I don’t fully agree with our plan. When you discussed strategic development, you mentioned sustainable lines, but you didn’t go into the depth of how to do it. In fact, it is where the money will come from. Many realistic cases of failure are only to talk about dreams rather than money. Personally, I feel that our concept is very good just as in the early days of building socialism in our country, but in the end we had to give priority to the development of the economy. So the funding needs to be prioritized. Therefore, based on this idea, I think we can do the contract work, after all, our technical level is enough to support the construction of most projects, and because our builder does not need to pay wages, it pays money by the hour, the capital cost of development is less than that of the company. Secondly, the time cost, because of the business proficiency of our builder and the form of task claim, the development time cycle will be shorter than some enterprise groups; Finally, in terms of responsibility, the current web3 project is not subject to high accountability after delivery, so we can be responsible for the later guarantee of corresponding business (extra cost). My thinking is not perfect. The main core is that we hope that on the basis of sufficient “LX”, we can shift the focus to economic development, and even make some mistakes in the early stage, but the general line is the same as “LX”.
我可能会唱个反调哈，我看咱们在讨论战略发展的时候提到了可持续行，但并没有深入展开如何做，说俗一点就是钱从哪儿来，很多现实的失败案例都是光谈梦想不谈钱，个人觉得哈，咱们的理念非常好就像在早期我国建设社会主义一样，但最后还是得优先发展了经济，所以收入还是要谈的，优先级高一点。 基于这个想法，我觉得咱们可以去做承包，毕竟咱们的技术水平足够支撑大多数项目的建设，而且开发成本由于咱们的builder不需要发工资，开发成本按照小时给钱，更可能比公司内要便宜，其次时间上由于咱们的熟练度和任务认领形式，开发时间周期会比一些企业团体更短，最后在责任上，说激进点目前的web3项目交付了甚至可以不用负责，或者责任并不高，但说良心点，咱们可以负责相应业务的后期保障（额外的费用）。当然我也是抛个砖头，思考的并不完善，主要核心还是在于希望咱们在良心的基础上，甚至早期可以犯一些错误的，将重心偏移像经济发展一点，总路线不变——LX。