RAI

jekpopulous2

There really aren’t any similarities. UST was under-collateralized by LUNA (which had an elastic supply). RAI is over-collateralized by ETH. It’s a CDP that works a lot more like DAI only with elastic redemption rates. Just for the record I’m not shilling RAI here… just explaining how it works. I’m not really sure how well it (or DAI) will hold up long term.

jadequarter

someone explain how RAI is different than Terra UST

jekpopulous2

I guess the TLDR would be that you have a CDP (like DAI) except instead of having a hard peg the price can float around a bit based on buy/sell pressure. RAI (from Reflexer) has been floating between $2.70 and $2.80 for the past year. The key is that as buy pressure increases so does the redemption rate and vice versa so there's incentive to keep the token within a fairly tight range. There's a lot more too it but it's not very easy to ELI5. You can get a better explanation [here](https://medium.com/reflexer-labs/stability-without-pegs-8c6a1cbc7fbd).

frozengrandmatetris

thank you. I made a post on r/defi if you have any thoughts. I am thinking that it would ban assets like DAI but not assets like RAI, because the definition has two prongs and RAI doesn't satisfy both of them.

frozengrandmatetris

there are some good ones, especially the ones that are not designed to be pegged to government currencies. a lot of potential is there. >the crypto asset will maintain a stable value relative to the value of a fixed amount of United States dollars it is unclear to me if this applies only to tokens such as DAI or MAI, which are specifically intended to be worth 1 USD. that is a fixed amount of US dollars. there is a chance that the language of the bill will spare other projects such as reflexer RAI, because this project is not designed or marketed in this way. RAI is not intended to be stable relative to the value of a fixed amount of dollars nor is it shown to perform this well, it is just intended to have low volatility relative to any government currency. I am not going to cry over tokens like DAI or MAI getting excluded from government sanctioned payment gateways and centralized exchanges. I have always believed that tokens like this will have some degree of centralization creeping in if they are always trying to keep a peg to a specific government currency. at one point DAI was basically a proxy for USDC given how much USDC was being used to collateralize it, and if that is still the case I would rather use USDC instead of DAI, but RAI will have my highest preference.

Theonlyeasyday

I agree. However, DAI is mostly collateralized with fiat at this point. I agree that the code is already there. It really comes down to: what do we want to price it in and how to absorb the volatility to create stability. I'll take a look at RAI. What you're talking about reminds me of Ampleforth (AMPL) which I talk about in my article. I don't think these are super viable, but I agree they're interesting testing grounds for new concepts. Right now, I don't see any alternative to collateralizing the token. Maybe after 50 years of stability, we can talk about relying on arbitrage to keep stability. But until then, I don't trust it.

VinnyS70

Anyone have any thoughts on RAI ? I don't understand the crypto world but noticed this one has only 1.82 million in circulating supply.

bitcoin_barry

* Cracks knuckles * > 1. If the bitcoin never actually leaves the network, how can you buy or pay with it? If I understand the question properly, have a look at the history of RAI Stones as money. People would trade things without ever physically moving their "money", they instead had a social agreement that a stone that was stuck in the ground that belonged to them, belonged to you now. Obviously this system didn't scale, but it shows how money doesn't need to exchange physically between hands. Bitcoin the network has a constantly updating state that tells everyone what discreet sums of bitcoin exists (eg, 1 BTC at address 1, 0.00223 BTC at address 2, etc etc.) Unlike RAI Stones that were assigned to people, bitcoin are assigned to addresses, and people own addresses which is good for privacy. > 2. The wallets, there are hot (online) and cold (offline), but they don't keep the bitcoins, they just keep the passfrases? If yes, how can you transfer satoshis or coins from one to another? This is where we need to understand the relationship between keys and addresses. Typically, when you set up a wallet, you will get some words to write down. This is actually a user friendly way of representing a really really really long number. Think about writing a long number vs a few words, which one are you more likely to mess up by missing a digit or mixing them up? That is your master key. From this we enter cryptography which is the mathematical magic of taking keys and doing one of the following: encrypt data, decrypt data, sign data. When you create an address and send bitcoin to that address, you actually create a random looking number that comes from your key. When you want to spend from an address, the network requires you to provide proof that you were the creator of the address. You do this by signing the transaction itself. This does 2 things: 1. A signature proves that you own the key that created a specific address. 2. The signature is always unique based on what you are signing so it is unchangeable. If someone tries to tweak anything in the transaction before passing it along the network (e.g. change the destination address), the signature becomes invalid. This also actually means that although the signature proves you had the original key, it doesn't give away what the key was. The long and short of this is: the key you have is like your eyeball to a biometric security system. Your eyeball (not an image of it, but the 3d representation of it in all its complexity) is yours and you want to keep it safe for the sake of protecting whatever is in your super secure vault secured by eyeball scanners. You want to avoid letting anyone get close to your face, you might even wear sunglasses. This is similar to having a "cold" offline wallet. When you sign transactions, you are reserving your eyeball for the iris scanner in your basement. When you have a "hot" online wallet, you have created a 3d model of your eyeball next to the vault and hid it somewhere that is publicly accessible. In reality, you are keeping your private key on a device that is internet enabled. An internet enabled device is effectively public space to a hacker and your storage device has your private key. If anyone can get your key, they can sign a transaction on your behalf. They have your eyeball. To an iris scanner, they are you. With your key, to Bitcoin, they are you. So to summarize: 1. You move satoshis by reallocating Bitcoin from an address you own to one or more addresses, some of which you may belong to someone else. 2. The network will make you prove that you own the address in the form of a signature. 3. You can keep your key on the same device that broadcasts transactions to the internet for convenience, or you can keep the key on an offline security device and use that when you are creating a transaction, which is slightly less convenient but more secure. This is why people say that your key (or as you said: passphrase) IS your Bitcoin. The network will not let the bitcoin be reallocated unless you use that key to rubber stamp it first. I hope this wasn't too much, I hope it hit the right chords and you get it. * Phew * > 3. Is the only way to have bitcoins by using wallets or can I create something in the actuall network and operate there? Wallets do 3 things: 1. They generate addresses from a key that you own. 2. They create transactions that instruct the network how bitcoin that you own should be reallocated, then broadcast it to the network (after signing). 3. They sign the transaction or rubber stamp it so the network will accept it. <- this is sometimes done on an external offline device. The network simply looks for valid transactions and bakes it into the blockchain. Once in the blockchain, the network has performed the reallocation. If you only want to "have" Bitcoin, you can create a key on an offline device, that device can give you an address and you can have someone send Bitcoin to that address. Now you own Bitcoin, but you can't do anything with it unless you get a wallet. In Bitcoin btw the word "wallet" is super overloaded so this gets complicated fast. The offline device is often called a hardware wallet. I think many of us are pushing for this to be called a signing device instead. The mobile app (or desktop app) you use to explore the blockchain, create and broadcast transactions is called a wallet. It can sometimes hold the key for you so that signing can be done at the same time at the risk of exposing the key to viruses or malware. So tldr; practically you need a wallet to own Bitcoin, and the safest way to own Bitcoin is to set it up on a signing device and link it to a mobile wallet. This lets you generate addresses and accept Bitcoin using the wallet while keeping your key safe, and therefore preventing anyone but yourself from moving your bitcoin.

Zorbithia

You mean XRB? Railblocks (the old name for Nano) had a ticker of XRB, then NANO, now XNO. As you can see, they are not very good at branding...or stopping their stake weight from accumulating too heavily in a few large wallets to the extent that the Nano network is frequently at risk of failing to meet quorum for consensus. RAI is another currency, there's actually been 2 of them called RAI afaik.

Naileditmate

Lmao goddamn I remember having some RAI, what a time

Tlux0

RAI, USK, etc. stuff with no centralized stablecoins as collateral

Giga79

DAI is 3.6% backed with USDC, and I don't think it was ever backed with USDT https://daistats.com/ Point stands. It's no RAI..

Clpunit

For those who haven’t seen it yet, there’s a new coinbase quest available for $5 worth of RAI!

Traveler-0854

I really do appreciate these posts now. I hope others do as well. Very well written and informative. Wow, i sound like a bot. Also...i'm definitely keeping an eye on RAI.

ZeMadMan1

Anyone have any Info on RAI Finance and/or it's token SOFI?

xmister85

RAI Finance... Hmm... A defi protocol running on?

ZeMadMan1

It's the native token for RAI Finance. For me it was just free money though 💰

Ur_mothers_keeper

Talking about algorithmic stablecoins like they're all the same is the wrong approach. Every single one is different. Terra USD collapsed, DAI did not. DAI depegged when SV banks collapsed (along with USDC, which is part of the collateral for DAI), RAI did not. I'm a big fan of DAI and makerdao. I was *never* a Dan of Luna, and told people to avoid it. The algorithms (more accurately, the game theory) behind the two were vastly different, one was sound and the other was a house of cards. It's important to remember that *every single pegged asset will lose it's peg eventually.* It is simply not possible to create two assets with different demand curves that have a correlation coefficient of 1 in perpetuity. Beyond that, they're all exposed to the systemic risk of the currency they're pegged to, and it's underlying economy. If your coin is pegged to fiat, it's value is eroding. If you save in stablecoins you don't understand crypto. This and the paragraph above taken into consideration, a free floating currency with it's own value, a predictable supply with a linear emission curve (or a max cap) and some stable level of expected demand beat out saving in stablecoins, even with the volatility, every time.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin sent $1 million worth of ETH to Coinbase. This move comes as the cryptocurrency market experienced a downturn, with ether suffering a 10% decline in the past week. Buterin also repaid 250,000 RAI and withdrew $1.6 million worth of ether. The reason for the transfer to Coinbase is unclear. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Try our free crypto chatbot at https://chat.coinfeeds.io*

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin sent $1 million worth of ETH to Coinbase. This move comes as the cryptocurrency market experienced a downturn, with ether suffering a 10% decline in the past week. Buterin also repaid 250,000 RAI and withdrew $1.6 million worth of ether. The reason for the transfer to Coinbase is unclear. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Try our free crypto chatbot at https://chat.coinfeeds.io*

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin sent $1 million worth of ETH to Coinbase. This move comes as the cryptocurrency market experienced a downturn, with ether suffering a 10% decline in the past week. Buterin also repaid 250,000 RAI and withdrew $1.6 million worth of ether. The reason for the transfer to Coinbase is unclear. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Try our free crypto chatbot at https://chat.coinfeeds.io*

Giga79

>Quite frankly haven't heard of RAI RAI is *like DAI* except it's only backed by ETH. DAI is a basket of goods. At one point was over 30% (IIRC) backed by USDC which called its decentralization into question. Today I think DAI is >5% backed by USDC. RAI doesn't scale (to demand) as quickly as DAI which is why the 'basket of goods' approach was taken, moreso why USDC was included into DAI at all. It's frankly bullocks that Canada has any issue with RAI. If ETH is fine then a 'super stable/slow ETH' should be too.

tobyredogre

Well done to all the Redditors calling for stablecoins to be restricted. RAI was a decentralised unpegged stable asset that Vitalik and Dankrad are fans of, but now that's caught up in rules and government pressure targeting other stablecoins. I daresay that any asset aiming to encourage price stability, such as delta-neutral assets, would also be affected.

Geolinear

No USDT, DAI, or RAI in Canada. Maybe a Canadian Will breakout into the market with a stable of their own.

Tkldsphincter

I never heard of RAI until now... lol I still don't fully understand what it is. I have more research to do... but a TLDR would be wonderful. I just see it's connected to DAI

poells

Got an email from coin base about an hour ago; no longer allowing Canadians to trade in USDT, RAI, or DAI??

frozengrandmatetris

I wouldn't mind if coinbase just had eth and no erc-20 tokens. if you like RAI so much, and you should because of how cool it is, you can get it on a DEX.

aminok

People use fully decentralized stablecoins like RAI, which are backed entirely by ETH, and that's using it in a way that "rivals fiat currency". People use Ethereum to access DeFi, which rivals the entire fiat financial system. L2s do indeed have centralized training wheels right now, but decentralized L2s like AZTEC and zkScroll are near launch, while the major L2s like Arbitrum One, Optimism and zkSync are working on launching their own decentralized sequencers, with the plan to remove their centralized training wheels. So given I'm informed and not peddling disinformation like you, it's clear why I see this as a good thing. Meanwhile, like all those peddling in anti-Ethereum disinformation, your views align with those of petty tyrants like Elizabeth Warren, who want government the government to ban DeFi: [‘DeFi is the most dangerous part of the crypto world,’ says Senator Elizabeth Warren](https://cointelegraph.com/news/defi-is-the-most-dangerous-part-of-the-crypto-world-says-senator-elizabeth-warren)

advias

DAI, LUSD, and RAI. DAI is centralized but heavily in bed with the government. RAI is fully decentralized, but works more as non-pegged stable token works on 8 different algorithms (tmu). LUSD is fully decentralized with only ETH backing it. USDT is very suspect indeed. USDC is likely in bed with the govts but its heavily centralized

frozengrandmatetris

vitalik interacted with reflexer RAI during the USDC depegging incident

frozengrandmatetris

don't peg it to a government currency. RAI is an example of this. it could even ditch the stablecoin designation and call itself a low volatility asset, since people think stablecoin means fiat peg.

_swnt_

Nice to hear your constructive criticism. Let me address some of them from my perspective. >There's an entire layer of what I consider to be bullshit talk (the technology, saving the world from banks, fair economy and so on), while everyone's motivation is actually to get rich from trading in the next bull run. Crypto started definitely with the focus on the former. It was a way for technies to find a way to avoid the systemic problems created by overly fragile financial system (e.g. due to Fractional reserve banking) and the inflation and power politics induced money printing. It was kind of luck, that it actually became.so popular. I knew about bitcoin and Blockchains since 2013 - but didn't invest because I saw the tech, I liked it, but said "yeah, it's going to fail. It's just s neat project which won't take over the world." But yeah, I was proven wrong. Yes, over the time much more people have come, who're in for the money. But I argue, that the core values of crypto make this possible in the first place. The core values of Crypto make bitcoin/ethereum etc. much more different than investing into an single stock or so. And your argument about the bull run can also be applied to the stock market and all kinds of investments. Stocks have companies baking them, but they don't "create any new money". All profits you get are by someone else who buys when you're selling. And they buy, because they want to hold it for a few years and sell it - then the stock is perceived as more valuable and sold at a higher price to the next buyer. And so on. This whole dynamic of "DCA in and sell higher later" applies to stocks, ETFs, crypto all equally. And all of them have some level of inherent value. For crpyto for instance, there are enough examples of ppl making good international p2p payments. There are examples of people being able to work on jobs which are culturally not accepted, but which aren't harmful. (Ask sex workers about how fed up they're on the stereotypes.) >In addition, while the crypto part is ok, the currency aspect is inherently failed because the incentive mechanisms reward every use case other than being a cheap, safe medium of exchange. In general, as the mcap increases the volatility will also decrease. At the same time, there are many interesting stablecoins approaches on the ethereum network: DAI, MAI, RAI, USDC/USDT, LUSD. Of all of these, Rai is an outlier, because it's stable but NOT pegged to the USD. Then there is also the LED: liquid energy dollar. >Add to this that the environment is heavily popilated by scams and grifters, and you get why one tends to accept Bill Gates' "greater fool" theory regarding crypto. To some extent this is a consequence of the Decentralisation & permissionlessness value. If you stick to basic rules such as going to official projects websites and being suspicious of high earnings etc. then one is often fine. The thing is, that the self-custody and self-empowerment in crypto has its costs. And the costs are higher self responsibility. In tradfi, you never keep your assets in your custody. It's the responsibility of the banks to keep you money and regulations and insurances cover the rest (for which you pay via taxes and bank fees). In crypto, you don't pay for that, but you need to get some practice and security hygiene. Over the time this will get easier - but atm it's still nerve wracking for some people. Also, people need to learn to be self responsible more with Crypto than with tradfi. This is a genuine tradeoff. Feel free to respond and counterargument. I'd like to hear and get educated from good points as well. :)

SwainIsABird

First time I see RAI mentioned elsewhere than on Vitalik's website, but I have also been using this as a decentralized hedge to all stablecoin shenanigans going on. Your comment makes me think of two things: First, you imply LUSD is as safe as RAI but I thought the moving peg/redemption rate was paramount to be able to ensure full worth of your RAI even in a wind down scenario where everyone leaves the protocol. Do I misunderstand? Second, what are the flaws in RAI or LUSD that you aim to resolve with your own project?

Dwaas_Bjaas

Yes you are correct, but its not the same as Luna. DAI is overcollateralized by ETH and USDC. So still not favorable if USDC is being shut down by the govt for example. RAI (a fork of DAI) is currently the only “stable coin” in the sense that it free floats around a certain value without it being pegged to the USD (RAI is a non-pegged stablecoin). But it is more stable compared to regular crypto. RAI is also 100% backed hy ETH.

_swnt_

You might be better suited to ask in r/BTC overall. > So I'm asking you all. If bitcoin isn't actually money, and it isn't a good medium of exchange or a reliable store and consistent store of value, or even an Inflation hedge: > Then what is Bitcoin? Bitcoin is only money as far as people use it that way. Honestly, I find some other coins or crypto on ethereum L2s more useful than bitcoin, as it has quite high tx fees. I have not used the lightning network though... I agree with you, that crypto has quite strong bull and bear markets - much more than traditional branches. However, the growing tech development and adoption is indeed a good reason for why this is happening. And there is real value behind crypto with its direct txs, censorship/politics-resistance, etc. However, on top of this real value there is lots of FOMO etc. that makes the dumps and pumps. However, as you can see historically, we've never reached a new bottom after a bull market has happened. And as more and more people buy bitcoin, it stabilises it's value to whatever it has now. This also means that future bull markets will likely not be as extreme as previous ones. It is a reliable store of value IF you don't mind that it fluctuates and IF you want to keep it for long term when new bottoms are reached. However, if you don't believe this, which I can understand, then bitcoin isn't such a good option for you. In the ethereum ecosystem there are stablecoins, some of which are more Decentralised than USDC/USDT, (RAI, DAI, MAI, LUSD), which can be store of value with little volatility. However, if you don't agree much with the established tradfi and Central banking system, then you don't actually want your assets to be pegged to USD (which means that only RAI works for you). As medium of exchange. Cryptos such as dash, etc. are also popular. However, if you're living in a well developed country, then there isn't much need for such things, as the finances are rather stable and well developed. But in Argentine, el Salvador, Pakistan the situation is different. I don't know too much about bitcoin and also don't hold it. I'm only in the ethereum ecosystem, so my answer is related to crypto in general, not specifically bitcoin. To all of the statements I've given, you can find people talking about and using it that way. I was too lazy to collect the links for all of my examples. IMO notable cryptos towards the original vision of bitcoin white paper are kaspa, payment via Ethereum L2s, and coins such as dash.

yorickdowne

I’d say there are a couple that seem solid. ETH, BTC; and then on the stable side maybe USDC, DAI and RAI though, that can change 😅

UnspentTx

FWIW: Reflexer's "ungovernance" system is a really interesting project: > At Reflexer, our mission is to build non pegged and governance minimized stable assets that are completely detached from fiat. To that end, we have developed the GEB Protocol, a smart contract framework which facilitates the creation of such stable assets through autonomous stabilization by a [PID controller](https://medium.com/reflexer-labs/stability-without-pegs-8c6a1cbc7fbd). > > RAI is the embodiment of our greatest goal: a pure ETH backed stable asset with only a few components which can be governed in the long run. We realized early on that, in order for RAI to be successful, we will need three ingredients: a clear roadmap toward removing most human control from the system, a way to protect the protocol and make it resilient to shocks and lastly, a way to pass any remaining governance responsibility to the community. > > -- https://medium.com/reflexer-labs/introducing-flx-20755214a465

frozengrandmatetris

just stop trying to peg them to government currencies. reflexer RAI is only meant to have low price volatility, not be pegged to anything. vitalik interacted with RAI during the USDC depegging incident.

DiscoverCrypto_org

Right, stables are called stables because they’re pegged to fiat. Other stables like RAI aren’t pegged to fiat money. There are different categories of stables, but for most stables, the fiat peg is the point. As far as binance goes, there are many other exchanges out there with their own tokens. So? Ftx messed around, a lot of users got hurt, but crypto continues. Crypto isn’t about a centralized exchange. It’s about maintaining custody of your own assets. If binance blows up, crypto will still exist. Still don’t understand your hang up with binance. Many people who use crypto don’t use binance.

Giga79

I don't think the hate is people thinking it's like UST, but something like RAI- which couldn't scale to meet market demands. Just compare the market cap to RAI vs DAI. It's a solution to a fulfill a very small niche in the market, but by design it's not for most participants - putting most participants into centralized solutions. It's like giving just *one* person first aid in an entire hospital then saying no one's cut any corners because *they're* served. It misses the bigger picture.

diomediocre

I'm not in this one but advise people look into $RAI. A non-pegged stable coin is a conceptually interesting idea even if it would be really odd as an investment.

AESTHTK

He leveraged it through RAI while USDC was depegged, so no.

LePanzer

Oh, thank you. I read about the RAI, but wasn't aware, that it was simply used as collateral.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum Co-Founder Vitalik Buterin sent 200 ETH to an address belonging to Kraken and 500 ETH to Reflexer to accumulate USDC and DAI tokens. He deposited the ETH to mint 150,000 RAI tokens, exchanging most for USDC. He later swapped 132,500 RAI for 378,500 USDC, and 17,500 DAI for 50,000 DAI. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Get more of today's trending news [here](https://coinfeeds.substack.com).*

Crypto_Cat_34_32

The title is kind of misleading. He didn't swap ETH for USDC. He used the ETH as collateral to mint RAI and purchase USDC.

FldLima

*Vitalik Buterin – recently sent 200 ETH (approximately $350,000 at current valuations) to an address belonging to the crypto exchange Kraken and 500 ETH (over $875,000) to the DeFi protocol Reflexer. He deposited the 500 ETH to mint 150,000 RAI tokens, exchanging most for USDC.*

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin's wallet named Vitalik.eth spent $700,000 over the weekend to mint the RAI stablecoin and used the funds to purchase USD Coin (USDC) while it traded below its $1 peg. The wallet was created seven years ago and held over 5,360 ether as of Tuesday. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Get more of today's trending news [here](https://coinfeeds.substack.com).*

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum (ETH) founder Vitalik Buterin moved 500 ETH to an under-the-radar decentralized finance (DeFi) project. He used the ETH to mint 150,000 RAI tokens and exchanged 132,500 RAI for 378,500 USD Coin (USDC). The remaining 17,500 DAI was swapped for 50,000 DAI within three hours. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Get more of today's trending news [here](https://coinfeeds.substack.com).*

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum (ETH) founder Vitalik Buterin moved 500 ETH to an under-the-radar decentralized finance (DeFi) project. He used the ETH to mint 150,000 RAI tokens and exchanged 132,500 RAI for 378,500 USD Coin (USDC). The remaining 17,500 DAI was swapped for 50,000 DAI within three hours. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Get more of today's trending news [here](https://coinfeeds.substack.com).*

ronchon

That's interesting. For those who don't know (and as far as i know): RAI is a "recreation" of what DAI used to be originally: a stablecoin backed by Ethereum instead of centralized assets such as ... other stablecoins. Which is what DAI now is. Albeit overcollateralized, in case of complete failure of freezing of USDC, DAI... dies. 😺

Maswasnos

Vitalik likes to short RAI, this isn't the first time

Maswasnos

Lol Vitalik shorting RAI [again](https://www.theblock.co/post/205078/vitalik-buterin-closes-seven-month-short-trade-on-rai-token-netting-92000), some things never change

DrakharD

TLDR The blockchain security firm shows that the Ethereum founder used the ETH trove as collateral on Reflexer to mint 150,000 RAI tokens. Buterin subsquently exchanged 132,500 RAI for 378,500 USD Coin ([USDC](https://dailyhodl.com/currencies/usd-coin/)). The remaining 17,500 RAI was swapped for 50,000 Dai ([DAI](https://dailyhodl.com/currencies/dai/)). He bought some stablecoins.

OrringtonBear

A few things, firstly that Circle and Tether only have the power to do what the smart contracts enable them to do. As far as I am aware that may include freezing coin balances but it doesn't include altering them. Secondly, Circle and Tether are still small enough that betraying peoples trust (say by refusing redemptions, or redeeming at less than face value) would likely destroy their reputation, something that would be quite damaging to them. Unlike a CDBC, people can just flee to DAI, RAI, MIM, USDD or any of the other stablecoins. Whereas with a CBDC, they don't even need to care if you have faith in them - you're forced to use it regardless, that's the point.

economist_kinda

>Where does Vitalik Buterin’s allegiance lie: RAI or Circle’s stablecoin USDC? Probably none more than the other.

_swnt_

I find the tokens RAI (control theory based Stablecoin, non pegged), MAI (baked by Multiple crypto assets, CDPs) and Reserve Protocol (tokenize diverse multi-asset baking just like wealthy people store their value, early phase).

mesutdmn

RAI is designed to be stable also, and u can convert it to many other stablecoins easily without wrapping ETH.

Internet_Responsible

Why did he go though RAI and not directly from ETH to USDC?

neuralzen

Probably just experimenting, it wasn't a straight buy, he used ETH to get a loan in RAI, and used the RAI to buy USDC

nelsonmckey

Saw that, yes he’s using RAI to buy.

Vejaliste

He didn’t swap ETH. He used it as a collateral to mint RAI and sold RAI for USDC. He trusts the ecosystem. For the moment it’s a small amount for him, but it shows he will be there to defend the ecosystem.

frozengrandmatetris

DAI is mostly collateralized by USDC most of the time. I think RAI is a neat idea. It's a fork of the original single-collateral DAI where the only collateral is ETH. RAI isn't actually pegged to anything, it's just designed to have low price volatility.

frozengrandmatetris

I'm interested in [RAI](https://medium.com/intotheblock/rai-a-free-floating-stablecoin-that-actually-works-d9efbbca94c0) or potentially MAI if qidao stops holding so much centralized WBTC as collateral

WhoIsTheUnPerson

The thing with Nano and the other "currency coins" is that they solve a problem. If I want instant transactions back and forth, I'll convert whatever I have to Nano, send it, then convert it back. If the value of Nano isn't pegged to anything, then its only purpose is as a mechanism of transfer. There's no reason to hold it, no expectation it'll go up. I had tons of RAI/Nano back in the day but when I realized that it's almost *too effective* that's when I sold. This is a casino, we're not here to facilitate easy transactions. We're here to speculate.

Giga79

DAI is backed by ETH and US dollars RAI is backed by ETH

BuyETHorDAI

Yes, this has been tried before. In 2015/2016 with MakerDAO's SAI, later to become DAI (150% collateral) and in 2017 with Synthetix (800% collateral). Since then, there are many many more on Ethereum, including LUSD which is 110 % collateral and RAI which is not pegged to the dollar but rather uses a PID controller to maintain peg.

Giga79

That's kind of dumb imo. It'll work but it won't grow much with such a handicap. RAI is kind of similiar, once $200M TVL and now I think it only ~$5M TVL since DAI ate its lunch. If you use $400 ADA you'll get say $90 DJED due to the collateralization ratio. If you mint $500 twice you end up with say $110, because the ratio has a chance to adjust and you get a better djed price on that second swap. If you mint $250 four times you get even more djed, etc. It's not whale friendly. It's very easy to lose 2-3% by selling for the same reason. IIRC Djed won't *let* you sell if there isn't enough collateral either, so if there's any hint of trouble a bank run on them is certain. There are more risks but those will be the most noticeable for people using it, if all other things work out well. It's going to attract a lot of drama if people think it works anything like other stablecoins.

SystemHodler

yes there is a video interview from RAI. there are also newspaper articles. at least one is online. 29€ is already the discounted price. you ll get also tutorials, ebooks and videos about mining, crypto , cryptography from us on the stick. So its not just software but also a crypto masterclass included

QueerShredder

Not really. Terra used an inflation/deflation mechanism to keep the peg of UST, playing with the supply of of both LUNA and UST. The risk of LUNA’s hyperinflation was always there if there was a run on UST because of that mechanism. My understanding of DJED is that it is a CDP like DAI/RAI overcollateralized by ADA as well as SHEN. Everyone here has been so nervous on new stablecoins since the Terra fiasco, and maybe rightfully so. But there really is a need for a decentralized stablecoin on these chains that is censorship-resistant and can’t be frozen by a central authority. Not every new stablecoin design is a scam, or prone to the same collapse as UST. I wish we would look at these new experiments with curiosity and intellectual vigor instead of dismissing them outright.

DMCarter_

DAI has centralized stablecoins as a significant portion of its collateral, so I wouldn't call it decentralized trustless. [https://daistats.com/#/](https://daistats.com/#/) It's easy to be strong when you another stablecoin as collateral. RAI is fair game though.

Giga79

It's over collateralized and backed by ETH. It's stable because of the collateralization ratio, so it moves *much* slower than the ETH backing it. It's the same way $DAI worked before Maker started backing it with real-world assets and USDC. The downside is RAI has less potential growth than DAI, but I'd personally rather see RAI *1-2-3-60* than 1 centralized stablecoin backing all DeFi.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has signed 25 transactions involving Rai Reflex-Index (RAI) worth $5.44 million. RAI is a stablecoin that is not pegged to any other asset. It leverages a system meant to delay most of the volatility its collateral is subjected to through a so-called reflex index. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Primary_Technical

Most of Buterin’s interactions with RAI follow one pattern. Newly minted RAI are transferred to his wallet and then swapped for another token — often partly decentralized stablecoin DAI. This is in line with the suggested function of RAI, which, according to an official explainer, “can be used as collateral for a pegged coin.” Pegged to nothing ?

Giga79

$RAI is *like* DAI except only backed by ETH...just the same DAI used to be.

frozengrandmatetris

DAI is mostly backed by centralized USDC. sad. and MAI is mostly backed by centralized WBTC. double sad. that leaves RAI, which is backed by ETH. it's less stable than either, not pegged to the dollar, and slowly leaks out value over time.

BuyETHorDAI

No, not all stables. For example RAI and LUSD are purely backed by ETH.

CarltonFrater

RAI

soyoudohaveaplan

I dislike stablecoins that are pegged to an inflating currency like USD. I much prefer stablecoins like RAI that are not pegged to anything. The fundamental purpose of a stablecoin should be reducing volatility NOT aping fiat money. With USD I only have downside. With RAI I have maybe a little less short term stability than USD but at least I have both upside and downside in the long term.

Giga79

DAI is backed by USDC fyi, so that'd make no sense. RAI is backed by ETH, maybe that's a better option.

Giga79

DAI is compromised by USDC. Now the company Circle can 'shut off' DeFi at their discretion. People really should be using RAI instead. Backed only by over collateralized ETH, like DAI used to be. It can't scale up to infinity like a fractionalized USDC can, but no one can 'shut it off' either. RAI is the only decentralized stablecoin on Ethereum as far as I know.

advias

He was also working on newer, more decentralized version of DAI and RAI, plus a fully decentralized oracle system. What he tweeted wasn't even wrong either, he's super rich and up there in the ability to fully know those things, esp where he lived

newtosh

RAI

Giga79

RAI is better. DAI is a **massive** risk to DeFi, by giving the US Treasury the ability to turn everything off at-will. RAI is only backed with ETH so no one has that lever.

QueerShredder

RAI is looking like a fine proposition for a decentralized stablecoin after this MakerDAO news.

Trixteri

you're not going to point out how this is part of their plan to swap all assets to ETH? because this is just locking USDC for 1.5% with really good security. and if people were looking for something *really* decentralized, they would go to RAI.

Buy_More_Bitcoin

It all depends on which stablecoin you refer to. There are a variety of mechanisms to go about it. [Here is a video just to get you started](https://youtu.be/HldRfcmiQnQ) rest assured, the rabbithole goes much deeper than this. My personal assement is to using DAI issued by makerDAO is currently the most secured option in defi. As for other more experimental things the list is rather long, I don't have all the information here but will share a few: [RAI](https://thedefiant.io/earn-and-learn-with-vitaliks-favorite-stablecoin-rai) appears to be interesting and worth looking into, something I have not yet done myself. [Ohm](https://www.olympusdao.finance/) is not exactly what one would call a stablecoin but something one should have on their radar in my opinion. Further more there are the usual suspects, such as tether and usdc. Those are fine to use on centralized platforms but I wouldn't bet the farm on them. FRAX also is doing some interesting things which go beyond the scope of this comment. I haven't answered your question directly but provided some resources which can guide you to an answer. I hope it may be helpful. To wrap things up, [here you'll find an extensive list of available coins and tokens categorized as stablecoin](https://www.coingecko.com/nl/categories/stablecoins) Best of luck on your journey sir

Trixteri

not really. stablecoins like RAI or DAI would serve this purpose better, and let ETH pay tx fees.

Spartan3123

That's good op, you learned something from the mistake. That will mean you will learn more and find legitimate opportunities in the future. Sadly the MKR subreddit is kind of dead, they do have a forum but i don't like that format. If you understand MKR a lot of it would be transferrable to RAI. I only learned about RAI after I started disliking the direction DAI was heading in...

Smiling_Jack_

RAI and forthcoming projects like it are the future of stable liquidity in DeFi, in my not-so-humble opinion. Don't take the downvotes to heart, OP. Folks here got burned by LUNA and UST, the same folks who didn't understand how it worked in the first place, and in their ignorance now assume anything that isn't USDC is another collapse waiting to happen.

Spartan3123

I think a lot of people got burned by UST and Luna and they are to focused on getting revenge on Do Kwon than educating themselves on the different types of stable coins. So even in this thread there are people who think DAI/RAI are algo stable coins /facepalm. So your post is heavily downvoted

QueerShredder

There was a Twitter thread or medium article (I’d have to find it) musing about the potential for RAI to partially back DAI instead of USDC so that DAI might be able to maintain its dollar peg. Not sure how feasible this is, but it might work given that RAI has nowhere near the volatility as ETH or BTC.

Spartan3123

it doesn't its floated but its value is stable and moves very slowly. ETH is used as collateral for loans and interest rates are used to expand or contract the RAI supply to control its price

Spartan3123

RAI isn't pegged to a dollar. In fact rune actually wants to make DAI like RAI [https://cryptobriefing.com/makerdao-proposes-endgame-plan-save-dai-from-attack/](https://cryptobriefing.com/makerdao-proposes-endgame-plan-save-dai-from-attack/) A part of the plan is to float DAI so it doesn't need to be strictly at 1 USD. DAI is vulnerable for collateral in CDPs being frozen. MKR is very complex and deals with real world assets. It hires people and functions like a real world company which makes it a target for the SEC. It will be very easy to pressure the people running MKR to shutdown or censor DAI. I would use RAI, if more people use it. Liquidity and network effect is import for collateral based stable coins.

ankitskywalker

Wouldnt RAI fluctuate to match eth, what would be the point? Why not just hold eth to the same if not better effect?

Ur_mothers_keeper

The tigke says algorithmic stablecoins, but the contents say "endogenously collateralized stablecoins" that is, stablecoins where the issuer of the stablecoin is also the issuer of the collateral. The truth is that any "endogenously collateralized stablecoin" is probably unsustainable and/or a scam. You shouldn't be using a stablecoin backed by some shit the stablecoin creators made up. Use DAI or Tether or RAI, never use bitusd (which is basically rebranded nubits) or Terra type horse shit.

JuxtaThePozer

did you get the POAP? You can donate 10 USD worth of USDC, DAI, RAI or ETH to stateful.eth on mainnet, Optimism, Arbitrum or Polygon before 00:00 UTC on 18th September

JuxtaThePozer

They offered a POAP to anyone watching the Bankless livestream which had Justin Drake, Vitalik and a bunch of other people from the community/dev/research teams To get it: Donate 10 USD worth of USDC, DAI, RAI or ETH to stateful.eth on mainnet, Optimism, Arbitrum or Polygon before 00:00 UTC on 18th September

Maleficent_Plankton

For those of you interested in the Ethereum Merge **POAP**: Mainnet Merge POAP Collection Process Send $10 to Stateful.eth in USDC, RAI, DAI on Mainnet, Polygon, Arbitrum, or Optimism before Sept 18 Link to POAP Art: https://app.poap.art/mainnet-merge/ POAPs also whitelist you to mint EIPandas: https://dao.evmavericks.xyz/eipandas/

OkDragonfruit1929

Only for debt-based fiat. Deflation is great for collateralization assets, like houses, corporations, land, etc... Deflation would be bad for debt-based units of account like RAI. But Rai will be the inflationary currency, backed by collateralized ETH. Automated decentralized equilibrium completely on-chain. Ether plus RAI and other over-collateralized stable coins are the solution you are looking for but aren't seeing.

Giga79

Because RAI is decentralized and over collateralized. It can't be seized or easily devalued/debased which is critical for a *currency*, and for trust to build around it. And it's built on an incredible technology stack, Ethereum. I admit it's not ready today but combining Zk rollups fees can become so negligible they will even be free in some circumstances. Also can be made private using the right approach, like Aztec with their ZK-money have done. I guess I'm impartial to RAI specifically. I'll admire anything that functions like it on Ethereum. DAI used to be good until they started backing it with USDC. Any stablecoin that's backed by USD is backed by *the bank* holding it, who can say no at any moment for any reason leading up to insolvency. It defeats the purpose of crypto, *the alternative financial system*, if the two crash at the same time over the same bank fuckup. It's just kicking the can down the road, feels like admitting defeat, and offers the centralized competition a direct vector of attack. If they're backed by (unaudited foreign, likely *bunk* Chinese) debt and not dollars, like Tether, that's worse since a bank run is practically inevitable. The only issue with coins like RAI is they can't scale to infinity like coins 'backed' by dollars, or promises of dollars. At a certain point people start to accrue negative interest for opening new loans, which no one would do so there are limits to how many RAI can sustainably exist. Which imo is not a bad thing since it prevents a UST/Terra implosion. People would have to create another coin and use that to its limit, then another. The people who create these things want a monopoly so this is never the mainstream/marketed approach. Also this would fragment liquidity until better L2/ZK approaches are constructed. I think it would be better to have a few days of negative APR than a few days of likely catastrophic depegging risk, or risk any chance I can't withdraw or trade because some foreign bank says *not today*. I obviously have a minority opinion, but I think centralization itself is a risk and it'll have to play itself out (like USDT being sanctioned leading to a depeg) before people care about the difference again.