on reference with the returns of past terms of work on moderation investors with the field of crypto might have with the subjective properties with strategy following meta norms as expecting to gains with the progress on acceleration. as extending the level of persistence and collects with the dedication of returns with the decision as involving with the table of trading/investment.
Topic: Is DeFi only another type of scam? (Read 224 times)
Its a new technology, which has multiple applications but it also has several loopholes, but that doesn't make it a bad technology. It need a robust mechanism, to make it scam proof. Not all DEfi projects are scams. Yes till we find a fix, better invest cautiously
Defi is just another cryptocurrency hype, as it was before with POS coins, then ICOs, then IEOs, then different DAOs and Defi appeared. Of course, it is not without scams and hacker attacks on protocols, but I think that the idea and technology will stay in cryptocurrencies forever. Maybe in the future they will come up with a really reliable and good Defi protocol, which will be convenient for many people to use.
Quote
Can't understand...
What is the work of Defi...
Luna was good project though it was from Moon to Earth....
What is the work of Defi...
Luna was good project though it was from Moon to Earth....
Why is it considered a good project if in the end many of us become victims of it?
That's why it's not easy for us to judge a project or token in a short time because everything could turn around without saying goodbye so many of us feel loss and regret so that they too have a sense of troma to buy other tokens.
Whatever comes your way in the crypto space as a new form of utility just take the advantage, make money and sell for Bitcoin, if these new utilities dont come it will be harder to make money in crypto space, I made more money from meme coins, shit tokens and defi projects in 2021 that's how I have some BTC today.
There was another attack on another DeFi smart contract hehe. In any case, how many DeFi smart contracts have been developed in Ethereum? I appears that all of them might not be secure.
Reports indicate that on April 18th, a leading protocol was just hacked for a large sum of Ether and tokenized Bitcoin.
According to blockchain developer and DeFi specialist Julien Bouteloup, an attacker managed to drain a Uniswap-based pool (a market), and gained more than $300,000 worth of ETH and an Ethereum-based tokenized version of Bitcoin, imBTC, in the process:
“imBTC TokenIon pool on Uniswap has been attacked and drained. Simple attack vector on Uniswap [allowed them] to steal more than $300,000 in ETH + BTC,” they wrote.
Read in full https://bitcoinist.com/a-defi-protocol-was-just-hacked-for-over-300000-in-ethereum-bitcoin/
Reports indicate that on April 18th, a leading protocol was just hacked for a large sum of Ether and tokenized Bitcoin.
According to blockchain developer and DeFi specialist Julien Bouteloup, an attacker managed to drain a Uniswap-based pool (a market), and gained more than $300,000 worth of ETH and an Ethereum-based tokenized version of Bitcoin, imBTC, in the process:
“imBTC TokenIon pool on Uniswap has been attacked and drained. Simple attack vector on Uniswap [allowed them] to steal more than $300,000 in ETH + BTC,” they wrote.
Read in full https://bitcoinist.com/a-defi-protocol-was-just-hacked-for-over-300000-in-ethereum-bitcoin/
The case made against MakerDAO seems to be from some group of big investors who may have locked a large amount of ETH in their CDP's. All this clamor about DeFi only started later. Yet, before calling everything a scam, the problem to realize is that all these things depend on the value of underlying cryprocurrency ETH.
Ethereum as a project has failed to deliver what it over-promised and that is the reason that it has no underlying confidence in its inherent value. Due to this, any such project like MakerDAO or DeFi is going to face difficulties. It would be best for these DeFi developers to pivot towards bitcoin for such solutions and this would be better for cryptocurrencies in the long term.
Ethereum as a project has failed to deliver what it over-promised and that is the reason that it has no underlying confidence in its inherent value. Due to this, any such project like MakerDAO or DeFi is going to face difficulties. It would be best for these DeFi developers to pivot towards bitcoin for such solutions and this would be better for cryptocurrencies in the long term.
DeFi is just another way to try to stop Ethereum from bleeding.
They just want you to lock ethereums in Defi so eth doesn't lose more value against FIAT. It is funny though ETH is being inflated just like FIAT. No hard cap on the supply like FIAT too.
When people realize that defi is a scam, ETH will be worthless. The later it happens, the bigger and brighter the fireworks is going to be.
They just want you to lock ethereums in Defi so eth doesn't lose more value against FIAT. It is funny though ETH is being inflated just like FIAT. No hard cap on the supply like FIAT too.
When people realize that defi is a scam, ETH will be worthless. The later it happens, the bigger and brighter the fireworks is going to be.
There should be some check for any form of vulnerability in the code of these DeFi. To me I have no trust in DeGi it sprung up all of a sudden and experience a shift of interest. One thing is common when market doesn't go as planned we see some sort of quick fixes for some people to get money. This reminds of of ICO and late IEO phase.
The question if some DeFi are scams is not the only question. Another question is are they safe for users?
Why are these DeFi developed in Ethereum insecure? Are the severe bugs there because of flaws in Ethereum's programming language Solidity?
Decentralized finance protocol dForce has lost over 99 percent of its assets in an attack Saturday night, according to DeFi Pulse.
Lending protocol Lendf.me saw some $25 million in ether (ETH) and bitcoin (BTC) exit its wallets late Saturday and early Sunday after its money market pool was attacked. Lendf is one of two protocols supported by the dForce Foundation.
“Lendf.me confirmed it was attacked at 8:45 Beijing time Sunday at block height 9899681,” Lendf.me said to Chinese media outlet Chain News. dForce did not respond to CoinDesk's requests for comment by press time.
It is unclear whether any users were able to withdraw their funds or if the attacker seized all $25 million. Compound CEO Robert Leshner claimed that the attacker seized the full total.
Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/attacker-drains-decentralized-protocol-dforce-of-25m-in-weekend-attack
Why are these DeFi developed in Ethereum insecure? Are the severe bugs there because of flaws in Ethereum's programming language Solidity?
Decentralized finance protocol dForce has lost over 99 percent of its assets in an attack Saturday night, according to DeFi Pulse.
Lending protocol Lendf.me saw some $25 million in ether (ETH) and bitcoin (BTC) exit its wallets late Saturday and early Sunday after its money market pool was attacked. Lendf is one of two protocols supported by the dForce Foundation.
“Lendf.me confirmed it was attacked at 8:45 Beijing time Sunday at block height 9899681,” Lendf.me said to Chinese media outlet Chain News. dForce did not respond to CoinDesk's requests for comment by press time.
It is unclear whether any users were able to withdraw their funds or if the attacker seized all $25 million. Compound CEO Robert Leshner claimed that the attacker seized the full total.
Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/attacker-drains-decentralized-protocol-dforce-of-25m-in-weekend-attack
I can't tell yet if this is another organized scam yet. Many projects have started looking into DEFi a close group member had advised everyone to research on defi (decentralized finance) and invest on them calling them the future, but I won't take him seriously because he is making some dollars off it.
My friend who is a Bitcoin maximalist, claims it just the recent scam, I don't think so personally.
The deception(whether intentional or not) is one of the reasons I avoid the platform for now. You don't call something decentralized when it clearly isn't really decentralized. I saw something quite interesting which should be tried: the Defi, Cefi and Hybrid.
Projects on Defi that claim to be decentralized should be verified by the community and pushed to any of the three (defi, cefi and hybrid) or to where they deserve to be. If those pushed to Cefi have plans to decentralized in the future they should still remain on cefi until they truely become decentralized and then be brought back to Defi.
I wouldn't mind seeing only few truely decentralized project on defi. It's way better than the current confusion.
One or few people are probably trying to bring sanity, from my observation but the "problems" are probably fighting back
Projects on Defi that claim to be decentralized should be verified by the community and pushed to any of the three (defi, cefi and hybrid) or to where they deserve to be. If those pushed to Cefi have plans to decentralized in the future they should still remain on cefi until they truely become decentralized and then be brought back to Defi.
I wouldn't mind seeing only few truely decentralized project on defi. It's way better than the current confusion.
One or few people are probably trying to bring sanity, from my observation but the "problems" are probably fighting back
Also, if it is really decentralized finance, there should not be anyone suable, I reckon. The liability should be on the community as holders of Dai.
This DeFi is CeFi hehehehe.
Read the article.
According to the complaint, collateralized debt position holders lost $8.325 million when the value of the Ethereum (ETH) that Maker held in collateral plummeted relative to the dollar-pegged stablecoin DAI in which those loans were held.
The risk of such a scenario was not clear to these investors, the complaint alleges, further criticizing Maker’s advertised decentralization:
“While misrepresenting to CDP Holders the actual risks they faced, The Maker Foundation neglected its responsibilities to its investors by either fostering or, at the very least, allowing the conditions that led to Black Thursday, all after actively soliciting millions of dollars of investment into its ecosystem.”
The complaint asks for a minimum of $8.325 million in compensation and $20 million in punitive damages.
Read in full https://cointelegraph.com/news/maker-foundation-faces-new-lawsuit-demanding-28m-for-black-thursday-liquidations
This DeFi is CeFi hehehehe.
Read the article.
According to the complaint, collateralized debt position holders lost $8.325 million when the value of the Ethereum (ETH) that Maker held in collateral plummeted relative to the dollar-pegged stablecoin DAI in which those loans were held.
The risk of such a scenario was not clear to these investors, the complaint alleges, further criticizing Maker’s advertised decentralization:
“While misrepresenting to CDP Holders the actual risks they faced, The Maker Foundation neglected its responsibilities to its investors by either fostering or, at the very least, allowing the conditions that led to Black Thursday, all after actively soliciting millions of dollars of investment into its ecosystem.”
The complaint asks for a minimum of $8.325 million in compensation and $20 million in punitive damages.
Read in full https://cointelegraph.com/news/maker-foundation-faces-new-lawsuit-demanding-28m-for-black-thursday-liquidations
Jump to: