-
Main Channel t.me/blockchain_lobsters
That's cool. Is RuneMine. com $MINE the one with the only pumpfun on bitcoin?
Читать полностью…
This is a completely different proposal from gnosis saving the user‘s dai on eth to the dsr of the maker. Depositing the dai of the gnosis bridge user to the maker is a risk-free benefit, because holding the bridge of dai itself has assumed the risk of the maker protocol vulnerability, which is not gnosis imposed on the user, and does not add additional risks. The behavior of gnosis is completely problem-free and meaningful.
Читать полностью…
with Aave V3 the risk profile starts to change once we have umbrella as bad debt is immediately compensated by stakers
Читать полностью…
depositing in sDAI is net less risky than depositing in compound or Aave V2
Читать полностью…
xDAI team did this in 2018... deposited stables in Compound and Aave.
Gnosis took over the chain and that program was terminated. Eventually we worked on the sDAI integration which was quite successful and the risk profile of the bridge didn't change significantly. This was all communicated to the DAO and more people deposited to the chain, than left because of it. All the defi in the chain grew significantly afterwards.
I think the premise of putting idle assets to use makes sense. There's a lot of wasted resources.
I think it's very difficult to make any judgement on this with such a short proposal and what motivated picking some assets and techs over others. It's not as obvious of a choice as it was for Gnosis in which the dependency on DAI was enforced due to the native gas token being DAI.
It’s really hard to imagine that there is a proposal to take bridging assets to the loan agreement to obtain income, which is completely irresponsible to bridge users‘ assets.
Читать полностью…
Doing this with treasury instead of bridge would at least make more sense
Читать полностью…
So no one is a 'recipient' of the yield it just boosts the ecosystem as a trickle down effect
Читать полностью…
my question for this ultimately is where the profit goes
as data says, the gnosis case, the users earn the yield
i guess a small marginal difference of dai vs. USDS :)
Читать полностью…
yes - and L2beat id love to see actually weight this as the heaviest part of the "how decentralized is this L2"
Читать полностью…
but umbrella not there yet. so tbh only stETH & sDAI are proper yield source
Читать полностью…
I don't mean at the bridge level. I mean like some examples people were mentioning a few minutes ago
Читать полностью…
I guess that everyone can agree that this introduces risk and points of failure. And we should also agree that the bridge is the most critical part of a rollup right now where risks and points of failure should be minimized?
Читать полностью…
And logically speaking, for example, if I bridge USDT from ETH to Polygon’s USDT, then my USDT on ETH is temporarily kept by your Polygon bridge contract;
You are now going to use my USDT on ETH to manage finances in a lending agreement, don’t you need my consent? Do you, the Polygon coin holders and the Polygon governance committee, have the right to decide for me?
You hold stables to derisk. That polygon proposal is insane.
Читать полностью…
Foundation earning yield and distributing to ecosystem
Читать полностью…
That would break a lot of systems tho if USD value changed constantly
Читать полностью…
Nah I prefer using RuneMine $MINE. So far it's the best bitcoint-Solana bridge I've used and it's affordable too
https:// www.runemine. com/
https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-polygon-pos-bridge-liquidity-program/20284
Читать полностью…