121–130 of 306 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I’d say there is 10-40x the fraud on uniswap than on centralised exchanges This makes no sense, especially if you factor in gas prices, pool fees, and volume.
If you own most of the lp, most of the fees go to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ya I seriously doubt there is much wash trading at the Tier A exchanges you listed above.
The market is interdependent. Wash trading on one platform benefits all other platforms. When you ask someone the price of BTC they don't say $x on Coinbase, $y on Kraken, etc. Literally all of crypto is a scam. After 10 years there is not one feasible use case that isn't done better through another tool. I don't consider "making black markets and extortion easier" a feasible use case.
1) NFTs - digital ownership
2) DAO - organizations without having to setup an LLC that allow voting etc
3) Accounting for low trust societies (supply chain management, etc)
4) Value store for very high inflation currencies, or states with severe problems
Earlier quoted context omitted.
~80% of pools and tokens on Uniswap are scams and rug pulls and it's even harder to figure out what's real.
Useless/scam tokens are a problem, but it's not specific to Uniswap. That's a problem inherent to permitting anyone to create a new token, like with ERC-20 tokens. If you want to trade useful tokens, Uniswap's data is the most truthful. It's not that the system can't be gamed, it's that he costs of gaming are transparent and predictable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Monetary speculation should be dumb in a sound money system Yeah, but no one is listening. From the richest to the poorest, it's all about "to the moon." 50% of my family and friends have RobinHood accounts and are day trading crypto (usually doge or shiba) ... and don't even know what it is. (A dear friend even spent $15k on a rig and thought i was lying when i said his crypto wasn't actually "IN" his digital wall…
What do you mean by "IN"? Are dollars "IN" your bank account? I'm not trying to make a tired argument about dollars being fake or something, I just don't see the distinction as far as wallets specifically are concerned.
Crypto has neither (a) nor (b); it is specifically designed to not have (a), and I don't see it having a (b) any time soon since regulation is anathema.
I see your point. Both are ledgers. So in that way crypto and bank accounts are similar. But bank accounts can become cash. Crypto cannot. Now the argument shifts to "what is cash" but a different kind of ledger. We can argue why one is trusted more than the other, and perhaps 100 years from now crypto might be as safe as US dollars or Euros. But today there is a big, bit difference between a crypto wallet and a bank account. I find it especially confusing that many crypto advocates typically lament going off the gold standard, which makes my head hurt...
Now that I argue this... i'm confused. Dammit, Beavis.
So this implies that the crypto markets are actually far less liquid than the trade volume implies. Suddenly those massive 10% +/- fluctuations in a day make a lot more sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Take a deep dive into MEV (miner extractable value). Poorly named for what it is, but I think it is something that you're missing in this picture.
> Miner extractable value (MEV) is a measure of the profit a miner can make through their ability to arbitrarily include, exclude, or re-order transactions within the blocks they produce. Um. Wow. So... how much of crypto is just "things that are illegal to do with anything that's not crypto"?
I recently had to go through extensive KYC/AML email conversations and phone calls with bunch of exchanges like Coinbase and others. Got me interested how wash trading could happen, when they were so strict with me, and which exchanges were investigated. These seems to be the exchanges they investigated. Would be interesting to see a breakdown of percentage per exchange, as I still don't understand how wash trading c…
How does Coinbase self-regulate wash trading?
Coinbase follows KYC laws. That prevents one person from opening two accounts and trading between them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Uniswap charges a flat fee to every trade for all user. Not flat. It’s a percentage of the trade value. > If you want objective data, Uniswap (and other on-chain exchanges) are truthful. Transaction costs limit on-chain exchange wash trading to some degree, but it doesn’t stop price manipulation. The on-chain aspect has an interesting issue in that during periods of high volatility the network itself gets both slow…
If I trade heaps on Bitfinex I get lower rates. Like a 100k trader might pay 0.2%, but a 10m trader pays 0.05%. Uniswap is the same for all.
Does anyone have any thoughts on why or how this is the case? I'm having trouble wrapping my head around how there is no departure if fraudulent trading is so rampant pre-regulation. I suppose it's worth noting that this largely seems to be speculation on their part anyway. Their data sample is comprised of only roughly one quarter of 2019. Meanwhile, Coinbase received their bitlicense in 2017. It's unclear to me how they can even be sure of the claim they're making at all. I wish they had included a citation here.
The paragraphs following appeal to Benford's law and Power law to explain away any concerns, but it's also unclear to me how it's directly applicable. The premises seem sound, but the conclusion doesn't seem all that cogent to me.