The essence of digital credit: How to extract value from digital capital

2026-01-16 00:20:10

【Crypto World】Michael Saylor recently expressed his views on the essence of digital credit: it is essentially a refined approach to digital capital. Specifically, by isolating risks, reducing volatility, shortening terms, conducting currency exchanges, and finally extracting profits—this set of strategies can transform digital capital into usable credit products. It sounds complex, but the core logic is: in the emerging financial realm of digital assets, how to design stable, controllable, and profitable credit tools may be an important direction for the future integration of DeFi and traditional finance.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

17 Likes

Reward
17
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ColdWalletAnxiety

· 01-18 20:01

In simple terms, it's about packaging high-risk assets into low-risk products. Saylor's theory sounds appealing, but actually implementing it is another matter. Digital credit is fundamentally a credit issue. No matter how much risk is stripped away, this hurdle can't be bypassed. It reminds me of the lending protocols that collapsed a couple of years ago; no matter how refined the packaging, risk can't be hidden. Combining DeFi with traditional finance? Ha, that might be the future, but first we need to overcome the mountains of liquidity and regulation. It's the same old story of risk stripping and reducing volatility. Feels like we're repeating this logic every day. Recently, Saylor has been quite vocal in the coin space, but the stability design he talks about is indeed worth pondering. This combination of tactics is really used to extract profits, but I just don't know which part might blow up with risk.

View OriginalReply0

SillyWhale

· 01-17 19:30

Saylor's theory sounds good, but can it really eliminate risk in practice? It seems like there's always a place for risk to settle down. That's how the crypto world works—package complex things, and a bunch of people start hyping it up. The core remains the same. Combining DeFi with traditional finance? Uh, I think it looks more like traditional finance is stealing the operational logic of DeFi. Lowering volatility, shortening the terms... Basically, it's to attract those small white users who are afraid of falling. This idea is indeed interesting, but who will be responsible for the risks that are peeled off? It's always a mystery.

View OriginalReply0

MysteryBoxAddict

· 01-17 13:51

Saylor's theory sounds good, but in reality, it's just playing the risk transfer game to the fullest, and in the end, someone still has to take the bailout Digital credit is essentially a credit gamble; no matter how much volatility is suppressed, black swan events can't be contained Speaking of which, if traditional finance could truly integrate with DeFi, we would have no chance here... Wake up, everyone Lower volatility, shorten terms, extract yields... these tricks have long been played out in the financial circle. Switching to a different track is still the same old story Honestly, I just want to see how long this "combo punch" can last in a bear market. Let's wait and see It's just packaging complex things to look more complex; fundamentally, it's a risk pricing issue So basically, you still need to find that willing risk taker to take on the risk. In DeFi, this is even more extreme than traditional finance...

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityHunter

· 01-16 00:43

Saylor's theory sounds good, but in practice, who bears the risks that are peeled off? Isn't it just retail investors taking the fall? Wait, isn't this just the traditional financial risk transfer play dressed up in a Web3 costume? Honestly, it still relies on stablecoins as the foundation. Without a solid stablecoin ecosystem, everything is just a castle in the air. The combination of DeFi and CEX should have come long ago, but the question is, who will regulate these things? It's interesting, but I'm more concerned about what new opportunities this can bring to liquidity mining. That's why I've always been optimistic about the future of MPC and multi-chain bridging. Sounds good, but in the end, it's still big institutions making money while retail investors get cut again. The core of digital credit is still trust issues; no matter how refined the design, it can't bypass this hurdle.

View OriginalReply0

staking_gramps

· 01-16 00:40

Saylor's theory sounds good, but the question is who will bear the peeled-off risks Basically, someone has to take the bait, right? Can this business last long? Another bunch of conceptual packaging, but how does it actually land? DeFi + traditional finance? Sounds great, but how to solve the trust issue? This combination is essentially about transferring risks layer by layer, but who ends up holding the bag in the end? Stable, controllable, and profitable—where in the world is there such a good thing? Saylor's idea is good, but if the crypto market crashes one day, it's all over.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainFries

· 01-16 00:35

Saylor is hyping again, talking eloquently, but the only ones truly making money are still those traditional methods. Wait, stripping away risks to lower volatility... Isn't that just the traditional finance approach? Digital capital? That term sounds expensive, but in reality, it's still just hype around concepts. DeFi combined with traditional finance... sounds good, but in reality? Who bears the risks? This set of theories works as long as the market is stable, but as soon as the crypto market fluctuates, it falls apart.

View OriginalReply0

ETH_Maxi_Taxi

· 01-16 00:31

Saylor's theory sounds good, but when it comes to actual implementation, will it be another story? Basically, it's still about risk transfer. Who will bear the final risk? Removing risk, reducing volatility... it sounds like passing the hot potato to the next sucker. Isn't this just traditional finance with a new name, old wine in a new bottle? Combining DeFi and CeFi? Ha, I want to see when they can really come together.

View OriginalReply0

DegenWhisperer

· 01-16 00:31

Saylor's theory sounds good, but very few projects can truly be implemented. --- In essence, it's just packaging—making retail investors feel it's stable. --- Who will bear the risk of peeling it off? In the end, it's still handed over to retail players. --- This idea is indeed fresh, but the water in DeFi is too deep, and risk pricing is difficult. --- Feels like another wave of marketing buzzwords from project teams; how much real return is there? --- The key is to see who will take on the risk; otherwise, it's all just talk. --- This logic is no different from traditional financial structured products, just with a different concept. --- Interesting, but it all depends on how the specific product is designed. --- Thinking of those collapsed lending protocols again; the word "stability" in the crypto world is really too hollow. --- Saylor loves to talk about grand visions, but actual execution ability is another matter.

View OriginalReply0