Paying the people who operate the Bitcoin 'operating system'
Author: Cathy
A couple of days ago, the Bitcoin ecological research and consulting team 1A1z published an in-depth report about Bitcoin Core builders.
The article appears to be just a regular developer interview survey, yet it reveals a layer of reality in the crypto industry that is often overlooked: there is a group of people far from the traffic center, not discussing narratives, not doing marketing, who are long-term maintaining the most fundamental and critical infrastructure of this industry.
In this list of sponsors supporting Bitcoin Core, the name OK is not in a prominent position. Precisely because of its low profile, many people are realizing for the first time that there are still large platforms in this industry investing resources in 'public research and development,' which may not yield immediate returns but will determine the industry's direction in the long run.
After the article was published, OK Star shared and quoted a statement from the internal team: 'From the earliest days, we have insisted on contributing a small amount to the underlying development of Bitcoin. Over the past decade, we have never promoted or publicized because we firmly believe in the future of blockchain.'
Similar expressions in the industry are not uncommon. But when this statement is placed in the context of Bitcoin Core, its meaning is different—it is not a marketing slogan, but a value choice: whether one is willing to invest time, resources, and patience in places where no one is paying attention.
01
Those who pay salaries for Bitcoin's 'operating system'
To understand the significance of this matter, one must return to a core question: What exactly is Bitcoin Core?
Simply put, Bitcoin Core is the 'operating system' of Bitcoin. It is the software that runs full nodes, the rule enforcer and transaction validator of the entire network, and the foundation for maintaining the security, network consistency, and censorship resistance of Bitcoin.
The BTC price, block height, transaction confirmations, network stability that we are familiar with—these indicators mentioned daily by countless people—all depend on the correct operation of this set of Bitcoin Core code.
More importantly, Bitcoin Core has never been a commercial project since its inception. It has no CEO, no KPI, no profit model, and no 'investment return cycle.' It relies on the contributions of global volunteers and the long-term support of external sponsors to sustain itself.
Some developers focus on optimizing network performance, some study verification rules and security, some are dedicated to privacy improvements and user experience optimization, and some work that ordinary users will never see in their lifetime, but the entire ecosystem cannot do without it.
Because Bitcoin Core has no profit model and no corporate endorsement, it needs external financial support. The report from 1A1z shows that sponsors supporting Bitcoin Core include foundations, research institutions, infrastructure companies, and a few trading platforms. These funds are primarily used for node performance optimization, security research, network synchronization, privacy enhancement, code review, and other areas.
It can be said that without this continuous support, Bitcoin Core would have found it difficult to maintain stable development over the past decade.
The report identifies 13 major sponsoring organizations: Blockstream, Chaincode Labs, MIT, Spiral (formerly Square Crypto), OK, Human Rights Foundation, Brink, Btrust, OpenSats, Vinteum, Maelstrom, B4OS, and 2140.
Figure: Major sponsoring organizations of Bitcoin Core, source: 1A1z
To make it onto this core list, the standards are clear: long-term, stable, low-profile.
This is also why, although platforms like Coinbase, Kraken, and Gemini have historically had developer funding programs, they have not been included as core sponsors—the report indicates that these projects are either inactive, infrequent, or no longer focused on Bitcoin development. In contrast, OK's funding program, which started in 2019, has continued to this day, making it the only trading platform among the 13 core sponsors.
Take Marco Falke as an example; he is one of the only six core maintainers with the authority to approve or reject changes to Bitcoin's underlying code (resigned in February 2023). His job is to rigorously review every proposal in the codebase to prevent malicious or flawed code from entering the Bitcoin protocol. This is a job that is crucial to the global crypto economy, but it is unpaid.
Since 2019, OK (and its predecessor Okcoin) has continuously provided funding to Falke to ensure that he can devote himself full-time to this crucial work for network security. In addition to Falke, OK has also funded Bitcoin Core developer Amiti Uttarwar, Lightning Network developer Antoine Riard, as well as non-profit organizations like Brink and Vinteum.
As of now, OK's funding amount for these projects has approached 2 million dollars. In fact, even before 2019, Okcoin had already established a funding program for open-source developers.
It is worth noting that this kind of investment has been almost entirely unpublicized for a long time. Until the recent report from 1A1z was released, many people didn't realize that so many organizations and companies were quietly supporting the underlying construction of Bitcoin.
In this industry, most companies chase trends and create narratives. The sponsors choose to pay for those things that 'must be done, but no one is obligated to do.'
02
Not just the underlying layer, but the 'last mile'
Support for the underlying protocol is just one aspect. What is often overlooked are those things that seem less 'grand' but determine whether users can truly use them.
User-side barriers
Taking OK Wallet as an example, it has become the starting point for many people entering Web3. Supporting hundreds of chains, various account models, self-custody and MPC technology, ecological integration speed, compliance chain support, etc., these sound more like 'product details,' but fundamentally belong to 'user-side infrastructure.'
For an industry to move toward mass adoption, these details determine whether the last mile can be completed.
Ordinary users do not care what consensus algorithm you are using or how advanced Layer 2 technology is; they care about: Can it be used easily? Will there be a risk of losing coins? Are the transaction fees high?
The design of CeDeFi is to solve these problems—combining the advantages of centralized exchanges and decentralized exchanges. Users can access over 100 decentralized liquidity pools without leaving the platform, and the system automatically finds the best price. More crucially, there is no need to remember mnemonic phrases (using Passkey authentication), and no need for cross-chain bridges (routing directly within the platform), resolving the two most troublesome issues for DeFi users: losing coins and being hacked.
These functions may not seem attractive, but they are more important for large-scale adoption than the technology itself.
Long-termism of the developer ecosystem
In addition to the user side, OK has also been continuously promoting the developer ecosystem, test networks, cross-chain infrastructure, hackathons, research collaborations, auditing systems, and other constructions over the years.
These investments may be far from the spotlight, but they are crucial for the healthy development of the industry.
Hackathons do not bring users directly, test networks do not generate transaction volumes, and auditing systems do not create topics. But without these, the developer ecosystem cannot thrive, security incidents will occur frequently, and the trust foundation of the entire industry will be eroded.
To some extent, the power driving the crypto industry is not just the trading volume on the leaderboard and the weekly changing narratives, but those who write code, run nodes, test protocols, and fund infrastructure.
03
Value of long-termism
The phrase 'ten years of hard work' sounds like a marketing slogan in the crypto industry. But looking at the numbers, some things are indeed happening.
Let's take a look at the state of the industry in 2025:
The number of tokens has skyrocketed from hundreds of thousands in 2021 to tens of millions in 2025 (over 50 million).
The token issuance cycle has been compressed from two years to 3-6 months.
The actual amount a project spends on technology is less than 20% of the total cost; the rest is spent on listing fees, market makers, KOLs, and media promotion (ICODA DeFi marketing budget guide).
In such an environment, choosing to invest resources in the 'invisible return' areas of underlying protocols, developer ecosystems, and user infrastructure is difficult because: returns are not visible in the short term, but they determine life and death in the long term.
This continuous investment will ultimately translate into competitiveness:
Technical efficiency can lead to cost advantages. When your system has fast processing speeds and low costs, there is naturally room to offer better prices to users. This is not a price war, but a technological dividend.
User experience determines large-scale adoption. Not needing to remember mnemonic phrases, not worrying about cross-chain hacks, the system automatically finding the best price for you—these functions address real pain points. If the details are well done, users are willing to stay.
Infrastructure construction determines future capacity. When the RWA market really reaches a scale of 600 billion dollars by 2030 (according to Boston Consulting Group predictions), the infrastructure that can support the flow of these assets will become the most scarce resource. At that time, those who have laid out in advance will have the greatest first-mover advantage.
This is the value of long-termism: laying the foundation while others chase trends, and having built high rises by the time others wake up.
04
Summary
The industry's hotspots have cycles, but Bitcoin's construction does not.
The market noise can rise and fall, but the underlying infrastructure needs to be built and maintained over ten to twenty years. This, perhaps, is the most difficult yet crucial aspect of the industry.
In this sense, participants like OK are worth paying attention to not because of their promotion, but because they choose to do things that 'someone must do' but 'no one is obligated to do.'
Builders do not necessarily need applause, but they deserve to be seen.
Where the crypto industry ultimately goes largely depends on these invisible choices.
1A1z original report link: https://s3.amazonaws.com/1a1z.com/files/1A1z%20-%20Funding%20Bitcoin%20-%20Part%201.pdf