Conversation

SBF
@SBF_FTX
2) NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE. NOT BORROWING ADVICE. NOT LENDING ADVICE. NOT ADVICE. JUST NOT.
1
19
SBF
@SBF_FTX
4) I'm not talking about who did what. I'm also not talking about their respective tokens. Each token has some price/market cap/etc. I'm not looking at those, and so don't know how this would apply to that anyway. This is about the protocols.
1
10
SBF
@SBF_FTX
5) My sense -- and this could be wrong! -- is that you can sort of order them on a spectrum: Compound -- Aave -- Cream from safest to boldest.
1
23
SBF
@SBF_FTX
6) In general when you introduce more coins, move faster, etc., you increase the default surface of these protocols. You also increase the utility of them.
1
15
SBF
@SBF_FTX
7) That's not to say everything is a tradeoff! Adding some things massively increases utility and doesn't increase risk that much. Adding others does the opposite. But on the pareto frontier there are tradeoffs.
1
12
SBF
@SBF_FTX
8) My TL;DR here is: variety is good. Some situations call for super well understood, immutable, 'safe' coin lists with no frills. Others call for dynamically adding where there's demand. For instance -- should you be able to lend UNI and borrow against it?
3
16
SBF
@SBF_FTX
9) On the one hand, it's super volatile, and adds risk. On the other hand, there's huge demand, and it would add a lot of value to be able to accept it. There's a tradeoff there!
1
13
SBF
@SBF_FTX
Replying to
@SBF_FTX
11) I'd love to see AMMs branch out (like
@BalancerLabs
did!) into differentiation; and I'd love to see more types of pools people could use instead of assuming that pool == x*y=k AMM. And I've love variants on rebases: not pure splits but a treasury managing the new tokens.
3
30
SBF
@SBF_FTX
12) have some creativity, y'all! And particularly be creative when it comes to the product, not just the memes.
2
36