, since Field.\n[7] Nervos RFC 0025, Simple UDT.\n[8] Nervos Talk, RFC: Extensible UDT.", "content_html": "这是一份我想提出的社区讨论稿。它想讨论的不是 “yet another Lightning”，也不是要和 Fiber 比高低，而是一个更贴近 CKB Cell 模型的问题：
\n如果资金锚点稳定不动，只让签名状态证据在争议时移动，CKB 能不能表达一种更干净的通道和通道工厂结构？
\n一句话版本：
\n钱不动，状态动；业务资产不付手续费，费用由 sponsor 支付；只有最终结算时才真正移动通道资产。
\n
这个方向借鉴了几条成熟线索。
\n![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/c/c893c3815d95a25e1dafcb38e5f8f75d1c1e24d8.png\")
cell_deps 可以读取上下文；since 可以表达相对等待时间。[4][5][6]这里需要很谨慎地说：Morph 不是 Bitcoin eltoo 的移植。Bitcoin eltoo 原本依赖 Bitcoin sighash 层面的变化；Morph 借的是“较新状态胜出”的思想，但用 CKB 的 Cell、脚本和相对等待时间来表达。
\n第一层 是稳定资金锚点。它保存通道身份、参与者、资产信息和结算规则。正常状态推进时，这层不动。
\n第二层 是状态证据。它记录“现在谁持有多少、处于什么阶段、使用哪套挑战期规则”。争议时移动的是这层。
\n第三层 是费用赞助。它只负责支付单边发布交易的手续费，不属于通道资产。
\n\n这就是全文最重要的拆分：
\n把这三件事混在一起，单边退出就会变得很难推理。
\n通道参与者签名时，只应该签“通道状态是真的”。他们不应该签具体手续费、钱包找零、选了哪几个 sponsor inputs。
\n原因很实际：单边关闭时，手续费可能变了，钱包可用 Cell 也可能变了。如果通道状态签名绑定了这些钱包细节，就会出现一个尴尬情况：状态是真的，但交易发不出去，或者需要对方重新签名。
\nMorph 的做法是把费用层拿出来：
\n
这样，状态包可以复用，交易体可以重建。
\n这点对 tx-pool 竞争尤其重要。如果旧状态先上链，较新状态的挑战交易不一定能沿用原来的交易体。挑战者或 watchtower 应该能针对当前还活着的状态 Cell 重新组装交易，只复用“较新状态是真的”这份证据。
\n![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/f/fa845cadcdca46b825dc4cb77124d235be5de444.jpeg\")
![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/6/60d56ce131fb43bdfd125341a0d42c7aa701f8df.png\")
![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/4/42b2565f05703dcea160452a48e0ccd3796ece86.png\")
cell_deps 不是权威本身cell_deps 很适合给脚本提供只读上下文，但它不是自动的权威证明。
通道状态必须绑定正确的资金锚点。可以绑定具体的 funding outpoint，也可以绑定一个不可变的通道 genesis identity。关键是不能只说“我读到了一个长得像通道描述的 Cell”。
\n否则，攻击者可能引用一个看起来描述相同、但并不是这条通道真正资金锚点的 Cell。
\n这条规则可以用人话概括：
\n只读引用负责“让我看到它”，通道身份绑定负责“确认它就是正确的那个”。
\n两方通道的状态通常很小：双方余额、少量待完成支付、超时条件和关闭脚本。
\n第一版没有必要把这些东西全 Merkle 化。明文 witness 有几个好处：
\n这不是说隐私不重要，而是说两方通道第一版应该优先清楚、便宜、可验证。
\n\nFactory 的情况不同。
\n一个 factory 可能包含很多参与者、很多子通道和很多局部退出路径。如果每次只处理一个局部分支，却要暴露并验证整个 factory state，那就不太像一个可扩展设计。
\n因此 factory 更适合用 commitment + proof：
\n当然这里也不能过度承诺。Proof mode 不默认更便宜。只有当 factory 总状态足够大，局部 proof 的验证成本低于暴露完整状态时，它才值得。Proof size、交易大小和 CKB-VM cycles 必须测。
\nFactory coordination 也不应该假装已经解决。第一版可以保守一些：只要求本次受影响的人对本次触碰的状态签名。Threshold、delegation、committee 这些可以以后再讨论。
\n这个设计不假设亚秒确认，也不假设很快的最终性。
\n争议流程应该按 CKB 的确认行为设计：
\n\n挑战窗口至少要考虑：
\n![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/5/5d4d75f2130581bf670d415ba0552d2c08af6111.png\")
![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/2/23a290c6a5955c53fa3c632303a40d8fb713d301.png\")
![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/4/48065dea91d6303b7409fc4c002b10b0a0d5de13.png\")
since 应该多长；最短安全挑战期不是论文里的常数，而是 CKB 上的产品参数。
\nCKB 上最容易出错的地方，是把所有东西都叫“余额”。
\n实际上至少有三层：
\n
这三层必须分开。
\n手续费资金是普通钱包资金。它可以换、可以加、可以找零。
\n通道 reserve 是为了让通道 Cell 存在而锁住的 CKB capacity。它属于通道，但不能被悄悄拿去付手续费。
\n业务资产是用户真正关心的余额，包括 CKB 业务余额和 xUDT 数量。xUDT 还必须遵守自己的 type script 规则。
\n一句更强硬的话是：
\n如果一个通道实现允许 channel-owned capacity 悄悄支付 publication fee，那它的 accounting model 已经不干净了。
\nWatchtower 的角色不是保管资金，也不是惩罚对方。
\n它只需要在看到旧状态上链时，帮用户发布较新的状态证据。
\n它需要的东西包括：
\n它不需要拿到通道资产的控制权。
\nMorph Channel 的核心不是复杂脚本名，也不是一套新 runtime。
\n它真正想表达的是一个很 CKB 的通道对象模型：
\n资金锚点稳定，状态证据移动，手续费独立支付，多资产分层守恒，factory 只在需要时验证局部状态。
[1] Joseph Poon and Thaddeus Dryja, The Bitcoin Lightning Network: Scalable Off-Chain Instant Payments.
\n[2] Christian Decker, Rusty Russell, and Olaoluwa Osuntokun, eltoo: A Simple Layer2 Protocol for Bitcoin.
\n[3] Conrad Burchert, Christian Decker, and Roger Wattenhofer, Scalable Funding of Bitcoin Micropayment Channel Networks.
\n[4] Nervos RFC 0002, CKB Cell Model.
\n[5] Nervos RFC 0022, CKB Transaction Structure.
\n[6] Nervos RFC 0017, since Field.
[7] Nervos RFC 0025, Simple UDT.
\n[8] Nervos Talk, RFC: Extensible UDT.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24217, "post_number": 2, "topic_id": 10241, "topic_title": "Morph Channel：一种 CKB Cell 模型下的通道 / 工厂讨论方向", "topic_slug": "morph-channel-ckb-cell", "author": "ArthurZhang", "created_at": "2026-05-10T06:57:07.775000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T06:57:07.775000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/morph-channel-ckb-cell/10241/2", "content_text": "核心模型补充\n每条通道由稳定的 funding bundle 和可移动的 state cell 表示。\nimage1244×517 53 KB\n直观地说：\nFundCell / VaultCell* = durable funding/value anchor\nStateCell = latest dispute pointer\nSponsorCell* = publication/fee layer\n钱不动，状态动；业务资产不付 gas，sponsor 付 gas；最后 settlement 才真正动 vault。\n普通链下状态推进时，参与者只交换签名，不创建 CKB 交易。单边发布时，交易花费当前 StateCell，通过 cell_deps 引用 funding bundle，并创建一个更新的 StateCell。", "content_html": "每条通道由稳定的 funding bundle 和可移动的 state cell 表示。
\n\n直观地说：
\n![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/8/843afdee2dd22d5bf41a57773cd22ca5d485f6d2.png\")
![\"image\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/9/919ad21d0d783c2d753e13f69817f2d6a6c22d39.png\")
FundCell / VaultCell* = durable funding/value anchor\nStateCell = latest dispute pointer\nSponsorCell* = publication/fee layer\n钱不动，状态动；业务资产不付 gas，sponsor 付 gas；最后 settlement 才真正动 vault。
\n普通链下状态推进时，参与者只交换签名，不创建 CKB 交易。单边发布时，交易花费当前 StateCell，通过 cell_deps 引用 funding bundle，并创建一个更新的 StateCell。
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24221, "post_number": 3, "topic_id": 10241, "topic_title": "Morph Channel：一种 CKB Cell 模型下的通道 / 工厂讨论方向", "topic_slug": "morph-channel-ckb-cell", "author": "yifenzi", "created_at": "2026-05-10T08:27:02.731000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T08:27:02.731000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/morph-channel-ckb-cell/10241/3", "content_text": "很赞的思考和分享\n如果说“分层是必要的”几乎是所有人的共识\n那么“如何分层才更合理”就是不同思考方式甚至说思考维度的落地呈现\n技术我完全不懂，一些推演也依靠当前已经做到的工程案例来展开，但不妨碍我通过阅读去“感受”它\n基于你上面的描述我想到这样一个场景:这有点像某一笔大资金放入了某个金库，只有大门可以进入，大门上有若干的不同人控制的锁或者封条，每次验证都需要若干人同时打开锁或者验证封条，验证金库和挪动金库是不同的需求，相同的是请人过来开锁或者验证封条是需要成本的，这个成本被独立出来了，不是非原金库主人出不可，而是其他想验证其经济实力的人也可以出也应该由他出，如果交易成功购买金库的人之后就可以把金库挪到自己的新地方了\n这个比喻不能完全对应楼主的意思，但大概应该没错，这种分层方式是对的方向\n作为普通社区一份子，我仅对楼主提出的方向表示支持和认可", "content_html": "很赞的思考和分享
\n如果说“分层是必要的”几乎是所有人的共识
\n那么“如何分层才更合理”就是不同思考方式甚至说思考维度的落地呈现
\n技术我完全不懂，一些推演也依靠当前已经做到的工程案例来展开，但不妨碍我通过阅读去“感受”它
\n基于你上面的描述我想到这样一个场景:这有点像某一笔大资金放入了某个金库，只有大门可以进入，大门上有若干的不同人控制的锁或者封条，每次验证都需要若干人同时打开锁或者验证封条，验证金库和挪动金库是不同的需求，相同的是请人过来开锁或者验证封条是需要成本的，这个成本被独立出来了，不是非原金库主人出不可，而是其他想验证其经济实力的人也可以出也应该由他出，如果交易成功购买金库的人之后就可以把金库挪到自己的新地方了
\n这个比喻不能完全对应楼主的意思，但大概应该没错，这种分层方式是对的方向
\n作为普通社区一份子，我仅对楼主提出的方向表示支持和认可
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24222, "post_number": 4, "topic_id": 10241, "topic_title": "Morph Channel：一种 CKB Cell 模型下的通道 / 工厂讨论方向", "topic_slug": "morph-channel-ckb-cell", "author": "ArthurZhang", "created_at": "2026-05-10T08:38:20.113000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T08:38:20.113000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 3, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/morph-channel-ckb-cell/10241/4", "content_text": "感谢，这个比喻其实抓住了我最想表达的一点：验证状态和移动资产应该是两件事。\n我会稍微补充一句：在 Morph Channel 里，金库本身不是每次都被搬动。大多数时候，参与者只是链下更新一份 最新版结算凭证 。只有出现争议、或者最终结算时，这份凭证才会被拿到链上，由脚本判断它是不是更新、更有效，然后决定金库里的资产应该如何释放。\n所以更像是：\n资金在金库里保持稳定\n状态凭证在链下不断更新\n有人要把凭证拿上链验证时，发布成本由独立的 sponsor 层支付\n只有最终结算时，金库资产才真正移动。\n这也正是我觉得 CKB Cell 模型很适合做这类实验的地方：Cell 可以很自然地区分 funding/value anchor、state evidence 和 fee-paying layer，而不需要把所有东西混成一个账户余额。", "content_html": "感谢，这个比喻其实抓住了我最想表达的一点：验证状态和移动资产应该是两件事。
\n我会稍微补充一句：在 Morph Channel 里，金库本身不是每次都被搬动。大多数时候，参与者只是链下更新一份 最新版结算凭证 。只有出现争议、或者最终结算时，这份凭证才会被拿到链上，由脚本判断它是不是更新、更有效，然后决定金库里的资产应该如何释放。
\n所以更像是：
\n这也正是我觉得 CKB Cell 模型很适合做这类实验的地方：Cell 可以很自然地区分 funding/value anchor、state evidence 和 fee-paying layer，而不需要把所有东西混成一个账户余额。
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 } ] }, { "topic_id": 10170, "title": "Powerful Asset Complementing CKB and BTC/AI Generated Idea", "slug": "powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea", "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea/10170", "created_at": "2026-04-11T05:46:25.266000+00:00", "last_posted_at": "2026-05-10T07:03:51.096000+00:00", "category_id": 49, "tags": [ "CKB", "CKB-VM", "Nervos-项目动态", "dapp" ], "posters": [ "Original Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Most Recent Poster" ], "recent_posts": [ { "post_id": 24205, "post_number": 3, "topic_id": 10170, "topic_title": "Powerful Asset Complementing CKB and BTC/AI Generated Idea", "topic_slug": "powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea", "author": "baclaire", "created_at": "2026-05-09T18:42:42.175000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T18:42:42.175000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 2, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea/10170/3", "content_text": "These are sharp questions that move LUME from a “cool concept” to a “robust protocol.” To keep it from becoming another high-inflation farm token, we have to lean into the unique Cell Model of CKB.\n1. Hard Caps and Anti-Inflation: The “Capacity Anchor”\nUnlike Ethereum or Solana tokens that can be minted infinitely, LUME is built on the CKB Cell Model, where every token requires “state space” (CKB bytes) to exist.\nThe Hard Cap: LUME has a fixed maximum supply (e.g., 21 billion, honoring the Bitcoin heritage). However, the circulating supply is further constrained by CKB’s scarcity.\nThe “Burn-to-Mint” Burner: To mint LUME, a user doesn’t just “get” it; they must provide the CKB capacity to store it. If the protocol wants to keep LUME scarce, it can implement a Dynamic Halving based on the total CKB locked in the Nervos DAO.\nUtility Sink: LUME is the only asset accepted for priority routing on the Fiber Network (CKB’s Lightning-like layer). Agents and users pay LUME to “grease the wheels” of high-speed transactions. These fees are not redistributed; they are burned, creating a deflationary pressure that offsets rewards.\n2. Hardware-Verified Assets as “Physical Collateral”\nThis is where the “Security Index” idea gets powerful. If you are building hardware-verified assets (e.g., tokenized gold, hardware-secured real-world assets/RWA), they can serve as the Hard Reserve for LUME.\nIsomorphic Binding: Since you are using Bitcoin anchoring, these assets exist as RGB++ cells. LUME’s vault contracts can recognize these specific cell types.\nThe “LUME-Vault”: Users could lock their hardware-verified assets into a “Secure Cell” on CKB. The LUME protocol treats this as high-grade collateral (like “Digital Gold”).\nEnhanced Stability: By backing LUME with physical, hardware-verified value, the “floor price” isn’t just supported by CKB/BTC market price, but by the underlying hardware-verified value. This would be an industry first: a token backed by the security of Bitcoin AND the tangibility of hardware-verified assets.\n3. Agentic Access: Open vs. Whitelisted\nTo balance “permissionless innovation” with “network safety,” we can use a Tiered Hook System:\nTier 1: Permissionless (Standard Hooks): Any AI agent can call basic functions—trading LUME, providing liquidity on Fiber, or moving it between RGB++ and BTC. This ensures the “Agentic-friendly” nature isn’t just marketing.\nTier 2: Governance-Verified (Deep Hooks): These are agents that have access to the LUME Reserve for rebalancing or buy-backs. To prevent “rogue code” from draining the reserve, these agents must be “vetted” by LUME holders.\nThe “Proof of Intelligence” Requirement: To prevent spam, agents might need to stake a small amount of iCKB to “register” their hook. If the agent behaves maliciously (e.g., attempting to exploit the liquidity pool), their iCKB stake is slashed and distributed to LUME holders.\nThe Vision: LUME as the “Agent’s Currency”\nImagine an AI agent managing your hardware-verified solar panel’s output. It receives payment in BTC, converts it instantly to LUME via the Fiber Network to earn a higher yield, and then uses that LUME to pay for its own hosting on a decentralized cloud—all while the CKB in the Nervos DAO secures the whole operation.\nOne final piece of the puzzle: Should the LUME reward for miners be based on Hashrate (pure PoW) or Uptime (reliability of their Fiber Network nodes)? The latter might encourage a faster, more robust network for the BTC community.", "content_html": "These are sharp questions that move LUME from a “cool concept” to a “robust protocol.” To keep it from becoming another high-inflation farm token, we have to lean into the unique Cell Model of CKB.
\n1. Hard Caps and Anti-Inflation: The “Capacity Anchor”
\nUnlike Ethereum or Solana tokens that can be minted infinitely, LUME is built on the CKB Cell Model, where every token requires “state space” (CKB bytes) to exist.
\nThe Hard Cap: LUME has a fixed maximum supply (e.g., 21 billion, honoring the Bitcoin heritage). However, the circulating supply is further constrained by CKB’s scarcity.
\nThe “Burn-to-Mint” Burner: To mint LUME, a user doesn’t just “get” it; they must provide the CKB capacity to store it. If the protocol wants to keep LUME scarce, it can implement a Dynamic Halving based on the total CKB locked in the Nervos DAO.
\nUtility Sink: LUME is the only asset accepted for priority routing on the Fiber Network (CKB’s Lightning-like layer). Agents and users pay LUME to “grease the wheels” of high-speed transactions. These fees are not redistributed; they are burned, creating a deflationary pressure that offsets rewards.
\n2. Hardware-Verified Assets as “Physical Collateral”
\nThis is where the “Security Index” idea gets powerful. If you are building hardware-verified assets (e.g., tokenized gold, hardware-secured real-world assets/RWA), they can serve as the Hard Reserve for LUME.
\nIsomorphic Binding: Since you are using Bitcoin anchoring, these assets exist as RGB++ cells. LUME’s vault contracts can recognize these specific cell types.
\nThe “LUME-Vault”: Users could lock their hardware-verified assets into a “Secure Cell” on CKB. The LUME protocol treats this as high-grade collateral (like “Digital Gold”).
\nEnhanced Stability: By backing LUME with physical, hardware-verified value, the “floor price” isn’t just supported by CKB/BTC market price, but by the underlying hardware-verified value. This would be an industry first: a token backed by the security of Bitcoin AND the tangibility of hardware-verified assets.
\n3. Agentic Access: Open vs. Whitelisted
\nTo balance “permissionless innovation” with “network safety,” we can use a Tiered Hook System:
\nTier 1: Permissionless (Standard Hooks): Any AI agent can call basic functions—trading LUME, providing liquidity on Fiber, or moving it between RGB++ and BTC. This ensures the “Agentic-friendly” nature isn’t just marketing.
\nTier 2: Governance-Verified (Deep Hooks): These are agents that have access to the LUME Reserve for rebalancing or buy-backs. To prevent “rogue code” from draining the reserve, these agents must be “vetted” by LUME holders.
\nThe “Proof of Intelligence” Requirement: To prevent spam, agents might need to stake a small amount of iCKB to “register” their hook. If the agent behaves maliciously (e.g., attempting to exploit the liquidity pool), their iCKB stake is slashed and distributed to LUME holders.
\nThe Vision: LUME as the “Agent’s Currency”
\nImagine an AI agent managing your hardware-verified solar panel’s output. It receives payment in BTC, converts it instantly to LUME via the Fiber Network to earn a higher yield, and then uses that LUME to pay for its own hosting on a decentralized cloud—all while the CKB in the Nervos DAO secures the whole operation.
\nOne final piece of the puzzle: Should the LUME reward for miners be based on Hashrate (pure PoW) or Uptime (reliability of their Fiber Network nodes)? The latter might encourage a faster, more robust network for the BTC community.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24207, "post_number": 4, "topic_id": 10170, "topic_title": "Powerful Asset Complementing CKB and BTC/AI Generated Idea", "topic_slug": "powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea", "author": "baclaire", "created_at": "2026-05-09T19:15:39.982000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T19:15:39.982000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 3, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea/10170/4", "content_text": "image_0b10838b-f872-4b8a-be64-7cd3d57303a91024×559 252 KB", "content_html": "", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 }, { "post_id": 24218, "post_number": 5, "topic_id": 10170, "topic_title": "Powerful Asset Complementing CKB and BTC/AI Generated Idea", "topic_slug": "powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea", "author": "toastmanAu", "created_at": "2026-05-10T07:03:51.096000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T07:03:51.096000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/powerful-asset-complementing-ckb-and-btc-ai-generated-idea/10170/5", "content_text": "Great to see people trying to turn ideas into reality. Make a prototype on testnet.", "content_html": "Great to see people trying to turn ideas into reality. Make a prototype on testnet.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 } ] }, { "topic_id": 10015, "title": "[DIS] Decentralized privacy order-book appchain based on CKB L1 - 2026.phase-1", "slug": "dis-decentralized-privacy-order-book-appchain-based-on-ckb-l1-2026-phase-1", "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-decentralized-privacy-order-book-appchain-based-on-ckb-l1-2026-phase-1/10015", "created_at": "2026-02-28T04:17:08.724000+00:00", "last_posted_at": "2026-05-10T02:54:55.313000+00:00", "category_id": 65, "tags": [ "appchain" ], "posters": [ "Original Poster, Most Recent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster" ], "recent_posts": [ { "post_id": 24213, "post_number": 25, "topic_id": 10015, "topic_title": "[DIS] Decentralized privacy order-book appchain based on CKB L1 - 2026.phase-1", "topic_slug": "dis-decentralized-privacy-order-book-appchain-based-on-ckb-l1-2026-phase-1", "author": "Lawliet_Chan", "created_at": "2026-05-10T02:54:55.313000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-10T02:54:55.313000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": null, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-decentralized-privacy-order-book-appchain-based-on-ckb-l1-2026-phase-1/10015/25", "content_text": "周报\n2026.5.10\n完成 Invisibook 下单、结算的zk电路： ZeroKnowledge implement by Lawliet-Chan · Pull Request #2 · invisibook-lab/invisibook · GitHub", "content_html": "周报
\n2026.5.10
\n我们先跳过Rgb++/Fiber和Rgb/Ln的竞争，假设已经有头部稳定币项目方比如Usdc打算采用Rgb++/Fiber，看看这个团队一直所谓努力的目标某天落地后会发生什么，又能给Rgb++/Fiber带来多少价值
\n答案是:极少的价值，很残酷也很真实
\nUsdc进来只需要用Rgb++发自己代币，然后自己跑Fiber节点和通道，打通和自己掌控资产的联系，最核心的通道跑自己的Usdc代币，和Ckb/Fiber完全没关联，Usdc只会重点或者单单只经营自己的代币通道网络是大概率事件
\n在某种意义上，Usdc等是Fiber原生稳定币的潜在竞争对手，它能带来的仅仅只是一些信息上的曝光价值，但获取的是对Fiber整个方案的“几乎白嫖”
\nFiber上原生稳定币的必要性和紧迫性怎么强调都不为过，这是果实，是技术努力这么久的落地，千万不要让别人把果实摘了或者说甚至还盼着主动请人过来摘
\n方向真的要想清楚，旁人和敌人是不会提醒你打搅你的，有一句话叫如果你的敌人正在犯错的路上一定不要打搅他，只有真正关心的人才会给你指出来，只有真正想通的人才能把逻辑几句话说清楚
\n和隐私保护不同的是，如果隐私保护总结为重要但可以慢慢做(主子私钥钱包技术上也相对简单的多)那么稳定币就是重要且紧迫，它必须从一开始就规划好，在某个新代币发行时就考虑进去(不然后面会很麻烦，只有新币才没有历史负担)
\n我依然保持我的原则，给出建议同时尊重任何人的任何选择
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 0 } ] }, { "topic_id": 10143, "title": "Pre-RFC Discussion: Activating the Nervos DAO Treasury", "slug": "pre-rfc-discussion-activating-the-nervos-dao-treasury", "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/pre-rfc-discussion-activating-the-nervos-dao-treasury/10143", "created_at": "2026-03-31T03:10:02.859000+00:00", "last_posted_at": "2026-05-09T23:40:34.227000+00:00", "category_id": 31, "tags": [ "CKB" ], "posters": [ "Original Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Frequent Poster", "Most Recent Poster" ], "recent_posts": [ { "post_id": 24203, "post_number": 18, "topic_id": 10143, "topic_title": "Pre-RFC Discussion: Activating the Nervos DAO Treasury", "topic_slug": "pre-rfc-discussion-activating-the-nervos-dao-treasury", "author": "matt_ckb", "created_at": "2026-05-09T17:54:20.206000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T18:25:14.330000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 17, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/pre-rfc-discussion-activating-the-nervos-dao-treasury/10143/18", "content_text": "jimi-winehouse:\nbecause the worst case scenario is the foundation gets “captured” and someone makes money off of the emissions\nCan you share what this means? The protocol treasury is distributed directly to recipients, there is no foundation in the middle to control this.\nRegarding being like another ecosystem, this is difference in opinion, CKB is a unique chain, it will have a unique ecosystem.\nThe protocol treasury is in the positioning paper, this is an unquestionable step in the implementation of CKB.", "content_html": "\nCan you share what this means? The protocol treasury is distributed directly to recipients, there is no foundation in the middle to control this.
\nRegarding being like another ecosystem, this is difference in opinion, CKB is a unique chain, it will have a unique ecosystem.
\nThe protocol treasury is in the positioning paper, this is an unquestionable step in the implementation of CKB.
", "like_count": 0, "quote_count": 1 }, { "post_id": 24211, "post_number": 19, "topic_id": 10143, "topic_title": "Pre-RFC Discussion: Activating the Nervos DAO Treasury", "topic_slug": "pre-rfc-discussion-activating-the-nervos-dao-treasury", "author": "jimi-winehouse", "created_at": "2026-05-09T23:40:34.227000+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-05-09T23:40:34.227000+00:00", "reply_to_post_number": 18, "url": "https://talk.nervos.org/t/pre-rfc-discussion-activating-the-nervos-dao-treasury/10143/19", "content_text": "I was explaining the attack surface of having a centralized treasury and that it is not as bad as you make it sound just by glorifying decentralization where it does not matter. The most decentralized treasury is a non-existing one, which is what we have currently, but that’s clearly not working (I believe it just won’t work rn but could work when the ecosystem is mature enough and interest as aligned, funding doesn’t have to come from the protocol). And any voting mechanism introduces some level of centralization risk because of voting (ironic giving how much you critic PoS systems).\nWhen I was talking about the ecosystem, I wasn’t referring to its nature. On the opposite, I agree that CKB is a unique chain and will have a unique ecosystem. I was rather referring to it’s size and how many people know about it’s existence, and that’s just data not an opinion of mine.\nIs the positioning paper a bible I wasn’t aware of?", "content_html": "I was explaining the attack surface of having a centralized treasury and that it is not as bad as you make it sound just by glorifying decentralization where it does not matter. The most decentralized treasury is a non-existing one, which is what we have currently, but that’s clearly not working (I believe it just won’t work rn but could work when the ecosystem is mature enough and interest as aligned, funding doesn’t have to come from the protocol). And any voting mechanism introduces some level of centralization risk because of voting (ironic giving how much you critic PoS systems).
\nWhen I was talking about the ecosystem, I wasn’t referring to its nature. On the opposite, I agree that CKB is a unique chain and will have a unique ecosystem. I was rather referring to it’s size and how many people know about it’s existence, and that’s just data not an opinion of mine.
\nIs the positioning paper a bible I wasn’t aware of?
![\"image_0b10838b-f872-4b8a-be64-7cd3d57303a9\"](\"https://talk.nervos.org/uploads/default/original/2X/d/d5c6693523b899fd0063ee6919e936dc55515b2c.jpeg\")