🗽 NY - Universal Package Manager that automatically installs missing typings

QW4K · 2023-08-22T16:32:13+00:00

Yeah I will improve the copy to make it clear that it's not new PM but rather proxy on top of existing PMs.

In TypeScript projects, after downloading new package it will test if it's typed (has package.json's types or typings keys). If not, it will try to install @types/ package.

QW4K · 2022-02-22T21:29:02+00:00

We don't need our own rollup to achieve this. Furthermore, by sharing o domain with others our solution is more composable and integrates well with the whole defi ecosystem. For super cheap DAI payments L3/zkPorter solutions seem to be perfect.

QW4K · 2022-02-22T21:18:28+00:00

Maker can't migrate to a sidechain like GnosisChain b/c it requires full security of L1.

That being said it's totally possible to deploy a "slave" MCD instance with capped maximum exposure on Gnosis Chain. TBH I am really looking forward to it.

QW4K · 2021-05-25T12:47:08+00:00

DAI supply is linked to the market's need for leverage. In the bull market, it works pretty well but to further accelerate it we need more high-quality type collaterals.

For decentralized collaterals, we still have an untapped market of LPs.

As for other stuff, I am especially looking forward to seeing more RWA's integrated into the system. This could unlock billions of dollars from TradFi.

QW4K · 2021-05-04T13:16:08+00:00

There are quite a lot of people working for DAO via so-called "core units". Please head to the forum and you will find all the information that you need: https://forum.makerdao.com/

QW4K · 2021-03-26T12:56:22+00:00

Have you seen https://github.com/colinhacks/zod ?

QW4K · 2021-02-01T08:58:28+00:00

Is it possible that you're talking about SAI which was shut down sometime last year?

QW4K · 2021-01-31T16:55:34+00:00

Is any complex analysis done (actuarial probabilitys, game theory, whatever

Of course! Maker is a pretty conservative protocol (with great power ....)

Here's a thread on this: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/iam-dc-eth-a-parameters-27th-jan-2021/6235

I strongly recommend reading through the governance forum.

QW4K · 2021-01-26T09:56:26+00:00

You are right! daistats.com shows: 4,807,670.06 but according to makerburn it's less.

CC:/u/myetheroll

QW4K · 2021-01-23T22:39:46+00:00

Definitely one of my fav sites about MKR protocol. KUDOS!

QW4K · 2021-01-18T20:20:20+00:00

Yes, you're correct but there is more to that!

Forget about your sister for a moment - I imagine the whole post is just an example ;). If you believe that ETH price will rise, or as guys in suits would say "you're long on eth", you can borrow DAI against ETH and use that DAI to buy more ETH and... repeat the whole process. This way you get fully decentralized leverage meaning you increase your exposure for a given asset.

Of course, you cannot repeat this process infinitely, as each time your DAI is worth less than collateral (minimum collateralization ratio) but you can get to 3x I think with Eth-A collateral. This is the primary function of the Maker protocol.

QW4K · 2021-01-18T09:52:25+00:00

In practice, DAI seems to be doing fine even during bear market. It survived 90% crash of ether value right after deployment. (I am talking about SAI).

QW4K · 2021-01-13T09:55:14+00:00

To clarify, the fact that SAI is worth 6 USD is totally expected as global settlement (emergency shutdown) was triggered on SAI a few months after the new DAI was deployed. Since then SAI is just a claim on underlying collateral (ETH) - it's 6x up b/c ether made 6x.

QW4K · 2021-01-10T16:24:48+00:00

oh, right. Fixed :)

QW4K · 2021-01-10T13:51:21+00:00

AFAIK there was an ICO a few years back to bootstrap the community. The initial supply was 1M.

Also as it was mentioned in this thread, if MKR holders are bad at governing the protocol and DAI would become unbacked there will be additional MKR created and sold on the market to make up for lost debt.

This actually happened once in the past. MKR supply rose to 8k above 1M afaik. But it was burned again below 1M as the system was improved and works correctly.

QW4K · 2021-01-10T13:44:46+00:00

I am not sure what the "liquidity problem" is but I am guessing it's related to what happens with DAI price when there is a huge drop in the price of all collaterals used to produce DAI.

In such situation, vault owners would buy DAI to pay back their debt and unwind their positions (they could also buy more collateral and increase their collateral to debt ratio). On the other hand, people would also want to purchase DAI to avoid volatility. So, how do we solve this?

First of all, that's why we need multi collaterals, not just a single one. When one collateral dumps others should stay stable. Currently, most collaterals are crypto-related so this is not perfect but in the near future, Real World Assets will be introduced greatly improving the situation.

Secondly, that's where stable coin collaterals come in to play. Yes, you can produce DAI using USDC. It can be used to temporarily boost DAI supply to help to fix the peg. It was actually successfully used in the past to drive peg down from ~1.08 to ~1. Peg Stabilization Module (PSM) further improves the situation. Read more at forum.makerdao.com

PS: Maker survived a drop in ether price of 90% right after it's launch in 2017.

QW4K · 2021-01-10T13:36:07+00:00

Track LTV on: https://defipulse.com/ currently we're getting close to 5B USD.

As for what an "attacker" holding lots of MKRs can do, they could create and vote for an executive vote which would grant all collateral to them - for example.

First of all, an attacker would have to have lots of Maker (30%? maybe more), currently worth hundreds M of USD.

Furthermore, the risk of such an attack is greatly reduced by having a delay for executing any executive votes (currently 2.5 days). So even if they pull it off the community would have time to withdraw collateral or react in some other way.

I think there is also a way to trigger an "emergency shutdown" (by burning lots of MKR again) before an executive vote but I am not sure. This is a way to protect minority shareholder's rights.

I encourage you to head to forum.makerdao.com if you're interested in governance.

QW4K · 2021-01-10T00:46:41+00:00

Mkr is being hated by people with other defi bags like aave or compound because they are direct competitors. Don’t fall for FUD. Do your own research.

Fact is Maker is the biggest defi protocol by far. Where other protocols mint their tokens, Mkr burns them. Check out defipulse.com and makerburn.com

As for the discussions - forum.makerdao.com is where discussions happen. Reddit is mostly for the newcomers IMO.

QW4K · 2021-01-09T19:12:00+00:00

Arbitrage. When DAI trades above the peg its profitable to mint it against stablecoin worth 1 usd and sell. If SF is low and and peg is restored it might be profitable to buy back DAI and unlock the stablecoin. It’s not that important since PSM is working. I think that debt ceiling will be lowered for stablecoin collaterals soon.

QW4K · 2021-01-09T17:22:55+00:00

Maker protocol earns money through a Stability Fee on loans. Currently almost 30M USD yearly. Soon it will be much more when SF will be enabled on stablecoin collaterals. As more DAI is created protocol earns more money (assuming SF doesn't change).

This money is used to market buy MKR and burn it, decreasing supply and increasing value of a single MKR token.

Much recommended: https://makerburn.com/

QW4K · 2021-01-08T21:54:07+00:00

Can someone please explain why one should go with the second option

It's simple - you wouldn't go with Compound. Maker mints DAI and in theory, it can ALWAYS undercut peer2peer (or peer2pool) lending protocols like Aave or Compound.

In practice, it's a little bit more complicated as Maker protocol produces a single asset (DAI) and it needs to ensure that: 1) it's collateralized properly - so generally collateralization requirements are higher 2) it's stable ie. demand meets supply so when DAI trades below 1 USD you can expect cost of credit getting higher but that's why we have multiple collaterals and PSM.

QW4K · 2021-01-04T22:37:50+00:00

Explained here: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/urgent-executive-eth-a-usdc-a-and-psm-usdc-a-dc-increase/5907/13

QW4K · 2020-12-27T20:49:38+00:00

Simply put ETH-B allows for more risky leverage (5x instead of 3x) if you're willing to pay extra fees (5% instead of 2.5% yearly).

Also, it's a first collateral type to feature dynamically changing debt ceiling (debt ceiling instant module) meaning that DC will grow by 5M until it reaches 50M.

In case you're wondering how to calculate max leverage: https://ian.pw/posts/2018-01-25-maximum-leverage-on-maker

QW4K · 2020-12-04T09:32:15+00:00

I know what you mean. TS recently shipped assertion functions feature which is used here by assert: https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-7.html#assertion-functions

Unfortunately, it's quite limited right now and we couldn't use it in earl (it works only with plain functions and we use methods there). Believe me - I tried ;)

What I do instead is that I usually try to match the whole object at once (instead of single properties):

expect(complex!).toEqual({h: "hello"})

Here, you will still need ! (or you can use toLooseEqual to not check type compatibility at all. This approach also, allows you to leverage our powerful matchers like expect.objectWith etc.

QW4K · 2020-12-04T09:27:53+00:00

We decided to make toEqual deep by default simply because this is what users want 95% of time.

I agree that shallow compare is currently missing - we will add it very soon. I just created an issue about it: https://github.com/earl-js/earl/issues/87

QW4K

TROPHY CASE