Transcript: The Technological Revolution and Market Trends Seen by Pioneers in the Blockchain Industry

As a pioneer and long-term witness in the blockchain industry, Du Jun's name has almost permeated every key wave: from early involvement in the popularization of Bitcoin in China, to building the central node for industry information flow, and then accurately capturing multiple cycles of opportunity as an investor. With his keen judgment of technological trends and a long-term perspective on capital operations, he has written numerous classic cases in the industry.

Today, he has founded an incubator focused on the intersection of AI and Crypto innovation, remaining active at the forefront of the industry—at the crossroads of the Bitcoin ecosystem, the stablecoin upheaval, and the AI wave, continuously exploring the boundaries of technology and firmly optimistic about the rise of Chinese people in the global technology landscape.

Recently, an industry insider engaged in an in-depth dialogue with this benchmark figure who has traversed the bull and bear markets. In this ideological clash about the future, Du Jun not only shared his deep analysis of the underlying logic of Blockchain but also publicly explained for the first time why he sees BitVM as a "key leap" for the Bitcoin ecosystem, predicting that 2026 will be the "year of programmable Bitcoin." When discussing the Hong Kong stablecoin sandbox and the regulatory game with the U.S., he calmly showcased the rational judgment of a capital strategist.

The following is the complete dialogue of this cyclical journey. Over twelve years of experience in the industry, there has been both a steadfast belief in decentralization and a profound respect for technological trends and market laws — this may very well be the ultimate key to Du Jun always staying ahead of the wave.

The Golden Age of Chinese Technology

Q: You mentioned that this is the best time for Chinese investors. Why do you think so?

Answer: It is indeed an era full of opportunities now, and the Chinese are in a leading position globally in several cutting-edge technology fields, especially in the Blockchain industry, where the advantages are particularly prominent.

The exchange is almost a track dominated by Chinese people, and the same goes for mining machine manufacturing. Public chain projects like TRON, Ethereum, Solana, and BNBChain have a large number of Chinese backgrounds among their founding teams and executives. Looking around in my social circle, whether it's exchanges, mining machine manufacturers, or wallet applications, you can almost always see the presence of Chinese people.

This influence has expanded from Blockchain to a broader range of technology fields: in Silicon Valley, Chinese leaders are frequently emerging in the AI and semiconductor industries, playing a decisive role in their respective sectors. Compared to a decade ago when Indian engineers dominated, today's "Chinese dividend" is becoming the new main theme. Because of this, I choose to frequently stay in Silicon Valley to personally experience and participate in this structural rise of power.

In Du Jun's view, Chinese people not only possess technological innovation in key technology sectors such as Blockchain, artificial intelligence, semiconductors, and new energy, but are also gradually moving towards capital decision-making and industry-leading positions. This comprehensive rise signifies that the "golden age of Chinese technology" has already arrived, and it also means that in the global technology competition landscape, Chinese people will play an increasingly important role.

The Positioning and Future of Public Blockchains

Question: You mentioned that there are currently only four main public chains. What are they? Will more public chains be needed in the future?

Answer: I believe that currently there are only four core public chains that have truly established themselves: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, and Solana. Their advantages lie not only in the technology itself but also in their clear market positioning.

• Bitcoin is digital gold, it goes without saying;
• Ethereum has become the de facto standard for DeFi infrastructure;
• TRON focuses on stablecoin transfers and settlements, having strong use cases in the payment field;
• Solana, on the other hand, is positioned as a high-performance, low-latency Meme blockchain, focusing on an ultimate user experience and liquidity hotspots.

The reason these public chains have reached today is not because of a "one-size-fits-all" functionality package, but rather a clear strategic choice. In contrast, many other public chains either have vague positioning or mediocre technology, making it difficult to break through and navigate cycles.

As for whether new public chains are still needed in the future? My judgment is: there is no need in the short term. Today's Ethereum Layer 1 solution has significantly improved scalability, reduced costs, and enhanced interoperability between assets. Apart from a very few Layer 2 projects that have emerged like a certain platform, most have long since vanished. It's like a Swiss Army knife; the functions that are really used frequently are just a few. The market's desire for "new public chains" is often a pseudo-demand magnified by imagination. At least in the next five years, I do not think there will be too many new public chains needed - even five years later, we may not see structural changes.

Du Jun emphasized that the core competitiveness of public chains lies in strategic positioning and the closed loop of real use cases, rather than in the stacking of concepts and expansion of quantity. His analysis of the current public chain ecosystem reflects the industry's higher demands for efficiency and practicality.

The Cycle of Exchanges and Missed Investment Opportunities

Q: You mentioned that the industry has a cycle every four years, with exchanges emerging in each round. You have successfully invested in several popular exchanges in previous rounds. Which exchange do you favor in this bull market? Have you invested in it? If not, what is the reason?

Answer: I am optimistic about a certain trading platform in this round, but unfortunately, I missed the investment. There are two reasons: First, they do not accept external investments; we had contacted them early on, and the team has hardly taken any external funds. Second, I did not buy their tokens in the early stage; by the time I bought in, it had already risen to $15, and I missed the best opportunity. In the past, I could always time my investments correctly, but this time I got distracted by researching AI and other fields, and I didn't focus enough on investing sufficient energy in the primary market.

Du Jun admitted that the opportunity in exchanges during this bull market was missed, reflecting the importance of focus in investment. He mentioned that certain institutions performed well in branding and investment, showing that the primary market still has potential, but requires precise judgment and resource investment.

Bitcoin Ecosystem: From Sentiment to Programmable Future

Q: You have invested a lot in the Bitcoin ecosystem and have incubated some projects. After these experiences, do you still have confidence in the Bitcoin ecosystem? Is it necessary to build an ecosystem?

Answer: There are some sentiments in the Bitcoin ecosystem. Before 2017, certain trading platforms mainly traded Bitcoin and Litecoin, and in the early days, there was even only Bitcoin. We often corrected the term "altcoin" and referred to it as "competing coins." At that time, we promoted the immutability, traceability, and distributed nature of Bitcoin, but rarely mentioned its programmability. After Ethereum emerged, it emphasized the programmability and innovative space of blockchain. The Bitcoin community was once divided into two factions: one faction debated scaling, leading to forks like BCH and BSV; the other faction hoped for Bitcoin to be programmable, functioning like Ethereum.

For many years, programmable routing technology has been immature, until the rise of inscriptions and runes in 2023. In my opinion, it lacks long-term value support, so I did not participate. Later, the BitVM protocol proposed achieving Bitcoin programmability through a white paper, which I found very interesting. Bitcoin is a $2 trillion asset, but liquidity is hard to release. Ethereum has derivative financial products like MakerDAO and Aave, while Bitcoin's WBTC relies on centralized institutions, which poses a risk of running away. Technologies like BitVM attempt to achieve decentralized minting and redemption, with pooled validation, creating assets similar to YBTC for on-chain scenarios. This is my dream, and we have invested in BitVM, RGB++, World Lock, Lightning, and several other routes. As long as programmability can be achieved, I support it. Now the BitVM route is clear, the code quality is high, and it is expected to achieve the first step of decentralized minting and redemption before September this year, with a complete solution possibly seen next year. The development cycle is long, but there is already a glimmer of hope, with some teams having 30 to 40 full-time technicians continuously iterating.

Q: So you are optimistic about the programmability of the Bitcoin ecosystem and believe this is a trend?

Answer: Yes, because these technological routes have begun to be implemented, they are not castles in the air. Last year was just a slogan, but now there has been progress. The programmability of the Bitcoin ecosystem is not only a technological breakthrough but also the key to unlocking its $2 trillion liquidity.

The "Religion" of Bitcoin and the Fight for Decentralization

Q: Some believe that Bitcoin is becoming more centralized, with many internal code changes. Is there any coin that can become the "second Bitcoin" and achieve complete decentralization?

Answer: Logically speaking, it is possible that new coins may emerge in the future, because nothing is impossible. But subjectively, I find it very difficult. Bitcoin and Ethereum are completely different concepts. Bitcoin is a belief, like a religion, representing digital gold and priceless freedom. You can say it is worth 10,000, 100,000, or even 1 trillion dollars, because it is irreplaceable, embodying fundamental culture and belief. If Ethereum loses its DeFi projects and the transaction volume drops from 5 million to 500,000, it may be sold off, but Bitcoin will not. In the early days, we called it "recharging belief", which reflects this logic. In the short term, it is hard for any coin to replace Bitcoin's position.

Du Jun compares Bitcoin to "religion", emphasizing its unique cultural and belief attributes. He believes that its decentralized nature, although questioned, is still difficult to be replaced.

Industry Transition: From Faith to Stark Reality

Q: I entered the industry at the beginning of 2017, and you were earlier. How do you view this round of changes in the industry? Why is this happening? Is this a turning point? What will the future look like? I feel that the logic in the past few rounds was that project parties sought VC funding, listed on exchanges, and retail investors took over, but this time only Bitcoin has risen while other coins have performed poorly, and the traditional path seems to have failed. Exchanges are becoming more on-chain, and the industry feels like a casino, with thousands of projects launched in a single day. Centralized exchanges either need to comply with regulations or engage in pyramid schemes or contracts. When I entered the industry, I held a belief in decentralization, but now it feels like there’s nothing but Bitcoin. What are your thoughts?

Answer: I bought Bitcoin in 2012, and in 2013, I co-founded a trading platform with Li Lin and others, serving as CMO, promoting the platform and Bitcoin. In the early days, we had to make users interested in Bitcoin, talking about its technological reliability, asset allocation, etc. At that time, there weren't many application scenarios, and the price fluctuations were not significant; we attracted users with technology and the concept of digital gold. By 2015, I was talking about Bitcoin with local governments, and from 2018 to 2022, I was still discussing it in Singapore, and the sense of achievement gradually faded. It's not that the world hasn't progressed; it's that we haven't progressed, still talking about Bitcoin after more than a decade. It's like not discussing the HTTP protocol with parents, but rather how mobile internet makes life easier. Blockchain should also discuss application scenarios.

The year before last, I discovered that stablecoins were a breakthrough point, offering high efficiency and low cost for cross-border transfers. Traditional transfers take 1 to 4 days and cost between 18 to 25 dollars, while Ethereum transfers only cost 0.25 to 1 dollar. Last year, the total amount of USDT and USDC transfers reached 27 trillion dollars, surpassing some credit card companies' 25 to 26 trillion, demonstrating the blockchain's promotion of economic efficiency. There have been several key moments in history: the 2008 Bitcoin white paper, the 2017 Ethereum ICO that granted equal rights in currency issuance, the 2020 DeFi Summer that achieved decentralized finance on-chain, and the promotion of stablecoins from 2014 to 2017 (certain policies gave rise to certain trading platforms, etc.). However, this cycle lacks innovation, with only Meme and Tap2earn projects, which harvest users rather than create value, leading to a lack of excitement in the industry. Without incremental users and assets, exchanges find it difficult to rise. New assets create new exchanges, as NFT assets have spawned certain platforms, and this round of Meme assets has also given rise to certain platforms. If the industry is left with only Meme and Tap2earn, it could be "game over."

Du Jun reflects on the industry's lack of innovation, believing that applications like stablecoins are the hope for the future, rather than mere speculative logic.

The Triumph and Future of Stablecoins

Q: You mentioned stablecoins, why does USDT outperform? Will there be a greater need for stablecoins in the future with the stablecoin legislation in Hong Kong and the US? Do you see potential for RMB or HKD stablecoins?

Answer: Studying the history of currency issuance is very interesting. In the early days, shells and gold were used, and after the formation of nations, each had its own currency. In a free competitive market, the US dollar and gold prevailed, and no one chose the Zimbabwean dollar or the Hong Kong dollar. Within sovereign nations, currency is enforced by the government, but in global circulation, the US dollar dominates. In the future, after breaking through sovereignty, there will be free competition, and stablecoins tied to the US dollar will have the greatest advantage. Gold stablecoins are not favored due to their investment properties.