> a few thousand people left on-chain.
> all that money just to serve two thousand people
This is clearly false and I welcome you to try and prove otherwise.
254 karma · joined September 18, 2022
This is clearly false and I welcome you to try and prove otherwise.
>do it through coinbase equation changes
Why? It's still just staking.
But the product Coinbase offers is staking.
Wrong. Nothing currently implemented in Coinbase Earn could be reasonably considered "lending". The article you linked is 2 years old and about Coinbase's prospective "Lend" product — which, as I understand it, never launched, perhaps because of a Wells notice submitted in 2021. This statement is about the one they've received more recently "regarding an unspecified portion of our listed digital assets, our staking service Coinbase Earn, Coinbase Prime, and Coinbase Wallet":
https://www.coinbase.com/blog/we-asked-the-sec-for-reasonabl...
Why would it be reversed?
Poke around this site for some info about Hoon and Urbit: https://developers.urbit.org/
This is a sentence that could be said at any point in history, about any dominant "system", financial or otherwise.
How could slavery be a 'a mess'? It powers the whole world. How could feudalism be 'a mess'? It powers the whole world. How could nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes be 'a mess'? It powers the whole world.
Is there reasonable evidence to show that whites and asians receive "external support" at a rate high enough to convincingly explain a 50 to 100 point disparity on this test?
In high school (USA) I was tracked into a two year remedial math course following an abysmal performance in pre-calc, so after 1 year of that I spent the summer taking an online course and tested back onto the normal track.
The Summer break is often derided as a time when students forget everything, but without it I likely would not have ended up studying mathematics in college.
Of course, but it's more like an email provider going under and you losing your inbox than a bad mortgage (which isn't to say that it's exactly the same, because blockchain assets are practically treated as currency, but clearly doesn't map onto the traditional understanding of securitization).
Unless Coinbase Earn is fraudulent — maybe it is, I don't know — I would argue you can and should. In the case of Ethereum, Coinbase is providing an IT service. In the case of [other protocol], Coinbase is hiring a contractor to provide an IT service on their behalf. For any reasonable understanding of what financial lending is, there is no "borrowing" here.
>Staking isn't nothing, it's an activity that requires skill, otherwise, why does it even exist? Shouldn't a centralized computer just do all the staking/validating if that's the case?
These claims demonstrate a profound, ignorance of how these protocols work — something I'm calling into attention not to berate you personally, but so that people who stumble across this thread later appropriately discount your claims.
...probably moot if these "third party service providers" are just doing the busywork of interacting with the protocol, on behalf of Coinbase, on behalf of the user. I grant that this involves a kind of custody management you don't see in other non-securitized IT services, but as long as everything is spelled out clearly (which it seems to be in the excerpt you posted) I maintain my position.
Interesting — an aside, I did not realize just how many protocols are supported on Coinbase Earn, otherwise I would have simply gone through each to see — but probably moot if these "third party service providers" are just doing the busywork of interacting with the protocol, on behalf of Coinbase, on behalf of the user. I grant that this involves a kind of custody management you don't see in other non-securitized IT services, but as long as everything is spelled out clearly (which it seems to be in the excerpt you posted) I maintain my position.
>What? Do a good job, make money. Do a bad job lose money.
This is more accurately phrased as "Do nothing out of the ordinary, make money. Do a bad job lose money." Nobody can "stake better" and expect more rewards out of it.
>It's like if the bank gave my currency (USD), to a different business owner (who needs it to run their business), who then puts it at risk (e.g., bankruptcy risk), to earn a return (i.e. profits).
Who is the "different business owner" in this case? Coinbase isn't giving my coins (rhetorically, I do not use Coinbase Earn or own any significant amount of blockchain assets) to anyone, they're interacting with a decentralized protocol on my behalf.
The risk profile also isn't exactly comparable, as in your example the bankruptcy and the potential profits are directly linked, while slashing is a punitive measure imposed by the protocol to punish bad behavior. The risk is that Coinbase mismanages their validators, but that's an error in service not in investment. More like a package getting lost in the mail than a business going bankrupt.
As far as I understand, you are incorrect. Coinbase is not making loans, at least not in the context of Coinbase Earn. Happy to be corrected here.
This is not a specific enough definition. I don't think my checking account is a security, despite the fact that I am loaning my bank money which they eventually give back.