interesting write up.
投稿
--
Renaitrea
·
--
To easily understand the essence of $QUAI and $QI and why @QuaiNetwork needs a dual-token system, let’s take $BTC as a reference.
As we all know, $BTC was initially designed to be a digital currency, aiming to replace fiat by offering maximum security. However, due to its scarcity and mass adoption, $BTC ended up becoming more of a "digital asset" or a "store of value"—more like gold than fiat.
Quai Network took this as a reference to introduce a dual-token mechanism without sacrificing the utility of both "fiat" and "digital assets/store of value" that $BTC has.
It’s as simple as saying:
"Oh, so $BTC was originally designed as a currency to facilitate daily transactions, but it became a 'digital asset' due to its scarcity. So why don’t we create two tokens that complement each other, ensuring both fundamental utilities function within their respective roles?"
"Good idea, but to achieve that, we need a 'stablecoin' that doesn’t rely on fiat for its intrinsic value—since our goal is to challenge fiat itself. At the same time, we need to ensure that our token serving as a 'store of value' gains enough liquidity and scarcity to truly become a digital asset."
"Alright, let’s create $QI as a stablecoin backed by Energy Consumption, and $QUAI as a digital asset functioning as a 'store of value.' This way, the liquidity from any $QI or $QUAI purchases can be fully directed toward $QUAI as a 'store of value' since $QI doesn’t require fiat for its intrinsic value—it’s backed by energy."
"Great idea! Let’s build this dual-token system: $QI as a stablecoin backed by Energy Consumption and $QUAI as a 'store of value' driven by scarcity and scalability!"
As we all know, $BTC was initially designed to be a digital currency, aiming to replace fiat by offering maximum security. However, due to its scarcity and mass adoption, $BTC ended up becoming more of a "digital asset" or a "store of value"—more like gold than fiat.
Quai Network took this as a reference to introduce a dual-token mechanism without sacrificing the utility of both "fiat" and "digital assets/store of value" that $BTC has.
It’s as simple as saying:
"Oh, so $BTC was originally designed as a currency to facilitate daily transactions, but it became a 'digital asset' due to its scarcity. So why don’t we create two tokens that complement each other, ensuring both fundamental utilities function within their respective roles?"
"Good idea, but to achieve that, we need a 'stablecoin' that doesn’t rely on fiat for its intrinsic value—since our goal is to challenge fiat itself. At the same time, we need to ensure that our token serving as a 'store of value' gains enough liquidity and scarcity to truly become a digital asset."
"Alright, let’s create $QI as a stablecoin backed by Energy Consumption, and $QUAI as a digital asset functioning as a 'store of value.' This way, the liquidity from any $QI or $QUAI purchases can be fully directed toward $QUAI as a 'store of value' since $QI doesn’t require fiat for its intrinsic value—it’s backed by energy."
"Great idea! Let’s build this dual-token system: $QI as a stablecoin backed by Energy Consumption and $QUAI as a 'store of value' driven by scarcity and scalability!"