DAO

Hitchie_Rawtin

The DAO has a veto but also a malfunctioning program will only work for as long as the canister remains funded, so you'd have to be implying whoever's being badly affected by the malfunctioning program would keep funding it indefinitely. If AI agents keep funding it, their funds are coming from somewhere up the line - whoever keeps filling its wallet needs to stop. Hardly rocket science.

gu45p

I was looking into the self custodial btc staking of Core DAO, as btc never leaves your wallet it is completely riskless

gu45p

Sure! so I do it with Core DAO, as it is self custodial the btc never leaves your wallet- no delegation, wrapped assets, change networks- none of that. I founf it the best way to keep custody while earning yield

MaximumStudent1839

> You can choose to see every innovation through a lens of cynicism,  Lol, "innovation".... Your shitcoin is basically a DAO token with a new buzzword "intersubjective work" token. No, what I have is not "cynicism". Cynicism is emotion-driven. I can reason through my skepticism. From a high level, my disposition is just a combination of statistical discrimination and Bayesian inference. From a low level, I see projects with broken principal-agent models, incentive problems, no data-driven reasoning on why X needs to be built to satisfy market demand, etc. Good grief! Even in the ivory tower academia with loads of BS overtheorizing, I haven't seen so much BS as here in crypto. At least in academia, ppl have conferences/workshops to rip each other apart on BS. Here in crypto, conferences all look like a big circus of self-congratulating circle jerks masturbating each other to attract VC money. You rarely ever see bad projects getting shamed by attendees for their flawed thesis on why it would ever attract any market demand. > foundational experimentation It is always fun to experiment on other ppl's money without real repercussions... >  you can recognize that building a decentralized future  Here is what I recognize. Talk is cheap. IRL, funding new projects often gets heavy scrutiny. The game is about building a product/service ppl will pay for. The entire idea is completely upside down in crypto. If this space had any level of scrutiny remotely close to the live TV show of Shark Tank, the crypto space wouldn't be in its current malaise. Such a pity we can't even meet a TV show standard. >**for the first time,** builders can create secure, decentralized services without facing the impossible cold-start security problem. So, all those apps on the ETH main net are just fairy tales? WTF?! > It allows this crucial infrastructure to rent security from Ethereum.  Bruh, a lot of your BS security is based on your "intersubjective work" token... please don't treat me like an imbecile. > That is the innovation. No, making a new DAO token as collateral along with ETH is not innovation.

gkendal

This. He could’ve used his fame for a meme coin. Then sat in Thailand with a couple mil, let the rest of it go up 100x in Bitcoin. But instead, he kept blaming the government. The guy was actually a software engineer who knew how to program a DAO or some crypto ICO. Sad.

epic_trader

>Jesus man, you can't accept it. The post-ETH DAO fork is a DIFFERENT BLOCKCHAIN than ETC and has DIFFERENT CONSENSUS RULES from ETC I can accept anything that is based on fact and can be verified, but none of your claims are true, you don't seem to know what you're talking about, and this very point you're making now doesn't relate to whether there was a rollback. >(I concur it is a bit esoteric how that fork was accomplished) I bet it would seem that way if you don't understand how this works, yes. >ETC has the most cumulative proof of work for any smart contract platform, look it up on wiki or whatever You're wrong and I don't have to look it up on a wiki or whatever, I've literally provided you with proof in the reply above. If you were a smarter and more honest person, you would look at the links, accept that I'm correct, take the L and move on. But I don't think you have the feintest idea what you're talking about, and you're probably incapable of actually verifying this for yourself, so I'm going to take your hand and explain exactly how you can use these links to prove which chain has more cumulative work and which chain is the *canonical* chain. The links above are from 2 blockchain explorers, one showing Ethereum blocks and one showing ETC blocks after the DAO fork which happened at block 1920000. Up until block 1920000 the 2 chains are identical because well, they didn't split. The amount of PoW is identical and that's why in block 1920000 for both blockchains, the "difficulty" and "total difficulty" are identical. In order to find the difficulty level on the ETC blockchain explorer, you have to click on "View details". "Difficulty" represents how much hash power mined the last block and is adjusted after every single block to make sure the next block is found after an average of 15 seconds. With more hashpower the difficulty goes up, with less hashpower it drops. "Total difficulty" is simply the combined difficulty number from every previous block. Because both chains share a history, it's trivial to prove which chain has the most cumulative proof of work because the "total difficulty" number is going to reflect exactly that. Immediately following the chain split, the chain where the most miners went will have the high total difficulty number. So figuring out who is correct in this discussion and which chain is the "original" according to your own definition, boils down to recognizing which of these 2 numbers are bigger. The higher number = more cumulative PoW. 39,495,109,617,178,927,573 - ETC total difficulty at block 1920100 39,497,170,367,613,719,972 - Ethereum total difficulty at block 1920100 Can you tell which of these 2 numbers is bigger or do I have to explain it to you?

sQtWLgK

Yes, "arbitrarily": The DAO proved that anything goes (considering that there's no stronger action than a confiscation). Also "majority consensus" of what? Only a very tiny minority of ETH stakeholders approved to do the fork. A majority of EF seats is what matters, because it's them who own the Ethereum trademark; the bongchain is only for the some and mirrors. Finally, that's absolutely not how Bitcoin works. Bitcoin isn't owned or governed by anybody. It hasn't ever hard-forked either: you can find nodes with the first version ever in the peer list.

YogurtCloset3335

Jesus man, you can't accept it. The post-ETH DAO fork is a DIFFERENT BLOCKCHAIN than ETC and has DIFFERENT CONSENSUS RULES from ETC (I concur it is a bit esoteric how that fork was accomplished). If you use your brain cell a little more, you'll figure out that ETC WOULDN'T EXIST if the ETH chain without the DAO hack transactions had more proof of work. ETC has the most cumulative proof of work for any smart contract platform, look it up on wiki or whatever. Reason is most smart contract platforms are just L2s for ETH or premined shitcoins.

sQtWLgK

Lol no. Nodes on either side of the fork don't recognize each other and so they don't count in any meaningful way. Formally, every hard fork implies letting the old chain die and start a new one with new rules. But with the DAO Fork, the original chain wasn't abandoned, mainly because the fork wasn't a technical upgrade but a bailout for friends.

siasl_kopika

>Decentralization has always been a central promise of the crypto world. slight error: decentralization is the central premise of the bitcoin world. Altcoins are all centralized inherently, either via low security budget, premiers, small dev teams etc. >But today, much of that decentralized functionality,ike lending, trading, stablecoins, and DAOs, is being developed primarily on Ethereum and other smart contract platforms. but what exactly are they "developing" ? Do you think stablecoins or DAO's have any future? Should turing complete contracts be involved in financial transactions? >And yet, a significant portion of the Bitcoin community rejects these developments. Yes, of course they do. Defi falls into two categories * Legacy centralized products (the oracle problem) * Gambling Both use cases of defi are essentially unnecessary, and both are better done with no blockchain.A centralized casino doesnt need to be an altcoin, it can just be a website or physical building. It could use bitcoin for payments for its victims, but it doesnt need any kind of shitcoin of its own. >What do you think? Is Bitcoin’s minimalist approach the way forward, or is the future of crypto being built in the DeFi space? Let’s talk. Defi is not the future; Its just a big pile of snake oil. Nothing we call defi is useful. Bitcoin is the whole of the space; it contains 100% of the innovation, and its implications are already world-shattering. Bitcoin is already comparable to the dawn of agriculture or the invention of fire. Its going to change human society radically. Whereas defi is just hot air and nothing.

RevolutionaryCup9494

Cookie DAO has dropped to a buy opportunity .14 cents right now.

oneawesomewave

The DAO!

wtf--dude

Just like the eth holder expected a healthy DAO

Objective_Digit

The quote does nothing for your argument. The DAO was not Ethereum. There was nothing wrong with Ethereum. It was hard forked simply to bail out the foolish DAO investors. This is not at all the same as the Bitcoin bug. Bitcoin is supposed to have 21 million coins, not billions. There's zero controversy fixing this as it favours no one party. And it was when Bitcoin virtually had no value.

Objective_Digit

The DAO "hack" was not respected. It was supposed to be an autonomous application. It should have been allowed to stand no matter how the money was taken from it. Therefore it was censorship.

epic_trader

It wasn't censored, the transactions took place and remain visible on the chain as part of the canonical chain. What actually happened was that the social layer came to consensus about moving the funds via a hard fork to another contract, honoring the intention of the smart contract rather than the poorly written code, in an event that hasn't repeated itself ever since. I know you want to spin this as something bad, but in reality it was a hugely important learning experience that significantly raised the standard to which smart contracts were written and emphasized the importance of properly auditing and vetting smart contracts. For instance, the year after Parity's smart contract wallet got hacked, twice, causing the loss of over $150 million. In spite of Gavin Wood and Afri Schoeden being very influential core developers and pushing really hard for the recovery of the funds, which several core developers also agreed with, and in spite of this being a really simply recovery that wouldn't disrupt any aspects of the blockchain or its history, the community were against a bailout due to the history and lessons of the DAO hack.

epic_trader

>So you claim I’m moving the goalposts to fit my narrativ Yep >but you’re clearly gaslighting truths Ethereum had a Hard Fork to cover the losses of a DAO I'm not and at no point did I deny that, suggest it didn't happen or downplay it. I correctly pointed out that it was an irregular state change, not a rollback, that's it. The reason why it's important to point this out, is that a rollback is a disruption that is equal to downtime or missing blocks, but what Ethereum did was move funds that were locked in a smart contract, into another contract, without disrupting the chain. If there'd been a rollback, people who had sent ETH to an exchange and traded them there for instance, might suddenly have had those funds again on Ethereum and that would have had huge implications. But that's not what happened. >I’m pointing out that Ethereum hasn’t been issue free for last 10 years No, what you claimed was that there'd been in a rollback, in response to a post that stated Ethereum had 100% uptime and never missed a block. I never stated, and neither did the post, that Ethereum had been "issue free".

Objective_Digit

It was a fix that favoured everyone - not one particularly party who had fucked up their funds (the DAO). Besides which, Bitcoin has almost no value then. The DAO alone was the biggest crowdfund in history at that point.

Objective_Digit

To fix a serious bug. Bitcoin was not supposed to have billions of coins. The DAO rollback was a bail out after a hack. There was nothing wrong with the ETH code. Not the same thing at all.

Objective_Digit

Ethereum classic is the original uncensored chain. "BTC maximalists" have nothing to do with it. >Bitcoin also had a fork to remove billions of bitcoin in circulation. Not the same thing at all. That was an existential problem that had to be fixed in its very early days. Bitcoin is supposed to have only 21M coins. The DAO roll back was a bailout for Vitalik and his pals. There was nothing wring with the ETH code itself.

barryl34

So you claim I’m moving the goalposts to fit my narrative but you’re clearly gaslighting truths Ethereum had a Hard Fork to cover the losses of a DAO I’m pointing out that Ethereum hasn’t been issue free for last 10 years

epic_trader

> So you’re saying they didn’t fork the chain because of DAO Hack No, I didn't say that, now you're moving the goalposts. I said that Ethereum didn't rollback the chain, the implemented an irregular state change. It doesn't matter that you can find an article that supports your claim when your claim is incorrect. https://ethereum.org/en/history/ https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/20/hard-fork-completed Maybe read these.

Signal_Reach_5838

You're right, Ethereum Classic lives on. ETH was forked and its previous position reinstated after the DAO hack, but not technically via a roll back.

Aaaaaaaaaafds

This update reads like the crypto version of a dark comedy and honestly, that’s why it's kind of brilliant. You rarely see projects embrace chaos with this much transparency and self-awareness. Most forks feel like rug pull dodges or exit plans. This one? It’s a 4-year meme saga that somehow keeps moving forward, confusing everyone while rewarding holders. That’s dedication. And just like $WHITENET, which also launched without shortcuts, VC games, or handouts, Eclipse DAO is banking on community resilience —not hype. Two totally different projects. One thing in common: they’re still here.

epic_trader

> The ETH chain with the DAO hack transactions had more cumulative proof of work behind it. You're lying bro. The DAO fork happened at 1920000. Look at the difficulty on both chains https://etc.blockscout.com/block/1920000 https://etherscan.io/block/1920000 https://etc.blockscout.com/block/1920010 https://etherscan.io/block/1920010 https://etc.blockscout.com/block/1920100 https://etherscan.io/block/1920100 If ETC had more miners or more cumulative work, why is the difficulty going up faster on Ethereum?

epic_trader

> If you're making semantic arguments why can't I do the same You can do that all you want, but that's not what you've done. Your argument seems to be that you googled the words "DAO" and "rollback" and found a bunch of poorly written and researched articles that uses the word "rollback" incorrectly as some sort of appeal to authority. Like I've already said, a rollback means reverting the state to a previous state and rolling back all the transactions in a particular block or sequence of blocks, which isn't what happened. Instead there was an irregular statechange which allowed the funds to be recovered by the DAO token holders. Technically the funds from the DAO contract and daughter contracts were moved into a new recovery contract from where token holders could redeem their ETH. >It also ignores the main point by distracting (using semantic arguments) from the main point which is that transactions on the blockchain were not permanent. No it doesn't. The only point I've ever argued was that technically it's not correct to say there was a rollback and it's not correct to argue that there's been any downtime or "missed blocks" which is what this post is about. You're the one who's now deciding to introduce a new "main point" because I presume you realise you've gone and wasted everyone's time by arguing about some BS you don't really understand.

epic_trader

>Did the hackers have their funds rolled back yes or no No, they did not have the funds rolled back. Why don't you look up what actually happened instead of mindlessly arguing a point you're wrong about? There wasn't any rollback. There was a hardfork which moved the funds from the DAO contracts into a new recovery contract from where DAO token holders could exchange their tokens for ETH. It wasn't a rollback, no transactions were reverted, the blockchain was not disrupted. >you know, package the roll back, censorship, unspend however you want. but it is clear as day as to what was and wasnt reverted. I already stated several times that what happened was a irregular state change, that's not a rollback. You were the one diving into a discussion about semantics so you don't get to move the goalposts now and pretend like it doesn't matter what you call it. You specifically insisted on calling it a rollback. >it doesnt matter how you package the mutability Yes it does. This discussion isn't about immutability, it's about whether or not Ethereum has had any downtime or "missed any blocks" in the last 10 years. You're arguing there was a rollback which disrupted Ethereum, I'm arguing there isn't. So it does matter, again you're trying to move the goalposts. >if the network agrees to make the chain not immutable thats fine, but it doesnt get to keep its immutability claim Who ever claimed immutability in all of this discussion? No one did.

edmundedgar

You're confusing the overflow incident with a different incident. There was another case where the chain split into two depending because of a bad BerkeleyDB configuration and there were two forks, and either one would have been fine. The chain is sort of available in this case because you can make sure your tx is in both chains so you have a confirmation either way. In the overflow incident, there was one chain for a while but it was bad because someone had printed a gazillion bit-coins. Until a fix was out and started getting blocks you had confirmations but there were on a doomed chain, so it was the same for you as the chain being down. This kind of thing didn't happen in the DAO bailout because the money was already frozen for two weeks, so it was possible to move it without affecting anyone else's transactions. If it had needed a rollback that had unconfirmed everyone else's confirmed transactions, it wouldn't have been done.

Ilovekittens345

I looked in to it. And it's true. Since the start of ETH, in 2015 the network has always been up. There have always been more then one node responsive to queries, always at least one node updating the state of the network block by block while the inbetween states where in the memory of the nodes. There was the DAO hack, but that did not stop the network from working. Neither did the hardfork. This is the power of decentralization. Take half the nodes that are the ethereum network down and the other half just continues like nothing is going on, and the network ... works.

YogurtCloset3335

I guess "rules are made to be broken"? The purists definitely hold their noses when this stuff happens. Also I think the crypto scene was small enough that they could roll back more easily. Now you see haxx 100x the size of the ETH DAO hack once per month, yet nobody even mentions rolling back the chain.

thegtabmx

>The chain was effectively down from when the DAO hack happened till it relaunched at the chosen block? No, that is quite literally not true. >Call me out here if I'm wrong, but I'm just calling it like I understand it. You are, so it seems you do not understand. >When a protocol upgrade is passed it's a soft fork No, almost upgrades can be hard forks or soft forks, but neither necessitate downtime. >Deciding to launch a new chain from a certain block hight is a hard fork, the original chain from with Ethereum came is now called Ethereum Classic Ethereum Classic did not hard fork from Ethereum. Ethereum hard forked with *the majority of consensus* when the majority of nodes/miners accepted the irregular state change. And there was no down time for either chain.

YogurtCloset3335

> >Then why the fuck would you bring it up and call ETC the "original"? I highlighted it for you, read it again. Is ETC mined still? Yes. So I fear it's you who is confused. > which chain had more cumulative proof of work behind it, ETC or ETH? The ETH chain with the DAO hack transactions had more cumulative proof of work behind it. Which then became the ETC chain when ETH was rolled back to reverse the DAO hack, violating the consensus rules on the longest chain. Thus ETC is the original ETH blockchain. Whatever hard forks happened in ETH before then are irrelevant because the old forks don't exist anymore. A block is only orphaned when the chain which contains the rival block gets longer than whatever chain contains the orphan. Thus you won't know which block is orphaned for a little while. Typically miners will make a snap judgement and try hard not to mine on an orphan chain. But again, they won't know which of 2 blocks is going to get orphaned for a little while. So once again you're throwing out red herrings

barryl34

So you’re saying they didn’t fork the chain because of DAO Hack “The hard fork effectively rolled back the Ethereum network’s history to before The DAO attack and reallocated The DAO’s ether to a different smart contract so that investors could withdraw their funds. This was extremely controversial — after all, blockchains are supposed to be immutable and censorship-resistant” Just pointing they forgot to mention that

yogofubi

Through a consensual hard fork, where a majority decided to return the stolen money through a state change. The alternative outcome would have destroyed the Ethereum network because of the sheer amount of ETH in that DAO

NorskKiwi

The chain was effectively down from when the DAO hack happened till it relaunched at the chosen block? Call me out here if I'm wrong, but I'm just calling it like I understand it. When a protocol upgrade is passed it's a soft fork, that doesn't necessitate downtime. Deciding to launch a new chain from a certain block hight is a hard fork, the original chain from with Ethereum came is now called Ethereum Classic - ETC.

MIP_PL

DAO hack?

Equivalent_Cover4542

Pepecoin’s approach with its own Layer 1 chain is definitely rare in the meme space. The merged mining with Litecoin and Dogecoin gives it solid credibility on the infrastructure side. What’s interesting to see alongside that is how some newer projects are pushing hard in terms of community automation and AI-driven engagement. NyanRocket ($NYR) is a good example, it’s a Solana-based meme coin that launched stealth with no presale or VC, and runs with zero taxes and zero central control. What sets it apart is its ecosystem of AI agents handling everything from meme creation to smart contract ops. It's more than just memes there’s a playable mini-game, staking mechanics, merch store, and upcoming DAO governance too. Both projects show meme coins evolving beyond just the hype.

SilasX

Those aren't really comparable. For the ETH rollback, they only did it because influential people messed up their own smart contract and wanted to fix a mistake that solely benefited their investors. For the BTC rollback, two different software versions well in contradiction and they had to settle on one. There was no real rhyme or reason behind who got one side vs the other, it was just a matter of how recently you updated. No specific privileged class benefited. BTC rollback vs ETH roll back: - Align the entire network vs fix one hack of one smartcontract. - Reverse a random fraction of transactions, vs one smartcontract made by the founder. - Fix the splitting of the network into two equal portions vs fix one infuential group's mistake. - Benefit the entire network vs benefit those who lost money on one DAO.

Ilovekittens345

So the hacker kept all the ETH he stole from the DAO?

noviwu97

DAO Hack is the Tian An Men of crypto world

epic_trader

No offense bro but that's not actually what happened, either you're just making this shit up or you've been reading some maxi nonsense. Ethereum didn't miss any blocks and there wasn't any rollback. Ethereum implemented an irregular statechange that specifically moved the DAO funds. No transactions were reverted, no blocks were missed, the blockchain never stopped.

epic_trader

How did the DAO hack relate to missing any blocks? Did the DAO hack cause Ethereum to miss blocks or stop the blockchain?

BylliGoat

"In June 2016, users exploited a vulnerability in The DAO code to enable them to siphon off one-third of The DAO's funds to a subsidiary account. The Ethereum community controversially decided to hard-fork the Ethereum blockchain to restore approximately all funds to the original contract. This split the Ethereum blockchain into two branches, each with its own cryptocurrency, where the original unforked blockchain continued as Ethereum Classic.[10]"

epic_trader

Was there any downtime as a result of the irregular state change that moved the DAO funds?

epic_trader

>It was absolutely rolled back! This is not techncally correct. There was no rollback. They implemented an irregular statechange to move the DAO funds.

BylliGoat

Bruh, not even close. It produces two entirely unique ledgers, one where one third of the entire economy was siphoned away, and one where that didn't happen. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_DAO What is this cope? It happened. Everyone knows this. You can't just fold your arms and say "nu uh". It's time to get over it and move on with your life.

Kike328

> No blocks were invalidated and nothing was rolled back. >Instead, EIP-779: Hardfork Meta: DAO Fork (i.e. the hard fork resulting from the attack on theDAO), performed an irregular state change. https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/100043/how-many-blocks-were-reversed-with-the-dao-hard-fork No transactions were undone

Dumperandumper

Ethereum Classic (ETC) isn't a breach to the current Ethereum (ETH) network runtime, but rather the embodiment of a fundamental disagreement about whether that runtime should have ever been altered. Following the 2016 DAO hack, the Ethereum community executed a hard fork—an intentional change to the network's rules and state—to reverse the theft. The chain that implemented this change became the modern ETH network. However, a faction of the community rejected this intervention, championing the principle of absolute immutability ("code is law"). They continued to validate the original, unaltered blockchain where the hack remains a permanent part of the transaction history. This original chain is Ethereum Classic (ETC). Therefore, ETC represents a preserved, historical version of the runtime that the main ETH network chose to abandon, standing as a permanent fork and a philosophical counterpoint to ETH's decision to modify its own ledger.

Kike328

how is the DAO fork related with network runtime?

PreventableMan

And they did a DAO bailout to alter the history of what happened <3

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum celebrates its 10th anniversary on July 30, 2025, marking a decade of innovation, challenges, and resilience. Founded by Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum evolved from a modest ICO to a leading blockchain powering DeFi and NFTs. Key milestones include overcoming the DAO hack, the ICO boom, scalability issues, and transitioning to Proof of Stake with 'The Merge' in 2022. Despite setbacks, Ethereum has grown into a robust, decentralized network, showcasing adaptability and community strength. Its journey highlights its role in shaping the future of blockchain technology. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

HSuke

I think your AI meter is broken. Besides the DAO hack was done while Ethereum was using PoW.

virtual_black_whale

This is obviously an AI post but for the readers: "4.      Slashing is not available" but forking is! See the DAO hack on Ethereum, this is the reason we have ETC (Ethereum Classic)

Enderbeany

I don’t even think of it as a loan - but a line of credit. It’s zero% interest with no payback date. BUT, you pay a 5% origination fee in (added to your balance) every time you borrow. Sovryn just holds your collateral and tells you what your LTV is. It’s a DAO, so oversight is automated…liquidation is automated at 110% LTV. Like I said, highly complicated, but I’ve been in this for a while so it’s comfortable for me. Would not recommend navigating this space without a high degree of confidence in what you’re doing.

YogurtCloset3335

Nope. When ETH rolled back DAO transactions, ETC was the longest proof of work chain with the most cumulative hashes calculated. That is the criteria by which all mined cryptocurrencies choose which fork is authentic. It doesn't matter that ETH hard forked before ETC, those chains it forked from are no longer being mined. In fact, ETC is now the largest smart contract platform secured by proof of work mining. I'm off to buy some..

epic_trader

Technically Ethereum didn't have a rollback, but made an irregular state change. Also technically ETC is not the original Ethereum, there'd already been 2 hardforks before the DAO fork.

YogurtCloset3335

Somewhat true but a proof of work blockchain can be rolled back by consensus, ETH did it when the DAO got hacked. ETC Classic chain is technically the original ETH blockchain.

MaximumStudent1839

Lower-tier companies have been doing this shit for ages. Back then, it was via NFT medium. Now they are launching stupid shit via Alliance DAO's second love child scam, launchcoin. > could this also lead to higher levels of fraud, extreme price volatility, and a lack of investor protection? There is no need to guess because we have seen it happen. Worse, they already have shareholders, and then they launch another coin in the hope of luring retail investors, thinking there are any scraps left after they met their fiduciary duties to their shareholders. Hint: it never happens in the long run. This is why you should avoid buying memecoins or whatever is issued by a company. The history of evidence is just so damning on how awfully they perform in the long run, as they have to navigate a thorny mountain of conflict of interest.

manikandanappuv9

Post thought question: Let's say there is AI abundance but certain things like land is limited, so bitcoin is also limited and this might make bitcoin more valuable and makes powerful unless the money equation completely disappears. Do you guys agree or do you think money will completely disappear? Please put your thoughts on the above question and chatgpt answer. Chatgpt answer below: “Hard post-money endpoint” = a world where money mostly stops mattering as the main allocator of resources. Prices, wages, interest rates, and “store of value” assets (incl. BTC) shrink to niche roles because almost everything you need is provided at near-zero cost and the remaining scarcities are allocated by non-price rules. --- Hallmarks of a hard post-money world 1. Near-zero marginal cost for almost all goods & services AI + robotics + (almost) free energy automate production, delivery, maintenance. 2. Non-price allocation of what’s still scarce Identity/quotas/lotteries: each person gets compute, energy, housing credits. Governance votes / reputation: access decided by civic score, contribution, or DAO-like rules. Planning algorithms: AI optimizes distribution without markets/prices. 3. Money fades as a savings & coordination tool No (or trivial) wages; universal provision replaces salaries. Debt/interest largely disappear; there’s little need to borrow when production is basically free. Financial sector shrinks dramatically. 4. Metrics change GDP, CPI, interest rates stop being central. Welfare is tracked via access, uptime, latency, satisfaction, healthspan, etc. 5. Crypto’s role shifts Cryptography still crucial (identity, provenance, verifiable compute). Tokens as money shrink; tokens as rights / governance / identity attestations may persist. Bitcoin as a store of value becomes largely irrelevant (there’s nothing meaningful to store for). --- How we might get there (theoretical path) 1. AI + abundant energy drive marginal costs → ~0. 2. Governments (or DAOs) guarantee universal access to almost everything. 3. Quotas/identity-based allocation outcompete price markets (simpler, fairer, politically preferred). 4. Deflation persists → people hoard less, prices lose meaning, monetary policy becomes moot. 5. Society retools laws & norms to suppress speculative markets in scarce status goods (or makes them non-transferable). --- Signals we’d be approaching it Persistent, broad deflation without recessionary pain. Mass unemployment without poverty (universal provisioning works). GDP and CPI sidelined in policymaking. CBDCs or quotas used mainly as identity/resource credits, not as spendable “money.” Financial assets’ returns converge to ~0; saving/investing becomes socially unnecessary. Large-scale non-price rationing (compute, land use, bandwidth, healthcare, education). --- Why many think this is unlikely (or very far out) Some scarcities are stubborn: land, human attention, pristine nature, frontier compute. Status competition never dies → people will pay (or want to pay) to differentiate. Politics & coordination: enforcing non-price allocation globally is hard; black markets emerge. Transition frictions: debts, pensions, legal contracts, and existing institutions are all money-based. --- Bottom line A hard post-money endpoint is the extreme: money (and with it, Bitcoin as money) mostly vanishes because abundance + non-price allocation make it unnecessary. Much more plausible is a soft post-scarcity world where many things are cheap/free, but key scarcities remain priced—and in that world, Bitcoin can still retain value and relevance as a neutral, scarce collateral/hedge.

Ok_Reputation9512

I bought $1500 of ETH at $14. Then Kraken randomly froze my account and told me I had 24 hours to remove assets. I was about to send it all to cold storage, had it all set up to do it but the wallets wouldn't send. Went back to cash and withdrew everything, then didn't get back into ETH but had meant to. That was right when the DAO hack happened. Missed the boat on cheap ETH because of a stupid exchange.

Hitchie_Rawtin

The creator took it down. If they'd let it play out then the node provider may have refused to serve the content & get shuffled to another subnet and replaced with another node (possibly aiming for a jurisdiction DMCA requests wouldn't matter in), or the DAO would've voted on it (Dfinity voted neutral, they wanted to see what the DAO would do). If the DAO wants to remove a dApp, they can. It never got that far so we won't know until somebody decides to test it again.

Flurb789

yep. it's a small project right now, but the DAO has 500+ copies in a warehouse. sealed copies go for 250k tokens, good condition 100k, and less from there. 100k is worth about $17 currently.

bzzking

* What’s Bybit’s long-term vision for decentralized finance, and how does it plan to balance innovation with regulatory compliance, especially with the recent Bills passed during the Crypto Week in USA? * What are the biggest lessons Bybit has learned from past market downturns in terms of protecting user assets? * How does Bybit plan to evolve its security architecture to stay ahead of increasingly sophisticated threats? * What’s the rationale behind using USDC for options settlement, and how does it impact capital efficiency compared to BTC-based options? * Will Bybit explore AI-driven trading tools or predictive analytics for retail users? * How does Bybit incorporate community feedback into product development, and are there plans for more DAO-like governance features? * What role does BIT token play in shaping the future of Bybit’s ecosystem, and how will its utility evolve? * Does Bybit believe crypto derivatives will eventually surpass spot trading in volume and influence? Why or why not? * How does Bybit define “responsible trading,” and what tools are being developed to support it? #

Gold-Coyote3753

Take a minute to check out CleanOceanInitiative.com - incredible project, brand new with tons of runway, passionate team driven by real world impact (eradicating ocean plastic pollution), with liquidity locked & dev+DAO tokens locked. Low risk, moonshot potential.

East-Daikon4624

Honestly, it depends on what you're looking for. Most people chase hype — meme coins, hype tokens, whatever’s trending on CT. But if you’re already stacking, I’d challenge you to look at **what your crypto is actually** ***connected to***. Right now, I’m focusing on projects **backed by real-world assets**. Not just paper promises or roadmaps that never happen — I’m talking land, legal infrastructure, development underway. We’re actually building something like that ourselves in southern Spain: A fully legal real estate development where we’re exploring DAO models and tokenized access — **but backed by actual land and brick**. No speculation. Just the real thing made liquid. Crypto with *tangible* collateral is where this space is heading. So yeah, look at your stacks. But also ask: **What happens if the market crashes tomorrow? What’s left standing?** If you’re curious, I can show you what we’re building. Not trying to pitch — just opening the door. Let me know.

East-Daikon4624

I've been knee-deep in the real estate game in southern Spain for over 12 years, and this is the first time I feel like I'm building something you *can't Google*. We're developing a massive project in Viñuela — an oasis in the Axarquía region of Málaga. It's not Marbella. It's not Ibiza. And **that’s exactly the point**. Raw land. Fully legalized. Infrastructure already underway. And we're exploring ways to open access to this kind of development **without going through funds or banks**. Yes, we're talking about DAO-like structures, **tokenization backed by real assets**, and entry models designed for early believers. I'm not here to sell you anything. Just to open the door to a **private Telegram group** where we're sharing blueprints, projections, and strategic architecture of the project. No empty promises. Everything real. Everything on the table. If you’re tired of shitcoins and projects with no ground beneath them, this is your call. The Mediterranean is running out of space. But we’re building a **new way to inhabit and invest in it**. If you want access to the Telegram group, feel free to reach out. PS: Ask me anything here. I’ve got nothing to hide. **Jose Cabello** CEO of Rumman | Developer of the Viñuela Project

Zarigis

The "admins" are controlled by the DAO, which must vote on every action. The only way they could freeze anyone's balance is by upgrading the contract implementation, which is possible but takes a while to execute. This is nowhere near how much control Circle has over USDC, which can freeze or modify balances without any time lock or delay.

Crypto-4-Freedom

Its the DAO token for Gnosis chain. I really love this side chain of Ethereum.(its the most decentralized chain after Bitcoin and Ethereum!) Manny great products/protocols are created on this chain, like: SAFE, COWswap, RealT real estate, Circles, Gnosis Pay, etc. My favourite product of the chain is Gnosis Pay, its a non-custodial crypto visa debit card. And you can stake your GNO on the card to get cashback, and still use those GNO's to vote in the DAO.

exmachinalibertas

The inbetween is introducing quantum safe addresses alongside the old format. This allows those who wish to make their funds safe able to do so, without forcing anybody to do anything. You can also require hash pre-commitments to spend old money, allowing old addresses to safely make transfers. It is up to users to decide what level of safety and security they want to have for their funds. It is not the role of you or the devs to make that choice for them. If I lock funds behind a requirement for OP_DUP OP_HASH160 OP_PUSHBYTES_20 <hash> OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG, I expect that that is the requirement to unlock the funds forever moving forward. That is the promise and whole purpose of the code. If you are allowing humans to change the code, you're doing exactly what Ethereum did with its hard fork after the DAO hack, you're just adding humans back in the loop, when the whole purpose of crypto is to remove humans from the equation.

littercoin

I think the answer you’re looking for is network effects. Also it’s good to talk about open source innovation from a bitcoin perspective as we are the custodians of open source money. In my opinion the bitcoin community done a poor job at funding further open source innovation but if you’re saving in bitcoin like me then you can afford to finance your own projects which is what bitcoin has enabled me to do. I think we can do more tho and would love to see (and I intend to set up) a Bitcoin community innovation fund, like a DAO, where you could submit sats and get voting rights to pool and distribute resources. I think the best example Bitcoin saw of going beyond its own echo chamber to support public goods was the pineapple fund in 2017 which brought loads of good press to Bitcoin and showed this innovation fixing real world problems. I intend to champion Bitcoin on my platforms as the leading funding source in the future and hope to use this to inspire further participation in a Bitcoin community fund to help open source projects grow and become more impactful.

IrishBitcoinGuy

I think the answer you’re looking for is network effects. Also it’s good to talk about open source innovation from a bitcoin perspective as we are the custodians of open source money. In my opinion the bitcoin community done a poor job at funding further open source innovation but if you’re saving in bitcoin like me then you can afford to finance your own projects which is what bitcoin has enabled me to do. I think we can do more tho and would love to see (and I intend to set up) a Bitcoin community innovation fund, like a DAO, where you could submit sats and get voting rights to pool and distribute resources. I think the best example Bitcoin saw of going beyond its own echo chamber to support public goods was the pineapple fund in 2017 which brought loads of good press to Bitcoin and showed this innovation fixing real world problems. I intend to champion Bitcoin on my platforms as the leading funding source in the future and hope to use this to inspire further participation in a Bitcoin community fund to help open source projects grow and become more impactful.

MyPizzaWithPepperoni

And if you're searching for an AI indexer, the best one and that also has is token is COOKIE DAO ( $COOKIE ). A diamon in rough, in case you're searching to invest too.

002_timmy

I very much appreciated your research into Across - definitely found it, say, interesting and worthwhile to examine exactly why DAO's aren't the superior form of governance some still think they are. So the lending market is built by the Glue team, not by someone like AAVE or Morpho. I'm definitely interested in checking it out. Thanks for showing how to get to LP

Environmental_gobrrr

is moons added yet? i signed up as MOON DAO thing it's r/cc moons lol

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; A hacker who stole $42 million from GMX, a decentralized crypto exchange, has returned the funds in exchange for a $5 million bounty. GMX confirmed the funds are now secured in its Security Multisig, and contributors are working on a distribution plan for the GMX DAO. The exploit was identified as a re-entrancy attack targeting GMXV1, while GMXV2 and other assets remained unaffected. News of the returned funds boosted GMX's token value by 18.4%, trading at $13.36. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Crypto-4-Freedom

RealT real estate, and their DAO token REG.

L-1-3-S

You're the one who incorrectly said "it's not the biggest" but now you dont want to argue over it. The only metric where ethereum is bigger is by transaction volume, which makes sense. Theres smart contracts, nfts, and way more things to interreact with on the Ethereum network. You don't do that with digital gold, each have their strengths. Every other metric Bitcoin is in fact biggest, market cap, price, nodes, miners, and most importantly owners. Also, you really gotta start doing some research before you make these statements man cause they just keep being untrue. Ethereum has absolutely had significant bugs: * **The DAO Hack (2016):** Reentrancy bug exploited to steal a significant amount of ETH, leading to a hard fork and the creation of Ethereum Classic. * **Parity Wallet Vulnerability (2017):** A bug froze hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Ether, highlighting issues with access control and contract management. I'm not going to judge the ethereum network for these things like you do Bitcoin, cause it both cases they were solved almost immediately and are irrelevant today. In Bitcoin's case it was solved in several hours. But the fact remains that Ethereum absolutely has had significant bugs just like the Bitcoin bug you mentioned. If that makes Bitcoin unsafe, then Ethereum is no safer, and it is also no safer for custody. Take a look at the cryptocurrency subreddit of people who lost their crypto. 9/10 its because of smart contracts and shitcoins that run on the Ethereum network (or Solana, but thats another story). This cannot happen on Bitcoin, you keep your keys safe, your bitcoin is safe, period. You don't have to worry about Smart contract vulnerabilities that are very real on Ethereum.

vudueprajacu

Hello, I'm a Linux enthusiast. I'm here to give an honest speech — really honest. I live in Brazil, where Linux isn’t that popular yet, even though we have some big channels like Diolinux. I have basic to intermediate knowledge of Linux and I love community-driven projects. As I mentioned, my quality of life isn't the best compared to first-world countries. So I decided to try to earn something doing what I like, especially since it's hard to find a job here in Brazil. I had this (not very original — sarcasm) idea of creating a **crypto project focused on the Linux community**, backed by a big DAO. I started with a small team — just me and two others — but they gave up halfway, so I kept the dream going alone. I created this token with two goals: **escape the poverty I live in**, and **fully dive into the Linux world**, which I’ve been part of for about 3 years. The crypto is well documented (at least I hope so). If there’s anything wrong, just let me know. It's also secure — I locked a large part of the capital in reliable services, and you can check everything on the website. I know that if this ever gains value, it might take years — and that’s okay. My honest goal is for the token to **help me and also support the community**, through the DAO I built. There are **over 1 billion SUDX tokens**, and the plan is to release them over time based on community needs. The DAO is currently live on Aragon with **50 million tokens**, and I’ll add more over time if the community asks. I don’t think it’s fair to dump everything into the DAO at once — only when truly needed. I'm not fluent in English — I use Google Translate and AI to communicate globally, since my native language is Portuguese. I chose to focus on an international audience because my country’s currency has little value. I launched a pool of **5 million tokens for $400**. It may not seem like much, but for me, that’s a lot of money. I’ll try to launch more pools if there are donations. So, please check out the website and see what I’ve built. If you think it’s trustworthy, let me know. The token is called **SUDX**, inspired by the `sudo` command in Linux. I know, it’s kinda cliché — but that’s what came to mind. Visit the site and see my proposal for yourself. Thanks to anyone who read this far. 💙 [https://sudx.xyz/](https://sudx.xyz/)

CalvinE

Link: https://x.com/HTX_DAO/status/1943595794332020751

Kelly-1896

I understand your feelings very well - watching Bitcoin rush to new highs, but not being able to fully share the gains because of early selling or high costs, it is indeed a bit regretful. DCA (fixed investment) is a good way to fight market volatility, but when you look back, you always feel that the entry threshold is getting higher and higher. Many people have this experience. Fixed currency income: Deposit USDC/USDT in platforms such as Aave and Compound, with an annualized 6%-12% US dollar-pegged income, which can be redeemed at any time and has strong liquidity. PoS staking: Participate in the staking of mainstream chains such as Ethereum, Solana, and Polkadot, and get an annualized reward of 5%-8%, which not only contributes to network security, but also steadily increases income. Diversified configuration: Core holdings of Bitcoin + Ethereum (50%), stablecoins for income optimization (30%), and opportunity capture to retain small funds to participate in high-quality protocol early projects or DAO governance (20%). Self-custody + audit security: Use hardware wallets or multi-signature wallets to keep assets, give priority to audited and community-verified mature smart contracts, and reduce platform and contract risks. Trends in the next ten years: Web3.0 ecology (DeFi, NFT, decentralized identity, metaverse) will reshape finance and the Internet, use reasonable leverage to lay out in advance, and seek progress in stability. It is recommended that you learn more

Kelly-1896

I understand your feelings very well - watching Bitcoin rush to new highs, but not being able to fully share the gains because of early selling or high costs, it is indeed a bit regretful. DCA (fixed investment) is a good way to fight market volatility, but when you look back, you always feel that the entry threshold is getting higher and higher. Many people have this experience. Fixed currency income: Deposit USDC/USDT in platforms such as Aave and Compound, with an annualized 6%-12% US dollar-pegged income, which can be redeemed at any time and has strong liquidity. PoS staking: Participate in the staking of mainstream chains such as Ethereum, Solana, and Polkadot, and get an annualized reward of 5%-8%, which not only contributes to network security, but also steadily increases income. Diversified configuration: Core holdings of Bitcoin + Ethereum (50%), stablecoins for income optimization (30%), and opportunity capture to retain small funds to participate in high-quality protocol early projects or DAO governance (20%). Self-custody + audit security: Use hardware wallets or multi-signature wallets to keep assets, give priority to audited and community-verified mature smart contracts, and reduce platform and contract risks. Trends in the next ten years: Web3.0 ecology (DeFi, NFT, decentralized identity, metaverse) will reshape finance and the Internet, use reasonable leverage to lay out in advance, and seek progress in stability. It is recommended that you learn more

ephBeeEye

Log viewers in this context aren't super users. They are principals which can view the logs of the smart contract and so its strictly for error handling. That doesn't give the ability to view a players cards or anything of the sort. What you're looking at in the sns\_init file is not a live part of the platform. That's related to our SNS DAO launch which will be the mechanism that brings decentralized governance to our platform in the future. The DAO isn't currently live nor is there a sale or anything like that live for it. It is under development and planned for the future but we're not aiming to promote that here which is why we didn't highlight those plans in the OP.

Glass_Original_7567

at least I’m not minting utility memes and calling it a DAO… yet

MrBluoe

yeah so... I'm not a lawyer, but if the company isn't a DAO, that means the CEO can make any decision on his own, no matter what the token says. So if tomorrow the CEO goes crazy and decides to sell everything, he can. Of course it would have legal repercussions, but this type of implementation doesn't inspire confidence in users to buy the token. I mean, why would they? Just another FTX situation waiting to happen. There is no real garantee.

MrBluoe

Yeah that's why adoption is slow. is estateX a DAO?

bzzking

How does Pineapple plan to stay resilient through market cycles and regulatory shifts? Are there any mechanisms in place to prevent inflation or token dilution over time? We see so many news articles about hacks and wallets getting drained. Are there any approaches to smart contract audits and ongoing vulnerability management? How do you mitigate risks from cross-chain bridges or oracle manipulations? Are there plans for DAO and if so, how will voting power be distributed fairly? How do you see Pineapple evolving in the next 2-3 years in the broader DeFi landscape? Super excited for your AMA!!! Good luck!

Mountain-Bread7598

 From what we’ve seen so far, Papple is building way more than just a DEX, it’s starting to feel like a full DeFi terminal. What’s the broader roadmap for the rest of 2025? Any hints at cross-chain expansion, mobile apps, or DAO governance rollout?

Best-Recipe-4040

dev is based, always grinding, never gave up, Wenpad is launching many projects since inception, and last one (TEG) absolutely CRUSHED all expectations. $LABS token has utility. I more than doubled my take just from DAO payments and reflections in ~1 year with a ~0,5% stake. 100k tokens gets reflections too so... Amazing project, probably the last affordable entry rn.

umzahmad

You bring up a great point — a lot of the current RWA focus is U.S.-centric and institutional. One project I’ve been watching that stands out globally is $SBX by SUPERBLOCK. They’re launching SBX Prime, a platform focused on institutional-grade commercial real estate — not just fractional homes or rentals, but prime assets in cities like Abu Dhabi, Dubai, and London. What’s unique is that it’s already live on testnet and backed by real valuation processes. Beyond that, SUPERBLOCK’s architecture is modular — meaning it’s not just real estate. It’s designed to support any type of tokenized finance (T-bills, commodities, infrastructure, etc.) via on-chain/off-chain plug-and-play modules. Legal, compliance, DAO, staking — all baked in. Feels like a more complete and scalable RWA infrastructure stack than most. Still early (presale is at sbxtoken.com), but definitely not vaporware. Would love to know if anyone else is tracking similar globally-focused RWA platforms.

Marijn_Q

DAO

Inevitable-Leave-875

Do your own research on the blue chips and why they are the top ranked. And when researching a lesser known coin/token, look at: Founder & Team Background Who are they? Real names or pseudonymous? Former FAANG, crypto native OGs, or some random Telegram scams? Track record? Any rug pulls? Prior pumps? Check LinkedIn, GitHub, SEC filings, and rugpull databases. Do they respond to criticism intelligently? Or just block you on Twitter? OPSEC Tip: If the founders are fully doxxed and U.S.-based, know they’re subject to U.S. law (SEC, OFAC, IRS). Sometimes pseudonymity doesn’t = scam. Code Quality & GitHub Activity Is the project open source? If not, why? Check GitHub: Are there commits? Is it a fork of another project? Are they copy/pasting or innovating? Use tools like CryptoMiso or GitHub Stars as weak signal proxies. Run a linter on their smart contracts. Sloppy coding = exploitable contracts = zeroed bags. Security Audits & Vulnerability Exposure Who audited it? Are there known CVEs (common vulnerabilities and exposures)? Check Certik, Immunefi, and Hacken for bug bounty programs. Smart contracts are forever. One unchecked bug and the protocol gets drained. Mechanism Design Is the protocol’s incentive structure economically sound, or is it a Ponzi in disguise? Check for Ponzinomics: unsustainable yields, recursive leverage, or circular swaps. Is the protocol actually useful without the token? Or is the token the product? Product/Market Fit Does the project solve a real problem? Who uses it? Is it a DAO with 80 wallets and 10 bots? Or is there daily organic usage? Use Token Terminal or DefiLlama to check real usage metrics: TVL, revenue, active users. Legal and Regulatory Risk Is the token a security? Did they do a public sale to U.S. citizens? Are they compliant with AML/KYC or deliberately avoiding it? (Good or bad depending on ethos) Has it already been flagged by SEC/FinCEN/OFAC? Token Distribution & Vesting Who owns the tokens? Founders? VCs? Airdrop farmers? What’s the vesting schedule? Any cliffs? Is it linear or backloaded? Use Messari or whitepaper tokenomics sections to verify actual unlock schedules. Watch out for VC unlock seasons where the price tanks on linear emissions from private sales. Community & Narrative Strength Are the supporters real humans or Twitter bots? (Use tools like FollowerAudit or BotSentinel) Is there real discussion on forums or just pump memes? What’s the meme game like? Narrative fuels speculative bubbles. Is this thing cult worthy? Cults like LINK, ETH, SOL, and BTC sustain price through hell. Most coins die when Reddit stops caring. Protocol Revenue & Sustainability Does the protocol generate real, recurring revenue? Is yield coming from users, or from token inflation? How are protocol fees split? Burned? Given to holders? Dev fund? Check DefiLlama Revenues or Token Terminal for hard data. Interoperability & Ecosystem Integrations Is it isolated, or plugged into other chains? Is it EVM-compatible? Supported by major bridges? Are DEXs, wallets, explorers, oracles integrated? Also tokenomics: Total Supply vs. Circulating Supply How much of the total supply is already circulating? If 10% is circulating and 90% is locked up, you’re early, but you’re likely buying into a future selloff. Rapid unlocks = price suppression. High FDV (Fully Diluted Valuation) + Low circulation = Delayed rug via emissions. Emission Schedule/Vesting Curve Linear: Steady inflation, easier to price in. Cliff + linear: VC dump alert. Sudden supply shock. Exponential: Pure inflation. Allocation Breakdown Look for this in whitepapers or dashboards. Here’s what you want to dissect: Team/Founders have greater than 20%, they’re greedy, and will likely dump VCs/Private Sale have greater than 25%, you’re the exit liquidity Ecosystem/Grants around 20%, okay if it’s transparently allocated Community/Airdrop less than 10%, fair but check distribution Liquidity Mining around 10–30%, good if designed well (no mercenary yield farmers who will dump on you) Token Utility: What does the token actually do besides go up? Good Uses: Governance (if active and enforced) Required for usage (gas, staking collateral, slashing risk) Fee discounts (e.g., BNB) Security layer (e.g., ETH staking) Burn Mechanics / Deflationary Design Are tokens being burned with every use? Is it programmatic or discretionary (manual = rug bait)? EIP-1559 on Ethereum is a gold standard: burn on actual usage. If it’s inflationary, check if usage is greater than inflation. If not, value bleed is baked in. Staking Incentives What APR are stakers getting? Where does that yield come from? (Fees? Inflation? New buyers?) Does staking have a lockup or slashing risk? High APR from inflation = stealth dilution. It’s yield that costs everyone. Liquidity Profile How much liquidity is there on major exchanges or DEXs? Who controls it? Is it protocol-owned liquidity (POL), or whales? Slippage test: Try simulating a $10K-$100K trade. If price impact is greater than 2%, it’s illiquid. Low liquidity = manipulated price action and whale games. Market Cap vs. FDV Market Cap = Circulating supply × current price FDV = Total supply × current price A token with $50M market cap but $2B FDV = 2.5% in circulation. You’re buying into a future inflation cliff. High FDV with low liquidity = worst combo. Inflation Control Is there a cap (like BTC)? Is there a halving or burn mechanism? Are emissions dynamic (adjusted based on usage like Curve)? Flat inflation = death by a thousand cuts unless usage scales faster. Whale Concentration Use tools like Nansen, Arkham, or Etherscan to analyze top holders. Are top wallets: Smart contracts (okay) Exchanges (neutral) Private wallets (danger) More than 10% in one private wallet = big risk

Cryptizard

>Why should a DAO in Buenos Aires or a co-op in Berlin have to trust the same validator set as everyone else? Sovereignty means picking your own trust model. Maybe you want to use local validators you know and trust. Maybe you want to federate with other communities. Maybe you want to run solo. That's called a bank, a credit union and stuffing money in your mattress respectively. These are not profound ideas. Even in the blockchain world, people have been using federated blockchains for over a decade. >the Bitcoin network will not survive a WWIII scenario \[...\] This is not some doomer fantasy Yes it is.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; TRON DAO announced that the circulating supply of USDT on the TRON blockchain has surpassed $80 billion, solidifying TRON as the leading stablecoin network. TRON hosts over half of the global USDT supply and leads in issuance, transaction volume, and daily user activity. With over 315 million user accounts and $21.5 billion in daily USDT transfers, TRON is a key player in digital dollar movement. Its efficiency and low costs make it a preferred choice for stablecoin activity, supporting financial inclusion and cross-border settlements. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

biba8163

> BTC thrives as the “digital gold” because Ethereum exists as the “tech platform. BTC was labeled Digital Gold BEFORE Ethereum existed > Mining digital gold... Bitcoin may make a dent in the financial world (2013) https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2013/04/13/mining-digital-gold > Bitcoin has caught the imagination of digital gold miners (2013) https://money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/slideshows/6-virtual-currencies-that-went-bust > One analogy people here kick around is that it is digital gold. Therefore it can reach significant highs exceeding that of Apple because there is no expected means of production. (2013) https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1sowur/how_is_a_2600000000000_market_cap_for_btc_possible/cdzqlwp/ > Network effect from the crypto space → Much of BTC's adoption comes from the momentum of the entire crypto ecosystem The momentum is that the total Alt marketcap (excluding stablecoins) has shrunk -40% since 2021 while BTC marketcap has gone up 72%. Alts generally gain value and attention when BTC exists and appreciates not the other way around. > no DeFi **DeFi is a bullshit scam narrative** from the Summer of 2020. It's NOT neither decentralized and it's NOT fiance. - Essentially a Shitcoin Casino. Leveraged plays, trading shitcoin tokens, earning yield on shitcoin tokens, providing liquidity on shitcoin tokens. NOT FINANCE - Every player like, MakerDAO, AAVE, LINK etc, is COMPLETELY CENTRALIZED - There are **no life financial products like life, home, health insurance, mortgages, home equity loans, car loans, personal loans without massive collateral, commercial loans, etc.** Again, shitcoin trading, yield farming, etc is NOT FINANCE. - Then you slap some scamified metrics like TVL based on scam tokens locked up to make gullible fools believe real capital is locked up instead of vaporware scam tokens. > no NFTs **NFTs are mostly scams selling you 1990s jpegs or links to jpegs** > no DAOs **DAOs are scams.** Lets look at the definition of DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations A decentralized organization/company that is governed by its stakeholders with no chain of command or any one person in charge, everyone has a say in governance of the organization by means of direct voting power proportional to their stake in it. It is autonomous because humans are not responsible for the executive function of the organization. The smart contracts does everything automatically. Stakeholders can vote to change the behavior of the contracts or vote to bypass/change it entirely, but the smart contracts are organization. In reality, Decentralization and Governance memes and the whales control nearly everything by printing tokens for themselves and dumping on gullible retail investors. Even the most celebrated Ethereum DAOs are token dump scams. I posted this about MakerDAO 5 years ago: > One man, Rune Christensen controls the system, interest, fees, voting, etc. There are ELEVEN addresses that accounted for 98% of the voting for the protocol change for an "executive vote" used USDC. Eleven addresses control the entire protocol and a protocol change was voted in just...what 24 hrs? And most of those addresses are probably owned by a handful of people. On what planet is that decentralized? https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/fl68d4/crypto_collateralized_stable_coins_have_proven/fkxc40i/ And people have posted the same crap about other DAOs whale controls everything like in Aragon another celebrated Ethereum DAO: > AGP42 : Put differently: aside from one whale, AGP42 passes. The Aragon community overall voted for AGP42, but it was rejected with 69% of the vote because of one whale. > AGP37: 82% in favor of AGP37. 453k to 99k. But then the whale voted. So despite 83% of addresses voting in favor of AGP37, on the surface it appears to be a large defeat where 66% vote against. > AGP-35:: Here’s another case in point: Edgeware Lockdrop Proposal for Aragon..The 792k whale voted for this. Deduct the whale’s votes and you get 338k. Which means that this proposal was losing by about 15% at ~43% versus ~57% pre-whale. Then the vote went from losing decisively to winning by a massive landslide. So aside from the whale, the Aragon community voted against Edgeware lock drop participation https://evanvanness.com/post/184616403861/aragon-vote-shows-the-perils-of-onchain-governance > Low TPS (5–7/sec) → Not viable for global payments or daily use at scale. There is zero interest in any crypto for payments except for stablecoins which really transact pegged fiat value. Tons of cryptos with high TPS and the world has zero interest in them. > Diminishing block rewards → Without active fee markets (which other chains helped normalize), miner incentives collapse over time. **Ethereum Maxis have been grasping for straws** with this one which was supposed to happen in the 2016 halvening when Bitcoin miners were not profitable for almost 2 years from 2014. Lots of mining companies went bankrupt in those years. There were tons of articles about how after the 2016 halvening, BTC was doomed. > By mid-2014, the high revenues of 2012 and 2013 are countered by high expenses, leading to a negative net cash flow from that moment on. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12525-018-0308-3 What happens is mining costs converges to the price of electricity and/or competition wipes out inefficient miners who don't innovate, find cheaper energy and locations. Since 2015, the miner rewards have been cut by -87.5%. But BTC price has gone up by 38,000% so miners rewards are more than enough. Fees alone will be enough reward the miners when block subsidies end. You can also slowly increase the block size over long time frames if needed to increase the subsidies if needed.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Grayscale has updated its 'Top 20' list of promising altcoins for Q3 2025, adding Avalanche (AVAX) and MORPHO while removing Lido DAO (LDAO) and Optimism (OP). The changes reflect market performance and sector-specific developments. AVAX was included due to strong partnerships and organic growth, while MORPHO's new V2 aims to integrate DeFi with traditional finance. Grayscale highlighted the volatility of these assets and advised caution for potential investors. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

jummy006

My Curve DAO and API3 show up in ledger live just fine, so you should be good as for as ERC20 support.

MaximumStudent1839

Very true. Crypto's loud voices are often those who got rich from being early and know nothing about the real world. They continue to get rich from getting the social network's deal flow or dumping on their followers. Most of them have jack shit idea of how an average consumer behaves and are extremely detached from reality. This sad fact applies extremely well to the "young entrepreneurs" entering this space. They will learn to be ruggers/PnD with the help of lowlifes like Scansem and then become productive members of society. They won't have sympathy or understand what average ppl go through; rather, they will make millions from making other hard-working folks into their victims. They will become sociopaths - lie without remorse behind a monitor. But predatory VCs, like Alliance DAO's Qiao, will make you think this is a good feature for this space.

MaximumStudent1839

Good question. > Why is litecoin not better? Is it because it’s just not popular?Because it is faster and cheaper and pow. The market demand for payment via native crypto assets is not great. The asset class is too volatile. Too many companies have tried, and too many have failed. The store-of-value angle has proven to have persistent demand. A token becomes what its holders treat it as and act with it. Treating a token as a medium of payment doesn't accrue value as much as a store of value. It is probably because, when ppl think it is a payment token, they just sell it after they receive it, they don't hodl and reduce market supply. > Aren’t there some alts that are solving blockchain and digital asset problems? What you are describing is solving self-referential problems. To care about them solving these problems, I need to first care about these problems getting solved. I need to care about digital assets. I need to care about blockchain. So what they are doing can't justify why ppl want digital assets/blockchain in the first place. ***You need to solve the first principal problem: why care about digital assets***, before worrying about solving digital assets-related problems. A lot of alts end up building blockchain solutions for use cases/assets that not many care about. > Wouldn’t you want a chain that swaps and transfer these at instant speeds and very cheap? In principle, a company could just run everything with a server for stablecoin use cases. They don't need a blockchain. Again, the issue becomes that you need to care about blockchain first. The best answer is that people care about a digital asset and like access to stablecoins be integrated into the native platform hosting the said digital asset. Again, most nearly always ignore the principal question: why do ppl want blockchain solutions in the first place? > Provide an opportunity to get paid something for farming your data you already let web 2 companies siphon for free. Amazon pays for your receipts too. It is not true you can't sell your data for money to web 2 companies. And it is not true web 3 provides an optimal solution either. > If there are other problems to solve in crypto rather than store of value Store of value has proven to be the best lindy source of demand for ppl to care about a digital asset long-term. Your other problems are second-tier or need to rely on the liquidity provided by the store of value market. > but just like in 2000 eccommerce.  I would say ppl were probably less malicious and intentionally extractive in 2000 than what you see in the space. Take Alliance DAO's mfer VC Qiao for example. He openly brags about extracting value from this space so he can cash out of here and buy stocks.

Cryptizard

They can, but the idea is that well before that point we will have migrated to new ciphers that are post-quantum secure. It's less of a technical issue and more of an organization/consensus problem. You need to get everyone to upgrade their wallet to the new cipher in a timely fashion. This has happened already with big coins though, for instance Ethereum's hard fork after the DAO hack, so we know it is possible to do.

DecentralizedLaw

Thank you for the thoughtful critique without snarky undertone. I understand from these comments that I should have explained this a lot better. Publishing laws on the blockchain as a medium offers exciting new opportunities for people from different jurisdictions to come together and agree upon the standards applicable to their (voluntary) interactions! To create a system where participants can vote and amend the legislation is next on the agenda. Think about a decentrally stored legal-wiki secured by the blockchain managed by DAO technology. Every successful system for human organization--from States to the Bitcoin network--are however founded on both changing and unchanging principles. The foundational idea of law in Western civilization is that there are laws that exist in human nature outside of authority and enforcement. The task of the legislator is to apply reason to align the legal system with these foundational principles. This idea led to the modern democratic state, the American Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent codification in international treaties (now accepted worldwide!). The benefit of this age is that we can determine these foundational laws empirically. We do not have to reinvent the wheel. This list has been extracted from rights that have been both included in the Declaration of Human Rights, and subsequently ratified in international treaties. I have made minimal additions to the phrasing, but have excluded all the rights that are not liberties (positive rights codify the ideal of Western European social democracy). So what you call mere values, are in fact international laws to which your government has committed. To the idea that we need specificity in law-making my answer is simple: this is impossible. You cannot have a law which accounts for all the specific situations and variations. That is why details are provided in lower level legislation, guidance by regulators, or in specific cases by the judge or jury--not in the foundational document itself. It is actually the clear and simple statements in foundational documents that make them valuable guidance for society at large. This is, in short, a perfect start for a renewed look at law and the future of (decentralized) governance with core foundational principles!