SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon • Hacker News Board

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#31

Post by omk » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

A point that most crypto heads miss is that the world does not run algorithmically. Legal contracts do not work like a software program and that characteristic is a feature not a bug. Not being able to reverse transactions that were part of an exploit is in infact a bug. Businesses need that tolerance for error. You need an oracle in your system. The oracle can maintain transparency of the attestations carried out if that is what matters.

An extreme anti-establishment view is driving most crypto enthusiasts into opting for tech that isn't going to remain in everyone's interest for too long. These lessons started with DAO.

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#32

Post by aeturnum » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #10

lalaland1125 wrote: post #8

These incidents really illustrate the main flaw of smart contracts: a single bug in your code can lead to incredible losses. I simply don't think it's possible for human beings to write good enough software for smart contracts.

How is that different from a traditional contract written by a lawyer? A single word could leave a huge unexpected hole in a traditional contract.

Part of contract law is that the legal standard for enforceability is "reasonableness"[1]. If there is a clause in a contract that you want to exercise, but your counterparty claims they didn't understand it or intend it they can take you to court. Unless you can convince a judge that they might, at one time, have wanted to agree to the contract then the contract is not a basis for you to take that action.

Contracts have always had a healthy dose of manual debugging that have allowed them to function.

[1] The idea of "a reasonable person" is used heavily in the US legal system and has problems but it also has upsides.

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#33

Post by lgats » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

Tade0 wrote: post #7

Pardon the pop culture reference, but did the attack happen to change its value from one of itself to zero of itself and was performed by a bitter, but highly intelligent man in his 70s?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noQsHiTJAXo

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#34

Post by duxup » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #28

duxup wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's actually some chance that a poorly written contract, can be fixed / worked out between the parties involved.

See also: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20180723-the-commas-tha...

I'll take some chance over no chance.

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#35

Post by exdsq » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:08 PM UTC

aerovistae wrote: post #5

There is no such thing as a stablecoin, it's a made up term to try to lend legitimacy to new crypto scams. And I say this as someone who just bought some Ethereum in the hopes of making a profit :)

If I create a USD-stablecoin with a supply of $1 backed by my $1 in US bonds, is that legit?

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#36

Post by PeterisP » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:09 PM UTC

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #10

lalaland1125 wrote: post #8

These incidents really illustrate the main flaw of smart contracts: a single bug in your code can lead to incredible losses. I simply don't think it's possible for human beings to write good enough software for smart contracts.

How is that different from a traditional contract written by a lawyer? A single word could leave a huge unexpected hole in a traditional contract.

In contract law, intent is the key part, so if the "hole" is truly unexpected (e.g. the most significant errors that come to mind would be an accidental omission of "not" which completely reverses the meaning of the contract; or perhaps a mistaken swap in the description of who pays whom) then it would be reasonable to demonstrate that is was not what either of the parties intended, and thus that single mistaken word simply does not matter and would be ignored.

What you do get in contract disputes where specific wording matters is in edge cases where you might reasonably assert that both parties wanted (and agreed) A or not-A for some specific situation as part of the negotiation, disputing where exactly some boundary lies - but not for the core parts or complete reversal. On the other hand, automatically enforced "smart contracts" don't make such a distinction and any typo can reverse the core meaning of the contract as well.

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#37

Post by tylersmith » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:09 PM UTC

lalaland1125 wrote: post #8

These incidents really illustrate the main flaw of smart contracts: a single bug in your code can lead to incredible losses. I simply don't think it's possible for human beings to write good enough software for smart contracts.

Human beings write software that flies people around the world and shuttles people between the Earth and space. Managing money is not more important than many things we use software for.

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#38

Post by qwertox » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

Is this a bug in Polygon? Just this weekend I was listening to Software Engineering Daily "Polygon: Connecting Ethereum Compatible Blockchain Networks with Denis Ermolin" (from June 2 2021) [1]

There was a lot of talk about how secure Polygon is.

[1] https://softwareengineeringdaily.com/2021/06/02/polygon-conn...

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#39

Post by tumblewit » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

Applejinx wrote: post #2

Zero counts as stable. Nothing further is ever going to happen to that price, I'll bet :)

Not really. If owning a coin becomes illegal it can fall below zero where you are paying someone to take your coins. Something similar to oil happened a while ago when storage had become an issue so prices fell below 0$

Re: SafeDollar ‘stablecoin’ drops to $0 following DeFi exploit on Polygon

#40

Post by twox2 » Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 6:11 PM UTC

aerovistae wrote: post #24

twox2 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All terms are made up by your definition.

Sure, that's true although it's just semantics. I'll be unreasonably specific then: the term stablecoin was made up with harmful intentions to deceive and mislead in order to make a profit off others' losses.

I'm not sure I agree, but it will be hard to convince you if you're coming from a place where you think crypto is scammy/deceptive to begin with. Let me assume you're willing to suspend your disbelief:

I do agree that some stablecoins are scammy in nature, but others serve an important purpose and that purpose is to allow individuals and enterprises to navigate doing business in crypto despite crypto's high volatility. Where is the deception in that?