“常规货币的根源问题是使其正常工作所需的全部信任。”

创建比特币是为了消除对受信任中介的需求。它以透明度，可审核性和分散验证取代了不透明的，有权限的系统。

"The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that’s required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve.” — Satoshi Nakamoto (2009)

“传统货币的根源问题是使其正常工作所需的全部信任。中央银行必须信任不要使货币贬低，但是法定货币的历史充满了对该信任的违反。必须信任银行以持有我们的资金并以电子方式转让它，但它们以较少的信用泡沫中的储备率使它付出了巨大的储备。” - Nakamoto Satoshi（2009）

Bitcoin was created to eliminate the need for trusted intermediaries. It replaced opaque, permissioned systems with transparency, auditability, and decentralized verification. The ethos was clear from day one: don’t trust—verify.

创建比特币是为了消除对受信任中介的需求。它以透明度，可审核性和分散验证取代了不透明的，有权限的系统。从第一天开始，这种精神就清楚了：不要相信 - 验证。

And yet, many of the institutions now holding Bitcoin—custodians, exchanges, ETFs, even public companies—continue to rely on trust-based assumptions, the very problem Bitcoin was designed to solve.

然而，现在许多机构都持有比特币（Custodians，交流，ETF，甚至是上市公司），旨在依靠基于信任的假设，比特币旨在解决问题。

For Bitcoin treasury companies, this contradiction is especially glaring. These are firms that claim to operate on a Bitcoin standard—yet without verifiable Proof of Reserves (PoR), there’s no way for shareholders to know whether the Bitcoin is actually there.

对于比特币国库公司而言，这种矛盾尤其明显。这些公司声称可以按比特币标准运营 - 但没有可验证的储量证明（POR），股东无法知道比特币是否真的存在。

The Problem: Unproven Bitcoin Is Just Another IOU

问题：未经证实的比特币只是另一个

Bitcoin is designed to be verifiable—but most corporate disclosures aren’t. When companies report BTC holdings without public wallet visibility or on-chain proof, investors are left to trust balance sheets, auditors, and custodians.

比特币旨在可验证，但大多数公司披露不是。当公司报告没有公共钱包可见性或证明链链的BTC持有量时，投资者将留下资产负债表，审计师和保管人。

That opens the door for several systemic risks:

这为几种系统性风险打开了大门：

* The mere presence of Bitcoin on a balance sheet is not a guarantee. Without verification, it’s no different than a fiat-denominated claim—an IOU dressed up in BTC terms.

*资产负债表上仅存在比特币并不能保证。没有验证，它与菲亚特（FIAT）的主张没有什么不同，这是用BTC术语打扮的。

* This lack of transparency also hinders efficient capital allocation. When investors can’t independently attest to a company’s solvency with respect to its Bitcoin treasury, they are less likely to allocate capital to that company in the first place.

*这种缺乏透明度也阻碍了有效的资本分配。当投资者无法独立证明公司的比特币财政部的偿付能力时，首先，他们不太可能将资本分配给该公司。

* In the public markets, a lack of verifiable PoR could also lead to mispricing and valuation discrepancies, as Bitcoin treasury companies are valued differently by investors who have different levels of trust in their disclosures.

*在公共市场中，缺乏可验证的POR也可能导致误差和估值差异，因为比特币国库公司受到对披露的信任程度不同的投资者的重视程度不同。

What We Learned from Gold: The ‘Paper’ Problem

我们从黄金中学到了什么：“纸”问题

Bitcoin isn’t the first hard asset to face this challenge. The gold market offers a cautionary tale.

比特币并不是第一个面临这一挑战的困难资产。黄金市场提供了一个警示性的故事。

For decades, gold investors have dealt with “paper gold” systems—unallocated accounts, synthetic ETFs, and derivatives with little or no linkage to actual metal. These claims often outnumber real reserves many times over, leading to widespread suspicion of price distortion and systemic misrepresentation.

几十年来，黄金投资者一直在处理“纸黄金”系统 - 未分配帐户，合成ETF和衍生品几乎没有与实际金属联系的衍生品。这些说法通常超过了真实的余地多次，导致人们普遍怀疑价格扭曲和系统性的虚假陈述。

Most gold investors don’現在売却するつもりはないと言います。

大多数黄金投资者并不表示目前不打算出售它。

But they have no way to independently verify it.

但是他们无法独立验证它。

Bitcoin gives us the tools to break this cycle. But only if companies choose to use them.

比特币为我们提供了打破这个周期的工具。但是，只有公司选择使用它们。

Bitcoin Is Built for Proof—and Companies Should Use It

比特币是用于证明的，公司应该使用它

Unlike legacy assets, Bitcoin is designed to make proof of ownership and solvency a native function of the asset itself. Through public key cryptography, on-chain auditability, and permissionless transparency, Bitcoin enables real-time, trust-minimized verification.

与传统资产不同，比特币旨在使所有权和偿付能力证明成为资产本身的本地功能。通过公共密钥密码学，链的可审核性和无许可的透明度，比特币可以实时，信任最小的验证。

This isn’t just a technical capability—it’s a governance feature. Bitcoin allows companies to demonstrate, cryptographically and without intermediaries, that their reserves exist, are intact, and are unencumbered. No bank statements. No opaque custodial claims. Just data, on-chain.

这不仅仅是技术能力，这是一个治理功能。比特币允许公司在没有中介的情况下证明，密码，没有中介，其储量存在完整，并且不受限制。没有银行对帐单。没有不透明的托管索赔。只是数据，链。

That’s a radical shift—and it’s one that Bitcoin treasury companies are uniquely positioned to take advantage of. In doing so, they can reduce audit complexity, strengthen shareholder communication, and align their internal capital practices with the trustless architecture of the asset they’re holding.

这是一个彻底的转变，这是比特币国库公司独特地利用优势的转变。通过这样做，他们可以降低审计的复杂性，加强股东的沟通，并使其内部资本实践与他们持有的资产的无信任体系结构保持一致。

And it’s already happening. Metaplanet, Premiere Member of Bitcoin For Corporations, is disclosing its BTC reserve addresses and transaction history. Anyone in the world—including shareholders, analysts, and regulators—can independently verify the existence and movement of their treasury.

它已经在发生。比特币公司的首映会员Metaplanet正在披露其BTC储备的地址和交易历史记录。世界上任何人（包括股东，分析师和监管机构）都可以独立核实其财政部的存在和行动。

That’s not just compliance. That’s Bitcoin, applied.

那不仅是合规性。那是比特币，应用了。

Public Companies Face the Greatest Responsibility

上市公司面临最大的责任

Public companies don’t operate in a vacuum. Their disclosures shape market perception, influence investor behavior, and—especially when Bitcoin is involved—serve as a proxy for the maturity of the asset class itself.

上市公司不会在真空中运作。他们的披露塑造了市场的看法，影响投资者的行为，尤其是在涉及比特币的情况下，将其作为资产类别本身成熟的代表。

When a publicly traded company holds Bitcoin but offers no visibility into how that Bitcoin is held or verified, it exposes itself to multiple levels of risk: legal, reputational, operational, and strategic. It undermines trust at the very moment it claims to be embracing a trustless system.

当一家公开交易的公司持有比特币，但对该比特币的持有或验证方式尚无可见性，它会面临多种级别的风险：法律，声誉，运营和战略性。它在声称拥抱无信任系统的那一刻破坏了信任。

More importantly, public companies send signals. Whether they like it or not, they become de facto representatives of the Bitcoin strategy they’ve adopted. Their behavior becomes part of the playbook for others considering similar moves.

更重要的是，上市公司发送信号。无论他们是否喜欢它，他们实际上是他们采用的比特币战略的代表。考虑类似动作的其他人，他们的行为成为剧本的一部分。

That’s why the responsibility is higher. Transparency isn’t optional for companies who lead with Bitcoin. It’s a duty. And companies that choose opacity not only take on unnecessary risk—they weaken the credibility of the entire movement.

这就是为什么责任更高的原因。对于领导比特币的公司而言，透明度不是可选的。这是一种职责。选择不透明度的公司不仅承担不必要的风险，而且削弱了整个运动的信誉。

What Proof of Reserves Should Actually Include

储备的证明实际上应包括

For Proof of Reserves to have real integrity, it must

为了证明储备金具有真正的完整性，它必须