Not your keys not your coins. Not your admin keys, not your coins.
Admin keys?
Solend seized $170M of user funds
91–100 of 221 posts
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Heh, user confidence comes from the price. If the price goes near zero, many people will leave and never return.
But a $170m liquidation o a DEX will only cause a flash crash on the DEX. Its a boon for arbitrageurs, its an oligarch level opportunity if you are paying attention.
Even with such a crash or "liquidation function" also crashing the network, blocks will eventually continue to be produced even with Solana's level of availability. So just let it happen.
Anyway, too late, half a million dollars of tokens voted to control $170m of user funds.
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it needs to be better in every way. If it’s not, then what’s the fucking point? Popularity and a better replacement are two different things.
Here's a new type of computer - it's exactly the same as your current computer, except it consumes 1/10th of the power... A replacement doesn't have to be better in every single facet.
Do you mean 10x the power?
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#94One 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…
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…
To be fair, "you deserve it if you got scammed" also plays well with the anti-crypto crowd.
A person pays the price of a house for NFTs of pictures of apes, gets tricked into giving them away to scammers, then buys them back from the scammers? Ha, what a fuckin' idiot.
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#95> The proposal succeeded hours after it was proposed, with one whale providing 1 million votes out of the 1.15 million votes in favor. Decentralized my ass
Hey, at least we have a good example of what "voting with your wallet" actually looks like if brought to it's logical conclusion.
In all fairness to crypto aficionados, it's not "voting with your wallet." It's more about using whatever is in your wallet to gain control over the financial...
Oh shit, someone stole my apes.
Can someone PM me to help me recover my apes? I can't vote without them!
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
>it needs to be better in every way It only needs to be better in enough ways to persuade enough people to adopt it such that it hits a tipping point and becomes the de facto standard.
No, it needs to be better in every way. If it’s not, then what’s the fucking point? Popularity and a better replacement are two different things.
>No, it needs to be better in every way. If it’s not, then what’s the fucking point?
I take it that you still use a CRT monitor then? After all, modern displays (eg. IPS/VA) aren't better than CRTs in every respect (response time, motion clarity, arbitrary scaling).
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
The pro-crypto folks have created the delusion that 'crypto will replace all modern finance' and they will quickly realise that regulations will wipe out the majority of tokens and projects unable to comply with them; and a remaining few of them existing and surviving. It also means the anti-crypto folks will also realise that destroying 'all of them' is another delusion that activists like the free software foundati…
>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
Xkcd of course had it right even back when "crypto" meant something else :)
Regulation and law indeed may not be able to beat crypto technologically. They don't need to. Humans are the weak squishy link in the chain. I don't need a supercomputer to crunch down your crypto, I need a warrant for your arrest or subpoena to ask for all your documents. I can outlaw your ability to operate without logs. Sure that would suck, but equally in crypto currency and normal world. Either exists as much at the mercy of the government, democratic or otherwise, to preserve the privacy, as much as the technological capability.
Unless we go completely anarchic (and I'm not personally looking forward to that), humans will remain squishy and laws will remain relevant.
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is entirely about a single a project trying to prevent cascading issues within itself. Claiming this is about Solana itself is a lie and this post should be deleted.
> This is entirely about a single a project trying to prevent cascading issues within itself. Claiming this is about Solana itself is a lie and this post should be deleted. I'm trying to understand this, but it's beyond me. Can someone ELI5? Here's what I get: Someone borrowed $108M (in USDC and USDT) and put up 5.7M SOL ($170M USD) as collateral, with the terms that if SOL should fall the lender can liquidate the SO…
> Question: who's making this claim and on what basis?
The Solend Team.
https://realms.today/dao/7sf3tcWm58vhtkJMwuw2P3T6UBX7UE5VKxP...
> Question: why is allowing this liquidation the end of the world?
Its not. They believe a function in their own project will cause the underlying Solana blockchain to have some uptime issues, because a similar function has been a culprit in the past, according to them. (Solana has failed to produce blocks periodically, I haven't followed more specifically why) This function will be called autonomously if the price of the collateral in question continues to decline. The rebuttals are:
a) a big cascading liquidation being interrupted by block production issues will just resume as block production resumes. so that's stupid. Solana goes down all the time, if other applications there can't handle that by now that's those application's problem.
b) DEX liquidity isn't all liquidity. So if $170m crashes the price on a DEX, that's just an opportunity for anybody paying attention to buy Solana cheap on the DEX and sell it for more on centralized exchanges like Binance and Coinbase. Its not Solend's problem. It is a completely unnecessary and amateurish "vote".
> what does any of this have to do with Solend? Are they the ones that lent the $108M out, or are they just the middle man?
They're the service being used where people deposit collateral, yes.
Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#99Re: Solend seized $170M of user funds
#100How did the "whale" have so much invested in the market but such little voting rights?
They don't have voting rights because they don't have SOL. They don't have SOL because they put it in there to get USDC+USDT. If they don't believe in the depth of the SOL/USD(C|T) books this could just be a way to sell SOL or go short SOL. This whale is probably just happy to default on the loan and get liquidated at this point.
I think SLND (Solend) is the token involved in voting rights here.