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

Solend seized $170M of user funds

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 221 posts

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#151

Post by 3a2d29 »

wyager wrote: post #137
3a2d29 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to be super “arm chair psychologist” about this, but I always thought the whole “you deserve it if you got scammed” mentality comes from the people that believe crypto will replace all modern finance. For crypto to replace modern finance, it needs to be better in every way (so it’s a total replacement). Decentralized currency is better for some things, worse for things like preventing scams. If modern finance pre…

> For crypto to replace modern finance, it needs to be better in every way I don't think this follows logically at all. Can you explain your thought process? (FWIW, I think that most likely the only component of finance that will be replaced by "crypto" [most likely just bitcoin] is the money and payments layer, so I probably agree with you in general.)

So I am thinking about how many crypto fans suggest fiat money and banks are a thing of the past.

I don’t think fiat money or banks can go away unless all their functionality can be replaced by crypto and do at least as well.

With finances, it’s more about preventing the bad over getting the good. As long as crypto introduces a big problem, there’s no way it becomes the primary financial tool.

In fairness, I am making some assumptions here, so maybe my view of finance is very wrong. I welcome any alternative opinions.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#152

Post by gitfan86 »

fny wrote: post #141
3a2d29 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to be super “arm chair psychologist” about this, but I always thought the whole “you deserve it if you got scammed” mentality comes from the people that believe crypto will replace all modern finance. For crypto to replace modern finance, it needs to be better in every way (so it’s a total replacement). Decentralized currency is better for some things, worse for things like preventing scams. If modern finance pre…

Modern finance is much better at handling fraud. Insurance exists, and recourse also exists since anonymity is not a requirement. Decentralized finance has thus far been demonstrably worse than everything in modern finance. It's illiquid, transaction costs are higher, full of scams, buggy, and recourseless. The whole space needs to grow up fast.

Modern finance does have a high barrier to entry. So it makes sense to try and become a big financial player any way you can and then figure out how to make it better once you are there. But that is really hard, and impossible if your efforts get cooped by scammers and day traders.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#153

Post by moralestapia »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #2

If you want a non-Reddit summary: https://web3isgoinggreat.com/?id=solend-dao-passes-proposal-...

"The proposal elicited strongly negative reactions from many in the crypto community, who feel that a project taking over a user's account flies in the face of the concept of defi and sets a dangerous precedent."

LOL

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#154

Post by gitfan86 »

laweijfmvo wrote: post #128
ChuckMcM wrote: post #10

And @patio11's take : https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1538601104098852865 which is illuminating as well. The whole "crypto is speed running through the finance playbook" theme is fascinating to me.

Thanks, this Twitter thread explained it all in plain English. Edit: Last question: > On the one hand here, we have one (rich) guy. Perhaps he is sophisticated, perhaps not, perhaps he believes code is law, perhaps not. > He used a computer program to borrow $100M. > The people who wrote that computer program are now terrified of it. So does Rich Guy get to keep the $100M in stable coin regardless of what happens to…

He has to negotiate with the Solend people. They want to be accused of breaking a contract or breaking the law, and he wants financial compensation.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#155

Post by dang »

smoe wrote: post #71
dang wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, we've changed the title to that. (Submitted title was "Solend just seized $170MM of user funds to prevent a decrease in Solana's price".) If someone suggests a better title (i.e. more accurate and neutral, preferably using representative language from the submitted article), we can change it again. And if there's a better URL than the Reddit thread, we can change that too.

I think a better url would be the governance proposal itself https://realms.today/dao/7sf3tcWm58vhtkJMwuw2P3T6UBX7UE5VKxP... Linked from this tweet by solend https://twitter.com/solendprotocol/status/153844135044142284...

I have zero clue what's going on with this story—seriously zero—but my spidey sense is that if we change the URL to either one of those, we'll trigger a bunch of complaints about it being one-sided.

That's not to say the current URL is the best one. But probably a neutral third-party source would be better, though such a thing may not exist.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#156

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #132
roenxi wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can outlaw your ability to operate without logs. Even going full Nazi, how do you enforce a law that technically challenging without bankrupting the government or crippling the economy? And what time-frame does it take to phase in?

> how do you enforce a law that technically challenging without bankrupting the government or crippling the economy? Drugs paid with cash are challenging. Crypto is not. Authoritarian states can do deep packet inspection and random phone/computer checks. Advanced states can just roll it into their AML frameworks, as well as track the purchase of mining equipment and their inputs. Both will offer whistleblower rewards…

This. Also enforcement does not need to be 100% to spook others out of the game. This is the same reason so few people cheat on income taxes even though the audit rate of the IRS is abysmally low.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#157

Post by scrlk »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #126
scrlk wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I just can't see why anyone would place this much trust in a PoS coin with a central governance and with major stake by VC in SV. In a bullrun, no one cares about "decentralisation" or "fundamentals", they just want to make as much money as possible, even if it means interacting with CEXs/CeFi/centralised L1 scamchains etc. Only when things go south do people understand why "decentralisation" is important.

> Only when things go south do people understand why "decentralisation" is important. So the greater fool theory isn't a feature of the platform as it's often portrayed as by it's detractors, but rather a self-imposed one by the new cohorts? I guess that while the tech matures the fomo aspect never seems to go away regardless of time. > because the decentralized cryptocurrencies are expensive to transact with — becau…

>I guess that while the tech matures the fomo aspect never seems to go away regardless of time.

As long as cryptocurrencies are far out on the risk curve, this will never disappear.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#158

Post by senectus1 »

threeseed wrote: post #104
foepys wrote: post #49

This is a fight between whales, nothing more. If the average "retail" coin holder thinks they have any influence, they are dead wrong. This is the cryptocurrency reality where the small man is overpowered by the bourgeoisie who own so much more capital that they only need to fear each other.

> This is a fight between whales, nothing more It clearly shows you that even in crypto the rich and powerful can manipulate the rules.

Whales are the vast majority of why crypto is broken.

too few hold too much. the evidence is blatantly obvious they have been messing with the markets for their own purposes. because they hold so much of it, it makes for a very fickle and fragile market.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#159

Post by robocat »

ReptileMan wrote: post #66
cowtools wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The undeniable fact is that regulations will be put in place for crypto why is this so undeniable? I would think well-implemented cryptocurrencies would be fairly regulation resistant

Because you have to convert the crypto into fiat to procure goods and services and the state will just control the border. There will be cases in which a weak state economy can become bitcoinized the same way some have become dolarizesld, but for strong states it is easy to make the border between the currencies as tight as they want it.

> into fiat to procure goods and services and the state will just control the border.

Regurgitated “fiat” meme.

Counter-example 1: buying services over the internet. What fiat and where is the relevant border?

Counter-example 2: go overseas and use services. What fiat and where is the relevant border?

Arguments about fiat and borders are often silly. However, a jurisdiction can make crypto illegal or risky.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#160

Post by DiggyJohnson »

dang wrote: post #155
smoe wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a better url would be the governance proposal itself https://realms.today/dao/7sf3tcWm58vhtkJMwuw2P3T6UBX7UE5VKxP... Linked from this tweet by solend https://twitter.com/solendprotocol/status/153844135044142284...

I have zero clue what's going on with this story—seriously zero—but my spidey sense is that if we change the URL to either one of those, we'll trigger a bunch of complaints about it being one-sided. That's not to say the current URL is the best one. But probably a neutral third-party source would be better, though such a thing may not exist.

I’m planning on writing a book about you, btw

That’s how much I appreciate what you do here.

Your “spidey-senses” are invaluable. I hope you train a mentor before you leave us.

Post reply on HN