Another #FreeLoveFriday. So far, I’ve covered Bitcoin, Mastercoin/Omni, and last week ChainLink and the importance of decentralized oracles. Today, let’s talk about one of the most fascinating projects in crypto - @MakerDAO

In my thread about Mastercoin, I briefly touched on the vital role fiat-backed stablecoins play in crypto markets, but there’s a catch with them:

The counterparty risk of a third-party holding fiat in reserves.
Enter MakerDAO, which set out to create a decentralized, collateral-backed cryptocurrency, DAI, that would be “soft-pegged” to the U.S. Dollar using the power of algorithms. In crypto tradition, its supporters said trust game theory, not operators.
In 2017, MakerDAO published a whitepaper describing a system where anyone could create DAI by leveraging ETH as collateral to create Collateralized Debt Positions. Essentially, you take out a digital USD loan against your crypto.
The game theory of the system is structured such that DAI issuance is controlled to keep the price pegged to $1.00. In essence, it buffers the fluctuations of the underlying collateral to create a synthetic dollar bill.
This obviates the need for a backing bank, or fiat in reserve, or any kind of dependence on fiat, save as a unit of account.
In 2019, the project innovated further to accept forms of collateral beyond just ETH. Now, there’s a whole ecosystem built on MakerDAO’s governance, including the DAI stablecoin, collateral vaults, and oracles.
While DAI seems to be similar to USD, it offers advantages that fiat cannot match. Namely, it is trivial to send even large quantities. No need for costly and slow bank transfers. So that’s why the price for DAI sometimes even exceeds its peg of $1.00.
Admittedly, it took me a while to understand exactly how Maker works -- our paper on the taxonomy of stablecoins sheds some light on its internals. It’s always amazed me how stable DAI has stayed over the years.
https://t.co/Pz3BkJLUM7
My greatest worry about algorithmic stablecoins like DAI had been the game theory. They work well as long as demand has them operating at or above $1.00, but the dynamics of when they fail are not well understood.
But last March, we saw that the biggest threat to the stable value of DAI isn’t governance, but the constraints of its underlying network.
As the Covid-19 pandemic triggered a meltdown of the traditional financial markets, a liquidity shock rang throughout the crypto markets. Ethereum network fees were outrageously high, and that’s if you could get a transaction confirmed.
You’ll recall, DAI is a collateralized product. If you can’t sufficiently re-capitalize your position as the price of your collateral plummets, the Maker contract follows its rules and liquidates your position.
It was sad to see people losing their money & being turned away from crypto. It was also disappointing to see an innovative project take a reputational hit for circumstances that were out of their immediate control.
I’m certain that the MakerDAO ecosystem will continue to innovate and seemingly make magic happen with math. I’m also curious to hear what you all and @RuneKek want to see built around MakerDAO next.

More from Bitcoin

Ok, so what is the significance of the @lagarde statement on bitcoin?

We were offered a very open insight (but slightly flawed analysis) into top level policy perspective behind the crack down on selfhosted wallets.

https://t.co/1LTzrxHbgs 1/32


'It is a speculative asset, by any account. If you look at the price movements... '

It starts with an economic price perspective and we can learn that ECB is closely monitoring this price movement as one of the many indicators.

So we are in the classic central bank frame 2/32

'Those who thought it would turn into a currency. Sorry, it is an asset not a currency.'

Here she summarises a classic debate on what is currency and what is needed for that. Based on the holy three: unit of account, means of payment, store of value. 3/32

The summary is classic, but too narrow and does not incorporate the wider financial history viewpoints on money, currencies and the way we pay. 4/32

ECB overlooks the de facto unit of account role of bitcoin, having been used to 200 years of having cash around whic is both the unit of account and a means of payment. 5/32
1/9 Bitcoin has performed remarkably these past few weeks despite:
-Most of DeFi falling 50-80%
-CFTC charging BitMEX
-POTUS contracting Covid
-Delayed stimulus talks
-FCA announcing a derivative ban for retail

Why? Let’s see what we can find on-chain

2/9 Bitcoin’s Realized Cap has been steadily increasing just as it did before the 2017 bull market took off. If it continues as it did in 2017, 2021 should be an interesting year.

https://t.co/nqgX7vTMDV


3/9 Bitcoin MVRV, whilst more volatile this market cycle, is also is holding the same trajectory it did during the 2016/17 bull market

https://t.co/jadbn6nCOB


4/9 Looking at the supply of Bitcoin on exchanges is a good indication as to whether or not users are increasing trading activity, or increasing hodl activity. With supply reducing it looks like the tendency recently has been driven by hodlers


5/9 Despite the recent volatility, the number of Bitcoin whales continues to increase, indicating the growing number of large holders that have positive expectations for the future of Bitcoin
Agree mate. Well done @ttmygh @profplum99 and @nic__carter on a ripping show. Im obviously in the "gold is superior" camp, though I am long #BTC (tiny position). I thought the best/most interesting point of whole debate was raised by @profplum99 regarding the fact that a 1/n


#Bitcoin transaction is never really final, given the energy required to keep the network running, and obviously its scale issues will only grow over time. That said, I actually though @nic__carter "won" the debate as it were, and I was unconvinced by the threat to national 2/n

security or undermining Fed policy angles Mike put forward. Two areas that are super interesting to me. One is the issue of #Bitcoin ownership, and how concentrated it is in terms of a small % of addresses that own most of it (2% addresses > 95% of holdings I think). 3/n

made great point a lot of this is omnibus/exchange related - so exchange or fund - ie @Grayscale holds #bitcoin for multiple investors. That may well be true - but it brings up 2 other issues. One - it proves that #bitcoin doesn't really "work" without 4/n

centralisation - as this implies most people need exchanges or funds (or @Paypal) to buy it. If so, that kills off a major "bitcoin is better than gold argument" - as in reality, gold is way more decentralised (from mine supply to ownership distribution). It also brings up a 5/n
$BTC: Two Bitcoin FUDs to address this Thanksgiving weekend:

1. China PlusToken FUD: Old news. Please see linked thread.

2. U.S. Treasury FUD: Read thread below...


1/ These news are much more relevant, as they imply severe trade-offs for people who want to keep their bitcoins undoxxed, with the cost and risks of doing so. I would not disqualify the tweet as mere FUD in the sense that what he posted is false. It should be taken seriously.

2/ For all we know, his decision of making it public before TG weekend may come out of the urgency of informing CT of a poignant anti-Bitcoin move by a Trump administration trying to cut lose ends before leaving office—not just "price manipulation" as I've seen suggested around.

3/ It implies the acceleration of a process already planned for for months in advance, not something he just came up with to "crash the market."

4/ In practicality, assuming this passes, it will have two major consencuences:

a. Armstrong's analysis is correct. And I would go further in saying, this regulation would leave the U.S. severely handicapped to continue to be the leader in the cryptocurrency industry worldwide.

You May Also Like

I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.


Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel

He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:

He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:

He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party