@alexkehr@henryksarat@tian_zhi_chen you not knowing what the highest impact crypto project is does not prove the point you think it proves
Agreed crypto has relatively underperformed given vc capital though. Basically everything was a maximize(extraction) game
Also, donโt look at this and think 20% depeg! Remeber wstETH = ~1.24eth. This is actually trading at a <2% discount (better than Fluidโs, even when it has liquidity).
FYI if you are stuck with ETH in Arbitrum Aave while the Fluid liquidity is empty
Check out uniswap aArbWETH <> aArbwstETH pool to swap your deposited Aave eth into usable (and withdraw-able!) wstETH now. Should be usable through any DEX router.
@cuntycakes123 itโs a special opcode on arbitrum (type 101 unsignedTransferTx). Requires 9 of the 12 Arbitrum security council multisig to sign
https://t.co/wvRgAmaYz8
new security model for Arbitrum: itโs like eth mainnet but instead of 1.2 million validators its 12 validators and they are random crypto people
ok sounds good ๐
new security model for Arbitrum: itโs like eth mainnet but instead of 1.2 million validators its 12 validators and they are random crypto people
ok sounds good ๐
new security model for Arbitrum: itโs like eth mainnet but instead of 1.2 million validators its 12 validators and they are random crypto people
ok sounds good ๐
new security model for Arbitrum: itโs like eth mainnet but instead of 1.2 million validators its 12 validators and they are random crypto people
ok sounds good ๐
@dcfgod@0xQuit Kelp has no right to exclusively haircut L2 holders, per their own documentation. All rsETH holders on all chains share equal right to the unified shared collateral. This is how OFTs work, and they are fundamentally different than bridged tokens natively issued on one chain
@dcfgod Loopers signed up for this risk. If you use 10x and it drops 10% you lose.
rsETH L2 holders DID NOT sign up for bridge risk. rsETH is an OFT where all issuances have equal rights/parity. Per Kelpโs own documentation, L2 holders are not second tier citizens.
Based on Kelp & LayerZeroโs OFT spec documentation, it seems clear to me all rsETH have equal redemption rights to the shared unified collateral supply. It seems untenable to me that Kelp could seize value from a subset of equal class holders
My full thoughts on Aave forum: https://t.co/4e7RQfr9DX
@ImperiumPaper@MonetSupply would love any thoughts if Iโm missing something?
Iโm seeing lots of people saying the rsETH โbridgeโ was drained.
THIS IS WRONG
rsETH does not use a โbridgeโ, it is a natively omnichain token (OFT). Kelp and layerzero both make it very very clear that all issued tokens share a unified supply and are pari passu.
If kelp grants preferential redemption to L1 holders just because of the vibes, the ensuing shit show will be unbelievable.
Iโm seeing lots of people saying the rsETH โbridgeโ was drained.
THIS IS WRONG
rsETH does not use a โbridgeโ, it is a natively omnichain token (OFT). Kelp and layerzero both make it very very clear that all issued tokens share a unified supply and are pari passu.
If kelp grants preferential redemption to L1 holders just because of the vibes, the ensuing shit show will be unbelievable.
Iโm seeing lots of people saying the rsETH โbridgeโ was drained.
THIS IS WRONG
rsETH does not use a โbridgeโ, it is a natively omnichain token (OFT). Kelp and layerzero both make it very very clear that all issued tokens share a unified supply and are pari passu.
If kelp grants preferential redemption to L1 holders just because of the vibes, the ensuing shit show will be unbelievable.
Iโm seeing lots of people saying the rsETH โbridgeโ was drained.
THIS IS WRONG
rsETH does not use a โbridgeโ, it is a natively omnichain token (OFT). Kelp and layerzero both make it very very clear that all issued tokens share a unified supply and are pari passu.
If kelp grants preferential redemption to L1 holders just because of the vibes, the ensuing shit show will be unbelievable.