编者按 当前全球经济进入新变局，特朗普政策加剧国际经贸不确定性，人工智能与Web3技术正深刻改变资产 定价底层逻辑。在此背景下，大类资产配置未来如何布局？中美资产分化背后有哪些结构性机遇？黄金 上涨是短期避险还是长期趋势？人民币资产能否迎来系统性重估？9月11日，由中国人民大学深圳研究 院主办、中国人民大学国际货币研究所和中国人民大学深圳金融高等研究院承办的"大金融思想沙 龙"（总第262期）邀请来自业界、学界多位专家，聚焦全球高波动环境下资产配置逻辑、美元信用变迁 与黄金避险属性强化趋势、技术革命对估值体系的重塑等关键议题展开深入研讨。本文结合沙龙多位专 家研讨分享内容进行系统梳理，以飨读者。 01 全球经济进入高波动、低增长的新常态 当前全球经济市场的核心特征是高度不确定性。近期金价持续高位震荡，全球大宗商品价格普遍上升， 反映出市场预期混乱、传统定价逻辑受到严峻挑战。 其次，地缘政治风险显著上升。俄乌冲突已超出区域范围，美欧深度介入，其走势与各方态度直接影响 市场避险情绪。地缘动荡促使资金流向黄金等传统避险资产，这一趋势仍将持续。 最后，全球经济增长韧性面临考验。美国经济能否实现"软着陆"尚存疑问，特朗 ...

Historical Context - The origin of DAO can be traced back to the birth of Bitcoin, which operates autonomously through a distributed consensus mechanism and code rules, regarded as the "first autonomous organization" [3] - The emergence of the Ethereum platform in 2016 provided the technical foundation for DAO, with The DAO project creating a venture capital platform using smart contracts, although it faced a hack leading to a fork, validating the concept of "code is law" [3] - DAO has expanded from the financial sector to diverse fields such as art, charity, and research, leading to the trend of "everything can be a DAO" [3] - With the explosion of DeFi and NFTs in 2021, DAO is predicted to become a core governance tool in the Web3 ecosystem [3] Core Concepts - Decentralized architecture allows for power distribution, with token holders participating in decision-making through voting, and governance rules executed automatically by smart contracts, eliminating single points of control [4] - Token economic models serve as both value carriers and governance rights, where the amount of tokens held determines voting weight, incentivizing community engagement and creating a "stakeholder binding" mechanism [4] - Transparency and autonomy are ensured as all proposals, votes, and fund flows are recorded on-chain, providing traceability, while smart contracts reduce trust costs and corruption risks [4] - Programmable governance allows for rules to be iteratively upgraded through code, adapting to dynamic market environments, exemplified by protocol DAOs like Uniswap adjusting parameters via community voting [4] Differences from Traditional Organizations - Power structure in traditional organizations relies on centralized authority, whereas DAO employs token democracy for distributed governance [7] - Trust mechanisms in traditional organizations are based on legal contracts and interpersonal relationships, while DAO establishes "technical trust" through immutable smart contracts [7] - Collaboration in traditional organizations is limited by geography and hierarchy, while DAO enables global collaboration [7] - Flexibility in traditional organizations requires lengthy processes for change, whereas DAO can quickly respond to market changes through on-chain voting [7] Industry Practices - The Messiah Exchange utilizes a DAO governance structure where users vote on core strategies like trading pair listings and fee distributions, ensuring decision transparency and efficient execution through a "on-chain proposal + smart execution" mechanism [8] - The Akashi public chain provides modular tools to simplify DAO deployment, with cross-chain protocols and RWA (real-world asset tokenization) capabilities enabling DAO expansion into governance of physical assets, such as crowdfunding and distribution for renewable energy projects [8] Future Outlook - Despite challenges in governance efficiency and legal compliance, DAO's technical characteristics are reshaping industry collaboration paradigms [10] - DAO is expected to become the "organizational infrastructure" of the Web3 ecosystem, driving decentralization in finance, social, and cultural sectors [10] - Traditional enterprises may also adopt DAO principles to create "hybrid governance" models, balancing efficiency and democracy [10] - The evolution of DAO reflects the profound impact of blockchain technology on organizational forms, indicating a silent revolution in power distribution and collaboration models within the future business landscape [10]