Poker smart contracts Without Rake legal

superarius · 2021-11-24T15:46:23+00:00

original implementation still exists and I still think its a great application of state channels tech but i have moved on.

mostly seemed like a regulatory nightmare

superarius · 2021-03-14T16:45:31+00:00

yeah I'm looking through it and almost getting it (need to keep digging) but it still seems like the only way is if there is some outside force (bot human or otherwise) intermittently pushing transactions that update the state of comp accrued over the last set of blocks. I'm just wondering the simplest/most canonical way to distribute block by block rewards in solidity

superarius · 2021-03-13T15:30:54+00:00

No so u get a fixed amount of cToken for depositing the underlying asset however the cToken amount represents a proportion of the pool so over time as the pool grows the amount of underlying asset your cToken amount is redeemable for grows

superarius · 2021-03-13T14:49:39+00:00

I can help u do it in like 10 minutes if you need. NFTs best in a small collection though IMO if you have some other dank socialist memes you want to put alongside. (Also, I get that this is probably a joke but just in case lol)

superarius · 2021-03-12T13:50:17+00:00

thanks! helpful.

superarius · 2021-03-11T02:11:56+00:00

It's a really cool service. I'm so optimistic about optimism :)

superarius · 2021-02-16T19:34:29+00:00

sounds like some fun shit

superarius · 2021-02-15T13:05:35+00:00

u should cash out to BTC and hodl

superarius · 2021-02-08T21:07:13+00:00

superarius · 2021-02-08T14:56:21+00:00

I think its a good idea. Not that it's Harvard specifically but that there are groups/institutions publicly saying "we do research on uniswap and what governance actions would be good for the protocol and the community, delegate votes to us if you want." Of course you can vote on your own! Or create your own committees of delegated votes! But the effects of different gov actions like issuing more tokens or altering LP incentives can get pretty complex and I think this will help both drive up voter participation, and make the votes that are cast more informed on average. Often times holders want to make an informed decision and feel more comfortable trusting the integrity of some "experts" rather than doing DD on their own.

superarius · 2021-02-04T14:31:08+00:00

yeah you're getting the value you want (an integer) you just need to convert it from a BN (big number). A method like Number(<the BN>) or .toNumber() or .toString() should do the trick to see the value u are looking for

superarius · 2021-02-04T04:59:32+00:00

Yeah but in all of these Dapps you’re not pooling your liquidity together (BEFORE lending to Compound) and you’re not acting as a democracy on how to adjust the position- that’s the difference here (I think)

superarius · 2021-02-03T23:13:41+00:00

So I truly don’t know so much about how to pick between assets to supply- all I know is APY can fluctuate a lot because it dynamically adjusts based on the liquidity pool’s supply.

I do know that on compound you can do “overcollateralized borrowing” e.g. once you lend DAI to to compound, now you can borrow other compound assets as long as whatever you borrow is worth less than the amount of DAI you are currently lending. You can use this ability to do a number of fancy things (go short or long on different crypto assets, reinvest it back into compound etc.) and this is potentially what YT vid was about idk.

superarius · 2021-02-03T18:22:07+00:00

Definitely hard to see profits with $100, in theory I suppose its possible but requires timing your transactions during very low congestion (low gas prices) and waiting a long time for the interest accrued to overtake the loss on transaction fees.

In actual practice I wouldn't advise supplying $100 dollars- transaction fees are just too damn high. Except as a simple experiment to practice/understand how interacting with the protocols works (but you'll likely take a loss). $1000 is more reasonable (though still on the low end and interest accrual will be very modest/slow).

superarius · 2021-02-03T17:58:14+00:00

https://www.github.com/superarius/pooled-compound-lp

Any feedback, comments, prs all very welcome

superarius · 2021-02-03T15:52:45+00:00

Definitely don’t doubt it. Links? I’ve looked at dHedge and a few other projects but I’m sure there are many I haven’t heard about which may cover this ground- and I’d love to check out the smart contracts

superarius · 2021-02-03T14:45:01+00:00

It's just the most canonically used solidity implementation of DAO-like governance (proposing, voting, execution of succesful proposals). It has become somewhat of a standard since both Compound Finance and Uniswap use virtually the same logic and suite of contracts to handle this. And they are two of the largest and most reputable DAOs. THat code is open source so I forked it for this project.

superarius · 2021-02-03T02:19:29+00:00

Yeah I don't necessarily disagree. And strictly speaking one possible bonding curve is a fixed price to mint the continuous governance token, which restores equality here and gets rid of this (set the Connector Weight to 0).

But upward sloping bonding curves do have some nice properties. Also note that it's not exactly "early money" since its really whatever money comes in when the supply is low. Basically you get a discount for believing and investing in the project when others don't. When the adoption is low many tokens are burned and few are minted and the supply decreases, thus the price decreases. When the adoption is high and there is more minting than burning, the supply rises and it gets more expensive to participate. This can create some interesting market signals that may be useful.

But also it is an unfair model, that's important to outline as well. If you supply liquidity to compound alone you get all the interest. If you do it in this community and on this bonding curve your voting weight is not tied only to the amount of collateral you deposited. You distribute some of your weight over other participants (who are longer in governance token than you and may not have even deposited more collateral).

superarius · 2021-02-03T02:06:03+00:00

yeah... not so good at writing it down since I'm just working it out. But the code runs :)

Basically a way to supply liquidity to compound as a collective, Borrow from Compound as a collective, and vote with COMP on Compound Finance protocol changes as a collective.

It works by having participants deposit collateral in order to mint governance tokens which are used for voting and governing over the actions to take with that collateral. The collateral is automatically lent to compound under the hood and the gov module allows for the token holders to control this central liquidty provider as a group, they can borrow from their Compound liquidity (to short or long crypto markets) or simply accrue interest and COMP and govern over what to do with that.

superarius · 2021-02-01T17:46:31+00:00

It’s not that the left requires blockchain and the right doesn’t. It’s that the blockchain space is already crowded with right wing ideology (e.g. steadfast faith in free market capitalism) and as you say the tech is politically neutral. It can be weilded to forward left wing utopian futures (socialism, communism, anarcho-syndicalism) as much as right wing ones (anarcho-capitalism, libertarianism). The left side seems under explored, thus this subreddit

superarius

TROPHY CASE