@TAOdomains Your roadmap mentions a Certik audit. Please don’t use them. They have a horrible track record and are the laughing stock of the blockchain security industry. They have mindshare, but repeatedly miss vulnerabilities and the projects they audit are regularly hacked.
@SurfaceCandy@girl_incrypto@DigitalCryminal@CryptoStone6@fuzzysemi@CryptoKriegerU @_Link_Adam @Unfederalreser1 He’s an expert in TradFi. He has a team behind him to help develop DeFi products that bridge crypto/blockchain technology and TradFi for institutions. The devs are 100% responsible for the exploit, but investors are 100% responsible for their decisions, especially borrowing.
@SurfaceCandy@CryptoStone6@fuzzysemi@CryptoKriegerU @_Link_Adam @Unfederalreser1 Again, however, it's solely the responsibilities of investors when they put themselves at risk by either borrowing on a platform where they don't fully understand how it works, or borrowing volatile assets that can eat into their supply-to-loan ratio.
@SurfaceCandy@CryptoStone6@fuzzysemi@CryptoKriegerU @_Link_Adam @Unfederalreser1 I do also agree that the community has a divide within it right now. There are people who blame the team for liquidations and people who blame themselves. I, for one, blame the investors. I do believe that the team is fully responsible for the lending mechanism exploit, though.
@SurfaceCandy@fuzzysemi@CryptoKriegerU @_Link_Adam This is why it’s actually extremely safe to supply and borrow the same asset. The prices move in tandem and the borrow percentage remains constant, apart from interest charges. These interest charges will slowly eat into your supply-to-loan ratio.
@SurfaceCandy@fuzzysemi@CryptoKriegerU @_Link_Adam You don’t pay back the dollar amount, you pay back the number of tokens you borrowed. If you borrowed $800 in eRSDL for $1, then you just have to pay back 800 eRSDL, whether the price is $1 or 10¢. The price/token doesn’t change anything.