查看原文
其他

【塔山之石】塔勒布比特币黑皮书(1/n)

许哲大大 天上不会掉馅饼 2022-07-19

【塔山之石】塔勒布论通胀

【塔山之石】塔勒布论现金抗通胀,而非比特币

【塔山之石】塔勒布比特币黑皮书推上撕币圈(一)


注:文中部分内容由于微信公众号后台未设计公式编辑器,故用图片形式展示,有阅读不便,可以去知乎许哲专栏查看原文。


之前说的塔勒布关于比特币的论述多少有点隔靴搔痒,因为推特也都只是只言片语,要理解他完整的意思不可避免的还是要回到他那个论文《Bitcoin, Currencies, and Fragility》。这文章很长,我时间精力有限,粗糙的翻译一下。因为里面涉及到不少专业内容,我会写点注释和导读。到一个阶段的最末尾,我才会说我自己的看法。


*** Warning:币信仰者别看,会不爽


体例:


英语是论文原文,包含标题和段落分割


[1]是论文原文里的对其他论文的引用


(*)是笔者的附加说明和评述


这类右上角的标注表示论文里的注释


论文里引述其他论文的部分使用引用的格式




Bitcoin, Currencies, and Fragility


比特币,货币及其脆弱性


A technology should be judged in how it solves recognized problems, not by its technical appeal.


一种技术的价值应该取决于它解决特定问题的作用,而不是它的技术有多厉害。


INTRODUCTION/ABSTRACT


综述


This discussion applies quantitative finance methods and economic arguments to cryptocurrencies in general and bitcoin in particular —as there are about 10, 000 cryptocurrencies, we focus (unless otherwise specified) on the most discussed crypto of those that claim to hew to the original protocol [1] and the one with, by far, the largest market capitalization.


本文将把量化金融的办法和经济学方法应用于加密货币,特别是比特币——由于加密货币约有10000种,我们将重点(除非另有说明)关注最被广泛讨论的,最创世的第一种加密货币[1],也是市值最大的一种加密货币。


In its current version, in spite of the hype, bitcoin failed to satisfy the notion of "currency without government" (it proved to not even be a currency at all), can be neither a short nor long term store of value (its expected value is no higher than 0), cannot operate as a reliable inflation hedge, and, worst of all, does not constitute, not even remotely, a safe haven for one’s investments, a shield against government tyranny, or a tail protection vehicle for catastrophic episodes.


就当下而言,尽管不断有人大肆鼓吹,但比特币也并未能实现「无需政府的货币」的构想(事实证明,比特币甚至算不上是一种货币),既不能作为短期或长期的价值储存(其价值甚至不比0高),也不能作为可靠的通胀对冲工具。最糟糕的是,长期来看比特币也没办法用来对抗货币当局的滥发,也不能为灾难性的尾部事件充当对冲保护的工具。


(*)尾部事件是指发生概率很小的,在分布函数尾部的事件,非常不常见的黑天鹅事件。


Furthermore, bitcoin promoters appear to conflate the success of a payment mechanism (as a decentralized mode of exchange), which so far has failed, with the speculative variations in the price of a zero-sum maximally fragile asset with massive negative externalities


另外,比特币的推广者们似乎想要融合投机属性和支付机制(一种去中心化的交易方式),尽管把比特币做为支付工具已经失败了,依然试图调和比特币支付属性和零和博弈的投机属性。而这个用于零和投机游戏的脆弱资产,带来了巨大的负外部性。


(*)负外部性是经济学术语,可以粗略的理解为对社会有害



(*)该图是比特币价格波动率的一个统计,波动率通常是描述资产价格不稳定性的指标,是用价格变化的方差来刻画的。波动率大意味着作为支付工具的难度高。


Going through monetary history, we show how a true numeraire must be one of minimum variance with respect to an arbitrary basket of goods and services, how gold and silver lost their inflation hedge status during the Hunt brothers squeeze in the late 1970s and what would be required from a true inflation hedged store of value.


纵观货币历史,我们展示了一个真正的基准货币,应该对任意一篮子商品和服务满足最小方差。以及黄金和白银如何在1970年代后期亨特兄弟的操纵案后失去了通胀对冲地位,以及如何能真正对冲通胀,保持价值。


THE BLOCKCHAIN


区块链


First, let us consider what cryptocurrencies do by examining the notion of blockchain and its intellectual and mathematical appeal.


首先,我们来研究一下加密数字货币用来验证的概念,区块链它背后的机制和数学方法。


(*)关于比特币原理的简介,网上有很多,这里说的实在是不够清晰,强烈推荐 3blue1brown 比特币原理简介;了解了比特币的原理后关于原理部分的描述可以扫一眼跳着看

(视频链接:https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV11x411i72w?mid=20121967&p=1&share_from=ugc&share_medium=iphone&share_plat=ios&share_session_id=2FA1E244-64FA-4A69-85B1-B1643990A5F9&share_source=WEIXIN&share_tag=s_i&timestamp=1658140732&unique_k=OqcSQug)


The concept behind such a chain is quite intuitive to early practitioners of quantitative finance. Consider that before efficient software for Monte Carlo simulations became widely available, some of us were using methods to generate pseudorandom variables via some forms of chained nonlinear transformations, in the spirit of Von Neumann’s original idea [2].


对于链背后的概念,对于早期量化金融的参与者们来说都是老熟人了。在蒙特卡洛模拟软件被普及之前,我们经常用链式非线性变换的方法来生成一个伪随机变量,这个也是冯诺依曼最初想法的精神[文献2]。



(*)如果你看着头晕,确保你知道哈希函数是什么的情况下可以跳过,如果还不知道,但能看点简单的代码,推荐参考关于哈希算法(关于哈希算法的详细解释看副条)




(*)如果你知道哈希函数是啥,可以直接跳过。不知道的再看一遍 关于哈希算法


This hard-wired attribute and absence of supervision of the blockchain allow the storage of activities on a public ledger to facilitate peer-to-peer commerce, transactions, and settlements. The blockchain concept also allows for serial record keeping. This is supposed to help create what the original white paper [1] described as:


A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.


因为这个哈希函数的固有性质和监管的缺失区块链技术能让大量的活动记录在一个公共的账本上,使得一个纯「点对点」的网络能记录商业活动,支付和清算。区块链的概念还能对连续的记录做到不可篡改的保存。这些性质为了实现中本聪白皮书描绘的目标:


一个纯的点对点版本的电子现金,可以让在线支付从一方直接支付到另外一方,而不依赖任何中间金融机构


From that paper, bitcoin makes use of three existing technologies: 1) the hash function, 2) the Merkle tree (to chain blocks of transactions tagged by the hash function), and 3) the concept of proof of work (used to deter spam by forcing agents to use computer time in order to qualify for a transaction) — technologies that, ironically, all came out of the academic literature[3]1 . The idea provides a game theoretic approach to mitigate the effects of the absence of custodian and lack of trust between participants in the maintenance of a permanent shared public ledger — attenuating or circumventing the coordination quandary known as the "Byzantine general problem".


在中本聪的这篇论文里,比特币使用了三项已经存在的技术:1)哈希函数,2)默克尔树(把一个个由哈希标记的记录数据块链接起来),和3)POW的概念(曾经用来阻止垃圾邮件的一个办法让计算机的工作时长来验证交易)。讽刺的是,所有这些技术都不新,都是学术界已经的文献里的[3] 1 。这个主意(指区块链技术)提供了一种博弈论层面上的方法,以缓解在维护永久公共账簿时缺乏托管人和参与者之间缺乏信任的问题。减弱或者绕过一种名叫「拜占庭将军问题」的协调困境。


(*)使用已经成熟很久的技术拼凑出一个新技术并不丢人和讽刺,利用久经考验的技术会让技术更可靠,这并没问题。显得略有讽刺是区块链技术的鼓吹者把这项技术吹得过于跨时代,好似再造天地一般。这个锅是区块链的过度鼓吹者的,笔者并不认为这是区块链应该被诟病的点。


1  As this discussion is focused on proof of work, we exclude from it Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies.


1  这里专注在讨论纯POW上,我们排斥类似以太坊或者其他加密数字货币

(*)以太坊要转用POS等完全原理上不同于POW的技术,之后关于POW的论述均不适用


The bitcoin transactional currency (BTC) system establishes an adversarial collaboration between the so-called "miners" who validate transactions by getting them on a public ledger; as a reward they get coins plus a fee from the underlying transactions, transfers of coins between parties. The proof of work method has an adjustable degree of difficulty based on the speed of blocks, which aims, in theory, to keep the incentive sufficiently high for miners to keep operating the system. Such adjustments lead to an exponential increase in computer power requirements, making at the time of writing onerous energy demands on the system — energy that could find alternatives in other computational and scientific uses.


比特币系统的可交易货币(BTC)建立在「矿工」们的竞争性合作上,矿工的责任是去验证公共账本上的交易是否合法;矿工会在验证参与者之间交易合法性的过程里获得一些币作为奖励。POW的算法会根据出块的速度来调整挖矿难度,理论上这个设计旨在为矿工创造足够的激励以保证网络的安全。这种调整造成了计算机算力需求指数性的增长,这需要能源的保证。这些算力和能源完全是可以用来做其他可算和科研用途的。


Miners derive their compensation from both seignorage (the market value of a bitcoin minus its mining costs) and transaction fees upon validation — with the plan to switch to transaction fees as the sole revenues upon the eventual depletion of the coins, which are limited to a fixed number.


A central attribute is that bitcoin depends on the existence of such miners for perpetuity.


Note that the entire ideological basis behind bitcoin is complete distrust of other operators — there are no partial custodians; the system is fully distributed, though prone to concentration . Furthermore, by the very nature of the blockchain, transactions are irreversible, no matter the reason.


矿工们有两个收入来源,一为铸币税(比特币的市值减去挖矿成本)和交易验证的手续费,这个手续费是计划在所有的挖矿奖励耗尽之后作为所有的收入,最后收敛在一个固定的数字。


(*)这里是比特币区块奖励的机制,每过一段时间区块奖励减半,最后直到没有,从而保证比特币的总量上限存在一个固定数字。当比特币达到最大值时,矿工的所有收益均来自于手续费。


比特币系统的存在完全是依赖于矿工们永久参与。


(*)意思是当区块奖励消失后,矿工们能否继续参与挖矿有问题,但比特币唯一的物理存在就是矿工,矿工要是不干了就彻底废了。这个担忧是确实存在的,矿工圈内亦有激烈讨论,不是空穴来风。


注意一下比特币背后的整个意识形态是对任何运营商性质的东西彻头彻尾的不信任,这里没有任何托管的概念;整个体系是彻底分布式的,虽然比特币有强烈的集中化的倾向。还有,比特币无论如何交易是不能逆转的,无论什么原因它就是不能。



从公开数据上来看比特币的持有者符合幂律分布,集中度非常难之高,和美国的财富分布程度差不多


(*)意思是比特币是集中在少数人手上的,所以理念上的去中心化并没什么卵用,还是掌握在几个中心手上


Finally, note that bitcoins are zero-sum by virtue of the numerus clausus.


最后,注意一下比特币是一个零和游戏在一个numerus clausus 数里不断转手而已。


(*)这里的numerus clausus 是拉丁语,意思是「closed number」,意思是比特币就在一个封闭的小圈子里互相搞一个零和的游戏而已。四个人打麻将永远创造不出价值的。


As we will see, mathematical and combinatorial qualities do not necessarily translate into financial benefits at either individual or systemic levels.


所以我们可以看到,数学的各种组合性质并不一定能转换成各种真实的经济价值,无论是对个体而言还是对整个经济体系而言。


Comment 1: Why BTC is worth exactly 0


Gold and other precious metals are largely maintenance free, do not degrade over an historical horizon, and do not require maintenance to refresh their physical properties over time. Cryptocurrencies require a sustained amount of interest in them.


评论1:为什么比特币的价值就是0


黄金和其他贵金属是不用花钱来维持的,它们不会随着时间的流逝而降解,因为它们的物理属性决定了他们不需要主动维护。而加密数字货币需要持续不断的利益去让人们维系它们的存在。




VULNERABILITY OF REVENUE-FREE BUBBLES


无收益资产泡沫的弱点


A central result (even principle) in the rational expectations and securities pricing literature is that, thanks to the law of iterated expectations, if we expect now that we will expectthe price to vary at some point in the future, then by backward induction such a variation must be incorporated in the price now. When there are no dividends, as with growth companies, there is still an expectation of future earnings, and a future expected reward to stockholders — directly via dividends, or indirectly via reverse dilutions and buybacks. It remains that a stock is a claim on accumulated assets and their residual value.


在一个理性期望的情况下(哪怕只是原则上的)或者是证券定价原理所阐述的那样,幸好我们有「双重期望值定律」,如果我们现在预期未来某个点我们会有一个对价格的期望,那么通过反推演算,这种变数一定包含在当下的价格之中。就算是没有股息的成长股也是对未来的收益有一定的期望,这个期望是指对股东在未来的回馈——无论是直接现金股息分红,或者是非直接的反稀释和回购等形式。股票仍然是对累积资产及其剩余价值的索取权。


(*)这里讲的未来贴现的股票定价模型,可以参考:如何简单明了地解释自由现金流折现?


(*)这里的范围要略广一些,不仅仅是股息回报,所有的回购增加股东权益的行为都囊括进去了,意思是说明一个资产必然是因为未来有回报的(无论是不是以现金分红的形式)才造就了它当下的「贴现价值」。


(*)并且未来在某个条件下产生的某种期望的综合效果,和当下无视未来事件对期望的影响也一定是相同的,双重期望值定律给我们估值带来的巨大方便。


(*)双重期望值定律: 


(*)当Y条件下X的期望值,也就是未来股票或者资产产生某些事件对我们估值的影响(利好或者利空的事件),长期综合考虑它们影响的总和,也就是对所有条件期望再求期望,最后是和无条件期望(完全不考虑未来可能产生的利多利空,也就是无视条件概率事件)最后必然也是一致的。


(*)我再换人话一下:风风雨雨最后长期还是看内在,当下只要观察长期价值,当下也必然反应长期。因为有双重期望值定律,我们不需要考虑太多可能产生条件下期望的事情对当下估值的影响,使得资产估值变为可能。


(*)再透一点,价值投资可以彻底无视未来可能对价值预估产生变动的扰动,因为这些未来潜在的扰动其实也已经含在现在都价格里。因为未来是不可知的,所以有了双重期望值定律,我们才有可能定价,无惧未知。


(*)这些都是为了说明价值投资理论是有点东西的,不是瞎吹的。


Earnings-free assets with no residual value are problematic.


The implication is that, owing to the absence of any explicit yield benefitting the holder of bitcoin, if we expect that at any point in the future the value will be zero when miners are extinct, the technology becomes obsolete, or future generations get into other such "assets" and bitcoin loses its appeal for them, then the value must be zero now  3 .


无收益资产是很成问题的。换言之,因为比特币的持有者是没有明确的期望收益。如果我们知道在未来的任意某一个时刻比特币的价值为0,比如矿工最后因为没区块奖励不干了,技术被更新换代了,或者新时代炒作的主题变成了其他「资产」比特币失去了投机的关注度,那么比特币现在的价值就应该是零 3  


(*)在价值投资里,一个东西未来的价格如果是0的话,那么它的「现值」必然是0。


(*)这段话的意思是比特币作为一个必须要有「后来人」接盘的东西,本身是无收益资产的话,那么几个可能让比特币归零的可能性存在,比特币的现值就应该是0。


(*)肯定有人会说黄金白银也是无收益资产,不照样不归零还新高嘛,这个在后文里有讲到。我们先来看小注释 的内容



(*)这两篇关于泡沫模型的论文我没读过,不过看得挺有意思的。塔勒布的意思是根据这个泡沫模型,一个靠后来者接盘的东西本质上是一个旁氏模型,然后必须维持一定的增速,否则旁氏骗局就崩盘了。具体的推导过程大家可以去看引述的原论文。所有引述的论文最后会罗列。


(*)一个旁氏盘子必须药不能停,这个是肯定没问题的。如果比特币是完全依赖后来者以更高价格买走的旁氏的话,那么它维系存在的增长需求也是不断增长直到不可能的。塔勒布大致的意思是比特币那是比一般泡沫要虚得多的泡沫里的战斗机。


The typical comparison of bitcoin to gold is lacking in elementary financial rigor . We will see below how precious metals lost their quality as a medium of exchange; gold and other dividend-free precious items (such as other metals or stones) have held some financial status for more than 6, 000 years, and their physical status for several orders of magnitude longer (i.e., they did not degrade or mutate into some other alloy or mineral). So one can expect one’s gold or silver possessions to be around physically for at least the next millennium, as well as having some residual economic value by iteration, for the same reason. Metals have ample industrial uses with demand elasticity (and substitution for other raw materials). Currently, about half of gold production goes to jewelry (for which there are often no storage costs), one tenth to industry, and a quarter to central bank reserves.


经常拿黄金和比特币作比较这个是在金融问题上一个很幼稚的错误  。我们下面会看到贵金属是怎么失去它们的交易媒介的性质的;黄金和其他非生息的贵重物(比如其他的金属或宝石)的金融属性有保持了超过6000多年,他们的物理属性能保持超过这个时间好几个数量级(他们不会衰变或者降解成其他物质)。所以我们能期望自己的黄金或者白银财产至少在下一个千年依然保持相同的物质形态,并且还有一些残存的经济价值。金属还会有很多工业价值,且有需求弹性(由其他金属的替代效应)。目前,黄金的产量一半用于珠宝业(一般这个行业不会有折旧损耗),十分之一用于工业,四分之一用于央行储备。


(*)意思是说贵金属宝石啥的并不是啥天然的货币,6000多年的金融属性历史远比不上它们更久远的历史,贵金属宝石等作为货币只占它们历史的很小一段,而且现在贵金属也失去了货币属性了。所以不存在什么金属天然是货币。且金属这类非生息资产因为有工业属性和其他用途,比如就是人们纯粹喜欢黄金而有价值。


(*)为什么把比特币称为电子黄金是不对的,是注释4的内容。


It is also a reasoning error to claim that an innovation, bitcoin, can become the "new gold" ab ovo, when gold wasn’t decided to be so by fiat thanks to a white paper; it organically became a reserve asset ex post, through centuries of competitive selection against other modes of storage, payment, and collectibles. Gold elicited an aesthetic fascination and had been used as jewelry and store of value for more than two millennia before it became, literally, a currency or before there was such a thing as a currency. The Phoenicians used it as store of value because there was demand for it, and it was not until the 6 th C. BCE that coins from Sardis became a widespread means of exchange [6].


声称比特币是一个伟大的创新因为它变成了一个「新黄金」从一开始就是一个归因错误。当黄金还没有成为那么「法币」的时候,它很早就成为了一个储备资产了,在过去很多世纪里它和不同形式的存储物支付工具和收藏品竞争。黄金引领了一种审美被用于珠宝和价值存储是要远早于它变成字面意义上的货币至少两千年。腓尼基人用它作为存储价值的工具是因为他们很渴望黄金,直到公元前6世纪,萨迪斯的硬币才成为一种广泛的交易手段[6]。


(*)这段注释的意思是不能倒果为因,黄金在成为货币前因为大家都很想要了,所以才脱颖而出变成一种储备资产,然后才有把黄金当做货币的事情发生。是先有大家想要黄金为因,才有黄金被当做货币为果。先宣传一个东西是货币,然后说它是新黄金是不对的。


(*)一个东西能成为货币储备是因为大家想要它,而不是它像黄金。黄金也是因为大家要它,它才成为货币储备资产的,而非反过来。




第一篇暂时写到这里。


到这里大致的意思是要么一个资产是生息资产,我们能通过贴现模型的方式估值资产。而一个纯粹靠后来者接盘维系价格的旁氏结构未来对增长的需求会达到不可能实现而必然走向崩盘。比特币是非生息资产。


例如黄金这样的也是非生息资产的东西,它能保持自己的价值是因为有需求,或者珠宝业人家喜欢黄金,或者是工业属性。且黄金存在的时间远远长于其作为货币属性的时间。是因为黄金被广泛的有需求了,才会让黄金脱颖而出成为货币的一种候选,并且黄金现在也失去了货币属性。


所以因为比特币和黄金一样是稀缺不可再生的,就论证比特币一定会像黄金一样具备货币属性(黄金自己都没有了),这个逻辑推断是不成立的。是先有需求才有储备价值,才发展成货币。而非单纯因为稀有。如果比特币不能让人产生需求,仅就不可再生和稀缺的话,是站不住脚的论断。


要么你拿贴现模型来,要么有人消费的供需模型来,否则就得用泡沫模型了,是个泡沫迟早要灭。如果迟早要灭,那么贴现价值也就是0了。




REFERENCES


[1] S. Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” Tech. Rep., 2008.


[2] J. Von Neumann, “Various techniques used in connection with random digits,” Appl. Math Ser, vol. 12, no. 36-38, p. 3, 1951.


[3] A. Narayanan and J. Clark, “Bitcoin’s academic pedigree,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 36–45, 2017.


[4] O. J. Blanchard and M. W. Watson, “Bubbles, rational expectations and financial markets,” NBER working paper, no. w0945, 1982.


[5] M. K. Brunnermeier, “Bubbles,” in Banking Crises. Springer, 2016, pp. 28–36.

[6] D. Graeber, Debt: The first 5000 years. Penguin UK, 2012.


您可能也对以下帖子感兴趣

文章有问题?点此查看未经处理的缓存