On February 13, 2024, the RGB++ protocol was launched, and it has been nearly 10 months since then. 10 months is not long, as many protocol developments take years; 10 months is not short, as some crypto products have already completed their journey.

An idea, from its birth to becoming a product and gradually developing, is constructed through a series of stories. The same is true for the RGB++ protocol. I try to review the development history of the RGB++ protocol and the possible thoughts and layouts involved from the perspective of a long-term follower.

---------------------

There are many ways to analyze things. In this article, I will focus on observing the development process of RGB++, so I will analyze it from the timeline, namely: early, mid-term and long-term scales.

1. Early stage: asset issuance agreement

Any protocol with native technology will face the problem of "how to popularize it to users". The RGB++ protocol faces a bigger problem because it was created by modifying some aspects of the RGB protocol to a certain extent. The RGB protocol itself is already very complex and difficult to understand, and the RGB++ protocol is definitely not easy to understand either.

In the market, it is difficult for most people to take the initiative to learn the specific technical content of a protocol. If you want people to learn, there must be motivation. The most common way is to use the "wealth effect" to attract people to learn, which is also one of the reasons why the Inscription Protocol is widely spread and successful.

Therefore, in the early stage of protocol issuance, the short-term strategy is to externally position the RGB++ protocol to highlight its characteristics as an “asset issuance protocol”.

In this way, on the one hand, users in the market can be attracted to learn about the protocol. New asset protocols often contain opportunities for wealth, and most people are unwilling to miss them. On the other hand, some researchers can be quickly guided to do evangelism work on protocol technology.

Looking back on this process now, it is undoubtedly a success. Since the RGB++ protocol was proposed, it has been widely mentioned by BTC researchers or influencers in the Chinese circle, and quickly established its own track. The concept and technical term of "isomorphic binding" have also been widely circulated in the circle, attracting the attention of many people.

Of course, there are some issues worth reflecting on at this stage, such as the lack of sustainability of the wealth effect, coupled with some social debates, which once put the RGB++ protocol in trouble. Of course, considering the overall cold reception of the BTC ecosystem at the time, the performance of other protocols was not much different.

2. Mid-term: The driving force for the improvement and expansion of the CKB network

The asset agreement can only be used as a start. To further expand the situation, more abundant content is needed to enable asset flow and trading. Speaking of this, we have to talk about the CKB network.

Many people avoid associating the RGB++ protocol with the CKB network when talking about it, which I think is a very strange phenomenon. Although the RGB++ protocol is not limited to the CKB network in theory, it is implemented on the CKB network. For a long time to come, it is inseparable from the CKB network and also empowers and serves CKB to a large extent.

Therefore, when the RGB++ protocol emerged and received a high level of exposure, the CKB network, as the foundation, began to actively/forcedly develop.

The word "development" is not entirely accurate. From my perspective, it is more like perfection and a compensation for the shortcomings of previous work. Why do I say this? Because in the early days of the protocol, the infrastructure of the CKB network was actually very poor, just like many old L1s, and it seemed to have lost the motivation to move forward.

Fortunately, the community and official development forces are strong enough, so in a very short period of time, wallet upgrades, asset management tools, several P2P trading platforms, intent-based trading platforms, etc. were achieved... Although these may not necessarily develop very well, they have greatly improved the CKB ecosystem.

At the same time, another thing was also put on the agenda: the expansion of the CKB network.

Although the CKB network is much faster than the BTC network and the fees are much cheaper, it will still be restricted if a large number of transactions flow into the CKB network. From the perspective of preparing for a rainy day, it also needs to consider expansion.

In terms of expansion, there are two parallel routes:
1. Following the Atom model, derive more parallel networks with security provided by the CKB network. This is what UTXO STACK does;
2. Follow the Lightning model and develop CKB's second-layer lightning network. This is what Fiber does.

The purpose of these expansions is to enable CKB assets and RGB++ assets to be portable, flow smoothly and be used throughout the entire CKB network ecosystem.

3. Long-term: Long-term protocols and long-term networks go hand in hand, and Web3 and Web2 merge

If I look further back and take a longer-term view, here’s what I can see:

The RGB++ protocol needs to be developed into a long-term protocol, and the CKB network architecture needs to be developed into a long-term network.

How can we achieve long-term success?

For the RGB++ protocol to exist for a long time, it also needs to be continuously expanded, which may include:
1. Expansion of protocol content: support for more modes, richer programming capabilities, etc.;
2. Expansion of protocol application scenarios: There needs to be enough/rich application scenarios to support the continued existence of the protocol.
-- The expansion of the protocol in web3, such as appearing in more UTXO chains, allowing assets from more other chains to appear in other places through the RGB++ protocol and enjoy Turing completeness;
--Expansion of the protocol in web2, such as using the RGB++ protocol to allow RWA assets to enter web3. These assets can be compliant financial products or physical objects;

For the overall CKB network, my definition of a long-term network is “high efficiency, high scalability, and high value”:
1. Combining the parallel chains of Fiber and CKB, high TPS and low fees should not be a problem, and high efficiency can be achieved;
2. The inherent Turing-complete capabilities of the CKB network should not be a problem for expansion. Combined with the recognized development capabilities of its technical team, practical applications will not be a problem, so high expansion capabilities can also be achieved;
3. High value requires that the CKB network can be truly useful, rather than being reduced to a financial product or even a meme like many public chains. This requires that RGB++ assets can be widely used in web3+web2. Why can't pure ckb assets do this? Because RGB++ assets can connect to a wider range.

I currently see that relevant teams have made efforts and work in these areas, such as integration with dogechain, introduction of stablecoins, negotiation of Rwa gold assets, development of tg wallets, etc.

4. The significance of RGB++ protocol

Finally, let me summarize the significance of the RGB++ protocol:

It is a connector that connects the vast UTXO world such as BTC, CKB, DOGE, etc.

It is a catalyst that drives the CKB network to find the true meaning of its own more sound development;

It is a fusion instrument that combines the characteristics of web2 and web3 to create interesting ideas for web5;

It is more of a technology, a mark left in the documents of technology researchers that reads "isomorphic binding".