gghluo
1.4K posts
The final verdict from @trueo_’s most contentious market has been delivered. The Jury voted for an outcome Reset. In other words, they ruled that it was too early to resolve the market. But there were some very interesting things about this dispute… For starters, both TRUE holders and Attesters voted against the Oracle Council’s initial decision. The Oracle Council voted 3-2 in favor of a YES outcome (I was among the YES voters). But TRUE holders and Attesters voted in supermajority support of the dispute. They deemed that the proposal came too early, and that Polymarket had not really released a “token” yet. Or did they? I personally voted YES as an oracle council member because I felt like the rules, though ambiguous, were satisfied as written when Polymarket released pUSD. I wasn’t happy about it, obviously it didn’t capture the essence of the market which was clearly meant to be about a potential network or governance token, but I voted YES nonetheless because I felt like the criteria in a literal sense was met when pUSD dropped. But TRUE holders and Attesters felt otherwise. They must have felt like the purpose of the market wasn’t satisfied even if the rules in a very rigid and literal sense were. I know the outcome might not be to everyone’s liking, and I know that some users would have preferred a YES outcome, but I do hope that they at least found some consolation in the process it self. Namely that the various arguments were aired, and that multiple desperate judgements came to pass on the dispute. In the future these contentious markets can be avoided with more precise resolution rules, but there is always some room for interpretation or some hidden ambiguity in the spectrum of possibilities. Getting these things right is very difficult, and ultimately, what I believe is more important than the outcome itself, is the process through which an outcome is derived. All this being said, there’s nothing stopping someone from proposing the same outcome again in hopes that TRUE holders have changed their minds, or that a different batch of Attesters gets selected who are more sympathetic to the resolution. Prediction markets are vey tricky specifically because of their subjective nature. But that’s also what makes them interesting! We still have much to improve on, and we learned a lot from this dispute, but hopefully we were able to prove that we take the concept of due process very seriously. Because at the end of the day, a prediction market is only as good as its oracle!
USD1 供应量数据反应了 wlfi 通过 [补贴先抢下市场后再来沉淀需求] 的打法，初见成效了： 1⃣通过连续几个月 10%+ APY 的存款利率补贴，吸引资金进场，USD1 供应量在 2 月份到达最高 $53.74 亿。 →[高利率先吸引资金进场] 2⃣之后随着补贴力度减小，存款利率降到 6% APY 左右，部分被高利率吸引的资金退出，USD1 供应量下降到 $40.71 亿。 →["利息一降，感情归零"，部分资金撤离。但沉淀下来的用户开始真正为 USD1 带来真实的交易/借贷等使用场景] 3⃣在补贴利率并没有增加的情况下，USD1 供应量现在又逐步反弹到 $45.11 亿。 →[沉淀资金/用户真实应用需求开始推动 USD1 供应量增加，初步形成良性循环生态]
看完大漂亮扒出来的履历，原来付鹏当年在雷丁读的就是个普通本科？ 结果愣是包装成“局长推荐赴英深造”的镀金履历；去雷曼当两年初级交易员，牛市里都没混上续约，转头就把这段被淘汰的经历吹成“华尔街实战老兵”？ 我真的看笑了，这哪是什么“实战派”，分明是“话术包装派”。学历本身没什么可嘲的，雷丁的ISMA学院也不是什么野鸡，但最让人膈应的是他这一套操作：一边靠注水履历攒出来的“国际投行背景”收割粉丝信任，一边又拿“实战派”的身份踩学历，骂学院派纸上谈兵。 结果牛市里连个初级交易员的合同都续不上，所谓的“市场理解”，说到底还是靠人设泡沫撑起来的。 说白了，他不是不信学历，他只是不信自己的学历能撑得起他吹的牛，所以才一边蹭着名校的光环，一边又立着反学历的牌坊，用“实战”当遮羞布，掩盖自己既没学历底气、也没业绩硬货的事实。
We use our treasury to support the growth of the Solana economy. That is, definitionally, DeFi. But economies don’t exist in isolation. For Solana to be healthy, all of defi has to be healthy. We like competition. We compete hard. But if we zoom out, we’re all pushing toward open finance and open systems. We’ve deployed our treasury into Solana DeFi for many years. We supported Tether’s recovery plan for Drift. In moments like these, it’s important to show up for the broader ecosystem too. That’s why we are lending USDT into @aave for the first time to support their recovery efforts, and we will also be bringing $AAVE to Solana this weekend. DeFi United
