recycled

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@wulframalpha @INArteCarloDoss i believe he means symmetrical, as in ‘mirrored opposite’

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes shoulda woulda coulda

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes coordination will always be hard, don’t see a workaround for that - also, don’t many crypto teams also normally relax on weekends?

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@bertcmiller @hasufl @fifikobayashi @Fiskantes @twobitidiot @defiprime @bneiluj wow
thanks for breaking this down in an ELI5

props to the guys that managed to outsmart the failsafes

even bigger props to the bot coder that turned it around to trap other bots, what a move

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes @OlympusDAO 25% of slp owned by protocol already

strong showing

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes if the system’s got no slack

tails are gonna show it’s wack

don’t think of it as primitive or limited

tale as old as time, when over-tuning it

a little volatility and here u sit

all alone, liquidated

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes when a protocol is distributing tokens, it’s doing so with a specific goal in mind - onchain tx records for every address gives it an unprecedented level of specificity in how they choose to distribute

very rarely will this result in a blanket airdrop imo

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes exactly

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes makes sense that airdrops prioritise addresses likely to participate in the network

was never about being a ubi replacement (lol)
thinking of airdrops as free utility (vs free money) is the way imo

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@goodalexander what market do they operate in? (if you’re allowed to say)

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@ercwl @ercwl0 hasn’t even mentioned the rainbow

new at this, clearly

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes @NFTX_ giving up the unique defi property of LP tokens in favour of optimisations .... hmm

sounds like uniswap is now closer to an automated onchain variant of a clob

i was hoping it’d be a bit more than that

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes @OlympusDAO coming back to this. indeed it doesn’t disappoint.

much thanks fisk for putting this on the radar

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes @OlympusDAO when you guys say it’s intellectually stimulating, i know i *have* to have a look 💆‍♂️

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Superno14460256 @Rewkang @Bancor @BreederDodo it’s bearish for oracles if u believe price feeds are a big driver for oracle usage medium term. but with scaling solutions, (1) is at least partially taken care of, and (2) only applies to spot markets; so not that significant

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Superno14460256 @Rewkang @Bancor @BreederDodo when there is reliance on external price sources, pools face (1) implementation problems, and (2) dependency issues

(1) is from ethereum inefficiency, (2) is that it restricts its use case to assets with existing markets

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes this seems to be an improvement over situations where functionality *can* be impacted by token price (like snx)

functionality that’s resistant to external market pressures seems like a big plus 👍

no comment on IL insurance
(also - i hold no bnt)

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Fiskantes i think you’re correct, but the minting by itself shouldn’t impact price - because minted tokens are owned by the protocol

so functionality of bancor is not impacted by dumps

[recycled @retiredacc1]

@Ksidiii absolute carnage