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

31–40 of 221 posts

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#31

Post by 55555 »

jacquesm wrote: post #24
55555 wrote: post #9

Sorry, I've read this again and now I think this has little to do with Solana and entirely to do with Solend, and I think they're separate. Maybe someone who knows more about the space can clarify things. I now presume the funds needed to be deposited in Solend's smart contract in order for the trader to borrow the funds against his collateral, and Solend is pushing a patch in order to modify the code so they can sei…

You could simply delete your post.

I thought there was a 10 minute rule. But actually I can still edit the headline and have. It's pretty big news imo.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#32

Post by peyton »

55555 wrote: post #31
jacquesm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could simply delete your post.

I thought there was a 10 minute rule. But actually I can still edit the headline and have. It's pretty big news imo.

You might want to remove the editorializing in your title as well.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#33

Post by throwoutway »

A smart contract can be upgraded to take over a whale’s account? How is that a thing? I remember the whole “code is law” on the chain, rather than trusting escrow/third party/judges

>Grant emergency power to Solend Labs to temporarily take over the whale’s account so the liquidation can be executed OTC and avoid pushing Solana to its limits. This would be done via a smart contract upgrade. Emergency powers will be revoked once the whale’s account reaches a safe level

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#34

Post by flaque »

55555 wrote: post #9

Sorry, I've read this again and now I think this has little to do with Solana and entirely to do with Solend, and I think they're separate. Maybe someone who knows more about the space can clarify things. I now presume the funds needed to be deposited in Solend's smart contract in order for the trader to borrow the funds against his collateral, and Solend is pushing a patch in order to modify the code so they can sei…

A better title would be "Solend seized $170MM of user funds".

Claiming it was done by "Solana" is incorrect. Claiming it's to prevent a drop in Solana's price is clickbait & editorializing.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#35

Post by eknkc »

flaque wrote: post #8

The current headline "Solana just seized $170MM of user funds to prevent a decrease in Solana's price" is factually incorrect. A project on Solana, called "Solend", froze $170m of funds deposited into its protocol. "Solana" didn't seize the funds, nor was the purpose specifically to protect Solana's price.

Also, it looks like the liquidation was pre approved by the contract that the whale deposited into. It was gonna happen regardless. They are doing this to change the way it is handled (off the chain instead).

I’m not sure about the implications but even Solend did not seize anything.

I still think this fucked up but it had nothing to do with solana.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#36

Post by nrmitchi »

peyton wrote: post #32
55555 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought there was a 10 minute rule. But actually I can still edit the headline and have. It's pretty big news imo.

You might want to remove the editorializing in your title as well.

The "headline" of the reddit post OP linked to is way to long to be a HN title.

The headline on HN has already been updated to "Solend just seized...", rather than "Solana just seized..."

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#37

Post by potatototoo99 »

55555 wrote: post #9

Sorry, I've read this again and now I think this has little to do with Solana and entirely to do with Solend, and I think they're separate. Maybe someone who knows more about the space can clarify things. I now presume the funds needed to be deposited in Solend's smart contract in order for the trader to borrow the funds against his collateral, and Solend is pushing a patch in order to modify the code so they can sei…

I'm only surprised why would the Solend team care about crashing the price of Solana. Why would the Solana care either for that matter (I don't know if they are the same people though). If it crashes because of a sudden bulk market liquidation then it is just working as intended, and eventually the price of SOL will recover if there is user confidence.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#38

Post by itake »

throwoutway wrote: post #33

A smart contract can be upgraded to take over a whale’s account? How is that a thing? I remember the whole “code is law” on the chain, rather than trusting escrow/third party/judges >Grant emergency power to Solend Labs to temporarily take over the whale’s account so the liquidation can be executed OTC and avoid pushing Solana to its limits. This would be done via a smart contract upgrade. Emergency powers will be re…

Contracts can be written as dumb proxies that allow people to 'update' their code (to correct for bugs or add new features). I believe at a high level, the creators have a 'proxy' contract that only they can set a variable that points to new versions of the primary contract.

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#39

Post by potatototoo99 »

eknkc wrote: post #35
flaque wrote: post #8

The current headline "Solana just seized $170MM of user funds to prevent a decrease in Solana's price" is factually incorrect. A project on Solana, called "Solend", froze $170m of funds deposited into its protocol. "Solana" didn't seize the funds, nor was the purpose specifically to protect Solana's price.

Also, it looks like the liquidation was pre approved by the contract that the whale deposited into. It was gonna happen regardless. They are doing this to change the way it is handled (off the chain instead). I’m not sure about the implications but even Solend did not seize anything. I still think this fucked up but it had nothing to do with solana.

Smart contracts are supposed to embody "code is law". It's not very lawful to then switch the liquidation with a vague "sell OTC over an undetermined amount of time".

Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds

#40

Post by granddemolisher »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #7

One of the themes in pro-crypto writings has been the idea that as long as you “do your own research” then the bad things won’t happen on your chosen cryptocurrency. The prevailing idea (among pro-crypto spaces) is that bad things only happen to other people who deserve them because they didn’t do the right research. Recently we’re seeing the bad things happen in more and more mainstream chains. Even famous NFT propo…

I find it as absurd as anyone else.

The field is unfortunately rifled with people who are shills and religious believers. I have talked to a few VCs and technical people drilling down into the tech - I had better arguments than them for why someone would use the projects they funded or created.

Post reply on HN