Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 200 results by dim_mak5
Re: Confused on the True Purpose of Non-KYC Crypto Debit/Prepaid cards
I don't know why someone would look for virtual crypto cards (is that what we're talking about here?) that would be linked to a crypto wallet? Virtual cards (Visa/Mastercard) that can be bought for cryptocurrencies and paid with online or added to a mobile wallet and paid with at POS devices are much more logical to me.
Even such cards have limitations, and if they cannot be activated with VPN/Tor, it is difficult to be anonymous with them, especially if you pay through a POS device. Be that as it may, if you're trying to spend cryptocurrencies that are in any way connected to something illegal, sooner or later someone will knock on your door, especially if it's a significant amounts.
Even such cards have limitations, and if they cannot be activated with VPN/Tor, it is difficult to be anonymous with them, especially if you pay through a POS device. Be that as it may, if you're trying to spend cryptocurrencies that are in any way connected to something illegal, sooner or later someone will knock on your door, especially if it's a significant amounts.
AML means anti money laundering and money laundering means turning profits from illegal sales such for example class a drugs sales into clean legitimate income. Laundering dirty money into clean money that can be spent on mansions and Lamborghinis and such without arising suspicion.
For someone who is depositing less than $500 worth of stablecoins into a crypto debit card I cannot understand why providers ask for KYC-AML for such tiny amounts that is laughable to big time drug lords and rich criminals
Which rich criminal is going to spend his time and resources going to launder $500 or even $5000 or heck even just $50000. The $50000 doesn't even buy you a house nowadays unless were still living in 1980s. $50000 is lower than the average annual wage in the USA. This has nothing to do with money laundering, its all about controlling your money.
Rich criminals and rich people do not use normal bank accounts and normal debit cards like we do. They use private banking that respect privacy laws that do not invade your privacy by asking private docs for AML KYC. Is privacy becoming a luxury now for the rich only not for the poor?
Re: Confused on the True Purpose of Non-KYC Crypto Debit/Prepaid cards
Okay can you list which crypto debit cards use non-custodial wallets and which one would you choose?
Here is a thread that maybe helpful because non-custodial wallets like Metamask also offer such services, this part of thread contain lists of non-custodial wallets offering debit cards services https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5473572.msg65211562#msg65211562Hi thanks for the link.
Yes I see:
- Gnosis card
- Metamask card: https://card.metamask.io/
- Holyheld Card: https://holyheld.com
- Utorg card: https://www.utorgcard.com/
- Xportal card: https://xportal.com/
- Offramp card: https://www.offramp.xyz/
- Cypher card: https://cypherhq.io/
- Fit24 card: https://fiat24.com/
- Thorwallet card: https://www.thorwallet.org/cards
- Onboard card: https://www.onboard.xyz/
- Coca card: https://www.coca.xyz/cards
From the above do you know which ones uses the Ethereum blockchains or Eth Layer 2's please? Also which ones are available for UK customers and I like to know which cards have the cheapest fees and do not charge FX fees when using the card abroad on holidays.
Or which cards are known to freeze non-custodial wallets connected to them?
I did apply to Coca and Gnosis but they both ask for KYC documents, why
If they are claiming the funding the cards are through non-custodial wallets then what is the point of them asking for KYC ID There is no connection between Ethereum and the stablecoins on the basis of them keeping ETH alive. The Ethereum blockchain is just one of the blockchains in which those stablecoins run and without those stablecoins, ETH will exist. Likewise without the Ethereum blockchain, stablecoins will exist. Now we have more chains such as TON, TRX and others where more stablecoins are traded than ETH, yet ETH is still doing so well.
Yeah but those chains are mostly asian chains that have their HQ in asia and Trump does not want asia to have the most crypto market dominance otherwise USA will fall vehind, lose world reserve currency status and asia will be the most financial superpower with china leading the way.
Ethereum is a big chain, there are tons of tvl and if there's no traditionally pegged stablecoin people will make delta neutral hedge ones.
Even before the hype of stablecoin ethereum were also having many things going on in their chain.
Remember that there are decentralized stablecoins out there which derive its value from the working of the market such as over collateralization.
Even before the hype of stablecoin ethereum were also having many things going on in their chain.
Remember that there are decentralized stablecoins out there which derive its value from the working of the market such as over collateralization.
Does over collateralization guarantee that a stablecoin like Dai does not lose its peg and wont crash to $0 like Terra stablecoin?
What happens when the collateral loses it value? Does Dai buy USA government bonds and if they buy bonds then that means there is people entity in Dai and if that is the case then how is Dai is decentralized when there is people employees working for Dai that can freeze your Dai balance wallet in cold storage wallets.
It seemed like Ethereum was cooked and the Coinbase came along with Base and reinvigorated things a bit. The fact with ETH is that is has way more value locked on the chain than any other smart chain out there. By a lot. I prefer using Solana over Ethereum, but big money has already chosen ETH. I don’t think it is going anywhere.
Is Base a layer 2 to Ethereum or a sidechain?
Is Ethereum still the most decentralized smart contract chain out there?
This is complex topic but I believe there are many ways trump can impose ban to tether like not allowing the use of dollar to peg their USDT and I agree that ETH value will plummet if stablecoin suddenly vanish.
Otherwise when will bitcoin gets its own stable coin on its own layer 2 to compete with ethereum? Layer 2's none of that sidechains nonsense that leverage no security from layer 1's.
There are plenty of L2 with its own stable for bitcoin, but never truly get the spotlight because people trust bitcoin much more than those L2 and if they want to do smart contract related activity they go to ETH where liquidity is not scarce compared to L2.If trump bans Tether then they will losing funding from them.
Theres Layer 2's and their Sidechains. Layers 2's are less risky because they leverage the safety and security of their underneath main Layer 1 base chain network. Is there a stablecoin on the bitcoin layer 2 yet like lightning stable coin? Obviously they cant be a stablecoin on the main layer 1 bitcoin network because fees will be expensive plus its going to clutter the main bitcoin network. The bitcoin maxis want their main btc base layer to be clutter free so less storage space in Gb is required to run a node.
USDT is much more actively used on Tron than Ethereum, so this is probably not true. There are too many scams and risks on Ethereum that many people prefer using Tron, besides it is faster and cheaper. I wonder if there is somewhere good data that compares usage not just issuance. Does anyone know a source?
Honestly I believe if it wasn't for stable coins Eth would be useless by now worth $0. Otherwise what people will use Ethereum for, just NFTs and selling NFTs for bitcoin not for stable coin payments? Smart contracts with what if there are no stable coins at the other end of the contract?
ETH has no advantage over the new generation of coins. It is only there because of age and being the first for these kind of features. Old interests are keeping the price high.Otherwise when will bitcoin gets its own stable coin on its own layer 2 to compete with ethereum? Layer 2's none of that sidechains nonsense that leverage no security from layer 1's.
I think I've read somewhere that someone is trying to deploy a stablecoin on Bitcoin, but I am not sure. Okay we can see a clearer picture here. West Vs East. West is Ethereum and USDC Vs East Tron and USDT. However USDT Tether lends money to the USA Government so I don't see why Trump would ban USDT as he is getting $billions from Tether. It is like killing one of your main funders. So from this can we safely assume that Tether USDT will remain for years until if democrats win the next USA election with their anti-crypto stance but then again banning USDT is like I said before killing one of the government main sources of income because Tether buys USA Govt. bonds.
USDC is officially regulated and recognised by the USA Government. People in the poorer east need USDT because the dollar is the world reserve currency and their local currencies are not as strong I guess. They could by USDC but they prefer to support Asian Tron over western Ethereum? So in future it will be like 2 global competing economies that is western blockchain vs eastern blockchain for smart contracts but bitcoin is separate from all this as its a store of value but bitcoin can dominate all if it can do smart contracts too making Ethereum and Tron obsolete.
What you mean too many scams on ethereum compared to tron? You mean ethereum has too many smart contracts defi hacks in compared to tron? Which is more decentralized, Tron or Ethereum?
Just look at this data point https://www.crypto-news-flash.com/tether-holds-33-1b-in-treasuries-now-top-7-worldwide/. If they continue to do this they will be unstoppable.
If ethereum is the worst smart contract chain out there then why it has the most dominance according to this link?:
https://defillama.com/chains
USDT dominance is currently 61% and USDC has a strong dominance too according to this link?:
https://defillama.com/stablecoins
But why there is a lot of USDT on Ethereum then, all should return back to Tron right if Ethereum is rubbish.
Or is USDT dominance high because there's a higher yield for it on De-Fi in compared to USDC?
But the final question begs why people choose USDT over USDC when USDC is regulated and the company Circle is a registered security and USDC is officially endorsed by Coinbase who are also on stock market exchange regulated by the SEC and Coinbase is custody of all the bitcoins for the big players like michael saylor and blackrock and such so does this guarantee that coinbase, circle and usdc will never go to $0?
There's thousands of entities and corporations and nation states that buys USA treasuries not just Tether. Russia 1 of them but the USA still went after Russia. Is Tether regulated by recognised bodies like the SEC? Does Tether have the same peace of mind like USDC?
Can the USA Government freeze Tether USA treasuries that they are holding and liquidate sell them and don't pay Tether the bond principal and interest back?
As unrealistic as it is for stablecoins to become illegal, even if it did happen, there would still be alternative options. CDP stablecoins aren’t backed by US dollars and are fairly decentralized. There are also Euro backed and Yuan backed stablecoins. Trump isn’t dumb enough to do something that would hurt dollar adoption and help out competing currencies.
As for whether it would kill Ethereum, the answer is no. You just have to look at Solana and XRP to see that people will still buy altcoins for other reasons unrelated to stablecoins.
As for whether it would kill Ethereum, the answer is no. You just have to look at Solana and XRP to see that people will still buy altcoins for other reasons unrelated to stablecoins.
So is Dai the only CDP stablecoin out there? I see that Circle a USA entity has issued EURC stablecoin alongside their USDC. Isn't Circle hurting dollar adoption by doing this?
You means altcoins released on the host blockchains such as XRP or solana or people buying altcoins with stablecoins?
Or you could even say ETH is what’s keeping stablecoins alive.
I mean, stablecoins like USDT run on different networks (TRON, BNB, and ETH).. but Ethereum is still the most popular and widely used. Without ETH, stablecoins probably wouldn’t even exist in the way we know them now.
People are still investing in ETH.,, they still believe in the project, even with all the bad news about developers or whatever drama’s happening behind the scenes. At the end of the day, it’s the investors that keep a project alive and ETH still has a strong base of supporters backing it.
I mean, stablecoins like USDT run on different networks (TRON, BNB, and ETH).. but Ethereum is still the most popular and widely used. Without ETH, stablecoins probably wouldn’t even exist in the way we know them now.
People are still investing in ETH.,, they still believe in the project, even with all the bad news about developers or whatever drama’s happening behind the scenes. At the end of the day, it’s the investors that keep a project alive and ETH still has a strong base of supporters backing it.
Yeah I know it is like Eth is the host landlord and USDC and USDT are like tenants in the household that brings in a lot cashflow for the Host to survive right or is it the other way around?
What if assets like stable coins and NFTs leave the Eth blockchain then can Eth still survive? Stable coins are already on Solana but why USDT or USDC not on Cardano yet?
You have too many misunderstandings about these concepts. First, if Trump bans $USDT, it won't directly affect $ETH. We might lose a lot of MC if that happens, but that doesn't mean it will directly affect $ETH (currently $USDT is used in many L-1 & L-2 projects).
Referring to the question in the title, I'll answer it with "Maybe", the $ETH ecosystem is indeed supported by stablecoins, but actually it's not only that, there are many other types of supporting assets that keep $ETH alive until now, so, even when stablecoins don't exist, it won't destroy $ETH.
Referring to the question in the title, I'll answer it with "Maybe", the $ETH ecosystem is indeed supported by stablecoins, but actually it's not only that, there are many other types of supporting assets that keep $ETH alive until now, so, even when stablecoins don't exist, it won't destroy $ETH.
Yeah USDT is mostly used on Tron so wont affect Ethereum if USA Govt. goes after Tether but USA Govt. can go after Asian Tron instead and that that will make all USDT holders swap their USDT for USDC out of fear I guess and finish off the Tron network unless Tron and Tether bring their own stablecoin for the chinese currency or whatever. Is that why China does not like Tether because it lends money to the USA Govt. and not to the Chinese Govt.
Okay apart from stable coins and NFT's, what other assets rely and need the Ethereum blockchain to survive?
Can there ever be a independent asset with its own independent decentralized blockchain like bitcoin? Like a dollar stable coin on its own blockchain without requiring a need for Ethereum or Tron to host it or is this simply will turn out to be a CBDC?
And talking of CBDC's can central banks take over the Ethereum and Tron blockchains if they decided for example to make USDC their official CBDC for the USA Govt. when USDC is still hosted on Ethereum?
USDT is much more actively used on Tron than Ethereum, so this is probably not true. There are too many scams and risks on Ethereum that many people prefer using Tron, besides it is faster and cheaper. I wonder if there is somewhere good data that compares usage not just issuance. Does anyone know a source?
Honestly I believe if it wasn't for stable coins Eth would be useless by now worth $0. Otherwise what people will use Ethereum for, just NFTs and selling NFTs for bitcoin not for stable coin payments? Smart contracts with what if there are no stable coins at the other end of the contract?
ETH has no advantage over the new generation of coins. It is only there because of age and being the first for these kind of features. Old interests are keeping the price high.Otherwise when will bitcoin gets its own stable coin on its own layer 2 to compete with ethereum? Layer 2's none of that sidechains nonsense that leverage no security from layer 1's.
I think I've read somewhere that someone is trying to deploy a stablecoin on Bitcoin, but I am not sure. Okay we can see a clearer picture here. West Vs East. West is Ethereum and USDC Vs East Tron and USDT. However USDT Tether lends money to the USA Government so I don't see why Trump would ban USDT as he is getting $billions from Tether. It is like killing one of your main funders. So from this can we safely assume that Tether USDT will remain for years until if democrats win the next USA election with their anti-crypto stance but then again banning USDT is like I said before killing one of the government main sources of income because Tether buys USA Govt. bonds.
USDC is officially regulated and recognised by the USA Government. People in the poorer east need USDT because the dollar is the world reserve currency and their local currencies are not as strong I guess. They could by USDC but they prefer to support Asian Tron over western Ethereum? So in future it will be like 2 global competing economies that is western blockchain vs eastern blockchain for smart contracts but bitcoin is separate from all this as its a store of value bit bitcoin can dominate all if it can do smart contracts too making Ethereum and Tron obsolete.
What you mean too many scams on ethereum compared to tron? You mean ethereum has too many smart contracts defi hacks in compared to tron? Which is more decentralized, Tron or Ethereum?
Re: Confused on the True Purpose of Non-KYC Crypto Debit/Prepaid cards
Otherwise how does a non-kyc crypto card makes sense with a custodial wallet and what triggers the service provider issuer to freeze your card or crypto if they don't know who you are to begin with
This makes them custodial over your funds as well so far they hold they for you and it's even much more easier to scam you if it's a fake provider or deliberate actions because you have nothing to show for , nothing tied you your account other than whatever they offer you..
They can also be decentralised, is not all that are like this.
Lastly, their service maybe regulated and if they notice any suspicious activity your account could be freeze anyways and you could have a low chance of recovery since you don't want to reveal your identity in the first place..
All these are stated on their TOS. Although some may state they don't keep any logs of users or state the only time your data will be shared would be when higher authority requests for it. The TOS gives better clarity on every services offering on how they operate and thus includes if such service is Custodial or non-custodial.
Okay can you list which crypto debit cards use non-custodial wallets and which one would you choose?
Re: Confused on the True Purpose of Non-KYC Crypto Debit/Prepaid cards
Otherwise how does a non-kyc crypto card makes sense with a custodial wallet and what triggers the service provider issuer to freeze your card or crypto if they don't know who you are to begin with
This makes them custodial over your funds as well so far they hold they for you and it's even much more easier to scam you if it's a fake provider or deliberate actions because you have nothing to show for , nothing tied you your account other than whatever they offer you..
Lastly, their service maybe regulated and if they notice any suspicious activity your account could be freeze anyways and you could have a low chance of recovery since you don't want to reveal your identity in the first place..
Only kyc crypto cards are regulated? Regulations says kyc is mandatory right? So that means non-kyc crypto debit cards are all scams because they are non-regulated? You know which crypto debit cards are officially regulated from the Trump's administration?
Re: Confused on the True Purpose of Non-KYC Crypto Debit/Prepaid cards
Hi,
Non- KYC means the service provider does not know who you are and does not know where you live right? So lets say for example you deposit a $million USDT onto your non-kyc crypto virtual debit card, because it is non-kyc can the service provider still freeze your USDT?
The whole purpose of non-kyc is is stop the service provider issuer freezing your crypto right? For example I could be the most wanted terrorist in the world but as long I have my non-kyc crypto card I can still spend it to survive because the service provider issuer do not know that I am a terrorist because of non-kyc so my crypto wont be frozen right?
Or can non-kyc crypto cards still be frozen and how do non-kyc crypto debit cards work, are they connected to a custodial or non-custodial right?
Otherwise how does a non-kyc crypto card makes sense with a custodial wallet and what triggers the service provider issuer to freeze your card or crypto if they don't know who you are to begin with
Someone please make sense of all this for me.
Lastly with president Trump signing off stable coins as legal then which crypto non-kyc cards are officially regulated by the SEC?
Non- KYC means the service provider does not know who you are and does not know where you live right? So lets say for example you deposit a $million USDT onto your non-kyc crypto virtual debit card, because it is non-kyc can the service provider still freeze your USDT?
The whole purpose of non-kyc is is stop the service provider issuer freezing your crypto right? For example I could be the most wanted terrorist in the world but as long I have my non-kyc crypto card I can still spend it to survive because the service provider issuer do not know that I am a terrorist because of non-kyc so my crypto wont be frozen right?
Or can non-kyc crypto cards still be frozen and how do non-kyc crypto debit cards work, are they connected to a custodial or non-custodial right?
Otherwise how does a non-kyc crypto card makes sense with a custodial wallet and what triggers the service provider issuer to freeze your card or crypto if they don't know who you are to begin with
Someone please make sense of all this for me.
Lastly with president Trump signing off stable coins as legal then which crypto non-kyc cards are officially regulated by the SEC?
Read the terms and conditions. You will see that you are giving them the option to subject you to KYC and freeze your funds.
You would be quite gullible if you think Non-KYC means you are given the right to be truly anonymous or your funds can never be frozen. It just means you do not have to do KYC pre-emptively.
The service provider holds your funds (and controls the private keys), so they can freeze your funds for any reason at any time. And when I say ANY reason I mean ANY. That is what custodial means. And non-KYC custodial services still use on-chain surveillance tools like Chainalysis for suspicious transactions. So if they have reason to believe your funds should be frozen, they will not unfreeze them until you provide them with KYC, AML and further documents.
Okay you know which non-kyc crypto debit cards whether virtual or physical cards are linked to your own non-custodial wallet? And can your crypto still be frozen in your own non-custodial wallet?
To clarify the funds on a crypto debit card is separate from the funds in your linked non-custodial wallet? I mean as in you have to manually top up your crypto debit card from your own non-custodial wallet or the crypto debit card automatically spends from your non-custodial wallet and I shall I assume the manual top up method can be frozen because tops up leaves the safe custody of your non-custodial wallet?
Sorry for a lot of questions asked as I try to make sense of all this as I cannot understand that if crypto non-kyc debit cards are a gimmick then why people use them over a normal bank account debit card that offers more consumer protections and no fees compared to a non-kyc crypto debit where there are more expensive fees and if the linked non-custodial wallet is linked to your crypto debit card then you also have to pay gas blockchain network fees too
I mean most are on the Ethereum main net. USDC and USDT. USDC is western regulated and USDT is eastern regulated but both are on Ethereum main net.
So lets say trump decides to ban just usdt, how is he going to do it when its on the Ethereum blockchain unless he bans ethereum too but if he does that then that will affect usdc too right?
So all 3 are like properly integrated with each other meaning they cannot be separated right?
Honestly I believe if it wasn't for stable coins Eth would be useless by now worth $0. Otherwise what people will use Ethereum for, just NFTs and selling NFTs for bitcoin not for stable coin payments? Smart contracts with what if there are no stable coins at the other end of the contract?
Eth is not a store of value like btc. Because stable coins are on Ethereum is it fair to say that the true marketcap of ethereum is ethereum marketcap plus all stable coins market caps too?
Otherwise when will bitcoin gets its own stable coin on its own layer 2 to compete with ethereum? Layer 2's none of that sidechains nonsense that leverage no security from layer 1's.
So lets say trump decides to ban just usdt, how is he going to do it when its on the Ethereum blockchain unless he bans ethereum too but if he does that then that will affect usdc too right?
So all 3 are like properly integrated with each other meaning they cannot be separated right?
Honestly I believe if it wasn't for stable coins Eth would be useless by now worth $0. Otherwise what people will use Ethereum for, just NFTs and selling NFTs for bitcoin not for stable coin payments? Smart contracts with what if there are no stable coins at the other end of the contract?
Eth is not a store of value like btc. Because stable coins are on Ethereum is it fair to say that the true marketcap of ethereum is ethereum marketcap plus all stable coins market caps too?
Otherwise when will bitcoin gets its own stable coin on its own layer 2 to compete with ethereum? Layer 2's none of that sidechains nonsense that leverage no security from layer 1's.
Confused on the True Purpose of Non-KYC Crypto Debit/Prepaid cards
Hi,
Non- KYC means the service provider does not know who you are and does not know where you live right? So lets say for example you deposit a $million USDT onto your non-kyc crypto virtual debit card, because it is non-kyc can the service provider still freeze your USDT?
The whole purpose of non-kyc is is stop the service provider issuer freezing your crypto right? For example I could be the most wanted terrorist in the world but as long I have my non-kyc crypto card I can still spend it to survive because the service provider issuer do not know that I am a terrorist because of non-kyc so my crypto wont be frozen right?
Or can non-kyc crypto cards still be frozen and how do non-kyc crypto debit cards work, are they connected to a custodial or non-custodial right?
Otherwise how does a non-kyc crypto card makes sense with a custodial wallet and what triggers the service provider issuer to freeze your card or crypto if they don't know who you are to begin with
Someone please make sense of all this for me.
Lastly with president Trump signing off stable coins as legal then which crypto non-kyc cards are officially regulated by the SEC?
Non- KYC means the service provider does not know who you are and does not know where you live right? So lets say for example you deposit a $million USDT onto your non-kyc crypto virtual debit card, because it is non-kyc can the service provider still freeze your USDT?
The whole purpose of non-kyc is is stop the service provider issuer freezing your crypto right? For example I could be the most wanted terrorist in the world but as long I have my non-kyc crypto card I can still spend it to survive because the service provider issuer do not know that I am a terrorist because of non-kyc so my crypto wont be frozen right?
Or can non-kyc crypto cards still be frozen and how do non-kyc crypto debit cards work, are they connected to a custodial or non-custodial right?
Otherwise how does a non-kyc crypto card makes sense with a custodial wallet and what triggers the service provider issuer to freeze your card or crypto if they don't know who you are to begin with
Someone please make sense of all this for me.
Lastly with president Trump signing off stable coins as legal then which crypto non-kyc cards are officially regulated by the SEC?
Hello,
I got a refund from amazon for around $7 USDC and I got like 24 cents in cashback rewards on my metamask virtual debit card. So I'm on their main desktop website and I am trying to withdraw this credit refund and reward to my metamask wallet but I get a red transaction process failed message
What gives?
I got a refund from amazon for around $7 USDC and I got like 24 cents in cashback rewards on my metamask virtual debit card. So I'm on their main desktop website and I am trying to withdraw this credit refund and reward to my metamask wallet but I get a red transaction process failed message
What gives?
Mostly swaps, might venture into staking and liquidity pools. Liquidity pools is lending/borrowing in de-fi right?
Sorry for the delay, I forgot to revisit this topic
Liquidity pool is different from lend/borrow
Liquidity pool you provide liquidity in 2 different coin for those who swap between these 2 coins
Lend/borrow you offer some currency to borrow some.
For example, you lend BTC to borrow USDT
- Example 1, I change the default max/unlimited value to 100 value so I do not have to spend gas fees in future to revoke this. The worse case scenario that can happen in future if I do not revoke this 100 value contract is max I can lose is $100 from a hack not a $million from my wallet address, basically I lose $100 from a $million if I do not revoke?
Exactly, you got it right
In this case only 100 dollars would be at risk
- You mentioned If the contract defaults to unlimited approval, is this still possible after I set the value with the 100 example I gave above, my 100 input value defaults back to max/unlimited again?
If you set a limit of 100, you'll make a tx and this transaction will only be on the 100
In a future transaction with the same contract you need to set it again to the desired value
- Who decided in the De-Fi world that the default input value should be set to unlimited/max and why? Who programmed this value? It is like for example banks giving their customers unlimited/max no withdrawal limits at ATM cash machines meaning if a thief has access to the debit card and there's a $million in the a account then the thief can empty all the cash from the cash machine and go onto the next cash machine and empty out and so on until balance goes to $0. It is an absolutely insane idea whoever thought of that max/unlimited input default value in de-fi. I hope there is a update to MetaMask wallet to auto adjust the default value for you for all de-fi transactions and if there is no incentive to do this then who is truly running De-Fi? Scammers/Hackers? Or they do this on purpose to collect more gas fees in de-fi from revokes.
I think they leave it at unlimited to save on fees
Some networks are cheaper, but you have to remember that transactions on the ETH network can be very expensive, and a simple transaction to approve a limit can cost several dollars, for example, making it expensive to make many transactions.
- I understand theres smart contract in de-fi that involves on-chain meaning gas fees to use the chain however Smart Signatures are supposedly off-chain meaning no gas fees so why it costs gas fees to Revoke a Smart Signature
I can't explain this part exactly, but to revoke through revoke.cash you have to make the transaction
Alright to confirm for liquidity pools I have to provide 2 coins not just 1? Example USDT/USDC trading pair, I have to provide both of them at the same amount each not just for 1?
So in De-Fi which is the least risky way of earning the most highest passive % annual income?
Can I lend $100 USDT for bitcoin collateral and how much bitcoin LTV collateral will I get? If the borrower has $100 dollars worth of bitcoin and wants to borrow $100 of USDT then why don't the borrower just sell his bitcoin instead of getting a $100 USDT loan?
In De-Fi the borrower can default lets say a million times however there's no credit history/reports/rating of the borrower in de-fi so the borrower credit history cannot be checked on de-fi or is it bad/backlisted borrowers do not exist in de-fi because smart contracts saves the lender automatically from losses from defaults?
[quoteI]In a future transaction with the same contract you need to set it again to the desired value [/quote]
Can you give examples of same contracts for better understanding. I thought all transaction in de-fi are new transactions requiring a new smart contract each right because you always get prompts on screen from your wallet to sign/approve this and that. Or is it sites like uniswap use existing smart contracts signed by metamask in the past for new de-fi transactions?
Quote
I think they leave it at unlimited to save on fees
To confirm if I change the value from unlimited/max to 100, I have to pay gas fees again to change this value each time I transact in de-fi and if this applies to ETH then there's no escaping expensive gas fees?
Layer 2 network fees like Polygon, Arbitrum and such are much cheaper however Ethereum main chain is the strongest de-fi chain out there for that network security assurance. For example would you hold $million of USDC on the main ETH chain or on layer 2 polygon chain? What happens if for example Polygon network gets weak with its token market cap crashing in value or gets hacked because of network weakness, will the issuer of USDC Circle accept legal responsibility of this or will they say sorry you lost a $million on polygon however polygon is out of our control and we only endorse official Ethereum because we Circle use Ethereum as our backbone for our business operations, hence we cannot compensate for your losses sorry? I'm sure they must have this writing in their small print somewhere.
Alright just to clarify it is a best security/safety practice to revoking Uniswap's smart contracts and smart signatures after finishing using Uniswap even though Uniswap is reliable and established?
Okay in your screenshot, to confirm it is okay to set for example to exact 100 and the transaction wont fail because there was no extra overhead in the 100 input? Most de-fi sites use the default max/unlimited value, which de-fi sites you speak of that set to correct value for you automatically?
Apart from unlimited/max value setting, is there any other setting in the metamask transaction screens that I need to be aware of? How do I prevent future signatures attaching to my coins after the transaction has completed.
De-Fi in its current state is a definitely a no go zone for beginners with security/safety issues like these and if Gas fees is required all the time to be safe and secure in De-Fi then I cannot see De-Fi growing unless the bare minimum necessity such as safety and security is present and free especially when it comes to finances. It is similar to getting a car without brakes/seatbelts and paying extra for these services. If De-Fi is truly decentralized like Bitcoin then I guess it is worth paying gas fees I guess.
Okay in your screenshot, to confirm it is okay to set for example to exact 100 and the transaction wont fail because there was no extra overhead in the 100 input? Most de-fi sites use the default max/unlimited value, which de-fi sites you speak of that set to correct value for you automatically?
Apart from unlimited/max value setting, is there any other setting in the metamask transaction screens that I need to be aware of? How do I prevent future signatures attaching to my coins after the transaction has completed.
De-Fi in its current state is a definitely a no go zone for beginners with security/safety issues like these and if Gas fees is required all the time to be safe and secure in De-Fi then I cannot see De-Fi growing unless the bare minimum necessity such as safety and security is present and free especially when it comes to finances. It is similar to getting a car without brakes/seatbelts and paying extra for these services. If De-Fi is truly decentralized like Bitcoin then I guess it is worth paying gas fees I guess.
I'll try to summarize as much as possible so as not to complicate things for you, I've noticed that you still have a lot of doubts
--> When using DeFi or any other type of transaction, only approve the limit you're going to use, it's that simple
Then you don't need to revoke anything
--> If the contract defaults to unlimited approval, simply change it to the amount you're using at the time
As you're just starting out, keep it simple and you'll learn more in the process
What I said in the previous post about saving fees by setting it to unlimited and then revoking it, etc., you'll learn over time and with practice
What are you going to do? Are you going to do swaps? stakes? liquidity pools?
Mostly swaps, might venture into staking and liquidity pools. Liquidity pools is lending/borrowing in de-fi right?
Ok can further clarify the following:
- Example 1, I change the default max/unlimited value to 100 value so I do not have to spend gas fees in future to revoke this. The worse case scenario that can happen in future if I do not revoke this 100 value contract is max I can lose is $100 from a hack not a $million from my wallet address, basically I lose $100 from a $million if I do not revoke?
- You mentioned If the contract defaults to unlimited approval, is this still possible after I set the value with the 100 example I gave above, my 100 input value defaults back to max/unlimited again?
- Who decided in the De-Fi world that the default input value should be set to unlimited/max and why? Who programmed this value? It is like for example banks giving their customers unlimited/max no withdrawal limits at ATM cash machines meaning if a thief has access to the debit card and there's a $million in the a account then the thief can empty all the cash from the cash machine and go onto the next cash machine and empty out and so on until balance goes to $0. It is an absolutely insane idea whoever thought of that max/unlimited input default value in de-fi. I hope there is a update to MetaMask wallet to auto adjust the default value for you for all de-fi transactions and if there is no incentive to do this then who is truly running De-Fi? Scammers/Hackers? Or they do this on purpose to collect more gas fees in de-fi from revokes.
- I understand theres smart contract in de-fi that involves on-chain meaning gas fees to use the chain however Smart Signatures are supposedly off-chain meaning no gas fees so why it costs gas fees to Revoke a Smart Signature