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

171–180 of 577 posts

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

#171

Post by encryptluks2 »

cs702 wrote: post #60

"SafeDollar" -- what an an unintentionally but perfectly Orwellian name! Nonetheless, I feel bad both for the people who worked hard to create this failed cryptocurrency and for the victims who suffered these sudden losses. It's hard to write bug-free code. One way to help prevent bugs is to make languages less powerful. In hindsight, it seems that Satoshi Nakamoto's decision not to make Bitcoin's scripting language…

I only feel bad for them to an extent. Many people are entering the crypto-space solely on hype hoping to get rich quick but honestly have no clue what they are doing and have way too much cash to burn.

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

#172

Post by runbathtime »

> As a result, SafeDollar’s price—which was supposed to always be equal to $1 since it’s a stablecoin—has plummeted to zero, according to the protocol’s own website.

Any defi project can all themselves a stablecoin. It is false advertising to say that you will maintain the peg to a dollar if you cannot meet that promise.

If you are just experimenting or trying to get something for nothing (synthetics- created out of thin air 'backing' your stablecoin), then don't make claims that it will be a dollar.

Also, selling unregistered securities is illegal. Operating a money exchange business is a crime without license.

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

#173

Post by 8note »

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…

The defacto state of nature is reversible transactions.

Unless the things have been destroyed, the trade can be undone

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

#174

Post by WanderPanda »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #145
tptacek wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It literally does not. The world runs advised by algorithms, but not governed by them. It's a fundamental difference. When algorithms in the real world create lose-lose outcomes, people override them, which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff. You can bake that logic into a software contract, but if the design of your system is that the totality of software contracts are the fin…

> When algorithms in the real world create lose-lose outcomes, people override them, which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff. An exploit where I take all your bitcoins isn't a lose-lose outcome, and neither is that. If I steal your credit card and you have to pay for my stuff, you're the only party who loses.

Replying to adtac:

But what if someone does not want the insurance of the bank? There is no opt out. With something like bitcoin you ideally have the option to take the risk of final settlement on your own or delegate it to some insurance deliberately

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

#175

Post by UIGYUIUYG »

brianwawok wrote: post #132
Barrin92 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna be honest I don't know what the audience is for a product where you risk losing your entire life savings because you typed a wrong word in a smart contract rather than paying a middleman a fraction of a percent. It's almost like a sort of willful ignorance of division of labour and the concept of pooling risk.

Doing illegal things, mostly. If you are working a w2 job and paying taxes and paying your mortgage / auto loan... crypto doesn't really help you. Blackmail? Awesome. Buying illegal substances? Awesome. Gambling? You got it...

You can literally say that about cold hard cash. Blackmail? Pay cash. Buying illegal substances? Cash. Gambling? Get your cash out. It's all in how you use it.

https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2021/05/moon-missi...

Anything is a store of value, wood, gold, water, dogecoin ect. If people want to accept something for something else this is a way of life.

It's just sad that people only see the bad use cases. How about if I transact only in crypto (Monolith card), now every purchase I make is via crypto, nothing different to using a bank card with US dollars backing it, just you have the full control over your own money.

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

#176

Post by keymone »

TameAntelope wrote: post #97
keymone wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

redeemable until it's not.

But given the monthly audits conducted, "it's not" is not very likely to happen at all. The auditor would have to be actively lying or misrepresenting for USDC and Gemini both for something like that to happen. Much more likely a smart contract somewhere fails than USDC/Gemini (the only two I know that do full audits to ensure 1:1 dollar backing, ignoring USDT). There just isn't much risk there, hence there not being…

what happens if gemini goes belly up like mtgox? are the assets backing the peg isolated from bankruptcy event?

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

#177

Post by [deleted] »

adtac wrote: post #156
thaumasiotes wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When algorithms in the real world create lose-lose outcomes, people override them, which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff. An exploit where I take all your bitcoins isn't a lose-lose outcome, and neither is that. If I steal your credit card and you have to pay for my stuff, you're the only party who loses.

If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the month. The bank will follow up with the merchant and/or law enforcement and, in most cases, the bank will get its money back somehow. In the cases where it doesn't, I'm sure the bank is insured against losses. Banks and insurance companies probably have a complica…

[deleted]

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

#178

Post by thaumasiotes »

adtac wrote: post #156
thaumasiotes wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When algorithms in the real world create lose-lose outcomes, people override them, which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff. An exploit where I take all your bitcoins isn't a lose-lose outcome, and neither is that. If I steal your credit card and you have to pay for my stuff, you're the only party who loses.

If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the month. The bank will follow up with the merchant and/or law enforcement and, in most cases, the bank will get its money back somehow. In the cases where it doesn't, I'm sure the bank is insured against losses. Banks and insurance companies probably have a complica…

> If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the month.

This is an epically terrible argument for why you shouldn't have to pay for things someone else purchased with your stolen credit card. "I shouldn't have to because I don't have to"?

Compare tptacek's claim:

>>> which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff.

There are four parties involved: you, the thief, the bank, and the merchant.

When you can afford to pay, here's a win/loss table in the case where you have to pay:

    you:      lose
    bank:     win
    merchant: win
    thief:    win
And in the case where you don't have to pay, but the bank collects from the merchant:

    you:      win
    bank:     win
    merchant: lose
    thief:    win
You don't have to pay, and the bank can't collect from the merchant:

    you:      win
    bank:     lose
    merchant: win
    thief:    win
When you have to pay, but you can't afford it:

    you:      win
    bank:     lose
    merchant: win
    thief:    win
Where's the lose/lose scenario?

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

#179

Post by darepublic »

brianwawok wrote: post #132
Barrin92 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna be honest I don't know what the audience is for a product where you risk losing your entire life savings because you typed a wrong word in a smart contract rather than paying a middleman a fraction of a percent. It's almost like a sort of willful ignorance of division of labour and the concept of pooling risk.

Doing illegal things, mostly. If you are working a w2 job and paying taxes and paying your mortgage / auto loan... crypto doesn't really help you. Blackmail? Awesome. Buying illegal substances? Awesome. Gambling? You got it...

> Gambling? You got it...

I had high hopes for betsofbitcoin but after making a bet on the 2014(?) superbowl the mtgox scandal occurred and my last bet was never redeemed.

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

#180

Post by swiley »

brianwawok wrote: post #132
Barrin92 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna be honest I don't know what the audience is for a product where you risk losing your entire life savings because you typed a wrong word in a smart contract rather than paying a middleman a fraction of a percent. It's almost like a sort of willful ignorance of division of labour and the concept of pooling risk.

Doing illegal things, mostly. If you are working a w2 job and paying taxes and paying your mortgage / auto loan... crypto doesn't really help you. Blackmail? Awesome. Buying illegal substances? Awesome. Gambling? You got it...

Or just small experimental things. I can pay for jmp.chat with bitcoin, the dev doesn't have to deal with paypal and I don't have to worry about my credit card being stollen.
Post reply on HN