If it (tBTC) fails it will sink the entire pool.
Which I have funds in, so yes the weaseling (aka one’s character) around that Matt and his team do consistently has a real impact on my funds. Thanks
If it (tBTC) fails it will sink the entire pool.
Which I have funds in, so yes the weaseling (aka one’s character) around that Matt and his team do consistently has a real impact on my funds. Thanks
1 week of work is a great success. This is much better than last time. Since tBTC has been running for a whole week, I think you can add it to the maximum number of DeFi platforms!
Umm, pools are immutable. Adding a tBTC pool will not affect your existing liquidity unless you choose to move it into the tBTC pool.
How gas efficient would a meta pool be? I have a feeling gas costs may be an issue for a while.
Strong against. Decentralization does not make a system more secure; on the contrary, it makes systems more vulnerable early on. Per stablecoin and renBTC volumes, there is clear evidence the market values permissionlessness over trustlessness; while not trustless, these funds have the lowest technical risk, which is arguably as, if not more, important than risks of centralized custody.
At this time, and considering tBTC’s past, it would have the highest technical risk of failure among Curve assets. tBTC should prove itself.
Wouldn’t the metapool structure allow risks to spread between pools? (If anyone can point me to more material on how metapools work I would love to read up more)
It’s never seemed to me that Curve’s goal is to have 100% of its pools succeed. In fact there are plenty of disclaimers about the variety of risks involved in each pool. I don’t buy these arguments that we can’t introduce pools with incremental risk. Let the market work.
So you’re telling me if tBTC fails, loses its peg, and so on…this pool and those who provide liquidity will not be affected?
Of course this new pool will be affected. You won’t be affected unless you choose to participate in it.
I’m referencing this pool idea tBTC/[renBTC/wBTC/sBTC] which I have funds in already.
Whoa there. If we vote in a pool that fails, we absolutely failed at our job to vet properly. We want 0 pools to fail, any more than 0 and we have serious problems
Not at all- I want to do both. That’s why we have a guarded release; so we can grow the project sustainably.
Adding a pool that only allows 100 tBTC seems pretty safe to me.
While an admirable goal, you have to admit there is non-zero risk of failure with renBTC, USDT and other assets involved in existing pools. That said, I’m in favor of a tBTC pool, but waiting several weeks for tBTC to mature a bit first seems prudent.
Okay, I apologize. That’s a good question, and I admit I haven’t studied meta-pools well enough to know the answer.
If it does present risk to the base pool, then that seems like a vote in favor of a standalone wbtc/tbtc pool.
The plan is to roll out incentives slowly, and in line with the guarded release. I think Curve is a strong choice for rewards, what’s key here is
A metapool of [tBTC, [sbtc pool]] would mean that if something happens to the “outside” asset - in this case tBTC, that doesn’t affect any other pools than that one.
Not a good idea. This pool has the potential to majorly damage Curve’s reputation if there’s another tbtc issue. Give it a month at the very least.
Ok so in the event tBTC fails, all the LP’s in sBTC pool are unaffected? I’m not sure i understand why that is the case. Traders would not flood the metapool with tBTC and drain the assets in sBTC pool?
But. If this is true that the core pool is unaffected, there’s no risk to adding tBTC as a metapool (besides the risk the tBTC holders already assume). Then it’s a nobrainer, there’s no reason NOT to add tBTC as a metapool
If tbtc fails would that affect my btc in the sbtc pool??? Wtf
It won’t in the case of a tBTC / WBTC pool for certain. I’m not the metapool expert, but existing Curve pools are immutable and don’t share much risk across pools. I’d imagine that continues.