Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

cryptoslate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 577 posts

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

#111

Post by paxys »

drcross wrote: post #82
MattGaiser wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Credit cards are far less decentralized than cash. But because credit cards have an administrator to protect the consumer, they are also preferable to cash.

The majority of people in the world can't get a credit card.

Those same people are way less equipped to use crypto. I have been to shops in rural areas in third world countries which have credit card machines running over telephone lines. Broadband internet and fancy tech is still a decade+ away for a lot of parts of the world.

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

#112

Post by [deleted] »

cutler wrote: post #15
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 :)

Maybe the world just needs less people trying to get something for nothing. If the scammers operating these currencies teach the greedy traders a lesson we'll all be better off.

[deleted]

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

#113

Post by dcolkitt »

omk wrote: post #31

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…

Much of the world literally does run algorithmically. Literally every day you trust your life, privacy and money to algorithms that make decisions without human intervention. The financial system trades trillions of dollars in automated systems that make split-second decisions in a way that precludes human supervision. Hedge funds and banks already trust algorithms that if broken could lose billions.

The existence of flawed software does not mean that it’s impossible to make reliable or trustworthy software. If you’ll never trust your money to a smart contract no matter how vetted, then I’d recommend you never fly a plane or store personal data in the cloud.

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

#115

Post by Kiro »

omk wrote: post #31

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…

I'm a crypto head but I don't think it will ever replace traditional systems in any way. For me, DeFi is its own cyberpunk universe where this stuff is part of the game.

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

#116

Post by jtbayly »

derefr wrote: post #80
omk wrote: post #31

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 the world does not run algorithmically Sure it does: moving gold and commodities between countries in non-mutually-friendly regimes, very much resembles crypto. Fiat finance is a system of contract law built on top of a de-facto "state of nature" of irreversible no-arbitrator commodity transfers. It exists in places where people can agree on who the arbitrating party should be. It does not exist outside of tho…

So... sending money to where your own government forbids you to send it? It sounds like you're admitting that the point of cryptocurrency is simply to break the law, while pretending like the purpose is much bigger.

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

#117

Post by [deleted] »

tylersmith wrote: post #53
6a74 wrote: post #12

So what type of exploit is this? Is this a problem with smart contracts? Could this be a problem for other cryptocurrencies with smart contracts, like Ethereum?

It was an issue with a specific contract, not the contract VM or the chain itself. It's absolutely a problem for other poorly written contracts, but not a systemic problem for all smart contracts.

[deleted]

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

#118

Post by tromp »

derefr wrote: post #46
tumblewit wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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$

Oil is physical; it takes up space, and needs special protections to not pollute the container it's stored in. Digital goods, meanwhile, can just be transferred permanently "into the void" (i.e. to an account without an associated key.)

In Mimblewimble blockchains you cannot "burn" coins, as the receiver output must come with a rangeproof that also proves the ability to spend it.

Of course, you can still throw away the recipient keys after use; you just cannot prove that you did.

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

#119

Post by viksit »

koolba wrote: post #100
viksit wrote: post #77

It feels like the mainstream adoption of tokens is going to need the equivalent of FDIC coverage / credit card transaction dispute systems. Is it theoretically (or in practice) possible to reverse / mitigate these kinds of token transfers? How would we even think about that?

If the contract was “smart” enough you could require an escrow to a third party, but you’re still trusting the contract to be correct.

Could you elaborate on this a bit? When you say "smart", do you mean "having knowledge of the escrow"?

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

#120

Post by iNane9000 »

twox2 wrote: post #104
iNane9000 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not even close to the main flaw. The main flaw is that it incentivizes crime, human trafficking and accelerates environmental destruction. None of these are huge problems if you can afford a private bunker in New Zealand. It’s a major problem for ordinary citizens, especially those of poorer countries. Everything involving code has bugs. Bugs aren’t a reason not to use code. Bitcoin isn’t a problem for the ver…

That it incentivizes human trafficking and crime is pure hyperbole. Also turns out that the barrier to entry for crypto is lower in the 3rd world than you might think: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvHN0MEBoZo

I believe the synagogue shooter was paid in Bitcoin. So not pure hyperbole.

Edit: might have the details confused about above point, but the general thrust of things is pretty clear. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/19/neo-nazis-banked-on-bit...

Post reply on HN