This is a tweet 🧵for @THORChain lending FUDsters. I may write a follow on thread about how THORChain is different than Terra Luna specifically, but that is for another day. This thread is just to address common concerns/reactions to lending in hopes that the community uses these tweets to rely to said concerns “No liquidation? Only a matter of time before loans are insolvent and the protocol collapses”

The design of THORChain Lending is very different than defi loans you’ve seen in the past, and it operates on a different set of assumptions. The need for liquidation is typically to ensure the protocol remains solvent, but thats not needed here. In fact, when collateral > debt, its a good thing for the protocol as it REMOVES liability. This is because the protocol already “made money” when the loan was opened, and now the loan won’t be closed (so the protocol had only upside and no downside). Even if the loan was closed in this state, the protocol would still net profit, 100% guaranteed (due to buy/burn the debt value and sell/mint the collateral value).

With the launch of Savers, wanted to write a thread about all the ways that it can "go wrong", so that people are fully aware of the risks at stake. 🧵 "Can I lose my BTC?"
The direct answer here is always "yes". Whenever you give your BTC to anyone or anything else, there is always risk. There isn't a place in the world crypto or non, where you can get a yield & take on zero risk.
THORChain just doesn't have CeFi risk (ie FTX)

Order books are coming to @THORChain which will be the first time we've seen a multichain order book with native assets in DeFi history. Let's dive into what this means, its challenges, and how it benefits THORChain and the entire cryptocurrency as a whole.

Follow the white 🐇🧵 Historically, we haven't seen much for order books in general w/ DeFi. It is currently dominated by CEXs & this is largely due to speed. Most DeFi ecosystems don't have the performance needed for it. Its why dYdX is migrating to #CosmosSDK, & why Serum ($SOL) was built on Solana

How @THORChain can succeed with an algo stable where $UST (and so many others) failed.

Thread time! 🧵👇 $UST failed due to a cacophony of reasons. From multiple pegging mechanisms, which weren't resilient enough. Secondary markets caused the tail the wag the dog. We can even talk about collateralizing with #Bitcoin INCREASED risk.

But for this thread, let's focus on the peg

**Trigger Warning** Unpopular opinion 👇🏻

🚫Staking is bullshit🚫 (mostly).

TLDR: Staking doesn't provide value to others, therefore it can only take yield from unwilling participants (inflation), which then creates a false yield, leaving you with less than you think. First, we should quickly define it. Staking is locking up a single asset to acquire typically more of the same token. We see this in dPoS networks, for example. This is not to be confused w/ bonding, which is what a validator does to run a node, or LP'ing (bonding/LP 🙅‍♂️ staking)

Since adding terra integration, all metrics are up on @THORChain and all of them are ATH! The fundamentals are stronger now than ever before.
* trade volume $88m (layer1 and synth)
* LP yield ($319k a/day)
* node yield near $(173k a/day) Trade volume

A 🧵 on ILP (impermanent loss protection) on @THORChain. Why can @THORChain do this? What risks does it pose the network?👇 Impermanent loss (IL) is a hot topic in AMMs, and for many of them, it's a really big problem. To be fair, IL experienced on one AMM is the same on another. What makes the difference is how yield is earned by swap fees collected, as these two things are battling each other.

Synthetic assets are now available @THORChain. Why is this a big deal? Follow the 🧵

#DEFI $RUNE #SYNTHETICS #ActiveTheSynths Let's start by defining what a synthetic asset is, and what makes it different than a wrapped asset.
A wrapped asset is collateralized by the asset its wrapping, while a synthetic is collateralized by one more assets (synthesizing an asset from multiple).

today, $RUNE’s fundamentals are stronger today than ever before.

1) the network is more decentralized now than ever with the highest number of nodes, which is continuously expanding.

2) the network bond are near ATH high and the pools are deeper than ever. 3) not a single core dev has left the project while there are more full time devs joining, making the dev team stronger than ever

4) the THORChain ecosystem continues to expand launching new websites, projects and communities further cementing the long term growth of the project

I want to clear up @THORChain's relationship with #IBC and why it's made the decisions its made.
IBC is a good bridging design but doesn't meet the design specifications and requirements of the @THORChain project. 🧵

https://twitter.com/Wickex2/status/1446876345120735245

THORChain will be implementing IBC, but NOT for interfacing with its liquidity pools. Instead, you can beam out $RUNE and THORChain synthetic assets to other cosmos chains via IBC, but not beam in external assets via IBC. This will contribute a massive amount to the IBC ecosystem

Now that @THORChain is BACK, we should reflect on what it took to get here. Follow the 🧵

1/ Multiple external audits have been conducted, of which those audits found nothing critical (will be released publicly soon). 2/ Internal audits did find critical issues, which were of course patched.