On the supposed “nihilism” of the Mango Markets arbitrageur

Re:On the supposed “nihilism” of the Mango Markets arbitrageur by favflam on Sunday October 16, 2022 @11:02PM (#33229456)

For crypto, I think it has to be "code as law". Otherwise, what is the point. People will be better off depositing their funds in a brokerage and trading that way. Trading and settlement have to be merged to get the benefits from the crypto approact to money.

I think the next step for smart contracts is to port risk engines (for leveraged trading) and treasury risk management into smart contracts. But I think there is little overlap between people who write risk engines (almost never open source) and people who write smart contracts with slick UIs, so I don't see this happening.

I think SBF (see https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1580170203664904195?s=20&...) of FTX, who knows how leveraged trading works, explained what risk controls FTX implements.

A simple risk control would be to have a single transaction rate limited in funds it can suck out of an account.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On the supposed “nihilism” of the Mango Markets arbitrageur by clarkeni on Monday October 17, 2022 @02:10AM (#33230251)

Unfortunately in crypto transaction limits can be easily bypassed (send more transactions or spin up more accounts).

Some good risk controls suggested here though: https://medium.com/@Austerity_Sucks/thoughts-on-110m-mango-m...

[ Parent | on HN ]