We have *no idea* if TradFi financial products we are offered are what they say they are, because their composition is considered proprietary business info, so we have regulations there to force us to read through reams of incomprehensible paperwork to make sure asses are covered
However, DeFi is *transparent by design*, it is only through opacity that it becomes difficult (but not impossible) to see what it contains. That information is still there, and teams that do really well at documenting their properties (and risks) rise higher than those that dont
Further, anyone anywhere in the world can audit these claims *in real time*, raising up issues to the level of the collective subconscious of DeFi until it becomes a fever pitch. We *constsntly* bicker about the properties of popular and well-used protocols, and that is important
Bc that means people care! They care enough to explore each and every inch of these protocols, identifying risks and falsehoods through the magnifying glass of open source software. That's not something you can do in TradFi (not even close) and a very key reason DeFi is better
Ultimately, this balances with the difficulty of actually writing the software (which is very hard), but these are just tradeoffs that need to be considered when understanding the tech and how it fits in the bigger picture
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@angela_walch Glad you asked! I have devoted the entire 4 years of my career to solving these problems, every since the day of the 2nd Parity msig hack in 2017 when I realized there was an extreme lack of software security processes like the ones I was used to at the companies I've worked for.
@angela_walch #1: Improving transparency and security processes of development teams through open source, common sense process checklists - @DefiSafety
#2: We created a TG and Discord community for Security engineers to communicate and learn from each other in 2018 #ETHSecurity
@angela_walch@DefiSafety #3: Since 2017, the entire industry has been working on increasing the state of the art of smart contract tooling, often increasing the state of art of software security on the bleeding edge in academia!
I got angry with people constantly saying "but the rich get richer!" so I wrote this: link.medium.com/OxzRW4C8Aib
btw, if you mined with only one Antminer S17 Pro over 18 months, you'd be at a net loss of 2% annualized
BTW this is hardly well researched (I uses two resources and purposely didn't reference them), but I think a good sketch someone could take and explore with better data.
No one should reference this piece as a data point in another piece without confirming the numbers.
I think I've figured out why no one wants to give up potentially classifying devs as brokers, no matter how much they say they won't prosecute: They think DeFi devs are the critical piece to implement 1099 reporting in DeFi dapps
I don't think this is a completely unreasonable request (while it is an unreasonable demand IMO), because right now figuring cost basis for tax reporting is a ridiculously hard problem.
Every application has different semantics to what constituted a "trade" vs. a collateralized loan vs. a like-kind conversion. US law doesn't help make it clearer either. I'm sure there are similar difficulties in other jurisdictions.
NFT idea: 1. develop a trait/attribute model for your NFT collectibles 2. Allow "tokenizing" the NFT and issuing N (fungible) tokens based on M attributes 3. Allow buying and selling in "attribute markets" 4. Can only unwrap if you have 1:1 of each attribute of the target NFT
Bonus points if the attribute model is scalable to account for underpriced or missing attributes
NFTs themselves will never be 1:1 swapable, but their underlying attributes can be decomposed (according to a model) and made swapable to establish more efficient pricing
This works for non-collectible use cases too:
- Houses (location, BR/BA, age, etc.)
- Fine art (creator, style, age, auction history)
So Curve is awesome for swaps between similar assets, right? The fact that they trade very close to each other is a key part about how Curve works, using it's custom swap invariant function.
That's step 1
Step 2 is that Synthetix is awesome for creating "synthetic assets" (aka synths) which are assets that trade like other assets, that are backed by another, entirely different asset. Basically, a plastic banana that I can buy and sell like a real banana.
So this psuedo-cartel of US miners only processes "compliant" transactions, meaning that they use their hashrate to exclude transactions from countries on the US financial sanctions list
But they only have 8% hashrate, so what's the big deal?
Well, that's all good and fine. That means 92% of Bitcoin hashrate should, in theory, process the remaining transactions, because it is economically profitable to do so. This mining cartel even says it themselves, they take a 0.35% hit to profits to provide this service
This doesn't sound so bad at all. Bitcoin works as intended, it might take a little longer to mine your transaction, but one of the non-US mining pools will include it, eventually.