11–20 of 540 posts
As of writing, CoinMarketCap values TerraUST (the stablecoin) at $0.09. Needless to say, that 3B didn't do a damn thing. No amount of cash infusions are going to save Terra, because the problem is trust.
I'm kind of amazed that the Bitcoin price wasn't affected more given this event as well as the larger macro events with the stock markets, Fed and inflation.
This is a dry run of the Tether (USDT) collapse.
I don't understand crypto, and or how the Luna/UST works, but if you supported/buy something this should be visible, not only in vanished bitcoins, or am I mistaken?
As of writing, CoinMarketCap values TerraUST (the stablecoin) at $0.09. Needless to say, that 3B didn't do a damn thing. No amount of cash infusions are going to save Terra, because the problem is trust.
Or the problem is a bank run. They threw 3B to fix an issue with a bank having 40B+ in assets and seeing more than 3B of withdraws.
I'm kind of amazed that the Bitcoin price wasn't affected more given this event as well as the larger macro events with the stock markets, Fed and inflation.
Unweathered protocols on eth failing shouldn't affect bitcoin. They're only related insofar as they are both crypto. The $3B in bitcoin sold could have been anything.
Following months of outcry about the unsustainable nature of Terra Luna, Do Kwon through his foundation tried to partially collateralize the stablecoin with bitcoin, with a goal of buying up to $10bn of bitcoin. He got $3-5bn (at the time, price changed a lot), and this prolonged the confidence system for one additional month.
And then it imploded and sold the collateral, of course it was partial collateral so it failed to do anything in a bank run.
So it doesnt matter whether we get records from exchanges or not. Nothing different would happen. People want to see Do Kwon have more reasons to have charges against him, but there’s no need to attribute it to malice, everything can be explained by incompetence already.
I am extremely out of the loop on the latest crypto developments / schemes, but * Where did this foundation get $3B to buy Bitcoin? * Is there any proof at all that they traded it to a counterparty who actually attempted to prop up UST and didn't just run off with them?
This brings up an exceedingly funny point: blockchains excel at making every transaction public (a property that nearly nobody actually wants) and simultaneously offering complete privacy to institutional actors.
In other words: privacy for me, but not for thee.
"Sold" It's hard to show that they really sold these coins. Certainly, the LFG transferred the coins to some different exchanges. But did they truly sell them? If I was running a dodgy ponzi scheme and saw it collapsing catastrophically, I don't think I'd be throwing good money after bad trying to futilely patch it up. Much better to stash the remaining assets away somewhere and personally cash out later on. Also, “I…
Good observation. I may not be Warren Buffet, but it angers me greatly to see this kind of moronic chatter masquerading as informed opinion on finance or market dynamics.
"Sold" It's hard to show that they really sold these coins. Certainly, the LFG transferred the coins to some different exchanges. But did they truly sell them? If I was running a dodgy ponzi scheme and saw it collapsing catastrophically, I don't think I'd be throwing good money after bad trying to futilely patch it up. Much better to stash the remaining assets away somewhere and personally cash out later on. Also, “I…