- New Waves (Waves 2.0). Not all Proof-of-stake chains are born equal: probabilistic consensus POS is much more decentralised than PBFT one. Let’s take it to the limit - 1000+ tx per second on L1 keeping full decentralisation!
Multi-chain EVM L2, connecting to different L1’s, not only Waves. Finally EVM on Waves, but let’s try to do more - L2 as a bridge between different L1’s!
Power DAO platform - new governance model for blockchain and beyond - let’s make futarchy-like approaches finally real. Skin-in-the-game KPI based governance to make # DAO’s work.
SafeFi - DeFi models based on predictable behaviour and risk/reward ratios. Yield farming is dead, long live sustainable economy.
Adaptive DAO-governance based stable coins - let’s make an undepeggable stable coin, with 100% predictable behaviour in all market conditions.
And, last but not least, let’s get Waves liquidity crunch unstuck! And make the process absolutely transparent. It’s gonna be a reality show that you all will be able to watch :) Let’s finally make Waves great in 2023.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I thought that $UST was similar to $USDN but it's actually not the case, it was very different. To dispel some misconceptions:
- UST is literally not backed by anything. When you issue new UST you send Luna but IT IS BURNED. This is not the case with USDN, Waves remains locked.
When you redeem UST new Luna is issued, to match the dollar value of your UST. If Luna is cheap tons of new Luna can be issued (this is what brought UST down)
In Neutrino you receive only Waves locked in the smart contract.
Neutrino has a recapitalization mechanism with NSBT governance token. Its holders receive fees from USDN swaps, and there's an incentive to buy NSBT and recapitalize USDN.
Also you need NSBT to do issues and redemption, which limits the swap volume. UST did not have this.
Get your popcorn ready: @AlamedaResearch manipulates $waves price and organizes FUD campaigns to trigger panic selling.
I hope I caught your attention. Follow me.
It started with my interview for @crypto with @MuyaoShen bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
The interviewer came up with an interesting theory that $waves price growth is somehow connected to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and mentioned a @FTX_Official transaction made on the eve of it
She was curious if we made that transaction and what we know about it. I was dumbfounded by the question, since FTX has a wrapped version of $Waves (they asked us to pay $1.5 mln for native token integration :) ), and I don't care for non-native integrations and don't follow them