- Range positioning for your capital. In the sweet spot, there is higher fee returns but higher impermanent loss (IL).
- Range orders are possible. If the price goes out of range, it is effectively a limit order (but you need to remove liquidity before price comes back within range)
- LP tokens will be NFTs instead of ERC20s. This will likely affect the way liquidity mining is done currently, or they'll move to Sushi/remain on Uni v2.
- Moving to optimism L2 in the future. This would lower gas for all DApps on Ethereum.
- More fee options for LPs
- Hint of protocol fees for UNI holders
- Business source license perhaps to disincentivize copies like Sushi
Overall, this seems like a fairly substantial change. It will probably take time for the ecosystem around this to mature. Excited for the long-term implications of this update.
The argument on the other side is that this is a matter of what's good for society in the long-term. For example, supporting a law that says "let's take all the money of class X and give it to the rest" would always be "in the interest" of the majority in the short term. That doesn't make it right.
To the parent's comment though, bonobos don't actually form patrols and they tend to avoid contact with other groups, so intra-group conflict is lower for bonobos than chimpanzees.
How can you use something that isn't built to build the same thing unless you're using a time machine? I suppose once Colony is in production, you can create a Colony clone using Colony.
It sound similar to what you do with one important distinction. "Freelancers" (I am using this term loosely since it seems like your organization gives you much more flexibility than traditional freelancers would get) earn a salary/income whereas in a Colony, the freelancers earn a tokens that represent future earnings potential in a colony i.e. share of revenue/profits. This way, you not only bring work to the Colony but completing it gives you a stake in your Colony.
Instead of such a knee-jerk reaction to crypto, perhaps you can ask if the crypto token involved makes sense in this use case. If it doesn't, like in 99% of the cases, you can dismiss it then. Colony, IMHO, is one of the few projects where it does make sense to have a token.
Bitcoin has moved away from the Longest Chain Rule to the blockchain with the most cumulative Proof of Work as what the nodes recognize as valid blockchain.
A big problem with this strategy is that presumably you're buying the coins after they've had a huge run-up and gone into the top 50. Since you aren't doing any type of research into the coins, they are quite likely to be just pump and dumps. Just something to consider, even if you can afford to lose the money.
Does Bitcoin's simple use case of a scarce digital commodity count? It's not that useful in the US/Western Europe but is genuinely useful in certain countries like Venezuela where inflation is in the triple-digit percent a year.
I am curious to know what types of "big big risk" POS presents. As far as I can tell, there are several POS cryptocurrencies today and they seem to work fine. The Ethereum team claims to modify their POS approach to avoid known issues like the 'nothing at stake' problem. But it would be interesting to know what other possible risks you're talking about.
Presumably, this is the premise behind T0 [1] in that it would allow beneficial owners, instead of brokers, to be able to lend their securities to short-sellers. In that case, there is no problem of tracking ownership - if you lend your shares to the short-seller, you're no longer the beneficial owner, and any agreement, like paying of dividend, has to be worked out between the two parties without involving a broker.
You're assuming the blockchain would work similar to Bitcoin, where every 'trade' (transfer) is a settlement, written into the blockchain. While this is the holy grail, you've rightly pointed out issues with high-frequency trading, synchronization across nodes, etc. The current system does T+3 due to this. A 'blockchain' could conceivably do better - even if it doesn't record every single trade like Bitcoin, it might record transfers at better granularity and better frequency.