Moneyfarm

moneyfarm

What is a Robo Advisor? First and foremost let’s get our definitions together. Robo Advisors a.k.a automated investment advice tools are online platforms that through a digital risk assessment questionnaire determines the risk suitability of investors and based on that risk category, they propose an appropriate investment portfolio. These investment portfolios are for example constructed using , a Nobel prize-winning method introduced by Harry Markowitz. Then via online portals or mobile apps, investors get to receive a real-time valuation of investment portfolios. mean-variance Most Robo Advisors charge based on a percentage of the assets they are managing, i.e. 0.75% of portfolio value. This practice is regulated and requires a license. The first Robo Advisor was introduced by John Stein, the CEO and co-founder of . The firm is one of the most successful and well-known Robo Advisors up to this day. Betterment Initially, Robo Advisors were designed to automate the process of investment management with a passive approach to it. Robo Advisors aims to reduce the operational costs hence the fees investors pay for portfolio management. They did successfully accomplish that. According to reports Robo Advisors’ market share by 2020 is expected to be USD 2.2 trillion. What is the current situation worldwide? Robo Advisors as a service has been used on a global scale. Though, there is definitely a different scene running in different parts of the world, for instance comparing the US market with Europe. The US retail market has shown much more interest and trust in using these computer programs to manage their money. This has alone made the US the source of innovation for Robo Advisors considering the competition between some heavyweight financial institutions trying to take a bite from the market share such as Vanguard or Charles Schwab and very bright startups such as Betterment, Wealthfront and Acorns. In Europe, not so much, yet. The UK is perhaps the leading market with the presence of Nutmeg, Moneyfarm and Wealthsimple. Across other countries in Europe, German’s Scalable Capital is the biggest player, with EUR 1 billion in assets under management compared to USD 16.1 billion (EUR 14.47 billion) managed by Betterment. Industry experts speculate that 2020 is to be the year when there will be more launches of hybrid and fully automated Robo Advisors in Europe. Whether they will be successful really depends on their go-to-market plan and learn the hard reality from the Robo Advisors graveyard that customer acquisition COSTS. Startups vs Incumbents Though we have witnessed more retails banks getting involved and launching an automated investment management service for mass affluent investors (customers with having less than USD 100K of investable funds). The service is being delivered as part of the online/mobile banking app. Another entry channel that can be seen with the market is the joint cooperation between some of the neobanks with online advice tools. N26 customers can integrate their accounts with Ovalmoney and invest their funds into some Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs). Although Ovalmoney is not providing financial advice per se, it makes investment portfolios (ETFs) available for its users, but the concept of such collaboration potentially could be seen more across the market. Robo Advisor for Cryptocurrencies? The past, present and future of Robo Advisors are analyzed by research institutes and there are already many research papers and market analyses available. We want to answer a more challenging question: does the Cryptocurrency market also need a Robo Advisor? One common attribute amongst all Robo Advisors is the passive nature of them, they are meant to be managing investors’ assets very cautiously with minimizing the risk to maintain a solid, continuous and long term returns for investors. This statement alone could reject the idea of having Robo Advisors in the crypto world, considering the wild nature of Cryptocurrencies with high volatility and unexpected fluctuations. But hold on, there is more to it. Robo Advisors in the capital market are hugely bundled with ETFs. All ETFs contain a basket of investments that can include stocks and bonds. An ETF typically tracks an underlying index such as the S&P 500 but can follow an industry, sector, commodities, or even currency. An ETF price can increase and decrease just like other investments. These products trade throughout the day just as a stock would trade. ETFs are put together to have controlled risk and provide underlying shares to investors with lower costs and lower fees than the assets included in the basket. All together, Robo Advisors and ETFs were a match made in heaven and each contributes to one another’s growth. So you are probably thinking about it already, we need to wait until we have ETFs-like investment vehicles in the Cryptocurrency market and then we can say Robo Advisors can enter the Cryptocurrency world. No, this is not when we end this article. What if there are ETFs-like instruments in the Cryptocurrency market? Digital Asset tracking instruments There are very similar products to ETFs that are called (ETPs). These instruments track underlying securities, an index, or other financial instruments. ETPs also trade across exchanges like stocks meaning their prices can fluctuate from day-to-day and intraday. Exchange Traded Products ETPs can be benchmarked to myriad investments including commodities, stocks, bonds or Cryptocurrencies. However, the prices of ETPs are derived from the underlying investments that they track. The low-cost structure of ETPs has contributed to their popularity. In December 2019 a series of regulated cryptocurrency ETPs have been listed for investors. Amun technology a company focused on creating digital asset tracking has received the required license to list their cryptocurrency-based ETPs. Investors can invest in crypto ETPs easily, safely and in a regulated framework. EU member state regulator has cleared a base prospectus filed by the firm. With that, EU retailers who have access to the Swiss SIX and Germany’s Boerse Stuttgart exchanges can now trade various crypto-based ETPs offered by Amun. One challenge that remains for the market and the ETP providers is to keep liquidity for the indices they launch. Market liquidity across Cryptocurrencies, especially alternative coins (all non-bitcoin coins). There are specialized parties, called market makers using sophisticated tools for providing offers for both sides of order book. The tool, called also makes sure make sure such coins or indices have sufficient liquidity to attract investors or financial advisors. market making bot Regarding the trading automation in crypto space this is developing very rapidly with many different that improve the trading operations of this alternative asset class. crypto trading bots What about technology? A well-integrated, modular platform that has an open mechanism for further integration and customization might be needed to finally push this idea of crypto Robo Advisor. It sounds complicated, but the solutions already exists. The integration to the market as well as the ability to include a variety of financial instruments within the custom made portfolios are what is required to deliver cryptocurrency-based instruments. With the likes of Empirica’s white-label Robo Advisory solution that is built on top of algorithmic trading platform that plays the role of a bridge that connects our Robo Advisory solution to broker/custodian and market data providers. Technically all portfolio management configuration, risk assessments and rebalancing are done through the Robo Advisor components and through the it automatically sends the orders for designated investors and once successfully executed. Then the algorithmic trading platform sends the information back through our APIs and portfolios are updated. algorithmic trading software Price measures(a sale above the bid price, or a buy below the offer price) is also very important for automated portfolio management. Robo Advisor technologies that are equipped with monitor execution of all orders across different trading venues and determine whether investors receive the best possible price at the time the trade is placed. smart order routing What about custody? Each Robo advisors have a custodian bank that actually holds investors’ money. Custodians add an extra level of security and regulation. Custodians are specialized financial institutions responsible for safeguarding a firm's or individual's financial assets. Is there any custodian that supports Cryptocurrency? There are cold storage custody services in the Cryptocurrency market. Most famous ones are offered by rather bigger Cryptocurrency exchanges such as Coinbase and Gemini. There are two main issues with such custody services, one is that within the traditional market custody services providers allow third-party systems like Robo Advisors to create custody accounts for investors via API and Custodies like Gemini and Coinbase do not. The second issue comes with API enabled executions which cold storages at this point do not provide that access, yet. With the news of crypto ETPs on Six Group from Switzerland, we know the custody service from here is also sorted out. SIX SIS is the central securities depository for the Swiss financial market, while also acting as a depository for international securities. It also offers issuer, clearing and settlement services as well as asset servicing in a variety of combinations. On the other side of the world, the Japanese bank Nomura has also been preparing to launch a custody service for digital assets in partnership with Ledger. Their solution is predicted to launch next year. Germany also recently passed a law, effective Jan. 1, 2020, which would allow authorized companies to offer crypto services, including custody. Final words The three main criteria for Cryptocurrency Robo Advisors to operate are listed in this article: - risk-controlled and low cost instruments like the ETPs, - the technology with an open mechanism for integration and portfolio construction and - custodial service to run secure and regulatory-friendly operations. Seems like the pieces are there to complete the puzzle. Ideally, a combination of digital ETPs and traditional ETFs into a single portfolio would be the goal to balance out the risk as well as not missing the opportunity on the exciting Cryptocurrency market. We do think the crypto market needs a Robo Advisor, perhaps the entrance could be either a new launch with a combination of assets with non-digital assets or the current Robo Advisors will start including Cryptocurrencies as part of their portfolio offerings. ( Disclaimer : The authors, Hanif and Michal, are working at Empirica)

Does the World Need a Cryptocurrency Robo Advisor?

The U.S. government is on the brink of another potential shutdown that could occur as early as 1st October if lawmakers from both the Republican and Democratic parties don't reach an agreement before then. Predictably, the surrounding a resolution is weighing down on the markets. The S&P 500 has dipped 2.28% over the past week. Moody's credit rating agency has also warned that a government shutdown could affect the U.S. government's AAA credit rating. uncertainty Currently, the only glimmer of hope is that the U.S. Senate passed a vote on Tuesday to begin the debate on a bipartisan bill that, if passed, could fund the U.S. government until November 17th. U.S. Debt on the Rise What’s worrying about this development is that in May this year, the U.S. with a similar debt standoff which led to the suspension of the debt ceiling until 2025. Subsequently, the U.S. national debt has shot up by an average of $1 trillion per month since June. Quite a remarkable movement and I fail to understand why no one is talking about this?!. grappled Ethereum's Merge: One Year Later It's slightly over a year since Ethereum transitioned from a Proof-of-Work (PoW) to a Proof-of-Stake (PoS) blockchain: Over 997,602 ETH have been burned, while the number issued stands at 710,013, resulting in a net supply reduction of approximately 287,589 ETH. Over 27.1 million ETH are currently staked on various protocols; 12.1 million ETH deposits were added after the Shanghai upgrade, which took place in April. Lido Finance holds the largest share of staked ETH at 32%, while Coinbase accounts for 8%. However, despite the strong fundamentals, hasn’t performed well over the past year, similar to the larger crypto market. ETH In fact, ETH has been consistently underperforming since the BTC merge. Noteworthy Mentions: Bear Market Blues: An Overview of the Major NFT Trends in 2023 The NFT market has been on a downtrend since the crypto market peaked. On a more positive note, there have been many interesting developments on the NFT innovation and adoption fronts. In our latest article, we take a deep dive into the major NFT trends of 2023. Here is the full . link Industry Shakers US Congress members call on SEC Chair to approve Spot Bitcoin ETFs Four U.S. Congress members are urging SEC Chairman Gary Gensler to promptly greenlight the introduction of spot Bitcoin ETFs. In a letter dated September 26, U.S. Representatives Mike Flood, Wiley Nickel, Tom Emmer, and Ritchie Torres expressed their concerns, suggesting that the SEC might be showing bias against spot Bitcoin ETFs. They referenced the legal precedence established when Grayscale Investments successfully secured a review for its ETF proposal. Bitcoin gains legal recognition as digital currency in Shanghai The Shanghai No.2 Intermediate People's Court in China has reportedly acknowledged Bitcoin as a distinct and irreplaceable digital asset, recognizing its scarcity and intrinsic value. On September 25, the Chinese court disseminated a report discussing advancements in internet technologies. The report noted that amid the evolution of internet technology, digital currencies like Bitcoin have emerged as distinct and irreplaceable entities. It further highlighted that among the myriad of digital currencies, Bitcoin holds a unique position differing from other digital assets. MicroStrategy Buys Another $147 Million Worth of Bitcoin Microstrategy, the world’s largest corporate BTC holder, has added to its stash. According to a Monday SEC filing, from August 1 to September 24, the company and its subsidiaries bought around 5,445 Bitcoin for nearly $147.3 million, at an average cost of about $27,053 per coin. This acquisition brings MicroStrategy's total Bitcoin holdings to approximately 158,245, purchased at an average price of around $29,582 each. MoneyGram unveils non-custodial wallet MoneyGram has unveiled plans to introduce a non-custodial digital wallet, set to officially launch in the first quarter of 2024. This wallet is poised to transform cross-border payments, facilitating easy swaps between fiat and digital currencies for consumers. This initiative is a result of MoneyGram's alliance with the Stellar Development Foundation, a collaboration that has notably propelled MoneyGram into a prominent position in global blockchain accessibility. Stay Updated - Follow me on Twitter! Enjoyed these insights? There's more where that came from. Follow me on for daily tidbits and updates. Twitter/X Also published here.

Concerns Over U.S. Government Shutdown Impacts Financial Markets

. With , understanding how borrowing works is crucial for developers, architects, or researchers. Borrowing is a cornerstone of Ethereum-based blockchain applications billions in assets loaned out Much like the evolution of programming paradigms, these DeFi applications have diverse architectural designs, reflecting changing priorities that range from security to efficiency and user experience. This analysis looks at the architecture of applications like , , , , and . We'll highlight key innovations and design patterns, which are important lessons for the development of future lending applications. MakerDAO Compound Aave Euler Yield If you're a developer, architect, or security researcher, this article is for you. By the end, you'll easily understand new borrowing applications on Ethereum, grasping their architecture swiftly and comprehensively. Dive in to see how these DeFi giants are built from the ground up. Borrowing in DeFi Most DeFi borrowing is . A user can borrow a specific asset if they provide collateral worth more than the loan. Unlike conventional loans, many of these loans don't have regular repayments or fixed end dates. In essence, you can borrow and never repay. overcollateralized However, there is a catch. . The collateral's value must always exceed the loan value by a predetermined margin If the collateral value falls below this, the loan is . liquidated During liquidation, someone else repays part or all of your loan, and they receive part or all of your collateral in return. All borrowing applications following this financial structure need the same building blocks, which then can be arranged in many ways: A treasury to store user collateral and borrowed assets An accounting system that tracks each user's collateral and debt Functions that determine the borrowers' interest rate A mechanism to verify if a loan is sufficiently collateralized, usually involving external price oracles A liquidation path for undercollateralized loans Risk management systems that record total borrowed amounts and other safety metrics, such as global and per-user borrowing limits, collateral minimums, and specific over-collateralization ratios An interface for users to add and remove collateral, borrow, and repay underlying Borrowing and lending can be thought of as separate features. In DeFi, we find both features in most borrowing applications, . but they are not always well integrated . The interest rates for borrowers and lenders are internally correlated; in fact, that is what makes those applications work with minimal intervention. In Compound, Aave and Euler they are are originators of the assets they lend to borrowers. On the other hand, MakerDAO and Yield . They don’t require users to supply assets so that other users can borrow This article will focus on on-chain borrowing and largely ignore lending. Borrowing is much more complicated because of the collateralization requirement, and understanding the borrowing pattern typically unlocks a better understanding of the entire protocol. The Architectural Evolution of MakerDAO , ancient in Ethereum terms, and it holds . Despite its modular architecture with distinct contracts for every function and unique terminology, it remains easy to understand and verify. MakerDAO , was launched in its current form in November 2019 $4.95B in collateral The treasury function in MakerDAO is managed by the contracts. Join There is a for each token approved as a collateral asset. separate contract Contrarily, MakerDAO doesn't possess any DAI, the borrowing asset. Instead, it merely as required. mints and burns DAI Accounting is handled within the contract. The Joins when collateral enters or exits the system. If a user borrows, they . .sol vat update this contract interact with the vat.sol contract directly This action updates the user's debt balance and allows them to mint DAI at the DAI Join. . To repay, users burn DAI in the DAI Join. This process then updates the Vat, enabling the user to settle their loan Additionally, the contract serves as the engine. It maintains global borrowing limits, sets per-user minimum thresholds, and oversees collateralization ratios. vat.sol risk management When changes are made to a user’s debt or collateral balance, the vat.sol contract evaluates both rate and spot. These refer to the interest rate based on the collateral used and the prevailing DAI-to-collateral price ratio. Interestingly, these values are fed into the vat.sol contract by other MakerDAO contracts, a method distinct from most other applications. MakerDAO prioritized safety during its design phase - , user experience was a minor concern, and competition was negligible. a time when factors like gas costs were secondary Consequently, it might appear quirky, costly to use, and challenging to navigate. Yet, the vast assets it manages and its record of operation without significant breaches underline its robust design and execution. Highlights: Each asset has its own contract in the maximally spread treasury function The accounting function is centralized within a single contract that also documents and enforces risk parameters, including collateralization checks Unlike other apps, oracles update the contract, overseeing collateralization Price and interest rate oracles utilize distinct interfaces The interest rate originates externally To borrow, users must interact with multiple contracts The Architectural Evolution of Yield Protocol served as a proof of concept for fixed rates using . This version built its collateralized debt engine on top of MakerDAO. However, Yield v1 was both expensive to use and challenging to augment with new features. Yield v1 YieldSpace Recognizing the potential of YieldSpace, we quickly transitioned into developing . Still drawing inspiration from MakerDAO, but now completely independent, Yield v2 ; Yield v2 prioritized reduced gas costs and an enhanced user experience. Yield v2 launched in October 2021 All accounting, risk management, and collateralization checks were consolidated into one contract: the . Mirroring MakerDAO's approach, we distributed the treasury functions across contracts, each dedicated to a specific asset. Cauldron Join We revamped our oracle integration, merging price and interest rate oracles into a . We reversed the oracle flow from MakerDAO such that  Cauldron as needed for collateralization checks. To my knowledge, this is the preferred flow everywhere except MakerDAO. common interface consults oracles Another significant deviation from MakerDAO's approach was our introduction of the . This contract serves as the sole intermediary between users and Yield. It wields extensive control over treasury and accounting, . Ladle but in return, offers immense flexibility for feature development In summary, borrowing in Yield v2 works as follows: Each asset has its own dedicated treasury contract, ensuring maximum distribution of the treasury function. A singular contract centralizes the accounting function. This contract also oversees risk management measures and performs collateralization checks. The collateralization function consults oracles to determine prices and interest rates. Both price and interest rate oracles share a unified interface. Interest rates are generated externally. Users can borrow by making a single request to just one contract. The Architectural Evolution of Compound Finance The was a , demonstrating that a money market could be established on Ethereum. For this reason, simplicity was prioritized in its design. The contract encapsulates all functions, including lending. first version of Compound Proof-of-Concept MoneyMarket.sol The treasury, accounting, and risk management tasks, such as collateralization checks, are consolidated into one contract. This contract retrieves prices from the oracles but determines interest rates based on asset utilization. Users interact solely with this contract, though they must make separate calls to supply collateral and borrow assets. Compound v2 , igniting the yield farming era and inspiring countless forks. It too functioned as a money market, allowing users to both lend and borrow assets. Compound v2 was launched in May 2019 Based on its and structure, it's evident that a major goal for was to use the . This ensured composability, allowing users to lend to Compound and then use those interest-bearing positions in other blockchain applications. whitepaper Compound v2 ERC20 standard to represent lending positions Interestingly, the whitepaper didn't highlight that Compound v2 incorporated into its smart contracts. Given this omission, the immense impact of this feature might not have been foreseen. rewards Each asset has its own treasury contract, maximizing the distribution of the treasury function. The accounting function is also distributed, with each cToken noting user collateral and debt. A singular contract, the Comptroller, logs and enforces risk management parameters, including collateralization checks. The contract responsible for collateralization checks references the oracles for prices and the cToken for interest rates. The price and interest rate oracles operate with different interfaces. The interest rate derives internally from asset utilization. Users must interact with multiple contracts to borrow. Compound v3 , adopts a more conservative risk management strategy, segregating the liquidity into a for each borrowable asset. The design also reveals concerns about user-friendliness and gas costs. Released in 2022 Compound v3 pool The system is more intuitive for both developers and users due to the reduction in the number of required calls. Additionally, the singular contract design reduces gas costs by minimizing calls between contracts. The segregated money markets are a defense against oracle-based attacks, which are now a major security concern. Other relevant features mentioned in the include: release notes A completely revamped risk management and liquidation engine. This design enhances fund security while being more borrower-friendly. Set limits across the market for individual collateral assets to mitigate risks. The interest rate models for earning and borrowing are now separate, with governance having total control over economic policies. Interestingly, Compound v3 mirrors the architecture of Compound v1 by having a single contract handle all functions for each borrowable asset. Other notable features include: Only lent assets can be borrowed; collateral assets cannot. Collateral does not yield returns in Compound v3. The prohibition against borrowing collateral enhances the safety for those depositing the collateral. This decreases the likelihood that governance errors or intentional attacks jeopardize the collateral. Eliminating returns on supplied collateral might be a result of Compound managing to amass much liquidity in v2. I have the intuition that in Compound v2 the borrowing limits were either below or not much higher than the assets lent to the application by the users. Assuming they will manage similar levels of liquidity for v3, disallowing collateral to be lent out makes the application safe, one of the core goals of v3. From an architectural standpoint: Every money market is an individual contract with its treasury, accounting, and risk management Each money market retains the borrowable asset along with all its approved collateral asset tokens, causing assets to be dispersed across the application Price feeds are the sole external input; interest rates for borrowing and lending are generated internally Traditional functions like supply/withdraw/borrow/repay have been smartly consolidated. Now, withdrawing a borrowable asset from a money market implies borrowing, while supplying it indicates repayment or lending based on the user's debt A routing contract is integrated, permitting multiple operations in a single call The Architectural Evolution of Aave was , succeeding ETHLend. Instead of ETHLend's peer-to-peer approach, Aave v1 introduced a shared liquidity pool. Aave v1 launched in October 2019 As in Yield v2, the also held the business logic. The implemented accounting, risk management and treasury functions. Pooling the treasury in a single contract was a differentiating point from Compound v2. router contract LendingPoolCore The decision to leave the collateralization checks in , called from the router and not the accounting contract seems weak, but it was probably fit for purpose as Aave v2 was only released two years after the v1 release its own contract The LendingPoolCore contract handles treasury and accounting LendingPoolDataProvider manages collateralization checks and interacts with the oracle LendingPool serves as the user entry point and implements business logic Interest rates for borrowing and lending are determined internally, relying solely on price feeds Aave v2 was . While it retained features similar to Aave v1, it introduced an improved and simpler architecture compared to both Aave v1 and Compound v2. With this release, Aave also introduced (akin to Compound's cTokens) and , which represent tokenized debt. Aave v2 released in December 2021 aTokens vTokens Certain features from Aave v1, which had limited use, were omitted for simplicity. Issues in Aave v1, like the complex representation of accrued interest, were addressed in Aave v2. The LendingPool contract consolidates global accounting and risk management functions, such as collateralization checks. It serves as the primary access point for users aTokens signify collateral and are akin to lending positions. Users' collateral is reflected through their aToken holdings, and the treasury function is distributed across all aTokens vTokens are used to represent debt positions. A user's debt is represented by the vTokens they hold Aave v3 was with multi-chain support and other features. These additions don't alter the core architecture. The update also boasts improved risk management and gas efficiency. Aave v3 released in January 2023 Despite its many advancements, for the purposes of this study, Aave v3 is not materially different from Aave v2. In fact, it might suggest that the architecture of Aave v2 remains robust in 2023. The Architectural Evolution of Euler was , aiming to offer money markets with permissionless features and minimal governance. Euler launched in December 2022 A hallmark of its design is the pattern. A . This storage can be accessed through distinct , each managing a different conceptual element of the system. diamond-like single contract holds all the application's storage proxies Even though one contract stores all assets, accounting, and risk management data, there are still eTokens for collateral and lending, and dTokens for debt, similar to Aave v2. However, these token contracts are merely views of the central storage contract. The contract manages accounting variables. Storage The contract functions as the treasury. BaseLogic The contract oversees risk management variables and functions, including collateralization checks. RiskManager An analysis of the code reveals that minimal gas cost was a priority, leading to the monolithic design eliminating the need for inter-contract calls. Security was assured through rigorous testing and auditing. Only the logic was distributed across various modules, serving as the implementation for the storage contract, which acted primarily as a proxy contract. This unified design also supports easy upgrades. Modules can be swiftly replaced to amend or introduce features . if no storage changes are required Euler was hacked fifteen months after its release and six months after the upgrade introduced the exploited vulnerability. . I do not think the monolithic architecture played a part in the assets being drained; rather, it was insufficient oversight of code updates Conclusion Early Ethereum applications such as MakerDAO, Compound, and Aave showcased the potential of overcollateralized borrowing on Ethereum. Once these proofs of concept proved successful, the focus shifted to introducing a mix of new features to capture market share. Compound and Aave's later versions introduced yield farming, composability, and pooled liquidity, which thrived especially during bullish market conditions. A significant development was Compound v2's introduction of tokenized lending positions, which enabled these positions to be recognized as standard assets by other applications. Aave v2 and Euler took it a step further by implementing tokenized debt positions, the broader utility of which remains a subject of debate. High gas costs emerged as a major concern during the bull market, prompting user experience modifications as seen in Yield v2, Aave v2, and Euler. Router contracts and monolithic implementations helped reduce the costs users incurred for transactions. However, this came at the expense of more intricate, and consequently riskier, code. Compound v3 appears to set a precedent, prioritizing safety over financial efficiency. It deviates from the traditional liquidity pool model to better safeguard against potential hacks. The rise of L2 networks, where gas costs are becoming increasingly negligible, will likely shape the design of future collateralized borrowing applications. In this article, I've provided a comprehensive overview of the key collateralized borrowing applications on Ethereum. The approach I've employed to analyze each application can also be applied to grasp the intricacies of other collateralized borrowing applications swiftly. When developing a blockchain borrowing application, always consider the storage of assets, the placement of accounting records, and the methods for risk and collateral evaluation. As you work through these considerations, draw upon the history of previous applications and the insights from this overview to inform your decisions. Thank you for reading, and best of luck. Thanks to for reviewing and editing this article. Calnix The author is a co-Founder and Technical Lead at Yield Protocol.

Borrowing on Ethereum: Comparing Architecture Evolution of MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Compound, & Euler

ইথেরিয়ামে ধার করা: মেকারডিএও, ইয়েলড, অ্যাভে, কম্পাউন্ড এবং অয়লারের আর্কিটেকচার বিবর্তনের তুলনা করা

Anleihen bei Ethereum: Vergleich der Architekturentwicklung von MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Compound und Euler

Préstamo en Ethereum: comparación de la evolución de la arquitectura de MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Compound y Euler

Emprunter sur Ethereum : comparaison de l'évolution de l'architecture de MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Compound et Euler

एथेरियम पर उधार लेना: मेकरडीएओ, यील्ड, एवे, कंपाउंड और यूलर के आर्किटेक्चर विकास की तुलना करना

イーサリアムでの借入: MakerDAO、Yield、Aave、Compound、および Euler のアーキテクチャ進化の比較

Ethereum에서 차용: MakerDAO, Yield, Aave,Compound 및 Euler의 아키텍처 발전 비교

Empréstimo no Ethereum: Comparando a evolução da arquitetura de MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Compound e Euler

Заимствование Ethereum: сравнение эволюции архитектуры MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Compound и Euler

Ethereum'dan Borç Alma: MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Compound ve Euler'in Mimari Gelişiminin Karşılaştırılması

Vay trên Ethereum: So sánh sự phát triển kiến trúc của MakerDAO, Yield, Aave, Hợp chất và Euler

借用以太坊：比较 MakerDAO、Yield、Aave、Compound 和 Euler 的架构演变

Welcome to the world of implicit operators in C#! Implicit operators are a powerful feature of the that has the ability to make our code more readable and expressive. In the wrong hands, they can allow for some really tricky behavior that’s hard to notice unless you go investigating. Implicit operators can allow us to , and thus eliminate some clunky syntax when we want to convert between types. This might seem like a small thing, but it can have a big impact on the readability and maintainability of our code. C# language define custom conversions that occur without explicit casting Implicit operators are defined using the keyword and can be used to create a method that converts one type to another. Two key rules of implicit operators are that they should not throw exceptions and should not lose information, as the conversion is done automatically by the compiler. This is because the compiler needs to be able to guarantee that the conversion can always succeed without any potential for data loss or exceptions. implicit Understanding Implicit Operators Implicit operators are special methods we can define in our classes to allow for automatic conversion to another type. They are defined using the keyword. This keyword is used to modify the operator keyword in the method signature, indicating that the operator will be applied implicitly. implicit Here’s a simple example: public readonly record struct Meter
{
    public double Length { get; init; }

    public static implicit operator Meter(double length)
    {
        return new Meter { Length = length };
    }
}

// Usage
Meter meter = 10.0;
Console.WriteLine(meter); // Meter { Length = 10 } In this example, we’ve defined an implicit operator that allows us to convert a to a object. This is done without any explicit casting or conversion in the code, hence the term “implicit operator”. The compiler automatically applies the operator when it’s needed, and we don’t need to explicitly cast with or in front of our variables. double Meter (double) (meter) The Power of Implicit Operators Implicit operators can be incredibly powerful. They allow us to create code that is more expressive and easier to read. By defining implicit operators, we can create types that feel like a natural part of the language, rather than something that’s been bolted on. This can be a popular solution for looking into strongly typed identifiers as well when you want to create types that naturally fit into the domain you’re working in. For example, consider a type. Without implicit operators, working with a type might look something like this: Money Money Money m = new Money(10.0m);
decimal amount = m.Amount; But with implicit operators, we can make this code much more natural and intuitive: Money m = 10.0m;
decimal amount = m; This might seem like a small change, but it can make a big difference in the readability of our code. And given that we, as software developers, spend much of our time reading code compared to writing it… Readability should be optimized for! Practical Applications of Implicit Operators Implicit operators can be used to improve the readability of your code and to create more intuitive APIs. They are particularly useful when working with domain-specifics or when you want to provide a simple interface for working with complex types. I even used them for creating custom return types that make my exception handling much easier! For example, you could define implicit operators for a type that allows you to work with money values as if they were numbers: Money public readonly record struct Money
{
    public decimal Amount { get; init; }

    public static implicit operator Money(decimal amount)
    {
        return new Money { Amount = amount };
    }

    public static implicit operator decimal(Money money)
    {
        return money.Amount;
    }
}

// Usage
Money money = 10.0m;
decimal amount = money; In this example, we can assign a to a object and vice versa, making the type feels more like a natural part of the domain you’re working in. decimal Money Money Advanced Usage of Implicit Operators While implicit operators are powerful, they should be used judiciously. Overuse of implicit operators can lead to code that is difficult to understand and maintain. That sounds counter to what we said earlier, right? Well, the code may be easy to read and this allows us to make assumptions about what is happening. However, if the actual behavior doesn’t line up with our expectations about what we’re reading, suddenly we have a much worse problem than hard-to-read code! It’s also important to remember that implicit operators should not throw exceptions or lose information, which ties into this point exactly. Here’s an example of a more advanced usage of implicit operators, where we define an implicit operator for a number type: Complex public readonly record struct Complex
{
    public double Real { get; init; }
    public double Imaginary { get; init; }

    public static implicit operator Complex(double real)
    {
        return new Complex { Real = real };
    }

    public static implicit operator Complex((double real, double imaginary) tuple)
    {
        return new Complex { Real = tuple.real, Imaginary = tuple.imaginary };
    }
}

// Usage
Complex complex1 = 10.0;
Complex complex2 = (10.0, 20.0); In this example, we can assign a or a tuple to a object, providing a flexible interface for creating complex numbers. The options for this become seemingly endless when you think about all of the different domains that exist. What about something for working with quantities and doing unit conversions?! double Complex Pitfalls and Things to Avoid While implicit operators can be incredibly useful, they can also be a source of confusion if not used carefully. One of the main things to avoid is creating implicit operators that can result in data loss or that can throw exceptions. Because implicit operators are applied automatically by the compiler, any exceptions they throw can be difficult to trace. For example, if we were to have an invalid cast exception thrown because of an improper type conversion operation, we’d be used to seeing a line of code with an explicit cast operation. We’d see in parentheses the type we are trying to cast to being applied to a variable or value and know right away there was some type of incompatibility as suggested by the exception pointing to that line number. With implicit operators, the conversion happens “magically” behind the scenes for us so if there’s any sort of error as a result of the operator executing: We not only have to pause to recognize there’s some type of implicit operator being applied (i.e. “Wait a second, how is a double value being assigned to this type that is not a double?!”) We then have to go into that type’s code (let’s hope we have the source for it!) and then go diagnose what’s wrong with the logic. Another thing to avoid is creating implicit operators that can result in unexpected behavior. For example, if you create an implicit operator that converts a to an , it might be unclear whether the conversion is parsing the string as a number or getting the length of the string. Remember from earlier we touched on readability being paramount? Well, this remains true. But if the behavior does not align with what the reader is understanding from the code in front of them, then this will create a lot of confusion. string int Conclusion and Best Practices Congratulations! You’ve just learned about implicit operators in C#, a powerful feature that can make your code more readable and expressive. Remember, while implicit operators are powerful, they should be used with care. Always ensure that your implicit operators do not throw exceptions or lose information. And most importantly, make sure the behavior of your operators is aligned with how the reader of the code would expect things to happen. Thanks for reading, and consider if you want to see how I made a multi-type object for dealing with exceptions using implicit operators! You can also on the topic that might help solidify some of the concepts. And finally, if you enjoy topics like this and would like a quick weekly summary on software engineering and other C# topics, you should totally ! My newsletter is a quick 5-minute read every weekend for you to catch up on some software engineering and C# topics. checking out this article head over to this video here for a tutorial check out Dev Leader Weekly Also published here. The lead image for this article was generated by HackerNoon's AI Image Generator via the prompt "display c# on a laptop’s screen"

Are Implicit Operators a Path to Clean Code or a Buggy Nightmare?

finally shows less than 365 days. This time halving is more meaningful than before due to the economic conditions we are in. Accepting Bitcoin as a is not going to happen in a day but there are non-negligible signs supporting the idea of using Bitcoin as a global currency. In this article, I will go through the reasons and signs that support why Bitcoin is here to stay and what can its real value be. I will mention the global systemic risks of monetary policies, for example, high inflation and interest rates in developed economies, and how a death spiral is leading the economies to a dystopia in the last part of this article The Bitcoin halving countdown global currency Firstly, just because I don’t want to sound like an obsessed Bitcoin-maximalist and conspiracy theorist, I will identify the real-life use cases of Bitcoin to determine the real value of Bitcoin before I mention global money problems in the last part. Here is a ultimate guide to Crypto for Beginners Let’s start with the first use case of Bitcoin; sending money. If the entire Bitcoin network was an international money transfer startup in which miners are contractors to provide service like local banks and tellers and users are clients to receive service like individuals like us, the Bitcoin network company would be the most transparent company with the . There are global companies that provide money transfer services across the globe, Western Union, MoneyGram, Paypal, TransferWise, and Remitly. cheapest and fastest transactions Western Union: $4.16 Billion MoneyGram: $1.02 Billion TransferWise : $4.1 Billion PayPal: $83.15 Billion Remitly: $7.8 Billion Those are only a few major, well-known western money transfer companies and there are many more if we include Chinese, Russian, Indian, and African companies. We can calculate the total value of randomly selected five well-known money transfer companies, with a rough estimate of $100 Billion. If the was a private company, the should exceed $100 billion. Bitcoin network valuation But, of course, the Bitcoin network doesn’t generate income for Bitcoin holders. But we must consider that those companies make money from foreign currency conversion. There is a spread between the rates on the TV screens and the rates you are offered by those companies. Bitcoin solves this problem too. You can anytime swap and exchange your Bitcoins with any other fiat or cryptocurrency in a democratic decentralized web environment. Another source of income for those companies is instant transfers, you probably used the Venmo app and saw the message stating that you need to wait up to 3 days or pay a fee for an instant transfer when you make a deposit to your bank account. Bitcoin doesn’t charge you for a faster transaction. It takes one or one and a half hours on the main network, and seconds on the . lightning networks Anyone with an internet connection, no matter where he/she is located, can create a and receive funds in a very short time without leaving their couch. You can be a citizen of country A and reside in country B, you don’t need local identity documents to create an account with the network. It is free and permissionless for anyone. Bitcoin wallet Lastly, let’s talk about the global economic conditions that pave the road for Bitcoin. The pandemic was the first of its kind in entire human history and left us with problems that we have never had before. We are living in interesting times since then. to keep economies floating and resurrected the inflation monster. Now central banks are raising interest rates to tame inflation. I can keep writing about all problems we currently have but I prefer to recommend readers to read Nouriel Roubini’s article . He has more credibility as an authority in economics and finance and he clearly explains the expected storm in economies. Yes, when you read the article, Bitcoin stands out more as an alternative. Central banks printed lots of money The Coming Doom Loop Now, I am thinking about how I can preserve my wealth under those conditions. I can’t buy a house because the prices almost doubled up, and I can’t buy treasury bonds or T-bills because the return is lower than inflation. I can’t buy stocks because their prices have been falling for more than a year. It is a quite hard time to decide where to store your wealth. Bitcoin stands out when I bring all the pieces together. But, we must answer some questions first; will Bitcoin's price go up during 2023? Is it the right time to buy Bitcoin? When you first hear that halving is less than a year away, you know the bull market is approaching too. If you don’t know what I mean, you should take a look at article to learn the . But, is it going to be the same again? Because the economical conditions are getting harder and household income and purchasing power are fading, I assume that individuals and institutions will have less money to invest in the current year. We already see some signs for example the collapse of two banks in the US; Signature bank and Silicon Valley Bank, and the troubled too-big-to-fail lender Credit Suisse in Europe. Bull and Bear Market cycles of Bitcoin Bitcoin stands out, yes, it is a great investment alternative and solution for the problems we have now. But the adoption is still not on the desired level. There are local enthusiasts, and communities in small experimental economies such as , and . The number of places where you can buy daily needs by paying Bitcoin is highly limited even in London, New York, Istanbul, or Moscow. You can’t buy a cup of coffee or a loaf of bread by using Bitcoin in most places. Bitcoin Town Bitcoin Beach How I see things is, Bitcoin is a highly promising startup which is already gone public at its launch with fair distribution. Masses think that the startup will eventually be successful and invest in it so the price keeps going up. But the startup still lacks turning its promises into reality. The adoption level is far from making Bitcoin a global currency. I'm not making a claim or prophesying. I am curious to see where we are heading too. Decreasing purchasing power in a shrinking economy leads to questioning the perception of money in individuals' eyes. I certainly know that we will hear unpleasant words like "high inflation" "high interest rates" "stock market crash" "Bank crash" and "Bitcoin".

Less Than a Year; Recession and Bitcoin Halving

The banking system is flawed by design. This first sentence may seem brutal to start an article, but to convince you that it is not the case, I suggest you look at this image: This image comes from the “ ” which lists all the penalties received by banks worldwide since 2000. Violation Tracker Industry Summary Page As you can see, in the first ten places, you will find names of banks you know well: Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs, ... None of them are missing! The banks have thus received a cumulative amount of fines of more than $347B since 2000. This figure is already huge, but be aware that it is only the tip of the iceberg. For every scandal that breaks out in the banking world, how many fall under the radar? Many more! The problem with the current banking system is its opacity and the feeling of impunity that private bankers have. They know that in 99% of the scandals, they will get away with dropping large checks that will not even come out of their pockets anyway. The system is designed that way, and they take advantage of its (known) flaws. More than the actors, it is the system itself that we need to question. The worst thing is that nobody will try to fix this system. In any case, it is impossible because the problem is linked to its design. The opacity of the current system allows the worst sides of humans to express themselves: greed and giving in to corruption. The collapse of SVB in March 2023 will have brought the flaws of the current system to the forefront once again. The subsequent Credit Suisse collapse in Europe will have shown that the problem is global. Nevertheless, you frequently see central bankers and private bankers meeting at conferences to talk about the future of banking. They come to boast about being ahead of the curve on digital, working on Blockchain (you know, the famous “Blockchain, Not Bitcoin”), or being exemplary in control. All this is just smoke and mirrors, but the problem is that a majority of the general public continues to blindly believe what the powerful people at the head of the current monetary and financial system say. In my opinion, the future of banking is not on the side of private banks but rather on the side of Bitcoin with the possibility to be your own bank. So, I'm going to tell you the reasons why I'm convinced that the future of banking has no banks. Just Bitcoin that is accessible without permission to as many people as possible. 1. Corruption The current banking system requires that you have blind trust in banks. However, if there is one thing that the banks have demonstrated to us for several decades, it is that they do not deserve the blind trust that the current system requires. The picture showing the cumulative amount of penalties received by banks since 2000 is enough to make you realize that the current system allows bankers to give free rein to the natural human penchant for corruption. When you look at the reasons for these penalties against banks, you see that their bad behavior seems limitless: mortgage abuses, toxic securities abuses, investor protection violations, economic sanction violations, consumer protection violations, fraud, banking violations, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, anti-money-laundering deficiencies, price-fixing or anti-competitive practices, False Claims Act and related, tax violations, ... The question is: how long will the majority of the general public tolerate these actions by the so-called Banksters? 2. Fractional Reserve Banking Until the COVID pandemic in 2020, few in the general public had heard of Fractional Reserve Banking. Many thought it was a technical banker's term. Not something that was of interest to them. Yet, it is essential to understand what Fractional Reserve Banking is because it is at the heart of today's banking system. Fractional Reserve Banking describes a system in which banks can lend out a certain amount of the deposits they have on their balance sheets. Banks used to be required to hold a certain amount of the cash that depositors placed in their accounts in reserve. But since the COVID pandemic, the Fed has decided to eliminate the reserve requirements for all depository institutions: To help you better understand why this system is problematic when depositors lose confidence in the system, here is an example. A U.S. bank has 10 customers with $2,000 each in savings. According to Fed rules, the US bank in question can use 100% of the deposits for loans. The available capital is $20,000. The bank decides to borrow 100% of the funds from these 10 accounts, which is $20,000. The balance shown to the depositors is still $2,000. For them, the operation is transparent as long as they do not try to withdraw their money at the same time... The bank has just created $20,000 that it will lend to one or more borrowers. The depositors may (or may not) receive interest payments on their $2,000. The bank will collect interest at a higher rate from the borrower to pay for your interest and service. Proponents of this system will tell you that it will stimulate the economy or that banks do not need to hold huge amounts of capital or that it makes regulation easier. However, ask yourself what will happen if all the depositors want to withdraw their deposits at the same time. Well, you will see the same bank run as the one in mid-March 2023 with the SVB bank. A bank run that will undoubtedly lead to the collapse of the bank unless the Fed saves it or the current administration in Washington decides to change the rules to save the system. The problem is that each time, this requires printing more and more fiat money out of thin air to save and protect the system as Janet Yellen so aptly put it. And each time, this pushes the problems of the current system to a later date, but with an even worse magnitude. This system is not sustainable forever. As far as bank runs are concerned, many thought that they could only happen in emerging countries like Argentina, Lebanon, Venezuela, or Zimbabwe. But the last few years have proven otherwise. You could see such bank runs in the early 2010s in Europe in Greece or Cyprus. And more recently in California in the United States ... 3. An Opaque System Have you ever wondered why the current system is so complex? Probably so that no one from the general public can understand how it works, otherwise a revolution would probably break out tomorrow, as Henry Ford said a century ago: “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Where we go around in circles is that an opaque system favors corruption. The current banking system is therefore a real vicious circle favoring bad behavior. It requires absolute trust with no way of checking but the past has already taught us that this is impossible. 4. Deposits Are Not 100% Covered When a bank like SVB collapses, all depositors are at risk of losing money beyond the bank deposit coverage limit. In America, the FDIC sets this amount at $250K. In Europe, the amount is €100K. What happens if you made the mistake of saving the fruits of your labor in a bank account beyond these guaranteed limits? Well, you can lose everything! Unless of course, as in the case of SVB, the government stands behind you. But be aware that this exceptional case is not the norm, because currently, US Commercial Banks Deposits is at a current level of $17.30T: You can see that in the case of a generalized bank run on all American banks, the situation would be explosive. Many would lose a lot of money unless the Fed decides to explode the M2 Money Supply and inflation as well! This situation is profoundly unfair, and it would be necessary to create banks that can guarantee 100% of the savers' funds. But obviously, this will not be done. The fruit of your labor will never be 100% safe within the current banking system if it exceeds the coverage limits defined by the regulators. 5. Privacy and Censorship Issues You work hard for a living. You earn money that you then want to save in the bank. In some jurisdictions, such as the Eurozone, you are obliged to save in a bank, as there are limits to how much money you can keep in cash at home. In France, for example, this limit is €10K. If you have more than this amount in cash at home, it's illegal. Yet, you have earned your money honestly by working hard within the current system. But these are their rules. You have to follow them or you are outlawed! Sooner or later, you risk having more than €10K in your bank account. And then you want to make a transaction with a third party for an amount of several thousand dollars or euros. It's your money, you should be able to do it without having to justify yourself and without the risk of censorship. Unfortunately, within the current system, this is impossible. To comply with their famous anti-money laundering practices, you will have to explain why you are sending this amount to a third party. You don't want to disclose it because of your privacy? You have a good chance of having your transaction censored. However, there is no money laundering, since your salary is paid every month into his bank account. The bank knows where the money comes from. But that's the way it is. This is unacceptable, and it will not be accepted forever with the new generations who will look for other solutions more respectful of their rights. 6. SWIFT: A Slow Cross-Border Interbank Payment System at the Mercy of the Americans In addition to point 5, imagine now that you want to make this transaction internationally. Chances are that you will have to use SWIFT, the interbank payment system used by banks. No matter what they say, it is a system dominated by Americans. We have seen how easy it was for the Americans to cut off the access to SWIFT to Russian banks from the very beginning of the war in Ukraine. Whatever your opinion on this war, it is not normal that one country reserves the right to control the whole financial system as America has done for decades. America is abusing the privilege of issuing the world's reserve currency. In addition to this problem of censorship at the state level, SWIFT is proving to be a slow, expensive, and inefficient system. Transaction fees depend on the amount sent, whereas in all cases, the figures are stored in the same way at the computer level! Abominable delays of 2 to 5 working days. If you have an emergency, don't count on a bank to help you! 7. Fees Banks take advantage of their positions to charge their customers exorbitant fees. The smallest service is charged an insane amount when you think about it. I'm not even talking about the abusive fees that some banks will charge to their most troubled customers when they are overdrawn. International remittance companies are also taking advantage of the inefficiency of the current system. To allow fast international transfers and thus compensate for the lack of SWIFT, Western Union or MoneyGram will charge their users crazy fees. No wonder these companies were against the introduction of a standard Bitcoin in El Salvador, allowing thousands of members of the Salvadoran diaspora to send money to their families back home via the Bitcoin network at a lower cost. Because Bitcoin changes the game here by decoupling the fees paid by customers from the amount transferred. After all, no matter how much money is transferred, it's only digital data that is transferred. There is no reason to charge someone who transfers $1M more than someone who transfers $1. Unless the goal is to take as much money as possible from customers, which is the case with the current banking system. 8. You Need Permission to Use Your Money Point 8 has already appeared in the previous points, but it seems important to write it again to show how unbelievable it is that so many people continue to accept the way the current banking system works. You need the bankers' permission to use your money. You are required to entrust your money to these private banks, and then you are trapped in a system whose arbitrary rules can change at any time. A system in which your money is at the mercy of the rules of others. If you don't want to obey these unfair rules, you may find yourself unbanked. In the world of Bitcoin, there have been several instances where people have had their bank accounts closed for no real reason. Simply because these people were connected to the Bitcoin world via an entrepreneurial activity for example. Something that is unacceptable, and that the people will not be able to accept forever! 9. Your Bank Is Always There for You, but Only During Office Hours To win new customers, banks are going to be full of ideas in terms of marketing by making them believe that they are close to their customers. Close to their customers and available at any time. At any time during office hours, of course ... If you need a particular banking service on a Sunday or holiday, don't count on your bank to be there. You will have to wait for bank business days and business hours. When it's 2023, is it normal for you to settle for such inefficient service? I doubt it. Perhaps you are not looking for better alternatives because you are too used to this inefficient system. You have the impression that no alternative exists. This is wrong. Future generations won't even question it, because they will be born at a time when Bitcoin has become something common and normal to use. Banks will have to adapt to survive. But they cannot do so, and that is why the powerful in the current system are doing everything they can to undermine Bitcoin. When you can't keep up with an opponent, the best thing to do is to try to destroy him. This is the sad philosophy of the powerful people in charge of the current system. 10. No Sovereignty. Your Money, Their Rules, so It’s Their Money. All the points I have just detailed show you something essential. In the current system, you are like a subject who must obey arbitrary rules defined by a minority of people who are not representative of the people. These people are the central bankers who have control over the private banks. In this flawed and not fixable system, you have no sovereignty. It's your money, but their rules, so it's their money. Because the money that belongs to you under certain conditions is not your money. Just a promise. I'm sorry to make you realize this so abruptly, but that's the reality as it is. I have a feeling that the topic of self-sovereignty will only grow in the future. More and more people will open their eyes and want what is rightfully theirs: control over the fruits of their labor. To have the freedom to use the fruits of their labor as they wish at any time. In short, to have freedom over their lives. Bitcoin Is the Answer Because Bitcoin Lets You Be Your Own Bank Now that you have a better understanding of the problem with the banking system, you will want to discover a solution for the future of banking. And this future of banking is bright because it will consist of turning yourself into your own bank. This solution is optimal because you are the person you can trust the most. Of course, this will require some adjustments at first since you will have to take on the security of the fruits of your labor by yourself. But this small adjustment will allow you to have complete freedom over the fruits of your labor. By switching to the Bitcoin system, no one can censor you. No one will be able to stop you from using your money at any time you wish. You'll be able to cross borders at any time at a reduced cost. Bitcoin addresses all the problems with the current banking system. Better yet, with Bitcoin, you can become a banking branch yourself by running your node on the network. You'll enhance the decentralization of the network while having the ability to check everything on the system yourself if you wish. Running a network is open to anyone with no prerequisites. This allows you to audit the system yourself every 10 minutes. It doesn't get much more transparent than the Bitcoin system. You can audit everything both statically (open source code) and dynamically (by connecting your node to the Bitcoin network). With Bitcoin, you get self-sovereignty with monetary rules that are known in advance and do not change. Something essential to preserve your purchasing power over time by having the right to save the fruits of your labor. It is not for nothing that we constantly repeat that Bitcoin is the best savings technology in the world. With Bitcoin, you will be able to make the rules yourself and therefore have access to your money without any preconditions. The real freedom over your money will be yours. In the end, you will even find that you will sooner or later achieve true freedom over your life. That's the path you'll be able to take by embracing the Bitcoin revolution. This is a much brighter future for banking than the one the powerful people at the head of the current system want to sell you. Don't take for granted the word of Bitcoiners who tell you that Bitcoin is an incredible monetary revolution, but verify it for yourself by developing the knowledge to build your truth about Bitcoin. That's what I suggest you do in the book “ .” The Truth About Bitcoin: Everything you need to build your truth about Bitcoin and stop trusting others without verifying The book is available on various platforms: - On Amazon in print format: 630 pages - On Amazon in Kindle format: 543 pages - On Gumroad in PDF format: 475 pages : contact me by email at - In P2P mode in PDF format or EPUB format with payment in BTC (-20% if you buy in Bitcoin) sylvain.saurel@gmail.com Also published here

The Future of Banking Will Only Be Bitcoin: Here's Why

Has the web become more productized? On the weekend of July 4, 2014, Brian Mayer launched a website that listed reservations for sale to popular restaurants in San Francisco. The price of each reservation was a sliding scale, based on how in-demand the restaurant was. But Brian Mayer didn’t own or run any of these restaurants. He didn’t work for or with them. He had simply called the restaurants up weeks in advance, booked a whole lot of reservations under assumed names, and then put them up for sale without the restaurant’s permission. He called it ReservationHop. ReservationHop was instantly popular, and almost equally vilified. It was criticized as unethical and aggressively opportunistic. Though the site framed it differently, Mayer was essentially holding reservations for ransom and putting them in the hands of people willing and able to pay. By circumventing restaurants entirely (he used fake names for the reservations and then passed them on to people that paid for them), he was putting restaurants in a position to lose money from last-minute cancellations. ReservationHop wasn’t strictly illegal, but it certainly walked the line of fraud. where he explained that the site was a bit of fun, a clever solution to a real need. His site was, after all, very popular. There was a market there that didn’t previously exist, and Mayer was there to fill it. As for the ethical concerns, he wrote most of them off. “To be honest, I haven’t spent a lot of time thinking through these questions. I built this site as an experiment in consumer demand for a particular product, and the jury’s still out on whether it will work.” ReservationHop eventually tried to include restaurants in its process before shutting down entirely. Mayer took to his own blog to defend himself Reflecting on the site this past year, as just one example of a much longer tradition of websites attempting to squeeze money out of everyday interactions or instances of bureaucracy. He cited other examples of websites that circumvent or otherwise ignore the norms, ethics, and laws tied to those interactions, sites like MoneyParking, which let users auction off parking spots they had no legal right to, and Enq, which ties up IRS phone lines so they can sell that spot to the highest bigger, Doctrow claims that the end goal is “Markets in everything!” writer Cory Doctrow positioned ReservationHop Despite making the headlines, “markets in everything” extends well beyond the ill-intentioned. The web is highly distributed and widely accessible, and since almost its early days, largely commercial. Beginning with the rise of the dot-com startups in the 1990’s, and the subsequent collapse of the dot-com bubble, the commodification of the mundane has spread further and wider into different subcultures and ideological manifestations—the gig economy, drop shipping, hustle culture, the rise of SaaS, startup evangelism. After the dot-com bubble, the web of the 2000’s, often referred to as Web 2.0, saw more dynamic applications like Flickr, Google Maps, and Delicious. Technologies like AJAX and Flash and philosophies about the web’s interactivity introduced refinements and polish to web design. Surfers of the web after the turn of the century ditched their hang-ups about entering their credit card online, or making large purchases over a computer. The web became something relatively familiar to large parts of the world. The web proved itself as a platform for experimentation in niche services and products. There are those, like ReservationHop, that use that lack of friction to attempt to circumvent norms or laws in search of profit, And there are many more who provide perfectly legitimate one-off services at fair prices to groups large and small. By the 2010’s, the web was awash with such products. So much so that in 2013, Ryan Hoover, fresh from working at a web startup and co-authoring a book about internet products, . He started with a list, which he called Product Hunt. Each day, Hoover would add a list of new products he found to a list he published on the web (he even used one of those products, Linkydink, to collect and share those links). There were more than enough new things to populate the list—usually small startups built by one or two people introducing some quick and easy service via the web, a bookmarking tool or drawing app or list of curated content—and within a few weeks hundreds of people had subscribed. Hoover recruited a small network of contributors to help him fill out the ongoing list, and updates continued to stream out every day. began to look for better ways to catalog them all , Hoover took his list and created a website of his own, launched in November of 2013. They added new features to the site, discussion forums, job boards, and more community features. But fundamentally the concept never changed radically. A daily updated list of new websites or apps which visitors to the site could browse and upvote. In July of 2014, less than year after its official launch, Product Hunt received the backing of Y Combinator. With the help of Nathan Baschez Product Hunt rode the wave of the productized web built on services and applications. Some were dispassionate ideas barely thought through , which hired people to take trash from inside your house and move it to the outside. But most services sought to connect people with real-life needs, either by making experience in the world easier or by amplifying digital life with an ongoing service. These products often adopted the Software as a Service (SaaS) model. SaaS was made largely popularized by Salesforce, but it had a growing presence throughout Web 2.0. The goal was to provide an ongoing service that continuously improves billed month to month, rather than a single package of software purchased once. like the infamous Trash Day Over time, Hoover—and others like him— . Find a niche. Optimize for engagement. Capture a market. Incentivize influencers. These rules spread through a network of social media accounts and blog posts from proprietors of online products, repackaged and reframed across different types of subcultures and businesses. adopted a set of rules that define the web’s product culture The product web has come to encompass a large part of what it means to exist on the web. It’s shifted the way we think about our day to day experiences. One website at at time. Sources Alexis C. Madrigal. "Silicon Valley Abandons the Culture That Made It the Envy of the World." The Atlantic. January 1, 2020. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/01/why-silicon-valley-and-big-tech-dont-innovate-anymore/604969/ Amber Leigh Turner. "The Product Hunt Story: How it all began according to its founder Ryan Hoover." The Next Web. May 5, 2017. https://thenextweb.com/news/product-hunt-story-began-according-founder-ryan-hoover Brian Mayer. "How I Became the Most Hated Person in San Francisco, for a Day." BrianMayer.com. July 7, 2014. https://brianmayer.com/2014/07/how-i-became-the-most-hated-person-in-san-francisco-for-a-day/ Nathan Baschez. "The Origin of Product Hunt." Medium. June 6, 2014. https://medium.com/lets-make-things/the-origin-of-product-hunt-7acb09e2593a First Published . Here Written by Jay Hoffmann on November 22, 2022. It takes place somewhere between 2011 and 2016.

There Are Web Products Everywhere You Turn 

This is the official HackerNoon wiki for Stellar. As part of our , this living wiki displays on If you’d like to suggest edits to our official Uniswap wiki, please submit them in the comment field below, a real human editor will read and review your suggestions for accuracy and publication. coin price pages Stellar crypto price page. Stellar is an open-source payment network that allows for the creation, trade, and sending of digital representations of currency in all its forms. Unlike physical money, the Lumen isn’t issued by central banks. This means governments don’t interfere with their activities. The Stellar Lumen is one of the best-performing and older forms of cryptocurrency. History of Stellar Stellar was founded by Jed McCaleb and is operated by the Stellar Development Foundation, a non-profit organization he and collaborator Patrick Collison founded. The foundation debuted on July 31st, 2014. The initial funding for the Stellar Project came from the payment startup Stripe headed by Patrick Collison which offered $3 million. Stellar launched with 100 billion stellar. 25 Billion Stellars went to donors from the initial funding such as Google, Fast Forward and Black Rock. Stripe received 2 billion stellars as a return for the initial funding. The name of the cryptocurrency was changed from Stellar to Lumens or XLM. In 2014, Brazil’s first bitcoin exchange, Mercado Bitcoin, announced they would be using the Stellar network. Stellar had approximately 3 million users registered by January 2015. Stellar’s Biggest Claim to Fame In 2014, Stellar created the Stellar Consensus Protocol (SCP) making it an open-source system. Under the SCP, transaction authentication is left to a select group of nodes on the blockchain, where it is hosted, instead of a whole set of nodes. This shortens the approval cycle and allows for faster and cheaper processing of transactions. The Lumen is a low-cost but legitimate form of crypto. It is a reliable and affordable cryptocurrency investment and is popular for it. Stellar stopped selling Lumens which has allowed for the value of the Lumen to rise, especially considering the Lumen is not a form of cryptocurrency that can be mined. The value of the Lumen depends on the number in circulation at any given time. Stellar has several partnerships with big companies. Stellar tries to solve the real-world problem of high transfer fees which is encouraging bigger financial institutions such as Moneygram which can afford to partner with the cryptocurrency offered by Stellar since they seem to have a solid base they can work with, even though it is not especially profitable. Criticism of Stellar Jed McCaleb, the co-founder of Stellar, was involved in a lawsuit when he tried to sell off his stake in Ripple after he left the company, knowing a lawsuit was coming for the company. This does not reflect well on the company, so the value of the coin will drop drastically if he gets involved in another scandal. Jed McCaleb was involved in a company that was hacked while he was in charge. The hack cost the company $460 million. This makes people weary of investing their money in a project he is involved in. The Stellar foundation had over 100 billion lumens originally but they removed nearly half of them from circulation in November 2019. This was controversial since this kind of market manipulation is one of the things decentralized systems like cryptocurrency are supposed to prevent. The Stellar Team Jed McCaleb is a co-founder and chief technology officer of Stellar. He founded and served as the CTO of Ripple until 2013. He co-founded the Stellar Development Foundation in 2014 to develop the Stellar open-source protocol which allowed cross-border monetary transactions. Joyce Kim is a co-founder and executive director of Stellar. She started her career as a lawyer. She co-founded Simplehoney, a mobile commerce startup, in 2011. She was Vice Chairperson at Freestyle Capital before she joined McCaleb as co-founder of Stellar. Conclusion Stellar is more of a money transfer platform than it is a crypto platform. Crypto is a means to transfer money for the company and not the essence of the company. This is the official HackerNoon wiki for Stellar. As part of our , this living wiki displays on If you’d like to suggest edits to our official Uniswap wiki, please submit them in the comment field below, a real human editor will read and review your suggestions for accuracy and publication. coin price pages Stellar crypto price page.

Stellar $XLM Wiki: Coin History, Techstack, and Crypto News

Regulators are circling above wishing death upon Cryptos; To survive, cryptos must come to a compromise where Centralized Finance ala Traditional banking and Decentralized Finance (DeFi) co-exist, and regulators have a say, yet the anonymity of the blockchain is preserved. This is what the immediate Future of Finance is likely to look like. …no amount of run will render  a Bank Alternative insolvent These parallel financial silos become one entity linked together by bridges. They are different from traditional finance/banking and also unlike decentralized finance; it is a hybrid, an alternative. For the purpose of this paper we would call it A Bank Alternative A Bank Alternative A bank Alternative will take the best of traditional Banking/Finance, put them in digital form, and bridge them with Decentralized finance, in such a way that you can enjoy the benefits of the two financial worlds from the same app seamlessly. Like a Fintech and DeFi having a lovechild. A Bank Alternative is different from traditional banking because it does not practice fractional banking, and different from DeFi because it does not use stablecoins rather it uses Digital cash which is real-money on-chain (like e-money or Private CBDC) and each digital cash is 100% backed by real money in a 1:1 ratio held in treasury and verifiable on-chain. This ensures that no amount of run will render a Bank Alternative insolvent, because all its cash and digital cash are represented by cash held in treasury in a 1:1 ratio. You will always get 1Dollar for every Dollar in your bank account or Digital-Dollar held in your Digital Account every time and anytime. A Bank Alternative is run-proof. It generates revenue from fees. A Bank Alternative will give you at least two accounts. One is like a traditional bank account for your fiat currency (in digital form), and the other is a digital account/wallet more appropriate for Web3, Digital assets, and cryptocurrencies. Both allow you to move in-between them seamlessly and by implication change the state of your money/asset permissionlessly. Many banks and Centralized exchanges (CEX) are looking at becoming a Bank Alternative Ah! Tax A Bank Alternative is primarily built on blockchain, however, all its centralized activities not verifiable on-chain would be regulated. And all decentralized finance activities verifiable on-chain would remain unregulated, making it easier to tax the off-chain regulated items for starters. This is a pragmatic first-step The Regulatory Hurdle The road to Bank Alternatives is filled with regulatory challenges from both the State and the financial regulators. Many countries have out rightly banned cryptocurrency like China, Bolivia, Ghana, etc and then there are countries where it is restricted including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, etc. The restrictions will have to be relaxed before a Bank Alternative can fully blossom Who Will Become A Bank Alternatives Many banks and Centralized exchanges (CEX) are looking at becoming Bank Alternatives but the regulatory hurdles keep them at bay. Fintech seems better position to become Bank Alternatives; in this group, you will find Revolut and MoneyGram + Stellar. However, in the true tenets and structure of a Bank Alternative, as described above, you will find only and . Only Fluid is active and has launched an App on Arbitrum that is working in true Bank Alternative. Yes, it’s early days, and many more features to come but this is the Bank Alternative. Fluid Finance Hightop If you stay traditional you will be left behind as the internet left AOL In Conclusion: The Future For Banks and DeFi is The Bank Alternative This middle-ground solution is where all Banks and DeFi must meet in other to survive. According to Robert Sharratt “If you stay traditional you will be left behind as the internet left AOL”; I translate this to mean, if you refuse to compromise as a DeFi-playing around with traditional financial services, the regulators will ensure you remain in the financial wasteland where all unregulated are sent to die. Disclosure Although, I do not work for Fluid Finance SA, I have had a financial relationship with fluid finance. This statement is intended to disclose any conflict of interest. Disclaimer The opinions shared within this article are solely those of the authors. Note that the content within should not be considered financial, legal, or tax advice. Neither the author nor Fluid Finance is a financial, legal, or tax advisor. Do your own research and consult professionals as needed for official policies, restrictions, and requirements in your jurisdiction.

Stories, News & Mentions about MONEYFARM

Moneyfarm’s Stories on HackerNoon