To say bitcoin will beat XRP, you have to think that all that matters is its lead. It's slower. It's more expensive. It lacks on-chain features like account security management. We don't know if block generation will be stable as the block reward drops. ...
— David Schwartz (@JoelKatz) January 11, 2021
1/20 XRP's Consensus Protocol vs Proof of Work (POW) and Proof of Stake (POS), and why Flare is superior to Ethereum for DeFi and stable coins.
— XRPatience (@xrpartisan) January 8, 2021
A thread.\U0001f447 pic.twitter.com/a2xDrKsxtR
Hands-down the best video I've seen arguing why @Ripple will win, XRP will not be deemed a security, and the SEC is likely to settle the case sooner rather than later. Video is from @jungleincxrphttps://t.co/ccjsfZGZvL#XRP $XRP #XRPCommunity
— XRPatience (@xrpartisan) January 4, 2021
1/XRP benefits explainer threads.
— XRPatience (@xrpartisan) January 8, 2021
There's lots of confusing tech-talk articles that explain XRP, Flare, concepts like Proof Of Work, Proof of Stake, etc.
I attempt to break down how it all works and where it's all going in simple language. \U0001f447 pic.twitter.com/WAxvknjzdq
More from Crypto
2020 was a game changer for Ethereum.
The vast majority of its success was fueled by #DeFi.
Here's what happened in 5 Tweets 🔽
1) Governance Tokens 🪙
Projects gave complete ownership of billion dollar protocols to their users, often using retroactive airdrops.
Early adopters earned tokens for past usage, and token-based voting now dictates all technical
2) Liquidity Mining ⛏️
Power users were the first to earn on-going distribution by providing liquidity.
$COMP sparked the wave, with $BAL coining the term a few weeks
3) Yield Faming 🌾
Projects coupled liquidity mining and governance tokens to boost 'yields' by combining lending rates with an incentive layer.
APYs peaked as high as 1M% during 'DeFi summer', leading to a 'food coin' craze like $YAM and
4) Fair Launches ✅
Who needs investment when you can launch using yield farming?
@iearnfinance debuted $YFI with no formal funding, seeding a community treasury for self-sustainability.
The notion of a core team and community became one and the
The vast majority of its success was fueled by #DeFi.
Here's what happened in 5 Tweets 🔽
1) Governance Tokens 🪙
Projects gave complete ownership of billion dollar protocols to their users, often using retroactive airdrops.
Early adopters earned tokens for past usage, and token-based voting now dictates all technical
It pays to be a web3 power user.
— Coopahtroopa \U0001f525_\U0001f525 (@Cooopahtroopa) December 9, 2020
Five networks that issued retroactive airdrops to value added actors \U0001f4dd
2) Liquidity Mining ⛏️
Power users were the first to earn on-going distribution by providing liquidity.
$COMP sparked the wave, with $BAL coining the term a few weeks
BAL is live!
— Balancer Labs (@BalancerLabs) June 23, 2020
The 435k BAL for liquidity providers of the first three weeks of liquidity mining (145k per week) have just been sent out to the wallets used to provide liquidity on Balancer.https://t.co/pkXFzwzPVC
3) Yield Faming 🌾
Projects coupled liquidity mining and governance tokens to boost 'yields' by combining lending rates with an incentive layer.
APYs peaked as high as 1M% during 'DeFi summer', leading to a 'food coin' craze like $YAM and
Check out @Cooopahtroopa's latest post for all the #DeFi farmers out there \U0001f468\u200d\U0001f33e
— Zerion \U0001f3e6 (@zerion_io) June 26, 2020
Turns out @synthetix_io & @CurveFinance were ploughing the fields long before $COMP & $BAL came along.
Learn how to put your #crypto to work with this #yieldfarming 101 \U0001f4b8
\U0001f449 https://t.co/zYUKtqx3BK
4) Fair Launches ✅
Who needs investment when you can launch using yield farming?
@iearnfinance debuted $YFI with no formal funding, seeding a community treasury for self-sustainability.
The notion of a core team and community became one and the
2/ What is a Fair Launch?
— fair launch capital (@fairlaunchcap) August 26, 2020
A FL enables founders to bootstrap new crypto networks that are earned, owned, and governed by their community from the outset.
In this dynamic, everyone participates on equal footing\u2014there is no early access, pre-mine, or allocation of tokens.
We are actively working to launch on @binance Smart Chain #BSC .
To make this transition easy & understandable for everyone, we are answering most frequently asked questions here.
Ready? Go! 🔥
1/24
#DeFi #YieldFarming
Q1 - What are the benefits of holding the $VALUE token on the Ethereum Mainnet network? Give me reasons not to sell. Some are assuming that the VALUE token will be abandoned now that vBSWAP is being created. Can you clarify the use case for VALUE?
👉 $VALUE will always be a governance & profit receiving token of the whole ecosystem if staked in #vGov. With the new farming token on #BSC , gvVALUE holders will get extra rewards at BSC if they choose to bridge their gvVALUE to BSC & stake in gvVALUE-B/BUSD 98/2 pool.
Q2 - What do I need to do with my VALUE tokens that are staked in vGov? Is it OK to leave them in the vGov?
👉If you have VALUE but aren't staking in the vGov & you would like to participate in the BSC expansion, you will need to stake your VALUE in the vGov to receive gvVALUE.
If you are staking in vGov but don't see the correct gvVALUE amount in your wallet, go to vGov (https://t.co/udXn5IJtVx) to unlock your gvVALUE from the old contract. There will be a bridge from ETH to BSC to move gvVALUE and vUSD over.
To make this transition easy & understandable for everyone, we are answering most frequently asked questions here.
Ready? Go! 🔥
1/24
#DeFi #YieldFarming
Q1 - What are the benefits of holding the $VALUE token on the Ethereum Mainnet network? Give me reasons not to sell. Some are assuming that the VALUE token will be abandoned now that vBSWAP is being created. Can you clarify the use case for VALUE?
👉 $VALUE will always be a governance & profit receiving token of the whole ecosystem if staked in #vGov. With the new farming token on #BSC , gvVALUE holders will get extra rewards at BSC if they choose to bridge their gvVALUE to BSC & stake in gvVALUE-B/BUSD 98/2 pool.
Q2 - What do I need to do with my VALUE tokens that are staked in vGov? Is it OK to leave them in the vGov?
👉If you have VALUE but aren't staking in the vGov & you would like to participate in the BSC expansion, you will need to stake your VALUE in the vGov to receive gvVALUE.
If you are staking in vGov but don't see the correct gvVALUE amount in your wallet, go to vGov (https://t.co/udXn5IJtVx) to unlock your gvVALUE from the old contract. There will be a bridge from ETH to BSC to move gvVALUE and vUSD over.
"Blockchain technology is energy-intensive..." => No, it doesn't have to be.
Let's look at Proof-Of-Stake, an alternative to the energy-intensive Proof-Of-Work algorithm.
🧵🔽
1️⃣ A Quick Recap On Proof-Of-Work
A Proof-Of-Work algorithm requires miners to do a certain amount of work that is compute-intensive to gain access to a service or the right to do something. This algorithm, by design, also requires that the work done shall not ...
... be reusable for anything else than what it was performed for. This lies at the core of the security concept of a blockchain. To gain the right to append a new block to a chain and to get some currency as a reward, there is work to be done, and this work must be verifyable.
That work is a race between different miners. Many miners try to compete and to be the first to find the answer to a problem presented to them. This implies that a lot of energy is wasted as only the first correct solution is accepted.
You can find a more detailed thread on Proof-Of-Work
Let's look at Proof-Of-Stake, an alternative to the energy-intensive Proof-Of-Work algorithm.
🧵🔽
1️⃣ A Quick Recap On Proof-Of-Work
A Proof-Of-Work algorithm requires miners to do a certain amount of work that is compute-intensive to gain access to a service or the right to do something. This algorithm, by design, also requires that the work done shall not ...
... be reusable for anything else than what it was performed for. This lies at the core of the security concept of a blockchain. To gain the right to append a new block to a chain and to get some currency as a reward, there is work to be done, and this work must be verifyable.
That work is a race between different miners. Many miners try to compete and to be the first to find the answer to a problem presented to them. This implies that a lot of energy is wasted as only the first correct solution is accepted.
You can find a more detailed thread on Proof-Of-Work
Proof-Of-Work is the name of a cryptographic algorithm that is used for some blockchains when new blocks are to be appended to the chain.
— Oliver Jumpertz (@oliverjumpertz) April 3, 2021
Let's take a higher-level look at how this one works, shall we?
\U0001f9f5\U0001f53d
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
