손톱 먹은 쥐
539 subscribers
143 photos
3 videos
31 files
375 links
*본 견해는 개인의 의견이며, 회사의 공식 입장과는 무관합니다.
Download Telegram
손톱 먹은 쥐
https://twitter.com/vitalikbuterin/status/1529850412760674304?s=21&t=-Eonz_Y9kNcseP0WIRN-Vw
Vitalik's recent post on automated stablecoins. Tells how stablecoin could wind down safe w/o creating a ponzi scheme. Worth read. (Kinda looks like he'd like to support RAI, stablecoin collateralized by pure-ETH and run by redemption rate adjustment; but still think there's points to learn out of it & takeaways on #고유_terra.)

Automated stablecoin?
1. It issues a stablecoin, which attempts to target a particular price index. There is some targeting mechanism that continuously works to push the price toward the index if it veers away in either direction.
2. The targeting mechanism is completely decentralized and it must not rely on asset custodians.

Thought experiment 1: can the stablecoin, even in theory, safely "wind down" to zero users?
- When a product declines, customers generally don't get hurt all that much in the non-crypto world. But in case of Terra, what's more likely is a rapid drop in interest followed by a bang instead of slow decline.
- RAI's security depends on an external asset, so has a much easier time safely winding down. However, it still has problem when it becomes primary dApp on Ethereum that it can crater the price of ETH (and also it cannot eventually grow more than ETH's market cap since it's over-collateralized).

Thought experiment 2: what happens if you try to peg the stablecoin to an index that goes up 20% per year?
- For a collateralized automated stablecoin to be sustainable, it has to somehow contain the possibility of implementing a negative interest rate (Terra systematically only had positive).
- The stablecoin must somehow be able to respond to situations where even at a zero interest rate, demand for holding exceeds demand for borrowing.

Attitude we should have (Important!!!):
- We need to move away from the attitude that it's okay to achieve safety by relying on endless growth.
- We should evaluate how safe systems are by looking at their steady state, and even the pessimistic state of how they would fare under extreme conditions and ultimately whether or not they can safely wind down.
Forwarded from Facta non verba.
Article by Georgios on ZK Hardware. ZK definitely is a major tech innovation in crypto space, but still we encounter hardware issues. Reckon that hardware should be spotlighted more in this scene for balanced growth overall.
-
"A full ZK mining and proving industry will manifest, starting with hobbyists generating proofs in their CPUs, then GPUs, then FPGAs."
-
"As cryptocurrency adoption increases, ZKPs will be required in order to accommodate the increased demand for performance and privacy from users, and new types of applications and protocols.
ZKPs fundamentally allow scalable and private payments and smart contract platforms to thrive but introduce non-trivial overheads which have historically hindered their adoption."
-
"They are slow and will require hardware acceleration to be made feasible over complex computations. We believe that the technology that will matter the most for ZK hardware acceleration is FPGAs and not GPUs (due to cost and energy efficiency) or ASICs (due to their inflexibility and long iteration cycles)."

https://www.paradigm.xyz/2022/04/zk-hardware
How Elon Musk think and take action (korean)

Interesting thought process of Elon Musk, human brain as a software, and a strategic enhancement loop.

https://hahnryu.com/2017/05/22/elon/
Forwarded from Facta non verba.
One thing to make sure is - Cash & Equity is fully backed by the law, but FTs & NFTs are not. We should go through more legal procedures to guarantee and clarify their portion of tokens. Nobody would like tokens w/ crazy volatility & zero utility.

https://www.nfx.com/post/network-bonding-theory
RIP Good times.pdf
3.1 MB
RIP Good times (Sequoia Capital, to portfolio companies)
CEX airdrops going live soon, with Binance happening at 2pm UTC
- Overall 158m LUNA to be distributed to exchanges (~16% total supply)
- 111m vested, 47m available immediately
- Majority of exchange airdrops going to Binance
- 100m LUNA total (68m vested, 30m available immediately) >> ~10% total supply, 61% of total cex airdrops
- We can assume a dump as large majority of users (assumption) were UST holders doing the binance staking programme
- About $300m sell pressure on orderbooks based on current ~$10 LUNA price

Source: https://agora.terra.money/t/psa-how-much-luna-per-exchange-binance-60/42327