One of the most underrated things about @pumpdotfun is that creators do not choose the supply or liquidity configuration of the coin. Buyers don't have to navigate pie charts or unit bias to glean FDV or inflows for a given token, drastically simplifying the trading experience. This might seem like minor detail, but to me showcases the true power behind programmatic liquidity: simply by looking at price, traders can instinctively feel how much momentum is behind a coin, removing a lot of the tricks used to con users into paying more than they should.

I saw the Bancor announcement this morning and decided to do some digging. I'm starting to get concerned so sharing my thoughts here. For disclosure, I have some ETH/DAI deposited in the protocol currently pending withdraw.

Post for context:
blog.bancor.network/market-conditi… Bancor makes it sound like they are doing this out of precaution but I'm starting think they are in serious trouble. Their post is reminiscent of the Celsius situation and their problems are likely similar/related. I'm not sure they're being straightforward about whats happening.

Over the past few weeks I've been working with solidity devs on their protocols and had some thoughts about contract architecture. I've summarized these thoughts into this doc:

palm-cause-2bd.notion.site/The-Default-Fr…

Here are the main points for a TL;DR: 1/n

Most projects take a process-centric approach towards protocol development: each contract is developed as a single process in a chain of logic that is triggered when external interactions occur. This is generally the intuitive approach because it’s how our brains think.