Why is the CAT20 code so mature? Are the rumors about the Unisat platform true? For the first time, the story behind CAT20 is revealed.

Interview / Editor: Jaleel Jia Liu, Cookie, BlockBeats

With the Fractal Bitcoin network launching nearly a month ago, CAT20 has become one of the hottest and most consensus-driven projects on the protocol.

One of the biggest highlights of Fractal Bitcoin is the activation of the OPCAT opcode, which has led to increasingly heated discussions about OPCAT in the Bitcoin ecosystem. At this year's Bitcoin Optech newsletter and developer conference, OPCAT became a frequently mentioned keyword. Related reading: “Why You Should Pay Attention to Bitcoin's OPCAT? The Biggest Narrative After the Lightning Network”.

CAT20 has conducted in-depth research on OP_CAT, so its low profile lasted only a few hours before it quickly spread through the community, attracting significant attention. Within days of minting, the miner fee rate on the fractal network soared to 5000 sats/vb. According to DotSwap data, the current price of one CAT token is around $1.28 (a $9.2 token). Early minters have seen returns of 5 to 40 times.

Even though the hype around Fractal Bitcoin has recently cooled down, the price of CAT tokens remains strong. What are the reasons behind this? The CAT20 code is clearly not from a newly started team. Against this backdrop, Rhythm BlockBeats conducted an in-depth interview with the CAT20 team, revealing the origins of CAT20, the technical accumulation behind it, the details of CAT20's collaboration with Fractal Bitcoin, and CAT20's "threat" to the Ordinals protocol.

Origin: Unveiling the Birth of CAT20's Prototype Six Years Ago

As an innovative Bitcoin token protocol based on the OP_CAT opcode, the origin of CAT20 can be traced back six years. Its team members began exploring how to implement smart contracts on the Bitcoin network during the BCH and BSV era, and years of technical accumulation laid a solid foundation for the birth of CAT20. In this section, the CAT20 team will share their development journey, the philosophy and ideology of CAT20, and the future evolution direction of the project.

BlockBeats: CAT20 has recently become popular, and its technical implementation is quite mature. Everyone is curious about the background of the CAT20 team. Who are the people behind CAT20? Can you share with us?

CAT20: At this stage, we have chosen not to disclose our identities. However, we can reveal that our team consists of five people who have been researching smart contracts on Bitcoin since 2018. Although we developed CAT20, we believe that CAT20 is a "leaderless" existence, and we are contributors to the CAT20 code.

Although our team is small, we have always believed that a small team can achieve great results, and sometimes having too many people can slow down progress. This is also our team's principle—only add personnel when necessary. In fact, if you find those who truly love Bitcoin, they can complete projects without needing many people. Even if there are 20 participants, the efficiency might not be as high. During the most intense phases of the project, we went almost several weeks without proper rest, yet we still produced results with high efficiency.

Although we have launched a preliminary version, there are still many areas that need optimization. This is a long-term project, and we will continue to improve. We welcome feedback from everyone. Currently, we are running on Fractal, hoping to apply these experiences to a larger ecosystem, such as the Bitcoin mainnet.

BlockBeats: When did you first have the idea to develop the CAT20 protocol? You have been researching smart contracts on Bitcoin since 2018. What attempts and experiences have you accumulated during this process? Can you share with us?

CAT20: This process can actually be traced back quite early. If we talk about the origins, we can start from 2018 when we began researching how to develop smart contracts for Bitcoin. At that time, we were developing on BCH (Bitcoin Cash) and BSV (Bitcoin SV, a fork of Bitcoin Cash), both of which had activated OP_CAT in 2018, while other opcodes that were disabled on the mainnet were basically restored and activated. So, we initially developed in these ecosystems. Particularly on BSV, we invested a lot of effort because BSV does not have the same restrictions as the Bitcoin mainnet; it has the best performance and the least restrictions on opcodes, so our tools ran most smoothly there.

From the end of last year to the beginning of this year, discussions began on the Bitcoin mainnet about whether to activate the OPCAT opcode. We had been researching this technology for many years and knew that if OPCAT were activated, many things could be achieved. Although it cannot do everything, it is the optimal solution for implementing smart contracts on Bitcoin, and many applications that cannot currently be realized can be expanded in the future. So we decided to at least create something that everyone could use right now to personally experience that OP_CAT is not just a theoretical concept. Thus, we migrated our previous smart contract code to Fractal Bitcoin.

Of course, during this process, we iterated through many versions, possibly going through four or five generations of improvements. Now we have the latest version, and while there may be new updates in the future, this version is already quite ideal. So CAT20 is a result of years of accumulation, similar to a research topic, having gone through many version iterations and already implemented on different chains. However, due to the high attention on Fractal, people are just beginning to understand its practical applications. In fact, similar technologies have already been implemented on other smaller chains, but these chains are not well-known, so people are not very aware of them.

BlockBeats: There has been a lot of discussion in the community about the "rumors and gossip" regarding the close relationship between CAT20 and Fractal, even questioning whether CAT20 is officially developed by Fractal. Do you have anything to clarify on this topic?

CAT20: First of all, we are very grateful to Fractal for providing a platform; otherwise, we would still be waiting for BTC to activate the OP_CAT opcode, a process that could last until our project is completed. So I think this collaboration is a win-win situation, which is the result we hope to see.

The relationship between CAT20 and Fractal can be likened to the relationship between Ethereum and Celestia. We are building an ecosystem on Fractal, but we are not part of the Fractal official team; we are an independent team with deep cooperation between both parties.

Our relationship with Fractal has historical roots. Lorenzo and I had a cooperative relationship when he was working on projects on BSV, which has lasted for four years and has been refined over a long time. Later, they successfully developed the UniSat wallet but faced a problem: once the Bitcoin mainnet was blocked, their new issuance or trading market business could not continue.

We heard last year that Lorenzo planned to create Fractal, and he mentioned it during our meeting in December. However, initially, they did not plan to add the OPCAT opcode to Fractal, while our work has always been to verify the feasibility of OPCAT and discover that it can bring many new applications, but we were struggling to find a real asset chain to experiment or develop on. So I suggested to Lorenzo, "Isn't Fractal going live in September? Can we add OP_CAT?" Later, after internal research and gathering information on Twitter, they decided to add this feature.

In fact, we also maintain cooperative relationships with some very well-known projects, such as sCrypt, etc. Now, more and more project parties are reaching out to us for help in developing on Bitcoin, and we welcome more project parties to collaborate with us to promote the development of OP_CAT.

BlockBeats: What are the current work and research focuses of the team? Through CAT20, what does the team hope to achieve?

CAT20: You can understand our team's work as being similar to the teams behind Ordinals, BRC20, and Runes protocols. As a protocol developer, we try not to develop specific applications, such as wallets, browsers, or DEX, but rather focus on improving the design at the protocol level. As for applications like DEX, AMM, or on-chain games, they may be developed by other teams, and we welcome more development teams or independent developers to participate and propose their ideas, "I want to create a DEX, I want to create a pump fun," which is great. We will try to provide some suggestions, explore the potential of CAT20, and create more valuable applications so that users can truly experience and feel the charm of CAT20.

We hope to remain neutral; for example, we do not plan to create a CAT20 Marketplace ourselves, as that might make people feel we are monopolizing opportunities. On the other hand, our team excels in building underlying infrastructure, and developing specific products may not yield ideal results. Even if we initially have users, we may later be replaced by products with better UX/UI. Therefore, we prefer to do what we are good at, leaving more applications for other teams to develop.

BlockBeats: What directions would the team encourage interested developers to explore? Or are there any project parties that have already started building in the CAT20 ecosystem and are seeking technical support from you?

CAT20: Ultimately, CAT20 is a token protocol. Everyone can refer to the development history of other token protocols, such as Atomicals, BRC20, and Runes. In the initial stages, everyone could only perform simple operations, such as minting, without even having wallets, let alone trading. Therefore, as tools like wallets, marketplaces, and browsers improve, the entire ecosystem gradually forms a closed loop, allowing users to truly experience the convenience of this ecosystem.

However, if we only focus on building these infrastructures, CAT20 would not be much different from other token protocols. The biggest advantage of CAT20 is that it can seamlessly integrate with other dApps. You may have seen the official tweets from CAT introducing that CAT20 is not just a protocol for launching meme coins; it can actually integrate with all smart contracts. Therefore, it can be applied to various scenarios similar to those on Ethereum or Solana, such as Uniswap, pump.fun, and so on.

Currently, some developers have shown interest in CAT20, but we do not plan to directly develop these applications. We want to leave the opportunities to developers and teams, allowing them to explore the potential of CAT20 and build a more diverse ecosystem. This way, the entire ecosystem will be more organic and healthy, rather than being driven by reserved tokens or other incentive mechanisms. Our goal is to encourage everyone to participate in the construction because they see the potential of CAT20.

Our partner sCrypt has an OP_CAT developer group on Telegram, which currently has over 1,300 members discussing how to utilize CAT20 to implement on-chain applications, such as time-lock features, etc. The biggest advantage of this protocol is that it does not require our approval or modifications to the underlying protocol. Developers can write smart contracts directly without needing to contact us; the protocol itself is very open.

For example, some developers are researching how to build decentralized exchanges through CAT20. They found that it is possible to implement on-chain trading like Uniswap or DYDX without complex smart contracts and PSBTs. Others are trying to develop algorithmic stablecoins and on-chain voting mechanisms, which are all excellent application examples.

BlockBeats: The current threshold for deploying tokens with CAT20 seems a bit high for ordinary developers. Does the team plan any innovations and solutions to lower the barrier for deploying tokens and create more innovative gameplay?

CAT20: Indeed, the current threshold is relatively high because the project has just been launched, and everyone needs time to adapt. However, we will soon release some documentation and educational content to help developers better understand this protocol. CAT20 is not just an ordinary token protocol; it has many flexible gameplay options, such as the pre-mine or fair launch you mentioned. The minting method we provide is customizable; although the currently announced method is just the most basic one, similar to the minting of BRC20 or Runes, the underlying architecture of CAT20 is completely different.

For example, you can design a minting model similar to an ICO, where users must pay a certain amount of coins to mint, or you can combine methods from Atomicals, adding hash and proof-of-work mechanisms. Of course, this is much easier than on the mainnet, but you can require users to put in more effort to obtain tokens. In addition, there are various innovative minting methods, such as requiring a certain amount of coins to be locked before you can mint, and so on.

Of course, as you said, end users do not need to directly interact with these complex mechanisms. Just like on Ethereum, ordinary users do not directly write smart contracts; this should be the task of developers and project teams. Developers and project teams can use existing tools to innovate more attractive minting methods and then provide a user-friendly front end for users to experience. Ultimately, users will interact with contracts through these applications rather than directly operating the protocol itself, just like experiencing it on UniSat, Dotswap, or other platforms.

BlockBeats: How does the team balance the relationship between technology, capital, and the community when developing CAT20? For example, the Atomicals protocol is referred to as the "technical purist" in the Bitcoin ecosystem, relying on community donations rather than VC investments, which has resulted in a decline in community cohesion. CAT20 and OP_CAT also have strong technical aspects, and ordinary communities may find it difficult to understand their importance. If there were capital support, it might be more successful. How do you consider this aspect?

CAT20: This is a great question about how to achieve balance. On one hand, our love for technology and ideals drives us to provide tools for the community for free. The benefits of this are obvious; people feel it is fair and it is easier to gain community recognition. This is somewhat similar to Bitcoin's issuance method; Satoshi Nakamoto did not raise funds or profit from exchanges or wallets, and we hope to follow a similar path.

On the other hand, VC funding is also a reasonable approach. There is no one-size-fits-all model; it depends on what product you are making. For example, Bitcoin, Ordinals, and BRC-20, as far as we know, did not raise funds but have developed well. Of course, there are some projects that may not have developed well due to a lack of resources, such as the Atomicals you mentioned (which I don't know much about). But each project's situation is different.

For us, CAT20 is not an amateur project; it requires long-term maintenance and updates, but we do not plan to profit through pre-mining or fundraising. We currently have other entities that can profit, and as the CAT20 ecosystem grows, new business demands will emerge indirectly, such as providing contract development, contract auditing, and more related tools to support the entire ecosystem. As the ecosystem grows, we will naturally have more opportunities, creating a virtuous cycle. Therefore, at present, the development of CAT20 will not rely on or introduce VC funding, which ensures the project's independence and community-driven development model.

BlockBeats: Does the team have any expectations for the price of $CAT and the overall market performance of CAT20?

CAT20: First of all, an increase in coin price is certainly a good thing, and the development of this ecosystem is a significant incentive for our main business. However, we do not want the entire project's development and progress to rely too heavily on the coin price, nor do we intend to specifically seek market makers or expend effort to maintain the coin price. Some exchanges have approached us to discuss listing, and I still say: CAT is leaderless, or as people say, it is decentralized and community-driven; I don't care. Just like Satoshi, if trading platforms want to list the coin, they can do so directly without contacting us. We try to keep it decentralized rather than manipulating or pushing it onto exchanges.

So the development of CAT20 and the price trend of $CAT are basically independent. We mainly focus on advancing the development of the protocol rather than paying too much attention to price fluctuations. To put it extremely, even if the price of $CAT drops to zero tomorrow, our development will continue.

We hope that $CAT can demonstrate its value through practical applications, not just as a meme coin. Currently, people may see it more as a meme coin being speculated upon, but in the long run, I hope more people can see its potential in applications and showcase its value through usage. I believe that such a long-term, stable development model will be better, rather than a rapid decline in popularity after being listed on trading platforms, which is not good for the long-term development of the entire protocol and coin price.

BlockBeats: To be more direct, what are your personal expectations for the CAT20 protocol? Do you think it will surpass Ordinals, BRC-20, and Runes to become a mainstream protocol in the Bitcoin ecosystem?

CAT20: If I hadn't experienced the history of BCH and BSV, I would definitely say that CAT20 is a "dimensionality reduction strike." However, after so many years, considering the years of BCH and BSV forks, purely from a technical perspective, BCH and BSV should surpass BTC because what can be done on Bitcoin can also be done on BCH and BSV, and even better, with added token and smart contract functionalities. So from a technical standpoint, CAT20 has smart contracts, but Ordinals, BRC-20, and Runes are still at the level of "inscribing" on Bitcoin, so it is certain that CAT20 will surpass them.

From a technical perspective, CAT20 indeed has the potential for a "dimensionality reduction strike" because, through the simple OP_CAT opcode, we can achieve many things that were previously impossible. This is backed by our years of accumulation and exploration. Therefore, from a technical perspective, I believe CAT20 can not only do what BRC-20 and Runes can do but also accomplish things they cannot, with unlimited scalability and complete permissionlessness.

Of course, having gone through so much, my answer to this question is that it is hard to say; it is not certain. Because I understand that a technical advantage does not necessarily mean market success. Many people still use the current asset issuance methods on Bitcoin, even though these methods are somewhat "deficient," such as simply writing data onto the chain and then parsing it through indexing, rather than executing through smart contracts. However, this is because Bitcoin lacks support for the OP_CAT opcode. If this opcode is activated, people will find that these indexes are no longer needed.

But as for whether the market will accept it, we will have to wait and see. I think CAT20 is a great thing, and I have a strong preference for it, so I personally expect CAT20 to have the opportunity to dominate the Bitcoin ecosystem because it addresses the limitations of other protocols that lack smart contracts. If the market recognizes its advantages, in the long run, it could become the mainstream token issuance protocol in the Bitcoin ecosystem, while those "intermediate" protocols may gradually fade into history.

During the Token2049 event, OPCAT themed activities_

The Driving Force and Leader Behind the OP_CAT Track

The activation of OPCAT is seen as a key step for the Bitcoin network towards the era of smart contracts. With OPCAT, the Bitcoin mainnet will be able to support smart contracts, greatly expanding its application scenarios. This technological upgrade will not only change the future of the Bitcoin ecosystem but may also trigger a flourishing development of more decentralized finance and smart contract applications. The CAT20 team will delve into the technical implementation, security, and far-reaching impacts of OP_CAT on the Bitcoin ecosystem in this section, explaining how ordinary users can benefit from it.

BlockBeats: In your opinion, what is the significance of OPCAT to the Bitcoin network? For example, smart contracts are a major focus. How do you think OPCAT technology will change the Bitcoin ecosystem, especially in terms of smart contracts and decentralized finance? Will there be applications like perpetual contracts?**

CAT20: Smart contracts are undoubtedly the biggest evolutionary upgrade for Bitcoin. Initially, people thought Bitcoin could only be used for payments and value storage until Ordinals made them realize it could also be used for asset issuance. Now, with OP_CAT, it’s like moving from two dimensions to three or even four dimensions; you can implement complex smart contracts, and the possibilities for the future are almost unimaginable.

Looking back at the history of blockchain development, everyone initially operated on Bitcoin, but later other blockchains like Ethereum emerged because people felt Bitcoin could not achieve certain functionalities, such as issuing tokens and smart contracts. If Bitcoin can implement smart contracts through OP_CAT in the future and achieve what other chains can do, or even surpass them, then do we still need other chains?

Some may view this as an extreme Bitcoinist perspective, but I personally believe that Bitcoin can logically achieve everything that other chains can do, and it can do it better. Since 2017, I have also worked on other chains, like Ethereum and EOS, but ultimately I found that only Bitcoin is logically consistent and has greater potential. Although there are some limitations on Bitcoin now, such as OPCAT not being activated yet, once features like OPCAT are activated, Bitcoin can achieve what other chains can do, and even things they cannot.

The significance of OPCAT lies in its determination of whether Bitcoin will move towards Turing-complete smart contracts in the future. This is not a simple minor change; it is a key choice for Bitcoin's future direction. If Bitcoin introduces smart contracts, at least from a programmability perspective, it will upgrade from 0 to 1. This means Bitcoin could implement all the smart contract functionalities currently available on other chains, such as staking, lending, etc. OPCAT can unlock Bitcoin's infinite potential and unleash its true capabilities.

BlockBeats: In the process of implementing smart contracts, is it enough to just activate the OPCAT opcode? Or does it require the cooperation of other opcodes? Is activating OPCAT only in Taproot scripts a relatively conservative choice? If more use cases are to be expanded, should more opcodes be unlocked?

CAT20: This question can be answered in two steps. First, activating OPCAT itself can indeed achieve Turing-complete smart contracts. With just OPCAT, we can already implement almost all functionalities available on Ethereum. This is not just a theoretical assumption; we have already implemented and verified it in code.

However, while OPCAT can achieve many functionalities, its efficiency may not be the highest. For example, Bitcoin currently cannot even perform multiplication operations, while many smart contracts require multiplication. Although we can implement these functionalities through OPCAT, the efficiency may be relatively low. For instance, to create an AMM, you need to perform multiplication, and while it can be achieved with OP_CAT, the efficiency is not high.

So the second step is to consider unlocking more previously disabled opcodes after OP_CAT is successfully activated. These opcodes were disabled in the early days mainly for security reasons, but if these risks have been technically resolved, we hope to reactivate them. This would not only theoretically enable smart contracts but also improve performance and efficiency in practice.

However, it is important to emphasize that we do not advocate for frequent upgrades and revivals of any code. We hope to unlock these previously disabled opcodes because there were reasons for Satoshi to disable them temporarily, but as the risks have been removed, they can be reactivated, rather than introducing new uncertain opcodes like OP_CTV.

BlockBeats Note: OPCTV (CheckTemplateVerify) allows users to predefine a set of transaction templates and lock conditions to ensure transactions are executed as expected. This will help achieve functionalities such as batch transactions, Lightning Network optimizations, and complex contract scenarios in decentralized finance. Currently, it is proposed in Bitcoin Improvement Proposal BIP-119 and has been discussed for its potential security and flexibility._

BlockBeats: I know that getting OPCAT online on the Bitcoin mainnet is not easy, involving interests and code security issues, just like the three years it took before and after the Taproot upgrade. How long do you think it will take for OPCAT to go live? What about its security?

CAT20: OPCAT will definitely be activated on the mainnet, and we certainly hope it goes live on the Bitcoin mainnet as soon as possible. Initially, our experiments were actually conducted on the Bitcoin signet (testnet), which already supports OPCAT. However, since signet is just a test network, although technically the same as the mainnet, the coins are just test coins with no actual value, so many real impacts cannot be tested accurately. That’s why we turned to the Fractal platform, which provides a very good testing ground for us to test the performance of OP_CAT in a real environment.

Many people are currently discussing risks, such as whether there will be risks with OPCAT on the mainnet or whether there will be MEV. I believe what we are doing now is the best proof; we hope to demonstrate through the practical applications on Fractal that OPCAT is safe and stable. If various applications can run stably on Fractal for a long time without additional risks, that will provide stronger support and evidence for OP_CAT's launch on the mainnet, enhancing everyone's confidence.

As for the timeline for OPCAT to go live on the mainnet, we cannot control that; we can only enhance the confidence of the community and developers through these experiments. We want to make it easier for everyone to see that it is not so dangerous, and the risks are known and controllable, and that it runs well on Fractal, so activating OPCAT on the Bitcoin mainnet is also safe.

BlockBeats: Currently, many criticize that CAT20 has a relatively large transaction size. What causes this, and is there room for optimization and upgrades in the future?

CAT20: Regarding the issue of transaction size, we first need to clarify what the "large size" is being compared to. Compared to BRC-20, CAT20 transactions are indeed larger because the validation logic of CAT20 is placed in the Script, while the logic of BRC-20 relies on an indexer or miner processing. In short, CAT20 chooses to run the logic on-chain, so its size will be larger than that of BRC-20.

To put it simply, it’s like buying a phone; you can choose a simple flip phone or a more powerful one, like an iPhone. BRC20 is more like a flip phone; it’s cheap but has limited functionality, while CAT20 is like an iPhone; although its transaction size is larger and costs more, it offers more advanced features, such as the ability to integrate complex applications. Just like in real life, many people are willing to spend more money on an iPhone because the functionality and experience it provides far exceed that of a simple phone.

However, from an engineering perspective, CAT20 still has a lot of room for optimization. For example, we can reduce the size by improving the compiler, optimizing the way contracts are written, or using more efficient Script scripts for some parts. Additionally, Bitcoin clients can further reduce the size through engineering optimizations without modifying the protocol itself.

BlockBeats: How does the CAT20 protocol "abandon" centralized indexers, and what are the technical solutions and principles behind this?

CAT20: CAT20 does not use a centralized indexer; instead, it uses a tracker similar to Bitcoin. In the Bitcoin system, all transaction issuance and transfers are completed by miners through Coinbase transactions and UTXO verification, and CAT20's mechanism is the same.

When using CAT20, users still need to find their own UTXO (unspent transaction output) to spend, but this does not require relying on a centralized indexer; miners will complete the verification process when packaging blocks. You can choose to use our default tracker or write your own tracker. Logically, CAT20 and Bitcoin are completely decentralized; you just need to find your own UTXO and read the state.

BlockBeats: What are the differences between the CAT20 protocol and the OP_CAT token protocol CATNIP promoted by Quantum Cat, as well as BitVM, which launched a popular white paper last year and hopes to run everything on Bitcoin?

CAT20: The biggest difference is that the CAT20 protocol actually exists, while CATNIP and BitVM do not yet exist. It may sound a bit extreme, but that’s my personal view. CAT20 is usable; you can play with it today, while CATNIP and BitVM are still in the conceptual stage.

I often use a straightforward analogy: it’s like me telling you that a restaurant is very delicious, and everyone should try it. Meanwhile, another restaurant is still in planning and preparation, with promotional slogans saying it might be great in the future, but you can’t try it right now. So the comparison between the two is unfair; you cannot compare something that exists with something that does not yet exist. I can boast that the future restaurant will be the best, but that’s all hypothetical; you can only truly evaluate its quality once it actually opens.

BitVM has been around for a year since its launch, but it still hasn’t materialized, and no users have developed any applications of actual value with it. In contrast, CAT20 is already running and addressing real user needs. This is a very objective comparison.

Therefore, we do not actively compare ourselves with other protocols; we prefer to let the market and users' real experiences determine which protocol is better, because ultimately, excellence is determined by users. Just like different restaurants, there are many choices, and customers will choose to go to places with good reputations and excellent experiences, which is the strongest evidence.

The "New King" is Crowned: Is the Era of Ordinals Coming to an End?

The birth of Ordinals marks a critical turning point in the Bitcoin ecosystem from closed to open, with various new protocols emerging. As the "new king" in the new round of protocol competition, CAT20, which can implement smart contracts, has reached a new dimension. However, the success of a protocol relies not only on technology but also on broad community support and promotion. The activation of OPCAT has not only attracted the attention of developers but also united the consensus power of miners, project parties, and others. In this section, the CAT20 team will explore the driving forces behind the revival of OPCAT and how ordinary community users can contribute their strength at this historic moment.

BlockBeats: Currently, how many teams do you know are working on OPCAT-related development? How are these teams progressing? Besides the Great Wizard team, which groups have consensus on the revival of OPCAT? How are miners, mining pools, core developers, etc., promoting the revival of OP_CAT? The Bitcoin ecosystem has been relatively closed in the past; is it now more open and welcoming to these technological explorations?

CAT20: First of all, I believe that Ordinals is an important watershed for the openness of the Bitcoin ecosystem. Before the emergence of Ordinals, most Bitcoin activities were simply buying coins, storing coins, and waiting for the price to rise, with very few people actually using Bitcoin for other applications. Ordinals broke this limitation, making people realize that Bitcoin is not just a store of value but can also issue assets, leading to the emergence of protocols like BRC-20 and Runes. This has attracted more users and developers into the Bitcoin ecosystem, making the entire system much more open.

Of course, there are still some so-called fundamentalists and Bitcoin maximalists within the Bitcoin ecosystem who believe that Bitcoin should not undergo too many changes, and some even suggest that these so-called "garbage data" should be filtered out. However, overall, with the changes brought by Ordinals, especially with the influx of more users and developers, the entire ecosystem has become much more open than before, with a significant increase in the activity of developers and projects.

Currently, we are also seeing many voices supporting OPCAT, with well-known companies and developer groups like Blockstream and StarkWare pushing for the activation of OPCAT, and miners and project parties are also actively supporting it. Although some early opinion leaders may oppose it for various reasons, from a technical perspective, OP_CAT has been running on some blockchains like BCH and BSV for a long time without any security issues. Therefore, I believe that many opposing opinions are more politically motivated rather than based on the technology itself; from a technical standpoint, I have not seen any negative impacts.

BlockBeats: If OPCAT is activated on the mainnet one day, will there be a split in consensus regarding the implementation of FT and NFT on the mainnet? Will there be a unified OPCAT technology ecosystem like CAT20 and CAT721, or will it be divided, with Ordinals continuing to dominate the NFT market while OP_CAT takes over the FT market?

CAT20: Personally, I believe that the functionality of OPCAT can cover all areas of FT and NFT for a simple reason: the emergence of protocols like Ordinals and BRC-20 is due to the lack of OPCAT in Bitcoin, which prevents smart contract development. If Bitcoin had protocols similar to ERC-20 or ERC-721, why would anyone still use those simplified protocols that rely on on-chain inscriptions? Ordinals, to put it bluntly, is a "subset."

We are about to launch CAT721, and once everyone uses it, they will find that CAT721 can not only achieve all the functionalities of Ordinals but also enhance the advantages of smart contracts. What Ordinals can do, we can do, and in addition, we can implement more functionalities that it cannot achieve, such as the verification of smart contract logic and complex interactions.

Ultimately, the market will decide which solution is more popular, but from a technical perspective, protocols based on OPCAT will undoubtedly be the better choice. Ordinals and BRC20 have indeed filled the gap in Bitcoin's smart contract functionality, but in the long run, they are transitional products, while smart contracts based on OPCAT will become mainstream.

BlockBeats: In the development process of OP_CAT, is there a possibility that CAT20 might repeat some of the old paths taken by Ethereum? For example, from the ICO craze to DeFi, blockchain games, Layer 2, abstract addresses, etc., transitioning from only a few simple meme coins to a flourishing application landscape?

CAT20: Yes, I think it is very likely to be this way. When something new comes out, people initially use it for its so-called basic functionalities, such as issuing meme coins and trading meme coins, and then move on to staking, trading markets, etc. However, we also hope that through CAT20, people will create things that were previously impossible, such as more decentralized applications that do not just focus on trading coins but truly empower users. This way, I believe the ecosystem will be healthier.

Moreover, as you mentioned, I think it is very likely that once people discover smart contracts on Bitcoin, they will start trying to create some useful apps that have already been proven on other chains, such as Uniswap, Maker Dao, AAVE… Initially, people may imitate and bring over these apps that have been implemented through smart contracts on other chains, especially those that have been market-tested; this will be the first wave of activities.

However, I think the most interesting part will be after everyone has fully explored CAT20, creating things based on Bitcoin's unique UTXO that cannot be done or are difficult to do on other chains, or that would not work well if they were done. This will lead to more innovative approaches.

BlockBeats: If we do not view CAT20 merely as an asset issuance protocol but as a token standard like ERC-20, is there a possibility that CAT could have a relatively complete governance mechanism like Ethereum? For example, for significant protocol-level changes, would there be proposal voting and similar on-chain governance?

CAT20: Yes, that is possible. For instance, I see some people speculating on Twitter that $CAT currently resembles a meme coin, but we can also develop it into an on-chain governance token for voting, which is entirely feasible. This is also what I mentioned earlier about the CAT20 protocol; we prefer to make it open and listen to community opinions rather than unilaterally controlling the direction of the protocol. If there are upgrades or changes in the future, we would also like to hear the community's opinions.

BlockBeats: After the activation of OP_CAT, will there be more competition among FT-like protocols on the Bitcoin mainnet? Similar to the competition between BRC20 and Runes?

CAT20: I think it is very likely. Once OPCAT is activated, people will see its powerful functionalities, and various token protocols based on OPCAT will undoubtedly emerge. This competition is a good thing because it can stimulate more innovation and encourage developers to continuously launch better protocols and products.

However, returning to CAT20, I do not believe that the current version will be the final form; the protocol and technology will continue to evolve, and we will keep improving CAT20. Regardless, competition can bring more choices, which is very beneficial for the entire ecosystem. We warmly welcome developers to use OP_CAT to create more innovative applications.

BlockBeats: The technical threshold for developing OP_CAT is quite high. Do you think future competition will only concentrate among experienced development teams like CAT20?

CAT20: I absolutely agree. Compared to Ordinals, BRC-20, and Runes, the technical threshold for OPCAT is indeed much higher. For example, there may be fewer than ten thousand people worldwide who truly understand how Ordinals, BRC-20, and Runes work, while there may only be about a hundred who understand OPCAT. This is why many people feel that CAT20 is a sudden innovation; it requires a deep understanding of Bitcoin's underlying protocol and a rich accumulation of experience with all the opcodes.

So I think initially, there will be competitive protocols, but there should not be many. It will not be like when BRC-20 was born, leading to dozens of variants like SRC-20 and BRC-420, which are just minor code modifications. For OP_CAT, the technical threshold for continuing to advance should still be quite high.

As time goes on, more and more developers will be able to deeply understand the mechanisms of OP_CAT, and at that point, the development of the entire ecosystem may experience a significant leap.

BlockBeats: You have previously worked extensively in BSV and are now focusing on Fractal. BSV and BCH have not made much significant progress in recent years, and the ecosystem seems to lack enthusiasm. This year, many people feel that Fractal is the 2024 version of BSV or BCH. What do you think of this statement? Why do you believe Fractal can succeed in the current environment? Is it related to timing? Also, what are the differences between Fractal and BSV/BCH? If Fractal continues to develop, do you think it could potentially surpass BSV or BCH in terms of consensus or market performance?

CAT20: I think it is very possible for Fractal to surpass BSV and BCH. I thought you would ask me if it could surpass BTC, which might be a bit far-fetched, but I believe there is a great opportunity to surpass BSV and BCH.

Why do I say this? First, in terms of computing power, Fractal has already greatly surpassed BSV and BCH. Computing power is fundamental, and Fractal's popularity and trading volume are growing very quickly. Since the 9th, in less than three weeks, Fractal's activity level has already reached a high level. Therefore, from the perspective of market performance and user activity, I believe Fractal has tremendous development potential.

The success of a project also depends on many factors. For example, some people say that compared to BSV, Fractal is not particularly fast or cheap, but this is not a single factor that can determine success. As everyone can see, UniSat holds a leading position in the Bitcoin ecosystem. It has developed the first wallet, the best new token tool, and a market trading platform, and it has been very successful.

The success model of UniSat also validates that the path to bringing users to a new chain is feasible. In contrast, if you are an unknown team, simply forking Bitcoin does not guarantee success. The UniSat team has proven their ability to attract users and projects, which is an effective approach rather than relying solely on a technical fork of Bitcoin.

BlockBeats: If OP_CAT is successfully implemented on the Bitcoin mainnet, will the competitive advantage of the Fractal network still exist?

CAT20: My view may be somewhat niche. Many people are currently discussing various new technologies like Layer 2, EVM, ZK, etc. More often, this is a market demand for marketing, and there may not be a real need for so many complex functionalities. In contrast, the Fractal network seems to have just forked the code and made some minor improvements, which are actually what users genuinely need. This reflects a deeper level of design and consideration, rather than the reverse, where one desperately researches technology for the sake of technology while neglecting the product and the users.

So at the end of last year, we saw over 100 or even 200 Bitcoin Layer 2 projects emerging, but we did not participate because we believe these projects are not genuinely aimed at realizing the long-term value of Bitcoin Layer 2. Many Layer 2 solutions are more about speculation and making quick money rather than truly enhancing Bitcoin's scalability.

As for the future of Fractal, it has opened up a whole new track. For example, CAT20 is the first version of smart contracts implemented with OPCAT, and there may be better versions or protocols in the future; I can't say for sure. I can imagine there could be a "Dog20," also using OPCAT, but its design might be more optimal and its performance higher.

Does this mean that Fractal or CAT20 is meaningless? Not at all. I think it is still meaningful because it has pioneered this new track, laying the groundwork for this field, allowing later entrants to improve or even optimize based on this foundation. Even if it is eventually replaced, the existence of Fractal or CAT20 has its historical significance.

BlockBeats: I know there are many community friends who may not be able to contribute much at the code level. What can they do if they want to support OP_CAT or CAT20?

CAT20: Everyone can contribute to OPCAT and CAT20; it is not just the responsibility of technical developers. Many people have heard of OPCAT but may not fully understand its true meaning and potential. At this time, the bridging role of third-party media and the community becomes particularly important.

Everyone can use various channels and methods, such as articles, social media, Twitter Spaces, etc., to popularize the logic behind OPCAT, explain why we want to activate it, and its significance for the Bitcoin ecosystem. Through more discussions and promotions, we can help people understand why OPCAT is worth paying attention to and advancing. In fact, Bitcoin Core developers can sometimes be quite passive. If everyone continues to discuss OP_CAT and forms a consensus and market demand, it will prompt them to pay attention to and accelerate the activation process. As I mentioned earlier, many times it is not purely a technical matter; it is a so-called "political" issue that requires more people to enter, participate, and form a consensus.

Of course, the rise in coin prices and the market value of the protocol will also attract more attention. However, we do not wish to turn CAT20 into a meme coin; rather, we hope to attract more users and developers to pay attention to and participate through its practicality and leading effect.

We are also not entirely sure that the activation of OPCAT is a good thing for Bitcoin, but all the evidence we have seen so far indicates that the activation of OPCAT is beneficial for Bitcoin. It can realize Bitcoin's smart contract functionality, bringing innovations that were previously unattainable, and so far, we have not discovered any security vulnerabilities or risks. All of this points in one direction—OP_CAT should be activated as soon as possible.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。