Binance Founder CZ Discusses BNB, BNBChain, and Its Ecosystem

Original Title: "Binance Founder Changpeng Zhao Discusses BNB, BNBChain, and Its Ecosystem"

Original Source: RPC Cat Friends Club

Guest Introduction:

David Namdar (X@namdar): CEO of BNC, also a co-founder of Galaxy Digital, with over a decade of experience in cryptocurrency and capital markets. He currently serves as the CEO of the Nasdaq-listed company BNB Network Company (BNC), leading a BNB-centric digital asset treasury project, referred to as the "BNB version of MicroStrategy" by the industry.

CZ: Founder and former CEO of Binance, also one of the most influential entrepreneurs in the global cryptocurrency industry.

David: Alright, good morning, CZ. It's great to see you. CZ: Good morning, David. Great to see you too.

David: I'm very excited to have this conversation with you. We've known each other for a long time, and it has been a fantastic journey. The recent market has been exciting, especially today as BNB is hitting new all-time highs. How's everything on your end? Where are you joining from?

CZ: Things are going well. I'm currently in Tokyo. As you said, BNB is reaching new all-time highs. I'm not exactly sure of the reasons behind it, but I believe your efforts have definitely contributed, so thank you. Overall, everything is going well.

David: It's great to hear that. I'd like to take a moment to reflect on our journey in the crypto space. The evolution has been remarkable. Looking back to 2017 when BNB was first launched, it truly stood out in that wave, being the first project to break the mold and was quite innovative at the time. How do you view the evolution of these years? Did you ever imagine it would grow into the thriving ecosystem it is today?

CZ: That's a great question. Initially (in 2017), BNB was an ERC-20 token on Ethereum, solely used for fundraising. We knew back then that we would develop a blockchain that is public, decentralized, and so on. But I didn't actually anticipate it would grow into a full ecosystem. So seeing all this now is truly rewarding. To be honest, over the past seven to eight years, I spent most of my time running a centralized exchange platform. During that time, I didn't really dedicate much time to the BNB chain. In the past two years or so, I had to deal with the U.S. government, handle U.S. government cases, fly to the U.S., spent four months in jail, and things like that. So in these 7-8 years, we didn't actually invest much time and effort into the BNB chain. Nevertheless, the community has grown. Especially this year, we started to pay more attention to the BNB chain. Now I'm also focusing more on the BNB chain — I don't have anything else to do.

CZ: And you are also part of this ecosystem, which is really empowering. This year, we have seen the BNB Chain truly thriving. This is a good thing. I think even today, the BNB Chain is still "underdeveloped," and the entire ecosystem is also "underdeveloped." This means there are still many opportunities for different projects to grow. Overall, I think it's great.

David: Yes, I completely agree. Recently, I have indeed been waving the BNB flag outside, doing my best to explain to investors the difference between BNB (as an asset) and the BNB Chain (the entire ecosystem), and how it has evolved to no longer be tied to any single company. How do you usually explain this difference to everyone?

CZ: Yes, many people are confused because many media outlets like to refer to BNB as the "Binance Coin." This is related to history: it did indeed have that name initially. We later tried several times to reshape the brand, hoping to differentiate the two. BNB initially had more rights on the centralized Binance exchange, but now, as you said, it has become a thriving independent ecosystem. BNB is a native asset on multiple blockchains, currently including BNB Smart Chain, Greenfield, opBNB, and previously the Tendermint-based BNB Beacon Chain. In the future, BNB will also be the native token of multiple blockchains adopting updated technology.

CZ: BNB is the token that powers the decentralized ecosystem of the BNB Chain, and it is very different from the "Binance company's token." While Binance's centralized exchange still offers fee discounts using BNB, that's just one of many use cases. The centralized exchange also provides BNB holders with opportunities to participate in some profit-sharing airdrops, such as Launchpad, Launchpool, Binance Alpha, and so on. But again, this is part of BNB's rights. BNB itself is a very thriving and large ecosystem: there are multiple on-chain DEXs, perpetual contract DEXs, lending protocols, stablecoins, and more. There are many things on the BNB Chain. In fact, I also find it quite difficult to explain to many people clearly, and everyone is easily confused—so I think you do a better job in this regard. Thank you for your help.

David: No, not really, but thank you for your praise. Let me tell you, what I'm really doing out there now is providing explanations as much as possible. You know, we've talked many times: I've been in this field for a long time, witnessing various evolutions. I've seen many people come and go, and I've also seen iterations and innovations, especially driven by regulatory factors. Right? So for me, now being able to explain how this "evolution has happened," including what you have built over the years, and you are one of the industry's most outstanding builders, this is a great thing.

David: In my opinion, BNB is a collection of many things, and it has already demonstrated that over the years it may be the most iteratively upgradable chain. Every chain — —such as Ethereum — — has its own roadmap, many different ideas, and upgrade visions. We also know that Bitcoin has many "political factors" in terms of BIPs (Improvement Proposals), and there are also many iterations. So, in a sense, BNB can be considered one of the most successfully upgraded and evolved chains in these years.

CZ: Yes. I think every chain has actually been evolving all along. The BNB chain has indeed evolved more because it originated from a Tendermint-based blockchain. It was initially an ERC-20 token, then migrated to the Tendermint blockchain, became an EVM-compatible chain, and also expanded to become a layer-two solution (opBNB). Then, we even have Greenfield (storage optimization). Now, there are some new variants being considered and developed by developers. From this perspective, we have evolved more in structure. Most other blockchains start from one architecture and then maintain it; whereas from the perspective of the BNB chain, the BNB token is the native asset of multiple blockchains. The underlying technology can evolve over time.

CZ: I have discussed with some core developers several times. They are looking at what the "next generation" will be: the next-generation architecture needs to provide 100 times, 1000 times the throughput, greater capacity and stability, lower fees, and be "AI-aware" and AI-ready; while also natively supporting stablecoins, RWAs, and so on. There are many related discussions. I hope our mindset, and the community's mindset towards BNB is: this token will be the native token of multiple blockchains, and the technology will continue to evolve rapidly. I hope we can achieve this together.

David: Yes, I totally agree. Moreover, a large part of it is about the community, as you said. Over the years, the community has been motivated by you and the BNB Chain team, as well as all participants. I have been observing myself and have seen a lot of enthusiasm from the outside world. You just mentioned stablecoins multiple times, let's delve a bit deeper into that. Now the "stablecoin story" is timely: with the recent Circle IPO, coupled with Ethereum's performance over the past few months, Wall Street and many investors are beginning to realize the potential of stablecoins, and the impact of the Genius Act. I would tell everyone that in many ways, we see very strong growth of stablecoins on the BNB chain, even surpassing Ethereum at some stages. So how do you view the stablecoin landscape on the BNB chain? From a global perspective, do you consider stablecoins as a "USD ETF"?

CZ: There is so much to discuss about stablecoins. Now people realize that stablecoins may be one of the biggest businesses in crypto. Binance, a centralized exchange, has a strong influence on "which projects can be listed," but in terms of profitability, I believe Tether may be the most profitable company per capita in human history. For example, they make a profit of 13-15 billion USD a year with about 200 employees, which is too exaggerated. So now everyone wants to do stablecoins. Circle has also achieved some success. In fact, about two years ago, BUSD was stopped by NYDFS, but it grew from 0 to 23 billion in two to three years; and that was even in a relatively "anti-crypto" government period (the Biden administration's "war on crypto"). However, USDC was not stopped, so it continues to grow, and now it has even gone public.

CZ: There are now thousands of projects trying to create stablecoins, which is great. I think it will bring more diversity, some will offer higher yields, and some will have new features, etc. But if you really look at the stablecoin landscape, my impression is: stablecoins are not actually that necessary in the US domestic market. Although today in crypto, the largest stablecoins are denominated in USD and pegged to the dollar, in the US, there is ACH, and domestic transfers are relatively easy. The stablecoins that are heavily used are actually in international scenarios outside the US. Stablecoins help the dollar become more dominant globally; to be honest, every country wants their currency to be used more globally. For example, China's renminbi also hopes to become a dominant global currency, as do other countries. Stablecoins are a way to achieve this. They help crypto and the blockchain industry better integrate into the traditional financial system, and they also provide crypto practitioners with a stable, at least fiat-denominated, value anchor in the ecosystem, which is also very helpful to various countries. So, from a purely economic perspective, countries should encourage the development of their own stablecoins.

CZ: Returning to the BNB chain ecosystem. Historically, USDT and USDC did not provide strong native support; they only recently started native issuance. I believe Tether has not yet native-issued on the BNB chain, while Circle has already done so, but also recently started. So there is a gap, a niche to be filled here. I think USD1 has filled this niche very well, and in the past few months, we have seen its strong growth. So I think stablecoins will continue to exist and become a major player—more precisely, a very large race. Looking back a few years, I myself didn't quite understand it at the time. When we just started Binance, I was wondering: who would use stablecoins? Why not just use fiat currency directly? But stablecoins have indeed solved many problems: international transfers are much easier with blockchain; blockchain is borderless, helping to keep prices synchronized across different trading platforms; and it is also a more user-friendly "fiat form." Because of this, it has grown very rapidly and will continue to grow. There are still many opportunities in the stablecoin race on the BNB chain because it is not yet fully developed. We have seen significant growth of USD1, and I actually expect more development there.

David: Yes, I agree as well. This also brings us back to NYDFS. They have indeed been causing issues. Even since I first entered this field, New York's BitLicense has been hindering innovation—not only in New York, but also across the United States and globally, as many regulators look at New York's BitLicense as an opportunity to slow down the development of crypto. So the "war on crypto" started much earlier. Now, when it comes to many stablecoins, I will also go back to the initial days of Tether. Tether was born out of industry demand: people were moving value between different trading platforms, and the existing financial infrastructure was trying to block it. Tether served its purpose and grew to be, as you said, one of the most profitable companies in the industry, if not the world. With the increasing on-chain activity of BNB, the demand for stablecoins will naturally be captured and will help support this activity.

David: Next up is the next area, RWA. I think we have finally reached a turning point in the growth of RWAs. Over the past few cycles, we have seen "start and pause": from the early days of real estate tokenization to some fund tokenization. But now we are indeed seeing a lot of RWA activity picking up. How do you see our current position in the RWA adoption curve? And what are some observations you have made around the BNB Chain?

CZ: We have been in this field for a decade, and we are "hardcore believers" in the idea that everything will be tokenized. Not just buildings, traditional money market funds, but even "people" can be tokenized; virtual assets can too. So everything can be tokenized, but tokenization is not easy. I personally believe that more traditional financial instruments will be tokenized first because they are more suitable for trading. For example, real estate, where price fluctuations are not as significant and trading volume is low, resulting in poor liquidity. If you tokenize a building, because the price is relatively stable, the trading volume will not be high; without sufficient trading volume, people will not place large orders on the order book, resulting in even poorer liquidity. If you want to enter or exit at a scale of several million dollars or even greater, it will be very difficult and can easily lead to abnormal price behavior.

CZ: Not every asset is easy to tokenize. Cryptocurrencies, due to their price volatility, have actually created a "feature" that makes everyone more willing to trade, leading to higher trading volumes. Additionally, when you tokenize a building, if you want to buy the entire building, you must buy all the tokens available in the market; the final few token holders may be unwilling to sell, causing the price to skyrocket. Moreover, owning "pieces" of a building does not necessarily mean you can live in it; in other words, understanding what economic usage rights and economic benefits you have is crucial. There are also regulatory concerns: when you tokenize a building, is it considered a security? Or something else? Who will regulate it? In larger countries, this issue is particularly prominent because the financial market may have multiple regulators; in other countries, this may not be an issue, but the regulatory framework is still crucial—what can these tokens do and not do? Many questions today remain unclear.

CZ: I think RWA will be significant and will continue to grow. If stablecoins are also considered RWAs (many people do indeed count them as such), then it is already substantial. Other newly tokenized assets will also be very interesting. However, personally, I believe that traditional financial assets will be tokenized first, followed by easily conceptualized and redeemable commodities (such as oil, wheat), and then followed by other assets.

David: That makes a lot of sense. It's one of the reasons I'm excited about the current cycle: many crypto players are venturing into the traditional financial space like never before, while some TradFi (Traditional Finance) players are attempting to enter the crypto market. For example, Galaxy — I think they are recently one of the first, maybe the very first, to tokenize their equity, as you may have seen in the news. We will see more attempts like this. Whether there will be a significant demand, and whether the crypto community will be genuinely interested in participating in the tokenization of stocks in the traditional financial markets—this remains to be seen. Now, back to the topic of transitioning from centralized to decentralized exchanges and other future areas. In a recent BNB AMA, you mentioned: If you were to start over, being twenty years old, you would work on an AI Agent and a privacy-focused DEX. This resonated with me deeply. When you think about that turning point — I have also heard you talk about many "future visions," about how the crypto market is moving from centralized exchanges to DEX. How do you think this will evolve?

CZ: Of course. First, to address another point you mentioned: tokenizing stocks. I think this is the "most obvious" thing to do because what country would not want its stocks to be accessible to a global audience? The issue lies in the fact that most stocks would be classified as "securities." There are very strict laws around securities in various countries (mostly with regulatory bodies like the SEC), and there is also some form of an international SEC alliance. So, some people who are issuing tokenized stocks are trying to bypass many of these "hurdles" by separating the "token" from the "security."

CZ: This poses a problem: the token price and the stock price are not in sync, which is incorrect. In my view, if there is a price difference, you should buy the cheaper one and redeem it for the more expensive one; as more people do this, the price difference will disappear. But the fact that the price difference persists indicates that the end-to-end process is not seamless. By my definition, this means that this product is still "not ready." However, I do believe that tokenizing stocks is a significant market, and we need regulators to provide very clear guidance—what can be done, what cannot be done, etc. I know many countries are piloting this, whether in the US, UAE, or other countries, and so on.

CZ: Going back to AI. I think AI will increase people's interaction level by 3–6 orders of magnitude, such as from a thousand to a million times. In the future, each of us will have thousands to tens of thousands of agents working in the background for us. There will be agents to transcribe this content—perhaps there is already an AI transcribing this podcast episode. I hope that in the future, there will be agents to edit videos, extract exciting parts, help me remove wrinkles, then post them online, and monetize them in some way. For example, people can watch one-third, and to watch the remaining two-thirds, they need to pay a bit, or even just pay a "tiny fraction of a cent." All of these transactions will be "high-frequency, low-cost." I believe that blockchain is the only solution that can handle this type of transaction. AI will significantly increase the transaction volume on the blockchain.

CZ: At the same time, blockchain can also do a lot for AI: for example, "Secure AI," such as privacy protection, secure training, secure data collection and usage, etc., can all be achieved using blockchain in a truly user-controlled manner. I have also talked to some AI companies: they will use blockchain to achieve "transparency in the algorithm development process," allowing people to peek inside because right now it is a black box. We don't know what data was used for training, but it seems like AI can give answers. For example, if I ask AI to summarize any book—if AI has that book, I'm not sure if it has paid for each book; I'm not sure if AI has paid $10 for each existing book; if I ask it to summarize a paid webpage, AI can inexplicably do it. So, blockchain can solve many potential issues with AI. Once again, I think this is a huge industry. A better description is: at least in my lifetime, there are three foundational technologies— the Internet, blockchain, AI. The Internet still has many opportunities, but the latter two are just beginning; all three have great growth potential, especially the latter two.

David: I completely agree. I have also spent a lot of time researching the AI market and its evolution. Last year, I was thinking of many ideas, such as establishing a bank dedicated to serving AI agents—we each will have thousands of agents, performing "trillion-level" transactions every day, beyond the scale our brains can comprehend. We need a blockchain-based, scalable ecosystem to support those activities. You have also said that AI cannot KYC, cannot open accounts with trading platforms and banks. So, if blockchain is not involved, this is not possible. Going back to 2017–2018, I was involved in one of the earliest AI agent projects, but it didn't materialize, called "Botchain." When you have unlimited, unimaginable "machine-to-machine" communication, we need a trace, and these records must be verifiable, on-chain. This way, during audits, we can see: my LLM/agent pulled data from where, yours from where, and what agreements they reached over a period of time.

David: Now, I want to go back a bit from the topic of CEX and DEX because this is another fascinating issue in the market. Looking back over the past few cycles, centralized exchanges have long been key drivers of many activities and the "first stop" in crypto for many. Today, we see rapid growth in DEX, which I think is a trend that both of us expected to continue. How do you think this will evolve on the timeline?

CZ: This trend is very clear. In the further future, DEX will be bigger than CEX, that is very clear. As you said, CEX, in my opinion, is the "stepping stone" for people entering the crypto world. Users from Web2 will find it easier to use email and password, have customer service, and someone to help them step by step. The concept of custody platforms is also easier to understand because it conceptually resembles a bank. But as they gain more experience, they will say: I now have my own wallet, I can manage it myself, which gives me more freedom and control and also means more responsibility (like protecting the device). Once people grasp these, they will turn to DEX.

CZ: Therefore, I fully believe that in the future, DEX will be bigger than CEX. As such, the on-chain ecosystem plays a crucial role. That's why, in my opinion, in the long term, the "on-chain ecosystem" is far more important than any centralized exchange. In this sense, being forced to no longer spend time on centralized exchanges is actually a good thing for me. Now, I can dedicate more time to contribute to the decentralized ecosystem. And it's quite fascinating because once you get used to it... I would say, from an ordinary person's perspective, the decentralized ecosystem is still relatively challenging to use. The trading volume is increasing significantly, but for regular users, using decentralized products involves seeing lots of random strings, many random numbers on the screen—how do you do that? Even in centralized exchanges, there are many numbers, but at least they are understandable. We need to as a community make our products better and more user-friendly. However, being on-chain and decentralized is definitely the future; otherwise, we wouldn't be in this industry, right?

David: This also ties back to one of the things that excite me about the market today. Looking back at my career: I come from the traditional financial world, but now I am a "crypto enthusiast," a "crypto lifer," and will always be. I have been trying to bridge the crypto market and the capital market: trying to create a Bitcoin ETF, taking Galaxy public, and helping other companies go public. In every cycle, I have tried to help as many people as possible see opportunities and become a small bridge between the two markets. In terms of where we are today: we see a lot of activity flowing from centralized exchanges to decentralized exchanges, but at the same time, the vast majority of wealth and capital in the world still flows through the traditional financial world, through centralized exchanges and markets in the traditional world.

David: I believe the truly massive opportunity now is "Digital Asset Treasuries." This is what Michael Saylor has achieved in the past five years. In fact, I was just talking to someone: Michael Saylor wasn't always a Bitcoin believer. On the other hand, you and I, since entering this field, have always held high the flag of Bitcoin, and I have also been a long-term believer in BNB. I often tell people: you might be the person I've seen in the industry who can always take a step back and stay focused at every fluctuation— "Focus on holding the bid, don't be shaken out by the fluctuation." Volatility is a "feature," especially when you are in a rapidly growing asset class. As the regulatory environment improves and investors' understanding of the potential and value of digital assets increases, I think Saylor has been ahead, leading the trend; as well as Japan's Metaplanet's Simon, the present David Bailey, and Anthony Pompliano, many people are holding high the flag of Bitcoin, helping people understand how such assets can uniquely enter government and corporate balance sheets.

David: I am also very excited to tell everyone the story of BNB and explain how special and unique of an asset it is. Based on this, whether from an investor perspective or as the CEO operating a leading digital asset custody company, I see a need: we must focus on a few truly special and unique crypto assets because not all crypto assets are the same. You and I are very clear about BNB — there is something special here. Over the past few months, it has indeed outperformed Bitcoin; from the beginning, it was one of the few assets that could outperform Bitcoin. When you think about the digital asset custody and the new wave, how do you see this market and the opportunities within it?

CZ: There is a lot to unpack here. First, let's go back to the starting point: humans like to use "classification" to understand things, thinking it's easier; such as "traditional finance vs. Web3," "Web2 vs. Web3." But in reality, there are no boundaries: fundamentally, it's all finance, just using different technologies. Traditional finance can fully utilize blockchain technology; banks can use blockchain technology; crypto companies should also deeply integrate with traditional financial markets and market structures. We shouldn't draw lines to separate, but should fully integrate — the terms are just to help people better understand. In this sense, crypto companies should access existing markets (fundraising, finding developers, getting resources), and existing financial markets should also use new technologies.

CZ: Regarding Michael Saylor, my intuition is that he probably became active in the public eye around 2017–2018, or maybe even earlier. Once he understands, he has very strong conviction. We have also experienced it ourselves: first learning, then "transitioning" or "completely transitioning," becoming a firm believer, you can traverse through fluctuations because you can see the longer-term future — not the price of tomorrow or the day after tomorrow (those are unpredictable), but the trends five or ten years later. This is interesting. Saylor invented a new structure, he really tried to explain this at different times, but I didn't quite understand, but I express my respect to him. This new structure is to allow crypto companies to raise money from the traditional market. The traditional market is larger; many investors can buy company stocks but cannot directly buy crypto; by buying "indirectly related to crypto" stocks, they gain easy access to Web3. Once they have this indirect gateway, they will continue to pay attention to crypto and help the ecosystem grow.

CZ: That being said, Saylor has used a very simple strategy to build one of the most successful companies in the world. Although he is a hardcore fan (Bitcoin Maxi, only looking at Bitcoin), there are also other very successful cryptocurrencies, including BNB and many other public chains. Looking at the success of Binance (a centralized exchange platform): if it only listed Bitcoin, it would not be as successful; it is precisely because it listed various assets that it attracted a large number of users into crypto. You and I both agree that BNB has shown strong performance and has many use cases. We are at the intersection you mentioned: connecting traditional finance with Web3 finance. Tools like DAT allow crypto companies to access traditional market funds and allow traditional markets to participate in crypto, which is a win-win. The more people are exposed to BNB or other crypto assets (whether directly or indirectly), the more help they provide to the crypto ecosystem.

CZ: This is something that is "extremely beneficial to both parties": once a company or investor gains indirect exposure to BNB, they may recommend it to friends; if they know developers, they may say "Why not develop your protocol on BNB?", "Why not use BNB for this?", "Why not use another cryptocurrency for that?" This will help the ecosystem grow. One very important point is that, in a decentralized world, it is not driven by a particular company or individual. I am not "driving" everything about BNB; I do what I need to do, but I do not manage everyone in the ecosystem, and they do not report to me. The more people align their incentives with the ecosystem, the more they will contribute, which in turn helps everyone in the ecosystem. Even in a decentralized world, if we can help more people form a "symbiotic" relationship, it will also drive ecosystem growth. So I think this is a great thing: Michael Saylor set a precedent, and now we are adopting it, and you are leading the way, which is great.

David: Thank you for your recognition. Like we have discussed through multiple crypto cycles, this can be said to be a path that was not initially anticipated. You have spent a lot of time communicating with various governments and company executives. We envisioned very early on: one day governments would buy Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB, and other digital assets. But at that time, we did not realize that there could also be a "corporate form," whose goal is to maximize the "amount of Bitcoin or BNB per share," to accumulate these assets and become very large holders; this provides investors with an incredible way to gain exposure to these assets and ecosystems. More importantly, as you mentioned: by gaining this exposure, everyone will step deeper into the ecosystem, which will create a special "flywheel."

David: I often cite the example of El Salvador (the trip we took together a few years ago). El Salvador did something special: they adopted Bitcoin and "went out" with it. From the perspective of "actually holding Bitcoin," they have also seen a good return on their invested USD; but the bigger return is that they "put themselves on the map" and gained worldwide recognition. They attracted entrepreneurs, developers, and investors from all over the world. When 10,000, 20,000, 100,000 people enter a small country, the compounding effects of scale will fundamentally change that country's trajectory within a generation. We see similar phenomena all over the world: as long as a country opens up regulation, attracts innovators, entrepreneurs, and capital, opens the doors to crypto, they will ultimately reap more and more dividends over time.

CZ: Absolutely. I totally agree. Before Michael Saylor, if someone had told me "You can create a public company to buy cryptocurrency," I would have thought it was too crazy: how could that even happen? This also reflects my insufficient understanding of the public market, the traditional market — despite having spent many years in fintech, I have not operated a public company, so I do not understand. Saylor obviously has more experience, and he figured it out. Then El Salvador is also very interesting: this is a very clear case of leadership — President Bukele. If it weren't for his drive, we wouldn't have gone there (why would I go there?); if it weren't for his drive, Binance wouldn't have set up customer service offices there, etc. I think this is a classic case: a country that quickly or early enough adopts new technology will gain greater dividends.

CZ: Let's look at the United Arab Emirates (UAE) again. The UAE has always been "pro-crypto, pro-AI," attracting many entrepreneurs. The UAE doesn't have many natural resources—there's oil, but not much else; it's a desert. But now it is a world-class, prosperous city (two cities). Everyone loves it there, the economy is performing well, and the country is growing rapidly. I believe that countries that adopt technology early and in the right way will grow very fast. This brings us back to the innovation we see: DeFi, AI, and so on. If a country can adopt these new things, the economy will continue to grow.

David: I also like such examples. The progress the UAE has made in 10–20 years is quite remarkable, and growth is compounding. As a wrap-up, if we talk about your vision for BNB and the entire crypto ecosystem in the next 10–20 years: How do you see the "possibilities and potential"? How would you measure "success"?

CZ: My perspective is: how many people can we help with BNB. Many companies do not focus on poor or underdeveloped countries, such as Africa, Southeast Asia, because the ROI is not clear at the moment. But if you look at Binance (the company, not the BNB chain), we have many users in Africa today, these users are currently bringing in little revenue; I believe that ten years later, they will bring in a lot of revenue, and there is no one else there. We help them first by allowing them to access finance; afterward, they will reap the benefits, and the platform will also receive returns correctly, which is a win-win situation.

CZ: For BNB, the opportunity is even greater because it is a decentralized, open network and protocol. What I want to do is: bring the next few billion people into the next wave, provide them with the next stage of new financial technology—the "next-generation new financial technology." As the world's population is likely to continue to grow, we should empower 100 billion people or more to provide them with financial services. That is the goal in my mind. It is not a price target, not a competition with other public chains or overtaking Bitcoin. As you said, BNB has outperformed Bitcoin in history up to the present, which is amazing and challenging; but I think that is not the right "benchmark." The correct "benchmark" is: as a community, how many people can we help. The more people we help, the more people join the community, and this is a self-growing phenomenon. We should continue to do this.

David: I think this is a very beautiful answer, thank you. Every time I try to keep everyone in the right mindset: focus on the long term, focus on building, focus on helping others. This is a beautiful vision.

CZ: Exactly. I think you have this mindset. You are one of the best personalities I have met in the industry, you have been in this industry for a long time, and you have a strong sense of mission. So when you say you are willing to take the lead, we are all excited. Whether you need my personal help, YZi Labs, or any of our affiliated companies or teams, we are happy to provide support. At the same time, other participants in the ecosystem, or participants outside the BNB chain ecosystem, we are also willing to seek their help.

CZ: I believe that fostering collaboration across the entire ecosystem and expanding the ecosystem are crucial. This will benefit everyone.

David: Absolutely. This has always been my approach: cooperation. I also like to tell everyone that I have defined "Why I Love Crypto": It is the most 'non-zero-sum' game in the world. Good participants are striving to increase market share. In fact, one more point I want to emphasize is: think about the 'next billion, the next two billion' people; they will only live in a world where crypto is becoming increasingly important. This is a beautiful vision of the future.

CZ: Absolutely, absolutely.

David: CZ, it's been my pleasure. This conversation has been very enjoyable, thank you, it's been a great discussion.

CZ: Great, thank you very much.

David: Goodbye for now.

Original Article Link

Welcome to join the official BlockBeats community:

Telegram Subscription Group: https://t.me/theblockbeats

Telegram Discussion Group: https://t.me/BlockBeats_App

Official Twitter Account: https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia