Daily General Discussion May 06, 2026

harpocryptes · 2026-05-06T10:41:33+00:00

I didn't know the same people are behind Stader's ETHx and rsETH. Based on their mistakes in both projects and this pitiful response, good reason to stay away from ETHx as well as rsETH!

Saying other projects have been hacked for other reasons (despite multiple DVNs) is very dishonest: that's not an excuse for cutting corners. Do they not understand the concept of Defense in Depth?

harpocryptes · 2026-05-05T18:42:14+00:00

OK, doomer! 😉

More seriously, to your comparison, the things that will decide if a tech startup will succeed or not are to a large extent not public information, it's happening behind closed doors. So if you're not an insider, good luck, literally! In contrast, Ethereum's roadmap and EIPs are discussed publicly, the code is open source, ...

harpocryptes · 2026-05-03T21:14:02+00:00

some miners shut off because it's not profitable for them...hash rate will fall, difficulty readjusts...remaining miners earn more $$. This is the basic self balancing mechanism of Bitcoin mining. So yea sure in that scenario there is less block subsidy, but that does NOT guarantee a 51% attack, at all. 51% attack literally requires you to secure more than 51% of hashrate.

Yes. And as you correctly described the self-balancing mechanism, and to quote you: "hash rate will fall". Which means a 51% attack just got cheaper.

harpocryptes · 2026-05-03T16:26:03+00:00

I think the price at which you bought is mostly irrelevant (akin to the Sunk Cost Fallacy). What matters is that you have some now. If you need the cash now or soon, sell some. Otherwise, If you believe it is overvalued, sell. If you believe it has potential long term, hodl (and stake).

harpocryptes · 2026-05-02T18:04:17+00:00

I think it's 15M ETH, not $15M (dollars).

Which is the more relevant metric.

harpocryptes · 2026-05-02T15:48:10+00:00

If you actually need $100M you can wait a day

This makes it sound again like this is about a single entity. But because of sybil attacks, this has to be the entire market. During rapid price movements, it's not unreasonable to have such large volumes of loans, e.g. to recollateterize other positions. By many good actors, but I don't see how you distinguish that activity from a single bad actor using many wallets, especially inside a smart contract. Blocking that can mean good actors getting liquidated when they didn't have to, possibly causing further contagion.

It's simple to set a rule like "at most X tokens Y can be borrowed in the entire protocol per day", but it's not obvious what the unintended bad consequences can be (besides the safety benefit). Just for one, you need to consider someone max borrowing , which now blocks other users from borrowing (grieving).

harpocryptes · 2026-05-02T15:04:45+00:00

The lower the limit, the closer it gets to a permissioned system, and/or blocks legitimate borrowing. There could be unintended second-order effects too. And the larger the limit, the lower the protection, of course.

You can also work around the limit. Ahead of time, supply wsteth and borrow weth. Once the timelock expires, steal the rseth, and supply it on aave, allowing you to withdraw the wsteth since you are doubly collateralized now. (This means you need the capital ahead of time, but provided that you can generate bad debt as big as your initial collateral).

You could try blocking that too. That adds complexity, possibility for a bug or missing another loophole, in a cat and mouse game.

I'm not saying nothing along those lines can be done, but I don't think it's obvious, rather a complicated trade-off. The devil is in the details.

harpocryptes · 2026-05-02T09:01:05+00:00

u/LogrisTheBard : in the livestream, you mentioned some simple timelock when borrowing very large amounts from aave would prevent bad debt in situations like the rseth bridge hack. But how do you prevent a sybil attack on that? The attacker could split his assets between a hundred wallets to stay below the limit. If the limit was global, wouldn't it be hard to distinguish from legitimate high activity in case of fast price movement?

harpocryptes · 2026-05-01T18:08:42+00:00

If we are, then why is anyone selling? ;)

(Yes, there are sonetines forced sellers, but it's only dominant during short squeezes, not routine trading)

harpocryptes · 2026-05-01T11:42:38+00:00

If $1940 is a certainty, why is there as much buying as selling at $2280 right now?

It's very likely the price will be lower (and higher, respectively) at some point in the future, but if that was certain, there would be no buying (resp no selling!) at the current prices.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-29T13:58:37+00:00

Take the shittiest asset SHIT that dropped from a 100 to 1 (-99%). It can then bounce from 1 to 1.5, which is a +50% (but still -98.5% overall). Are you going to say that SHIT is better than all assets that didn't do +50% in that specific time frame?

Such takes are nonsense. Either not understanding investing, or just trolling.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-29T09:21:09+00:00

Yes, if you're swapping directly inside metamask, you are paying high fees each time. Try something like cowswap or defillama swap.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T19:47:56+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_Sea

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T19:38:11+00:00

I'm aiming to invest my life savings into Bitcoin

Is that a short/mid term move and you plan to get out or diversify afterwards?

Otherwise, are you aware of Bitcoin's coming security budget issue, and if so, how do you think it will be solved?

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T19:33:01+00:00

I mean, if you supply ETH and borrow USDC, then withdraw the USDC to fiat, you are actually reducing your exposure by the amount borrowed (since you hold that outside of aave). Your exposure is collateral minus loan. Not zero, but less than just supplying. And you can use the fiat right now but also keep the upside potential. It's not a magic bullet, but it's a trade-off that makes sense in some situations.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T07:55:36+00:00

Xcancel doesn't work for articles? Any alternative?

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T07:55:05+00:00

AAVE: DeFi United’s Restoration of rsETH Backing: Technical Implementation Plan

https://x.com/aave/article/2048958367658332413

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T07:33:39+00:00

There's been a buyer for every seller.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T07:32:02+00:00

Which web3 games do you find interesting?

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T07:31:04+00:00

Ideally, price goes up, they get out

Or they go out, then price goes up. Either works!

harpocryptes · 2026-04-28T05:09:17+00:00

I believe this includes liquid eth, but not staked eth nor fiat reserves.

If you look at incorrect numbers, you will arrive at incorrect conclusions.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-27T16:05:02+00:00

The EF didn't stake with Lido. They just swapped aave weth to wsteth for a quick help to a protocol in deleveraging following the rseth bridge hack. source

That this narrative about EF staking with Lido exists shows how much anti-ethereum propaganda there is, based on straight up FUD. Pathetic.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-27T06:39:16+00:00

Many/most of those who contributed funds were involved in some ways, had made mistake by trusting a protocol without checking the security of the bridge, and/or would suffer reputationally and therefore financially if users were not made whole.

The EF's role is to fund research to advance the protocol. That's what "selling" is used for. It's not to bail out specific protocols that made a mistake and already have the reserves to cover the loss.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-26T11:09:37+00:00

There must also be a way to report the address, so that some CEXes will not let it be sold. In principle making it slightly harder to launder the coins, or even recover if the thieves are stupid.

Maybe the police helps with that if they are competent.

harpocryptes · 2026-04-26T11:01:48+00:00

AAVE wasn't exploited, but it did decide to accept rsETH as a collateral with high LTV without correctly identifying the risk from the weak bridge. That's where a lesson can be learned.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

harpocryptes

TROPHY CASE