Yeah I guess since he was pretty hostile and troll-esque in the Discord server (which led to him getting banned) I had a pretty short fuse with him on here. My wife says I've been getting less patient over the years, and perhaps I should be a little more patient, and a little more tactful in my approach; doubly so on a public forum like Bitcointalk. Apologies Potato, at the end of the day we can often forget on the other side of the computer is another human being. I wish you all the best. (Just some honesty and less fud spreading would be appreciated haha)
I appreciate the sentiment and its why I stay above name-calling and attacks on individuals. Can you please cite where I was "hostile" and "troll-esque"? I was there for 20 minutes. I got banned almost immediately because I pointed out that the core mechanism of DAM (produce flux) and FLUX (produce more FLUX) is deflationary.
My quote in the Discord conversation with you was "Burning flux to get more flux is a price deflationary mechanism - I can't see people with huge stacks of locked DAM buying FLUX just to burn it to lose money. Without another use-case for FLUX the concept doesn't work. The primary use case for FLUX should NOT be burning it to multiply your FLUX rewards, that should be a secondary use case."|
So this exploit, actually can't be exploited because nothing in the DAM-FLUX ecosystem utilizes the "approve" function. See for yourself, go trade a regular ol' ERC20 on uniswap, and you'll notice you must approve it. Trading FLUX and DAM do not require this, as per ERC777. So this is currently unexploitable. Now Hodl has mentioned that later today he'll be replying in a long form to address this concern.
Again remember who brought these allegations forward; a toxic member of the crypto community who has a history of scams, evidence fabrication and has had his accounts banned several times (why he's changed his aliases so often). A great twitter to see more on Librehash, is ProofOfFraud on twitter, a twitter account created to expose Librehash.
A broken clock can be right twice a day. Would Hodl be willing to ask OpenZeppelin in their public support forum (
https://forum.openzeppelin.com/c/support/contracts/18) for feedback on his implementation? They wrote it.
Now this is flat out dishonest, and misleading. Abra's entire platform was it's interaction with traditional securities markets. You could "purchase" stock, ETFs and the like with crypto on Abra. That's what's gotten them into hot water with the SEC. To insinuate that their platform is anything the Datamine Network is absurd.
CTFC went after Abra because they "accepted orders for and entered into thousands of digital asset and foreign currency-based contracts via a mobile phone application. These contracts, which constituted swaps under the CEA, enabled customers to enter into financial transactions, with the respondents acting as the counterparty, to gain exposure to price movements of over seventy-five digital assets. By entering into these contracts via their app, respondents violated Section 2(e) of the CEA, which makes it unlawful for any person, other than an eligible contract participant, to enter into a swap unless the swap is entered into on, or subject to the rules of, a board of trade designated as a contract market. Additionally, in soliciting and accepting orders for these contracts, the respondents illegally operated as an unregistered futures commission merchant. "(
https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8201-20)
I understand your point is that Abra created synthetic derivatives and then allowed price exposure to them via an app and that DAM/FLUX are different and I will agree with you on that. However, the CFTC entering the fray on on-chain swaps doesn't bode well for a project that touts itself as "Money 2.0". You're clearly not identical - I wouldn't suggest you are (that would be dishonest); my concern was more directly related to the clearly-increasing regulatory oversight occurring within DeFi. Jake Chervinsky summarizes this well on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1282750679312891910?s=20 To that extent, is Datamine even a registered company?
Anyway - as with all things in crypto buyer (and seller!) beware. Hopefully your "Money 2.0" doesn't draw the ire of the US Secret Service, because it is increasingly clear that the United States only really cares that you're dealing with its citizens - not where you're operating out of.
https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/71261/coinbase-is-selling-blockchain-analytics-software-to-the-us-secret-service