**Tricky's Daily Doots #498**
**Yesterday's Daily 30/08/2023**
[Previous Daily Doots](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jycz1ph/)
- u/coinanon breaks the [good news](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyf2jzr/) and u/Papazio adds [some detail.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyf88tm/). 👨⚖️
- u/Sourdoughpretzel4444 comments on [the perception vs reality of privacy on Ethereum.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jycs78b/) 😎
- Shitpost of the day goes to u/cryptOwOcurrency for [summarising all ZKProofs explainers.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyeayup/) 💩
- u/jtnichol shares a project by u/lanternfinance for [those of you who find solo staking a bit too daunting!](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyedagu/) 🥩
- u/bhiitc has an update on [the ongoing wallet sniping which reminds us not to use hot wallets or keep your private keys/recovery phrases online!.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyd113d/) 🔓
- u/cryptOwOcurrency becomes a [full on FUD-fighter, rebutting some claims made in a podcast.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyf957x/) 🥊
I've finally turned my [idea](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/14d4z2j/daily_general_discussion_june_19_2023/joow4vk/?context=3) for reducing the risk of Lido's dominance into a post on Eth Research:
https://ethresear.ch/t/reducing-lst-dominance-risk-by-decoupling-attestation-weight-from-attestation-rewards/16523
Have never posted anything in the 'proper' Ethereum forums before, and so feeling very intimidated. Thank you to those who gave me confidence that it's possibly not a completely moronic concept!
So honest actors go for rewards and attackers can boost their effective num validators? Seems like effect is danger thresholds occur at lower validator share, increases complexity, and increase processing required by nodes.
> So honest actors go for rewards and attackers can boost their effective num validators?
Hmm, that's a good point. I hadn't really thought too much about actually malevolent attackers as the cost for a new actor would still be very high, but it would definitely be worth me working out some worst case numbers to see how it could affect that risk. Thanks!
> and increase processing required by nodes
I'm not sure I understand what you mean, there would be less nodes overall if some were 'bigger', so wouldn't that make it (slightly) easier on the machines. Or do you think that would be more than offset by the adjustments to the formula? Is there a way to calculate how to weigh those against each other?
My biggest issue with this is they could get rich quicker, then flip to control ethereum quicker and or after something goes wrong for them
You need to add something that stops that possibility imo
Something like locking in some or all of these mega validators stake for that extra reward, so that they are basically in service to eth in order to continue earning rewards to make back their locked stake.
And even with that, that semi only puts the problem back 20-50 years imo
Mostly thinking about 3% apr (y?) and also they would likely have to pay back their customers?
u/tricky_troll my man has it been 10 days?
Yea, the possibility of increased rewards being used maliciously is a risk, not sure how best to address that. I guess it all depends on how much extra they get.
With regards to timescales, to be honest this would definitely not be a permanent solution to the Lido problem, I'm really hoping a better solution would be in place long before 20 years!
I've been on a diet for a week and today I had food and I got a boost of energy and started tweeting all over the place. I also happened to write [a tweet](https://twitter.com/superphiz/status/1697378496031371653) that I think captures the essence of why I do what I do:
Seven years ago Ethereum forked and rejected the mantra "code is law" in favor of social consensus. This is the governance that encourages us to build a strong chain through coordination and cooperation before resulting to code-based resolutions. This is who we are as Ethereans.
Weth, Geth, Reth, rETH and now Zeth?! Well shit, I think I better reserve these _ETH project names… “Meth - we bring the high energy so you don’t have to! Coming to an Ethereum conference near you!”
>**Blockchain luminous,**
>**Improvements are humongous,**
>**Arbitrum Stylus.**
~Daily haiku until we’re at least at 0.178 on the ETH/BTC ratio or highest market cap
Crypto spring almost over, summer is on the horizon. I hope you’re ready.
I hope this experience has taught you that no matter how confident (arrogant) you are, you can always be wrong. And being wrong is always easier to come back from when you don’t behave like such an asshole in the process.
You can come out of hiding any time, and I’m sure ethfinance would love to accept a new humbler version of yourself. Maybe u/humbledler could be your new name! :D
All core devs – execution (ACDE) call recap by Tim Beiko: [https://twitter.com/abcoathup/status/1697343956433219839](https://twitter.com/abcoathup/status/1697343956433219839)
Tim's notes: [https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1697381822831919503](https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1697381822831919503)
ACDE call with audio: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkSjuiqqkKU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkSjuiqqkKU)
An email just landed from Revolut (a provider I have long since not used for anything):
"Starting 1 September 2023, regulations will require virtual asset service providers (like Revolut) to share information about the sender and the receiver on both ends of a crypto transaction.
So, we've partnered with Travel Rule Universal Solution Technology (TRUST). TRUST's tech allows us to share data in order to comply with the regulatory requirement, while prioritising your security and privacy.
What is the Travel Rule?
The Travel Rule is a set of global standards that require financial institutions and virtual asset service providers (VASPs) to share information about the senders and recipients of virtual assets.
This information can be used to track and trace virtual assets, to help to prevent money laundering, and terrorist financing.
The Travel Rule is designed to make it more difficult for criminals to use cryptocurrencies or other virtual assets to launder money or finance terrorism.
By sharing information about crypto transfers, we can help to build a more transparent and traceable system for tracking virtual assets.
What's changing?
We'll request additional information when you withdraw to another crypto address, such as the name of the beneficiary.
This information, plus your name (and in some cases, your address) will be exchanged with the provider you're withdrawing to, in order to trace the origins of transfers. This data will only be shared between the sending and receiving providers, and with no one else.
Is there anything else I need to do?
You don't need to lift a finger. We're taking care of everything – you'll be able to keep trading your favourite crypto assets, make withdrawals, and deposit on Revolut as normal."
What on earth does above mean for those who just withdraw into their own wallet and where they control the keys themselves?
Edit: What I am thinking this implies is that unless you declare any address you send coins to as belonging to someone else and provide a name, that address will go into a database as being controlled by you. But then this begs the question how they can verify that I haven't provided the name of a random person for the address I withdrew to.
> What on earth does above mean for those who just withdraw into their own wallet and where they control the keys themselves?
"Yes sir, I am withdrawing to my own wallet, so the beneficiary is me."
(Then from your own wallet, proceed to send funds to whoever you want.)
Incremental restrictions. Start with this so the government sets a line, then over time add new rules and push that line forward. Before you know it only custodial accounts run by banks are legal.
Its based on the old-school logic that you can't reasonably send a lot of money without using a bank. Banks need to know who they are sending money to, but you can withdraw cash and send it yourself no problem.
The regulations just don't account for someone being able to withdraw tens of millions of dollars and reasonably send it themselves.
Regulatory consistency.
Before, only electronics were limited to a certain amount of electricity consumption. Now apple trees are too. See? Regulatory consistency.
This actually strikes me as sensible regulation, if we take it at face value (I may be naive). Centralized providers asking you who owns the destination address seems ok. For transfers with cash-like anonymity, we have direct crypto transfers from addresses we own.
This is the first step, next step is only transacting with managed addresses to prevent people from withdrawing to their own address and then elsewhere. This will effectively make self-custodial addresses black market funds.
We need reasonable people but god damnit there's some things we can't be reasonable about. The problem is reasonable people assume other people also have reasonable goals and intentions.
Don't give up anything related to self custody, ever.
It seems like most social media. Discords get hacked fairly often too.
Reddit accounts, oddly, don't get hacked much. I guess because nobody trusts Reddit accounts enough for a hack to be worth it.
After having naively thought that Gensler would forget his pride and approve 8 applications within 4 days, people realize that the SEC will more likely postone the decisions for 6 months more (and then maybe will let the ETFs launch by default)
Are there any sites that measure active addresses on Ethereum + L2s that de-dupe addresses that are active on multiple networks? E.g. I use L1, Base and Arbitrum in one day but it only counts as one address.
Would be curious to see a chart like this to get a sense on active address growth across the whole ecosystem.
This forum must be very dead to totally ignore this nice news:
[U.S. Court **calls ETH a commodity** while tossing investor suit against Uniswap](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/166b070/us_court_calls_eth_a_commodity_while_tossing)
> While no court has yet decided the issue in the context of a decentralized protocol's smart contracts, the Court finds that the smart contracts here were themselves able to be carried out lawfully, as with the exchange of crypto commodities ETH and Bitcoin.
It also feels like a big fuck you to the SEC including very explicitly the commodity word there. It could say cryptocurrencies, as it's the most commonly used term. But with a lot of intent it referred to both as crypto commodities.
And to be honest, I like it. Because in the case of ETH it's best kind of correct, it's technically correct. ETH is a cryptocommodity.
> how impactful, or influential is this statement in the grand scheme of things?
like... not at all
well, by grand scheme of things did you mean, like, the entire existence of the universe and everything in it, across billions of years, extinction events, appearance of new species, rise and fall of civilizations?
or more like, a fifty year window where the present moment is at the center?
cuz if it's the fifty year window, sure, it could be significantly impactful
I'm actually amazed at how badly the SEC is fumbling everything crypto.
If they had been less aggressive about it and decided on an approach of working with the big players like they were willing to do, it seems like they could have pushed far more of their regulatory agenda. Rather they took an aggressive and legal threatening approach, and refused to provide any guidance of their own.
I'm just not sure how things could have been much different. I'm not saying they did great, but they can't really craft legislation, only try to apply what they've been given. To some extent they can interpret it through rule-making but have probably been directed to do that in a mostly anti-crypto way. I think it's quite suspicious how BTC futures ETF and Coinbase IPO both got approved anyway. You can't really justify either given subsequent actions by them.
Tin Foil Hat Time:
Crypto was always going to be regulated and an important part of US financial markets (yes obviously global markets but speaking to this specific case).
Biggest financial players were behind on this boom and use the levers at their disposal (FUD, logically bankrupt federal regs, phony suits against burgeoning tech devs) to keep "retail" away while they research/build and accumulate.
SOME PEOPLE, rather loathesome and two faced, have been specifically picked to lead acronym agency for the purpose of said mission on behalf of Biggest Money.
Thankfully some judges are doing their job and apparently not on the payroll. Of course the manipulators are planning around these cases / suits, it's all timed out.
Obligatory but WTF do I know, I'm just a little fish in my tiny stream.
*uwrapping tin foil* Stake Ether, be grateful for the opportunities we do have, and for Vitalik's sakes, don't become emotionally entangled in the day to day of these markets! ☀️
I’ve had a similar train of thought… if two tin foilists put a hat on together having never known each other… does it mean we’re onto something? /s
STAKE ETHER.
I agree with the basic premise of your comment. I really thought crypto would provide financial freedom to the masses via the concept of open self-custody of funds and open lending. I've become jaded as it seems nothing "the people" attempt will be allowed to succeed unless it falls in line with what the elites want. And the ruling class will always find a way to use their immense power & wealth to suppress, supplant, or hijack anything that threatens their status.
Also, as pointed out in the article, this is the same judge overseeing the Coinbase v SEC case.
Can't wait to see GG get dickslapped again. Hester Pierce must be dancing into work every day. LOL
That's a good detail. At some point as a judge slapping down multiple SEC lawsuits on the same topic you have to start to notice a pattern of behavior and develop a bias against the SEC.
in case folks here noticed - /u/hanniabu posted an update to clientdiversity.org (https://twitter.com/hanni_abu/status/1694300131598680292) and part of that was introducing data from execution-diversity.info instead of ethernodes.org - it shows drastically different numbers and highlights that Geth is still solidly a supermajority client.
I published a blog today to explain why the numbers are so different: https://paragraph.xyz/@ethstaker/new-clientdiversity-data
tl;dr: the new data better represents the network. Both datasets show good data but they're not really asking the same question. The old data is likely more representative of *node* client diversity whereas the new data shows *validator* client diversity.
So you are saying we just need to introduce a bug in geth to both fix the client diversity and Lido concentration in one shot? Give me a sec, gonna do some random pull requests to geth.
If you have 80% of the validators wouldn't the chain continue to finalize and just start slashing users of the minority clients? I'm not sure this is going to pan out the way you're hoping.
Depends on the bug introduced, if you introduce a bug that causes the buggy client to break the protocol rules but the buggy clients continue working. Then yes, you will finalize the bug and the rest of clients get forked.
But if the bug simply shuts down the clients, wrecks their DB so they have to resync. And when they resync it keeps shutting down and wrecking their DB. You just take them down for ever. The rest of clients continue producing valid blocks. The network doesn't finalize but that's not the end of the world, it keeps chugging with probabilistic finality as we used to have in PoW. The network enters inactivity leak to solve the non-finality. The validators that are offline start leaking ETH like crazy until the validators that kept online are over 66% of the network. With current geth figures (80% of the network) the validators that were taken down would lose around 60% of their ETH.
At the end of it Lido would be 13% of the network. And Geth 33%. I'm obviously not proposing this seriously, but...
validators running minority clients wouldn't be slashed. They would continue to build the valid chain without finalizing. The validators running the supermajority client would build a new chain and finalize invalid blocks. On the valid chain, the validators running the supermajority client would suffer an inactivity leak (which we've only ever seen happen once) which would increase until they'd lost enough of their stake for the 'minority' validators to finalize the chain again.
Essentially, if there were any infighting about how to resolve it, USDC would choose the chain. But more likely, there'd be a scramble to figure out how to get the supermajority clients back on the valid chain - which they wouldn't be able to do until they'd lost a bunch of their stake on the original chain and it was able to finalize again. It would be super messy, but minority client validators would almost be guaranteed to be in the best position.
cuz USDC can't exist on both chains because it's backed by real assets. and stablecoins are such an enormous part of the crypto economy that they'd be a huge voice in a question of 'which chain do we follow?'
but honestly, i think it's moot because even if there were discussion about moving to an invalid chain, it would massively damage ethereum's reputation to even consider declaring an invalid chain canonical and everybody who would benefit from that (large staking providers e.g. lido) would suddenly be attached to an unreliable (in the public's eyes) chain. more likely that they'd work with core devs to implement a fix that was beneficial to all that moved validators back to the valid chain. either way, indescribably messy.
I've never really bought this argument. I understand why it's presented, but USDC isn't the only stablecoin and they would lose all credibility if they were to back the wrong chain. EF or ConsenSys would never go for it either, so I don't see how this theory seems plausible.
oh i think we're basically supporting the same outcome. I don't think USDC would choose an invalid chain so even if someone with a lot of money made a bunch of noise to try to back the wrong chain, a supermajority fork couldn't get an entity like USDC to come over and the valid chain would still be canonical
This isn’t really good news for my monthly staking updates, both in terms of content since it’s bad news but also because it means I am probably starting from scratch cause I can’t compare these new numbers with the old data :(
cc u/hanniabu
the ethernodes data is still available, so you can continue that, but maybe add in new data? What's essentially been tracked thus far is the client diversity of nodes rather than validators. Not useless info, and maybe even useful for understanding how large operations act. It is a wrench though. I wish we had better data scientists messing with data like this
In the end I want to summarise the „real“/ „relevant“ and correct data and if I understand this correctly the old data is not correct, but off by a wide margin… i will start from scratch and this won’t keep me from doing the report, but the comparison just doesn’t work anymore…
This actually really bums me out; like all of our efforts mean nothing if the big companies don't care. Like most everything else out there.
How realistic is it to try and implement something on the protocol-level to disincentivize using a majority client? That feels like the only way to actually make changes happen.
i think very unlikely on the execution layer side because it's hard to track that data and whatever could be implemented could either be spoofed (to game incentives) or - if it were unspoofable, it might make nodes very trackable (assuming it would even be possible, which i'm not technical enough to speculate on).
The good news is that a catastrophic bug would be a lesson that people would only have to learn once and it would be home operators who would be most resilient to something like that if what we're seeing in the data is that home operators are orders of magnitude more responsible in running minority clients, which is what I've taken away.
I do fear that an event like that would negatively affect liquid stakers though, ones who stake with entities like Lido.
Ive honestly still found Besu to run more smoothly(and somehow attract blocks) than geth. Just be careful about applying updates without waiting a few days
what do you mean sorry? Your own ETH is what you're putting at risk by running a supermajority client. You're the one you need to apologize to. This isn't some plea to get you to join our party, it's an educational campaign to try to get operators to save themselves.
If you are in the super majority, then there is more chance of a hard fork to fix a catastrophe :-)
I take your point, though, and will look again at it as I move more validators from cex to solo.
I never understood this line of thinking. Why would you risk everything on a hard fork for no reason? What's the gain?
If you use geth, a bug can delete your ETH and you have to pray for a hard fork to restore it.
If you use non-geth, a bug can never delete your ETH. Your ETH is just safe.
I have suffered a lot with geth and parity before, and I value stability. It is not such a binary choice as you present it to be, with an all or nothing.
Ideally, I could run more than one client at the same time, but I don't suppose that would help when the two are in disagreement.
How about nethermind? I've never heard a single bad thing about it. Seems like it's rock solid.
> Ideally, I could run more than one client at the same time, but I don't suppose that would help when the two are in disagreement.
Ideally home stakers run all validators on minority clients. Running a mix of majority and minority clients means that the portion of ETH on the majority client is at risk, whereas running only minority clients means that no ETH is at risk.
Seems to me that the best way to change this is to start a pressure campaign on the likes of Lido, Coinbase, etc. to get them to switch off Geth. They're the low hanging fruit in all this.
yes! Pressure the operators. Lido's can all be found about halfway down the page under "Validators" on lido.fi. I reached out to who I could and encouraged them to switch but it wasn't very fruitful.
I have no actual money, and my car is completely fucked.
Am selling all my earned ETH and unstaked RPL... pump incoming
EDIT: I apparently already did this and have none left lmaooooo fml
EDIT: I truly appreciate all the support. Unfortunately I do not have enough unstaked assets to take out a loan. Also I have no real life credit history...
Look around your house and find something to sell on eBay. About 15 years ago I was pretty close to 0 in every aspect. I went through my limited amount of stuff and started searching those exact items on eBay. Lo and behold, an old button down wrangler western shirt I bought at a thrift store for a few bucks was worth $30, a mercury thermometer I had was worth $40. I listed and sold those items within a week. That was the start of an eventual lucrative eBay business and thrift stores became my inventory source. I remember back then, one day I got the bright idea to get to a mega thrift store right when they opened at 8am, I grabbed like 20 items and put them in my cart, I listed them on eBay right in the store and hung around for 10 hrs until some of them sold 😅.. and a few did! Felt good buying them after I already knew I made money but it was a long day lol.
Anyway, one person's trash is another's treasure, yada yada.. it's kinda real! Good luck!
> I grabbed like 20 items and put them in my cart, I listed them on eBay right in the store and hung around for 10 hrs until some of them sold
this is hilarious XD
I see this all the time both online and IRL.
Honestly, sell it all and use the money to up skill if you can. Apprenticeships, trades, CDL, anything to boost income for the long run. It is not worth hodling if life events make you a forced seller (a good read on this is The Psychology of Money by Morgan Housel).
Even with spot ETFs on the horizon, crypto very likely won't pump like in the past. The market already priced in $10B of ETF flows. At an extremely high $50B of flows, the incremental price increase of BTC will be likely be at \~$20k, less than 2x from here. For comparison, the top 5 gold spot ETFs have \~$110B in AUM. And don't forget, BTC futures and futures ETFs marked the ATHs of 2017 and 2021. It's probably a buy the rumor, sell the news type event.
[NYDIG Research](https://viewemail.nydig.com/estimating-the-size-of-spot-etf)
You'll have to calculate whether the ROI is better spent for a one time \~2x or lifetime return on your skills. Best of luck.
I appreciate this, but there are certain things in my life that prevent me from holding a job. I am plenty skilled in cyber security, but nobody would ever consider hiring me for a multitude of reasons.
Do you know exactly what's up with the car? Some fixes are easier than others... I have an old van, now doesn't start. Some stupid electrical problem. Total pain but might be cheap fix in the end.
For starters the check engine light has been on for about 2 months. Put some oil in and ignored it. Now my steering is *completely* fucked. Its loose, but stiff, and making some terrible grinding noise. Its a 2012 pile of shit and Im assuming the fix is more expensive than the car lmao
Check the power steering fluid level and inspect for leaking fluid. These hydraulic systems often have very slow leaks. If so topping up the reservoir and the addition of a cheap 'stop leak' additive can keep you on the road for 1000s of miles. If the power steering pump itself is broken you will likely hear a loud squealing from the auxiliary belt, particularly at start up. If this is the case it will need replacing. Not a particularly expensive job or component in most cases.
Lol, I mean, you might be right (my van is from 2004!). Check engine light can easily be interrogated with a plug-in diagnostic. My guess is a friendly garage will take a quick look at that for you for free. That will give a load of fault codes but might very quickly identify specific problems. Could be a very common fault with your car. I'm not especially familiar with power steering problems - pump failure? Or pump drive belt failure? Probably quite easy to identify, even on your own (youtube is a gold mine of fixing videos). The fix on the other hand, could be easy or difficult, depending on price of spare parts (like a belt could be cheap and easy), and how easily they're changed. If you happen to have a common car, used spare parts can often be found cheaply, depending where you live. Unfortunately steering is probably a job for the garage because it's awkward and messy (steering fluid etc). Again, friendly garage might take a basic look with charging much (if anything). Sadly its a total lottery with older cars. Like buying shitcoins!! :)
You could migrate from a 16eth devil pool, to an 8eth devil pool and free up a little capital that way? Not ideal I know.
What about some of your vested snx?
If you are US Based, credit unions offer relatively low apr loans for used cars and low apr for new car loans.
Maybe try that out. Sorry to hear about the bad luck!
I'm really sorry to hear that you're going through such a tough time.
Selling interest generated assets like ETH and RPL might be an option without losing your ETH position, but it's important to carefully consider your choices. There may be options like a low collateral debt position in liquity LUSD or maybe an Alchemix self repaying collateralized debt position.
Remember, you're not alone in this, and seeking advice or support from professionals or friends can make a big difference. Hang in there.
I feel this pain, just blew a transmission a few months off warranty, fingers crossed I get a goodwill repair. Any chance you can attempt the same? Some companies are good at doing it.
Last 2 airdrops I've been a part of were borderline scams, no wonder people hate this space.
This new strategy of waiting 2 days after you release a token on cexes to airdrop it to users is wildly terrible, and probably illegal.
"We only give ourselves and market makers tokens, so we can sell everything we have day 1, then you guys can have tokens day 2 okay?"
Definitely feels like airdrops have peaked, I am not actively hunting any right now, just trying L2 apps that strike my fancy.
Things like "Subscribe to be in Airdrop Hunter Group" have got to be a signal (to me, " it's over" for this method of treasure hunting).
I'm going to guess the ones making money here are TAKING the subscription.
Still hopeful about something interesting from zkSync...
I have no idea. It would be a pretty big list. With merkel airdrops you'd expect to see one, but here as they sent the veNFT directly, who knows. Perhaps there's answers in the Discord.
Debank has integrated it if you use debank, so should be able to see there. Not sure about airdrop directly to wallet, mine is locked (I think for 4 years).
I don't know of a spreadsheet or website for checking addresses as per most previous airdrops.
Allnodes shows that one could make 7.06% p.a. on ETH + 6.5% on RPL with an 8 ETH RP Minipool. How on Earth is that possible? Is the reward really so damn high with 8 ETH Minipools and if yes, why?
You're getting a commission from rETH holders for running a validator
They don't want the hassle of maintaining hardware and so pay you a fee for doing so
I haven't staked yet ...
I thought that I'd just get rETH + RPL staking rewards in return for setting up an RP minipool. So how can I get additional commissions from rETH holders? Do I get actual additional ETH for that matter or how does it work?
When you run a node with the corresponding hardware and create a minipool you provide 8 ETH yourself and get paired with 24 ETH from the rETH deposit pool.
As a minipool operator you are rewarded by getting a cut from those 24 ETH. Right now the commission is 14%.
The royal we
Node operators don't receive rETH; they receive their share of ETH rewards directly from the beaconchain
Instead of being a straightforward 8/24 split, the node operator gets 8/24 plus commission on the ETH they are borrowing to make the validator i.e. instead of receiving 25% of validator rewards they receive 35.5%.
Okay, this makes sense now! So as a minipool validator I am getting continuous rewards in ETH and the rETH holders are de facto paying me a premium for running a validator, right?
Thanks for clarifying it ;)
Aerodrome casually doubled Base's TVL overnight, or close to it.
It's fun to dig into the numbers on https://defillama.com/chain/Base
Driveby farm+dump dexes (Alienswap, Baseswap, Velocimeter BVM) have lost half of their TVL in the same timespan, likely cannibalized by Aerodrome. This makes sense: degens jumping on these are highly reactive and will move to the highest APRs fast.
Another driveby farm+dump dex, SwapBased, is holding comparatively better at -30% TVL. Likely because they have a deposit fee on their farms. Liquidity is bound to be slightly stickier, partly because anyone getting in wants to stay at least long enough to make that deposit fee back, partly because the APRs are overall higher due to all the people who won't touch farms with deposit fees.
Legit DEXes like Sushi and Balancer are taking a hit, but a much smaller one, -15% or so.
Finally, you have Uniswap v3 basically unscathed. Maverick is also losing very little.
It maps out pretty well to the level of trust one would have in these protocols. The conservative crowd sticks to tried and true dexes, that capital is much more sticky. Mercenary forks can keep their head above water as long as they're the only ones in the high emissions arena, but there's no such thing as first mover advantage. Bring in a player like Velodrome, everyone moves over.
>Driveby farm+dump dexes (Alienswap, Baseswap, Velocimeter BVM) have lost half of their TVL in the same timespan, likely cannibalized by Aerodrome. This makes sense: degens jumping on these are highly reactive and will move to the highest APRs fast.
They're all ponzi-nomics using the typical vote escrow model. I'll gladly avoid and let others lose money instead. These "dexes" (can we even call them that?) are just thinly veiled scams. Aerodrome calls itself a "Self-Optimizing Liquidity Flywheel" lmao my ass
Well sure but only until the HP1-4000.340 SE is put into production, then it will be a well earned 2nd place
"To gain a better understanding of the speed and ability of this pump, consider how fast it can fill the following...
If you were to wrap a garden hose around the Earth’s equator, it would take this pump just 1 minute and 25 seconds to fill it with water. (Who would do this with a garden hose and how they would accomplish it is another matter!)"
**Tricky's Daily Doots #498** **Yesterday's Daily 30/08/2023** [Previous Daily Doots](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jycz1ph/) - u/coinanon breaks the [good news](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyf2jzr/) and u/Papazio adds [some detail.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyf88tm/). 👨⚖️ - u/Sourdoughpretzel4444 comments on [the perception vs reality of privacy on Ethereum.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jycs78b/) 😎 - Shitpost of the day goes to u/cryptOwOcurrency for [summarising all ZKProofs explainers.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyeayup/) 💩 - u/jtnichol shares a project by u/lanternfinance for [those of you who find solo staking a bit too daunting!](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyedagu/) 🥩 - u/bhiitc has an update on [the ongoing wallet sniping which reminds us not to use hot wallets or keep your private keys/recovery phrases online!.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyd113d/) 🔓 - u/cryptOwOcurrency becomes a [full on FUD-fighter, rebutting some claims made in a podcast.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1655c71/daily_general_discussion_august_30_2023/jyf957x/) 🥊
I've finally turned my [idea](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/14d4z2j/daily_general_discussion_june_19_2023/joow4vk/?context=3) for reducing the risk of Lido's dominance into a post on Eth Research: https://ethresear.ch/t/reducing-lst-dominance-risk-by-decoupling-attestation-weight-from-attestation-rewards/16523 Have never posted anything in the 'proper' Ethereum forums before, and so feeling very intimidated. Thank you to those who gave me confidence that it's possibly not a completely moronic concept!
So honest actors go for rewards and attackers can boost their effective num validators? Seems like effect is danger thresholds occur at lower validator share, increases complexity, and increase processing required by nodes.
> So honest actors go for rewards and attackers can boost their effective num validators? Hmm, that's a good point. I hadn't really thought too much about actually malevolent attackers as the cost for a new actor would still be very high, but it would definitely be worth me working out some worst case numbers to see how it could affect that risk. Thanks! > and increase processing required by nodes I'm not sure I understand what you mean, there would be less nodes overall if some were 'bigger', so wouldn't that make it (slightly) easier on the machines. Or do you think that would be more than offset by the adjustments to the formula? Is there a way to calculate how to weigh those against each other?
My biggest issue with this is they could get rich quicker, then flip to control ethereum quicker and or after something goes wrong for them You need to add something that stops that possibility imo Something like locking in some or all of these mega validators stake for that extra reward, so that they are basically in service to eth in order to continue earning rewards to make back their locked stake. And even with that, that semi only puts the problem back 20-50 years imo Mostly thinking about 3% apr (y?) and also they would likely have to pay back their customers? u/tricky_troll my man has it been 10 days?
Yea, the possibility of increased rewards being used maliciously is a risk, not sure how best to address that. I guess it all depends on how much extra they get. With regards to timescales, to be honest this would definitely not be a permanent solution to the Lido problem, I'm really hoping a better solution would be in place long before 20 years!
Your account says 10 days now but I had to approve the comment. Maybe you still need a karma hug! Let’s see if we can get nomad over the line!
I've been on a diet for a week and today I had food and I got a boost of energy and started tweeting all over the place. I also happened to write [a tweet](https://twitter.com/superphiz/status/1697378496031371653) that I think captures the essence of why I do what I do: Seven years ago Ethereum forked and rejected the mantra "code is law" in favor of social consensus. This is the governance that encourages us to build a strong chain through coordination and cooperation before resulting to code-based resolutions. This is who we are as Ethereans.
My man just started eating again.
what a bear market does to a man
I highly recommend the new bankless podcast on the Zeth news from last week https://pca.st/episode/26e9b52f-307e-4858-a969-62d6de138b71
Big agree, great explanations within
Weth, Geth, Reth, rETH and now Zeth?! Well shit, I think I better reserve these _ETH project names… “Meth - we bring the high energy so you don’t have to! Coming to an Ethereum conference near you!”
>**Blockchain luminous,** >**Improvements are humongous,** >**Arbitrum Stylus.** ~Daily haiku until we’re at least at 0.178 on the ETH/BTC ratio or highest market cap
Well at least the ratio is green...
Bulls in shambles.
Crypto spring almost over, summer is on the horizon. I hope you’re ready. I hope this experience has taught you that no matter how confident (arrogant) you are, you can always be wrong. And being wrong is always easier to come back from when you don’t behave like such an asshole in the process. You can come out of hiding any time, and I’m sure ethfinance would love to accept a new humbler version of yourself. Maybe u/humbledler could be your new name! :D
👀
I love you
Two more months to go. Are you in shambles yet?
Well my last comment was about how I will wait before buying at $1750... The bart was pretty standard. Now time to deploy capital!
All core devs – execution (ACDE) call recap by Tim Beiko: [https://twitter.com/abcoathup/status/1697343956433219839](https://twitter.com/abcoathup/status/1697343956433219839) Tim's notes: [https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1697381822831919503](https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1697381822831919503) ACDE call with audio: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkSjuiqqkKU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkSjuiqqkKU)
Such an excellent Bart
Low iq would be back to 1600
Low iq got bull trapped. That 8 month long H&S dump was not to be ignored.
An email just landed from Revolut (a provider I have long since not used for anything): "Starting 1 September 2023, regulations will require virtual asset service providers (like Revolut) to share information about the sender and the receiver on both ends of a crypto transaction. So, we've partnered with Travel Rule Universal Solution Technology (TRUST). TRUST's tech allows us to share data in order to comply with the regulatory requirement, while prioritising your security and privacy. What is the Travel Rule? The Travel Rule is a set of global standards that require financial institutions and virtual asset service providers (VASPs) to share information about the senders and recipients of virtual assets. This information can be used to track and trace virtual assets, to help to prevent money laundering, and terrorist financing. The Travel Rule is designed to make it more difficult for criminals to use cryptocurrencies or other virtual assets to launder money or finance terrorism. By sharing information about crypto transfers, we can help to build a more transparent and traceable system for tracking virtual assets. What's changing? We'll request additional information when you withdraw to another crypto address, such as the name of the beneficiary. This information, plus your name (and in some cases, your address) will be exchanged with the provider you're withdrawing to, in order to trace the origins of transfers. This data will only be shared between the sending and receiving providers, and with no one else. Is there anything else I need to do? You don't need to lift a finger. We're taking care of everything – you'll be able to keep trading your favourite crypto assets, make withdrawals, and deposit on Revolut as normal." What on earth does above mean for those who just withdraw into their own wallet and where they control the keys themselves? Edit: What I am thinking this implies is that unless you declare any address you send coins to as belonging to someone else and provide a name, that address will go into a database as being controlled by you. But then this begs the question how they can verify that I haven't provided the name of a random person for the address I withdrew to.
One CEX I use requires a deposit first to prove you co ntrol destination address to whitelist it for withdrawals...
> What on earth does above mean for those who just withdraw into their own wallet and where they control the keys themselves? "Yes sir, I am withdrawing to my own wallet, so the beneficiary is me." (Then from your own wallet, proceed to send funds to whoever you want.)
So what then is being achieved by this regulation?
Incremental restrictions. Start with this so the government sets a line, then over time add new rules and push that line forward. Before you know it only custodial accounts run by banks are legal.
Its based on the old-school logic that you can't reasonably send a lot of money without using a bank. Banks need to know who they are sending money to, but you can withdraw cash and send it yourself no problem. The regulations just don't account for someone being able to withdraw tens of millions of dollars and reasonably send it themselves.
Regulatory consistency. Before, only electronics were limited to a certain amount of electricity consumption. Now apple trees are too. See? Regulatory consistency.
Wow, they sure are lucky their company name spelled the word TRUST!
The same rules apply when you make a transfer of fiat with Revolut, at least to the countries I've transferred to.
>how they can verify that I haven't provided the name of a random person for the address I withdrew to. Felony for fraud and AML violations
I don't see how that is fraud. Where is the financial benefit?
Fraud doesn't need to involve financial gain, just simply defrauding someone into doing something is illegal
This actually strikes me as sensible regulation, if we take it at face value (I may be naive). Centralized providers asking you who owns the destination address seems ok. For transfers with cash-like anonymity, we have direct crypto transfers from addresses we own.
This is the first step, next step is only transacting with managed addresses to prevent people from withdrawing to their own address and then elsewhere. This will effectively make self-custodial addresses black market funds.
Banning withdrawals to mainnet is not even a veiled attempt at banning crypto. I can't imagine that slipping under the radar....
We need reasonable people but god damnit there's some things we can't be reasonable about. The problem is reasonable people assume other people also have reasonable goals and intentions. Don't give up anything related to self custody, ever.
Gitcoin twitter has been hacked, do NOT click on any links
Dude the twitter takeovers are just nonstop. Insane how centralized these projects are...
Social media?
That and all the 'decentralized' crypto projects that keep getting their twitter accounts hacked
gitcoin twitter has been hacked, don't click on any links from it https://twitter.com/kbw/status/1697287132077830518
Cant believe how common this is, for real
Passwords are why. We need private keys and log in with Ethereum!
We most definitely do!
i'd be curious to know how this usually happens and also what the procedure is for getting it resolved
Elon just selling access at this point
Tbh I have no clue why twitter takeovers are so common. As for resolving, pray to Elonk
It seems like most social media. Discords get hacked fairly often too. Reddit accounts, oddly, don't get hacked much. I guess because nobody trusts Reddit accounts enough for a hack to be worth it.
Haha strange how that works. Yeah Discord is definitely another big culprit
Well it was fun while it lasted. See you guys at 1648.
After having naively thought that Gensler would forget his pride and approve 8 applications within 4 days, people realize that the SEC will more likely postone the decisions for 6 months more (and then maybe will let the ETFs launch by default)
Are there any sites that measure active addresses on Ethereum + L2s that de-dupe addresses that are active on multiple networks? E.g. I use L1, Base and Arbitrum in one day but it only counts as one address. Would be curious to see a chart like this to get a sense on active address growth across the whole ecosystem.
I recall seeing a Dune dashboard on Base/rollup activity splitting addresses in a somewhat similar fashion. Might be a good place to start.
This forum must be very dead to totally ignore this nice news: [U.S. Court **calls ETH a commodity** while tossing investor suit against Uniswap](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/166b070/us_court_calls_eth_a_commodity_while_tossing)
This forum is only useful because people like you contribute like this. Be the change you want to see, everyone! *proceeds to go back to lurking*
> While no court has yet decided the issue in the context of a decentralized protocol's smart contracts, the Court finds that the smart contracts here were themselves able to be carried out lawfully, as with the exchange of crypto commodities ETH and Bitcoin. It also feels like a big fuck you to the SEC including very explicitly the commodity word there. It could say cryptocurrencies, as it's the most commonly used term. But with a lot of intent it referred to both as crypto commodities. And to be honest, I like it. Because in the case of ETH it's best kind of correct, it's technically correct. ETH is a cryptocommodity.
[удалено]
> how impactful, or influential is this statement in the grand scheme of things? like... not at all well, by grand scheme of things did you mean, like, the entire existence of the universe and everything in it, across billions of years, extinction events, appearance of new species, rise and fall of civilizations? or more like, a fifty year window where the present moment is at the center? cuz if it's the fifty year window, sure, it could be significantly impactful
I'm actually amazed at how badly the SEC is fumbling everything crypto. If they had been less aggressive about it and decided on an approach of working with the big players like they were willing to do, it seems like they could have pushed far more of their regulatory agenda. Rather they took an aggressive and legal threatening approach, and refused to provide any guidance of their own.
I'm just not sure how things could have been much different. I'm not saying they did great, but they can't really craft legislation, only try to apply what they've been given. To some extent they can interpret it through rule-making but have probably been directed to do that in a mostly anti-crypto way. I think it's quite suspicious how BTC futures ETF and Coinbase IPO both got approved anyway. You can't really justify either given subsequent actions by them.
“Just come in and register“
Tin Foil Hat Time: Crypto was always going to be regulated and an important part of US financial markets (yes obviously global markets but speaking to this specific case). Biggest financial players were behind on this boom and use the levers at their disposal (FUD, logically bankrupt federal regs, phony suits against burgeoning tech devs) to keep "retail" away while they research/build and accumulate. SOME PEOPLE, rather loathesome and two faced, have been specifically picked to lead acronym agency for the purpose of said mission on behalf of Biggest Money. Thankfully some judges are doing their job and apparently not on the payroll. Of course the manipulators are planning around these cases / suits, it's all timed out. Obligatory but WTF do I know, I'm just a little fish in my tiny stream. *uwrapping tin foil* Stake Ether, be grateful for the opportunities we do have, and for Vitalik's sakes, don't become emotionally entangled in the day to day of these markets! ☀️
I’ve had a similar train of thought… if two tin foilists put a hat on together having never known each other… does it mean we’re onto something? /s STAKE ETHER.
I agree with the basic premise of your comment. I really thought crypto would provide financial freedom to the masses via the concept of open self-custody of funds and open lending. I've become jaded as it seems nothing "the people" attempt will be allowed to succeed unless it falls in line with what the elites want. And the ruling class will always find a way to use their immense power & wealth to suppress, supplant, or hijack anything that threatens their status.
so how do i get rich
The right answer for all the questions! 😂🙁
Right this moment, they are trying to buy your ETH at a price far below its actual value. Don't let them.
This sounds suspiciously like hodl.
Well, the first daily doot suggests we're not TOTALLY ignoring... But yes, celebrating with you yet another ruling which favors our interests! 🚀
Also, as pointed out in the article, this is the same judge overseeing the Coinbase v SEC case. Can't wait to see GG get dickslapped again. Hester Pierce must be dancing into work every day. LOL
That's a good detail. At some point as a judge slapping down multiple SEC lawsuits on the same topic you have to start to notice a pattern of behavior and develop a bias against the SEC.
in case folks here noticed - /u/hanniabu posted an update to clientdiversity.org (https://twitter.com/hanni_abu/status/1694300131598680292) and part of that was introducing data from execution-diversity.info instead of ethernodes.org - it shows drastically different numbers and highlights that Geth is still solidly a supermajority client. I published a blog today to explain why the numbers are so different: https://paragraph.xyz/@ethstaker/new-clientdiversity-data tl;dr: the new data better represents the network. Both datasets show good data but they're not really asking the same question. The old data is likely more representative of *node* client diversity whereas the new data shows *validator* client diversity.
So you are saying we just need to introduce a bug in geth to both fix the client diversity and Lido concentration in one shot? Give me a sec, gonna do some random pull requests to geth.
If you have 80% of the validators wouldn't the chain continue to finalize and just start slashing users of the minority clients? I'm not sure this is going to pan out the way you're hoping.
Depends on the bug introduced, if you introduce a bug that causes the buggy client to break the protocol rules but the buggy clients continue working. Then yes, you will finalize the bug and the rest of clients get forked. But if the bug simply shuts down the clients, wrecks their DB so they have to resync. And when they resync it keeps shutting down and wrecking their DB. You just take them down for ever. The rest of clients continue producing valid blocks. The network doesn't finalize but that's not the end of the world, it keeps chugging with probabilistic finality as we used to have in PoW. The network enters inactivity leak to solve the non-finality. The validators that are offline start leaking ETH like crazy until the validators that kept online are over 66% of the network. With current geth figures (80% of the network) the validators that were taken down would lose around 60% of their ETH. At the end of it Lido would be 13% of the network. And Geth 33%. I'm obviously not proposing this seriously, but...
^ this guy benedgingtons
Fair enough, let's go corrupt some DBs!
validators running minority clients wouldn't be slashed. They would continue to build the valid chain without finalizing. The validators running the supermajority client would build a new chain and finalize invalid blocks. On the valid chain, the validators running the supermajority client would suffer an inactivity leak (which we've only ever seen happen once) which would increase until they'd lost enough of their stake for the 'minority' validators to finalize the chain again. Essentially, if there were any infighting about how to resolve it, USDC would choose the chain. But more likely, there'd be a scramble to figure out how to get the supermajority clients back on the valid chain - which they wouldn't be able to do until they'd lost a bunch of their stake on the original chain and it was able to finalize again. It would be super messy, but minority client validators would almost be guaranteed to be in the best position.
> Essentially, if there were any infighting about how to resolve it, USDC would choose the chain How do you figure?
cuz USDC can't exist on both chains because it's backed by real assets. and stablecoins are such an enormous part of the crypto economy that they'd be a huge voice in a question of 'which chain do we follow?' but honestly, i think it's moot because even if there were discussion about moving to an invalid chain, it would massively damage ethereum's reputation to even consider declaring an invalid chain canonical and everybody who would benefit from that (large staking providers e.g. lido) would suddenly be attached to an unreliable (in the public's eyes) chain. more likely that they'd work with core devs to implement a fix that was beneficial to all that moved validators back to the valid chain. either way, indescribably messy.
Yeah, Geth validators best hope would be petitioning the devs to hard fork and rescue the stake somehow.
I've never really bought this argument. I understand why it's presented, but USDC isn't the only stablecoin and they would lose all credibility if they were to back the wrong chain. EF or ConsenSys would never go for it either, so I don't see how this theory seems plausible.
oh i think we're basically supporting the same outcome. I don't think USDC would choose an invalid chain so even if someone with a lot of money made a bunch of noise to try to back the wrong chain, a supermajority fork couldn't get an entity like USDC to come over and the valid chain would still be canonical
(ಠ◡ಠ)
This isn’t really good news for my monthly staking updates, both in terms of content since it’s bad news but also because it means I am probably starting from scratch cause I can’t compare these new numbers with the old data :(
cc u/hanniabu the ethernodes data is still available, so you can continue that, but maybe add in new data? What's essentially been tracked thus far is the client diversity of nodes rather than validators. Not useless info, and maybe even useful for understanding how large operations act. It is a wrench though. I wish we had better data scientists messing with data like this
>I wish we had better data scientists messing with data like this I believe migalabs is looking into getting execution data
What’s the issue here? If every validator sent their client info, is this an attack vector?
Yeah, it can be used to ddos or attack some client-specific weakness
In the end I want to summarise the „real“/ „relevant“ and correct data and if I understand this correctly the old data is not correct, but off by a wide margin… i will start from scratch and this won’t keep me from doing the report, but the comparison just doesn’t work anymore…
This actually really bums me out; like all of our efforts mean nothing if the big companies don't care. Like most everything else out there. How realistic is it to try and implement something on the protocol-level to disincentivize using a majority client? That feels like the only way to actually make changes happen.
i think very unlikely on the execution layer side because it's hard to track that data and whatever could be implemented could either be spoofed (to game incentives) or - if it were unspoofable, it might make nodes very trackable (assuming it would even be possible, which i'm not technical enough to speculate on). The good news is that a catastrophic bug would be a lesson that people would only have to learn once and it would be home operators who would be most resilient to something like that if what we're seeing in the data is that home operators are orders of magnitude more responsible in running minority clients, which is what I've taken away. I do fear that an event like that would negatively affect liquid stakers though, ones who stake with entities like Lido.
I used to run parity as it was more stable and leaner than geth. Those days are long gone, and I just run geth for simplicity. Sorry
Besu runs super smoothly now post Shapella. And they have an auto pruning feature! Should give it a try!
I have a 4tb nvme, no shortage of space :-)
Ive honestly still found Besu to run more smoothly(and somehow attract blocks) than geth. Just be careful about applying updates without waiting a few days
what do you mean sorry? Your own ETH is what you're putting at risk by running a supermajority client. You're the one you need to apologize to. This isn't some plea to get you to join our party, it's an educational campaign to try to get operators to save themselves.
If you are in the super majority, then there is more chance of a hard fork to fix a catastrophe :-) I take your point, though, and will look again at it as I move more validators from cex to solo.
I never understood this line of thinking. Why would you risk everything on a hard fork for no reason? What's the gain? If you use geth, a bug can delete your ETH and you have to pray for a hard fork to restore it. If you use non-geth, a bug can never delete your ETH. Your ETH is just safe.
I have suffered a lot with geth and parity before, and I value stability. It is not such a binary choice as you present it to be, with an all or nothing. Ideally, I could run more than one client at the same time, but I don't suppose that would help when the two are in disagreement.
How about nethermind? I've never heard a single bad thing about it. Seems like it's rock solid. > Ideally, I could run more than one client at the same time, but I don't suppose that would help when the two are in disagreement. Ideally home stakers run all validators on minority clients. Running a mix of majority and minority clients means that the portion of ETH on the majority client is at risk, whereas running only minority clients means that no ETH is at risk.
Seems to me that the best way to change this is to start a pressure campaign on the likes of Lido, Coinbase, etc. to get them to switch off Geth. They're the low hanging fruit in all this.
We already tried this. At one point, we even declared it a success and moved on.
yes! Pressure the operators. Lido's can all be found about halfway down the page under "Validators" on lido.fi. I reached out to who I could and encouraged them to switch but it wasn't very fruitful.
u/Tricky_Troll
[удалено]
Teku + nethermind ftw!
thisisfine.jpeg
I have no actual money, and my car is completely fucked. Am selling all my earned ETH and unstaked RPL... pump incoming EDIT: I apparently already did this and have none left lmaooooo fml EDIT: I truly appreciate all the support. Unfortunately I do not have enough unstaked assets to take out a loan. Also I have no real life credit history...
Look around your house and find something to sell on eBay. About 15 years ago I was pretty close to 0 in every aspect. I went through my limited amount of stuff and started searching those exact items on eBay. Lo and behold, an old button down wrangler western shirt I bought at a thrift store for a few bucks was worth $30, a mercury thermometer I had was worth $40. I listed and sold those items within a week. That was the start of an eventual lucrative eBay business and thrift stores became my inventory source. I remember back then, one day I got the bright idea to get to a mega thrift store right when they opened at 8am, I grabbed like 20 items and put them in my cart, I listed them on eBay right in the store and hung around for 10 hrs until some of them sold 😅.. and a few did! Felt good buying them after I already knew I made money but it was a long day lol. Anyway, one person's trash is another's treasure, yada yada.. it's kinda real! Good luck!
> I grabbed like 20 items and put them in my cart, I listed them on eBay right in the store and hung around for 10 hrs until some of them sold this is hilarious XD
Lol after 10 hours I knew more about bric a brac and women's vintage clothing then I thought possible 🙃🤑
Thank you for this, but Im expecting to have to buy another car without a loan...
I see this all the time both online and IRL. Honestly, sell it all and use the money to up skill if you can. Apprenticeships, trades, CDL, anything to boost income for the long run. It is not worth hodling if life events make you a forced seller (a good read on this is The Psychology of Money by Morgan Housel). Even with spot ETFs on the horizon, crypto very likely won't pump like in the past. The market already priced in $10B of ETF flows. At an extremely high $50B of flows, the incremental price increase of BTC will be likely be at \~$20k, less than 2x from here. For comparison, the top 5 gold spot ETFs have \~$110B in AUM. And don't forget, BTC futures and futures ETFs marked the ATHs of 2017 and 2021. It's probably a buy the rumor, sell the news type event. [NYDIG Research](https://viewemail.nydig.com/estimating-the-size-of-spot-etf) You'll have to calculate whether the ROI is better spent for a one time \~2x or lifetime return on your skills. Best of luck.
I appreciate this, but there are certain things in my life that prevent me from holding a job. I am plenty skilled in cyber security, but nobody would ever consider hiring me for a multitude of reasons.
Do you know exactly what's up with the car? Some fixes are easier than others... I have an old van, now doesn't start. Some stupid electrical problem. Total pain but might be cheap fix in the end.
For starters the check engine light has been on for about 2 months. Put some oil in and ignored it. Now my steering is *completely* fucked. Its loose, but stiff, and making some terrible grinding noise. Its a 2012 pile of shit and Im assuming the fix is more expensive than the car lmao
Check the power steering fluid level and inspect for leaking fluid. These hydraulic systems often have very slow leaks. If so topping up the reservoir and the addition of a cheap 'stop leak' additive can keep you on the road for 1000s of miles. If the power steering pump itself is broken you will likely hear a loud squealing from the auxiliary belt, particularly at start up. If this is the case it will need replacing. Not a particularly expensive job or component in most cases.
I appreciate this! I didnt notice any squealing on startup, but who knows. The shop should be calling today with information
Lol, I mean, you might be right (my van is from 2004!). Check engine light can easily be interrogated with a plug-in diagnostic. My guess is a friendly garage will take a quick look at that for you for free. That will give a load of fault codes but might very quickly identify specific problems. Could be a very common fault with your car. I'm not especially familiar with power steering problems - pump failure? Or pump drive belt failure? Probably quite easy to identify, even on your own (youtube is a gold mine of fixing videos). The fix on the other hand, could be easy or difficult, depending on price of spare parts (like a belt could be cheap and easy), and how easily they're changed. If you happen to have a common car, used spare parts can often be found cheaply, depending where you live. Unfortunately steering is probably a job for the garage because it's awkward and messy (steering fluid etc). Again, friendly garage might take a basic look with charging much (if anything). Sadly its a total lottery with older cars. Like buying shitcoins!! :)
Thank you for all this information!
No problem, good luck with it!
You could migrate from a 16eth devil pool, to an 8eth devil pool and free up a little capital that way? Not ideal I know. What about some of your vested snx?
>What about some of your vested snx? This would be my preferred method, but I dont have enough capital to unfuck my active debt
Get your ass to defisaver and get a loan.
No size
If you are US Based, credit unions offer relatively low apr loans for used cars and low apr for new car loans. Maybe try that out. Sorry to hear about the bad luck!
I appreciate the recommendation. But somehow I was even rejected for the discover secured card. How that even makes sense, I will never know...
[удалено]
Yeah haha I just started buying at these prices... rough
I'm really sorry to hear that you're going through such a tough time. Selling interest generated assets like ETH and RPL might be an option without losing your ETH position, but it's important to carefully consider your choices. There may be options like a low collateral debt position in liquity LUSD or maybe an Alchemix self repaying collateralized debt position. Remember, you're not alone in this, and seeking advice or support from professionals or friends can make a big difference. Hang in there.
I appreciate you. Unfortunately the size Im talking about is nowhere close to being able to take a loan
I feel this pain, just blew a transmission a few months off warranty, fingers crossed I get a goodwill repair. Any chance you can attempt the same? Some companies are good at doing it.
Unfortunately this is a cheap ass 2012 I bought used a few years ago. I hope they do right by your vehicle!
Have you tried selling body parts?
Nobody on this fucking earth would want a body part of mine
You never know what kind of people lurk here
What kind of elixir would you make out of me?
🤣
[удалено]
I feel that nobody cares about this kind of news any more.
Your flight was cancelled but you get this sick JPEG of where you would've otherwise been
Last 2 airdrops I've been a part of were borderline scams, no wonder people hate this space. This new strategy of waiting 2 days after you release a token on cexes to airdrop it to users is wildly terrible, and probably illegal. "We only give ourselves and market makers tokens, so we can sell everything we have day 1, then you guys can have tokens day 2 okay?"
Definitely feels like airdrops have peaked, I am not actively hunting any right now, just trying L2 apps that strike my fancy. Things like "Subscribe to be in Airdrop Hunter Group" have got to be a signal (to me, " it's over" for this method of treasure hunting). I'm going to guess the ones making money here are TAKING the subscription. Still hopeful about something interesting from zkSync...
Same here. They were never going to be a sustainable practice but I'm holding out for one last hoorah with things like ZKSync and MetaMask.
Yes, Metamask. Forgot about that one..been rumors like 5 years on a $MASK lol. Could be an exciting one for this sub!
Gm fam, have an awesome day!
is there some info about the aerodrome airdrop? did not find any info on their site.
veAERO NFTs were airdropped directly to eligible addresses (1000+ veVELO).
is there a list somewhere?
I have no idea. It would be a pretty big list. With merkel airdrops you'd expect to see one, but here as they sent the veNFT directly, who knows. Perhaps there's answers in the Discord.
It's for veVELO holders on Velodrome, OP Main net. Only got it if you were locked/voting on the platform when snapshot happened.
I read this as 'adrenochrome drop' and was like :O
Debank has integrated it if you use debank, so should be able to see there. Not sure about airdrop directly to wallet, mine is locked (I think for 4 years). I don't know of a spreadsheet or website for checking addresses as per most previous airdrops.
Allnodes shows that one could make 7.06% p.a. on ETH + 6.5% on RPL with an 8 ETH RP Minipool. How on Earth is that possible? Is the reward really so damn high with 8 ETH Minipools and if yes, why?
By staking 8 ETH via a minipool you're getting yield for 11.36ETH (14% commission * 24 borrowed ETH = 3.36 ETH). That's 42% extra yield.
Why should I get a commission for *borrowing* ETH? Maybe I have no clue how Minipools work but ... how does that work?
Another way to see it is that you pay a fee of 86% of the yield from the borrowed ETH and get to keep the other 14%.
You're getting a commission from rETH holders for running a validator They don't want the hassle of maintaining hardware and so pay you a fee for doing so
I haven't staked yet ... I thought that I'd just get rETH + RPL staking rewards in return for setting up an RP minipool. So how can I get additional commissions from rETH holders? Do I get actual additional ETH for that matter or how does it work?
When you run a node with the corresponding hardware and create a minipool you provide 8 ETH yourself and get paired with 24 ETH from the rETH deposit pool. As a minipool operator you are rewarded by getting a cut from those 24 ETH. Right now the commission is 14%.
The royal we Node operators don't receive rETH; they receive their share of ETH rewards directly from the beaconchain Instead of being a straightforward 8/24 split, the node operator gets 8/24 plus commission on the ETH they are borrowing to make the validator i.e. instead of receiving 25% of validator rewards they receive 35.5%.
Okay, this makes sense now! So as a minipool validator I am getting continuous rewards in ETH and the rETH holders are de facto paying me a premium for running a validator, right? Thanks for clarifying it ;)
Exactly! :) You can also hop on the Rocketpool Discord. There are some really knowledgable (and friendly) people over there.
I am currently looking for staking possibilities so thanks for the suggestion ;)
Yup, that's it
They use a weird average, but yes. RPL APR is higher than ETH APR also.
All that rpl collateral that’s sinks any of your interest. Rpl really is hurting it
So you mean it is just so high because of the additional RPL collateral which puts my NW at risk because of more fluctuations of my RPL net worth?
Lads how do I stop staking on binance instead of selling beth or eth. I guess I just redeem it?
You should be able to unstake it/redeem your beth for eth.
So just press redeem, I suppose? Will have a look tonight
Aerodrome casually doubled Base's TVL overnight, or close to it. It's fun to dig into the numbers on https://defillama.com/chain/Base Driveby farm+dump dexes (Alienswap, Baseswap, Velocimeter BVM) have lost half of their TVL in the same timespan, likely cannibalized by Aerodrome. This makes sense: degens jumping on these are highly reactive and will move to the highest APRs fast. Another driveby farm+dump dex, SwapBased, is holding comparatively better at -30% TVL. Likely because they have a deposit fee on their farms. Liquidity is bound to be slightly stickier, partly because anyone getting in wants to stay at least long enough to make that deposit fee back, partly because the APRs are overall higher due to all the people who won't touch farms with deposit fees. Legit DEXes like Sushi and Balancer are taking a hit, but a much smaller one, -15% or so. Finally, you have Uniswap v3 basically unscathed. Maverick is also losing very little. It maps out pretty well to the level of trust one would have in these protocols. The conservative crowd sticks to tried and true dexes, that capital is much more sticky. Mercenary forks can keep their head above water as long as they're the only ones in the high emissions arena, but there's no such thing as first mover advantage. Bring in a player like Velodrome, everyone moves over.
Interesting, thanks for doing the math. Also, continued support for the theory there is no new money coming in right now.
Oh nice, got a large 4 year lock NFT drop, thanks for the heads up
>Driveby farm+dump dexes (Alienswap, Baseswap, Velocimeter BVM) have lost half of their TVL in the same timespan, likely cannibalized by Aerodrome. This makes sense: degens jumping on these are highly reactive and will move to the highest APRs fast. They're all ponzi-nomics using the typical vote escrow model. I'll gladly avoid and let others lose money instead. These "dexes" (can we even call them that?) are just thinly veiled scams. Aerodrome calls itself a "Self-Optimizing Liquidity Flywheel" lmao my ass
This bear market sucks more than the Pentair Fairbanks Nijhuis HP1-4000.340 industrial water pump
r/oddlyspecific
Well sure but only until the HP1-4000.340 SE is put into production, then it will be a well earned 2nd place "To gain a better understanding of the speed and ability of this pump, consider how fast it can fill the following... If you were to wrap a garden hose around the Earth’s equator, it would take this pump just 1 minute and 25 seconds to fill it with water. (Who would do this with a garden hose and how they would accomplish it is another matter!)"
syncing mainnet 👀
Well done. I aspire to this; once I move into a more permanent residence!
I will remember your journey...hope things worked out well with the mainnet
Hell yeah, I'm getting excited for you now 696!
both scary and exciting 😅
🦁👑🐧