The defi matrix

As each asset class goes on-chain, it can be stored in a digital wallet. And it can be traded against other such assets. Not just cryptocurrencies, but national digital currencies, personal tokens, etc.

We’re about to enter an age of global monetary competition.

The defi matrix is the table of all pair wise trades. It’s the fiat/stablecoin pairs, the fiat/crypto pairs, the crypto/crypto pairs, and much more besides.

Uniswap-style automatic market making for everything. Every possession you have, constantly marked to market by ~2040.
More liquidity, less currency?

This is an interesting point. Cash doesn’t make you money. In fact, it can lose you money in an inflating environment.

Reliable, 24/7 mark-to-market on everything is hard — but if achieved, means less % of assets in cash. https://t.co/Hg7W32iCDY
AMMs boost BTC. Here's why.

- All assets trade against all assets in the defi matrix
- Automated market makers give liquidity for rare pairs
- Everything is marked-to-market 24/7
- Value of cash drops, as you can liquidate instantly
- The new no-op is to keep your assets in BTC
Basically, automated market makers like @Uniswap boost BTC in the long term, because they allow *everything* to be priced in BTC terms, and *anyone* to switch out of BTC into their asset of choice.

Though in practice this may mean WBTC/RenBTC [or ETH!] rather than BTC itself.
Minimum necessary currency

Total global liquidity for everything via automated market makers will drive the world to minimize national currency holdings.

Because the scale-up of AMMs & yield farming will allow anyone to instantly get a better return than holding cash!
This is how the age of coercion yields to the age of volition. You still keep minimum necessary currency on hand to render unto Caesar, etc.

But no more than that. Every excess unit of fiat beyond the necessary minimum goes into crypto to seek higher returns in the defi matrix.
The defi matrix is what comes after the social graph. AMMs enable global yield farming. Every minute, every user will (automatically) run a search to find the best return for their assets in a totally liquid global financial market, and auto-rebalance.

It all becomes arbitrage.
Yeah, this is hard, but another thing that might get marked-to-market is your job. It's also an asset, one that requires maintenance like a house, except the maintenance is via labor rather than capital.

Maybe you can constantly find a better job too...
https://t.co/NhCP1AGNzu
Algorithmic liquidity reduces the need to hold currency.

Normally people talk about "liquidity events" as the moments when you can convert an illiquid asset into currency. But with AMMs you have a continuous liquidity event...

More from Bitcoin

$BTC views

Price needs to let volatility wear off before its next big move. Thinking 30K-40K range for the next 1-2 weeks. Then either 50K straight or after piercing 30K and bouncing back above 30K within 1-2 days.


$27500-$27000 is the key area. If price heads back down to 30K, expect 30K to be breached, fall to that area, and bounce back. FAST. All very fast.


What do I do with this information?

Simple.

I'm trading the range against a core position. Buying when price pushes lower, selling when higher. It's like playing the achordeon. There's always air left inside.

Where exactly?

Nowhere.

I don't use limits for that. $BTC is liquid enough to trade at market without issues.

I'm watching PA, volume and rates for buying and euphoria as reflected in rates for reducing.

Decision making is dynamic. Nothing is set in stone. But most likely if price heads back down to 30K 'll be holding off next time. The gameplan is to have ammo to buy the dip (to redeploy). If 30K breaks absolutely no buying until down to 27Ks or back above 30K.
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

You May Also Like

Still wondering about this 🤔


save as q