I'm sure someone else has explained this, but it is just so cool and I want to explain how this works.

So Curve is awesome for swaps between similar assets, right? The fact that they trade very close to each other is a key part about how Curve works, using it's custom swap invariant function.

That's step 1
Step 2 is that Synthetix is awesome for creating "synthetic assets" (aka synths) which are assets that trade like other assets, that are backed by another, entirely different asset. Basically, a plastic banana that I can buy and sell like a real banana.
Synthetix has a feature that lets you swap between any two synths with zero slippage and a flat fee. That's because it is simply converting the sythentic asset into another synthetic asset, the backing for the synth doesn't change it just uses a different price oracle now.
This is important. Absolutely no slippage, at any size

Swap $1m sUSD for $1m sBTC? flat 0.3% fee

Swap $10m sUSD for $10m sBTC? flat 0.3% fee

swap $100m sUSD for $100m sBTC? Well, there isn't that many synths in Curve, yet but you get the point. The only limit is the pool depth
Okay, so that's awesome. We have two building blocks:
1. Curve lets you swap like-assets with extremely low slippage and a low fee
2. Synthetix lets you convert synths to other synths, with no slippage and a low fee

What happens if we just... combine them?
So here's the flow:
1. I swap my "real asset" (e.g. USDC) for a "synthetic" one (e.g. sUSD)
2. I exchange one synthetic asset for another (e.g. sUSD -> sBTC)
3. I swap my new synthetic asset to a "real" asset again (e.g. wBTC)
"But, that's so much more complicated than swapping on another AMM!"

It is. It's not cheap either, at over 1m gas to execute. And to make matters worse, due to how a Synthetix swap works, you actually have to wait a few minutes between the swap, so it isn't even full atomic!
"It's not fully atomic! Why would I do this???"

The answer is capital efficiency. AMMs with a curve that allows trading assets that are dissimilar are inefficient with larger and larger swaps.

For example, a $10m USDC -> wBTC swap on Uniswap right now has >13% slippage!
Conversely, with this feature, a $10m USDC -> sUSD/sBTC -> wBTC swap has less than 1% slippage (you actually even get a boost right now, due to the balance of sBTC/wBTC pool)

Of course you would pick this option now!
There's lots of limitations to this, and it's really only efficient with large swaps (~$1m or more), but as Curve and Synthetix (and AMMs like Uniswap) grow, the range where this is profitable will change.

But on principle, this will be the best way to perform a high-value swap!
Why is that important?

I think as we have seen, gas fees are just going up and up and up. Optimism soft-launched their L2 today, but Ethereum's success means that block space will always be at a premium.

The gas costs will not be coming down as much as you'd think!
Instead, what we will see happen is that with the increase of cheap transactional capacity on L2, Ethereum will be at *more* of a premium (not less) as it will be used by high-valued settlement transactions and large capital movements (and exchanges, etc.)
So this is my prediction:
This more efficient means of large-value swaps will see a lot of use on base layer Ethereum, as gas prices continue to grow.
Hobbyist/frequent traders will move to Layer 2, where smaller value trades will be economically more efficient.
(Potentially) We will see these two boundaries blur using this building block: a popular, lower-value, high-frequency AMM operating on L2 will settle activity back to Ethereum, with large capital movements settling between these L2s using this new swap primitive.
This is the natural progression of things. The ecosystem will only get more complex as this year moves forward, and navigating from a purely synchronous/atomic environment to newer primitives that play with atomicity and/or asychnronous behaviors is the major DeFi story of 2021
I hope this is helpful to people. This is a really complex new feature from @CurveFinance, but one that unlocks something really awesome, and plays to it's strengths as a high-valued swap engine (and popular yield lego!)

More from Crypto

1/ @MIT discussing the need for blockchain gateways to achieve interoperability across different blockchain networks, and to support the cross-blockchain mobility of virtual assets

https://t.co/PbjQkSlTT3

@quant_network are collaborating with MIT in the creation of ODAP

$QNT

2/ "In order for blockchain-based services to scale globally, blockchain networks must be able to interoperate with one another following a standardized protocol and interfaces (APIs)"

Gilbert founded ISO TC307 which 60 countries are working towards standardizing the interfaces


3/ "We believe that a blockchain gateway is needed for blockchain networks to interoperate in a manner similar
to border gateway routers in IP networks. Just as border gateway routers use the BGPv4 protocol to interact with one another in a peered fashion we believe that a...

4/ blockchain gateway protocol will be needed to permit the movement of virtual assets and related information across blockchain networks in a secure and privacy-preserving manner"

You can read more about the gateway protocol ODAP in this 21 tweet


5/
"We motivate the need for blockchain gateways and blockchain gateway protocols in the following summary:

✅Enables blockchain interoperability:
Blockchain gateways provide an interface for the interoperability between blockchain/DLT systems that operate distinct consensus...
Out of curiosity I dug into how NFT's actually reference the media you're "buying" and my eyebrows are now orbiting the moon

Short version:

The NFT token you bought either points to a URL on the internet, or an IPFS hash. In most circumstances it references an IPFS gateway on the internet run by the startup you bought the NFT from.

Oh, and that URL is not the media. That URL is a JSON metadata file

Here's an example. This artwork is by Beeple and sold via Nifty:

https://t.co/TlJKH8kAew

The NFT token is for this JSON file hosted directly on Nifty's servers:

https://t.co/GQUaCnObvX


THAT file refers to the actual media you just "bought". Which in this case is hosted via a @cloudinary CDN, served by Nifty's servers again.

So if Nifty goes bust, your token is now worthless. It refers to nothing. This can't be changed.

"But you said some use IPFS!"

Let's look at the $65m Beeple, sold by Christies. Fancy.

https://t.co/1G9nCAdetk

That NFT token refers directly to an IPFS hash (https://t.co/QUdtdgtssH). We can take that IPFS hash and fetch the JSON metadata using a public gateway:

https://t.co/CoML7psBhF
You may be wondering why @bristoliver rather cryptically RT’d a chart that I posted last night. The answer is not just that he loves quadratic fits on log axes, but that this chart may –and I stress may– hint at a vaccine effect amongst the over 80s THREAD


WARNING: this is a long thread, and it’s a bit of a roller-coaster. We find some apparently strong patterns in the data, and then start to unpick them a bit. So if you start getting excited half way through you might find you’re less excited at the end. But we’ll see…

First we first have to go back a bit. @bristoliver posted a thread a few days ago explaining why, with a constant vaccination rate, a log plot of cases should show a quadratic form. In other words, it should fit an equation like: a + b.x + c.x^2

I meant to link in the model thread there - here it is


the quadratic coefficient – the ‘c’ in that equation – gives an estimate of the % of the population who are being newly protected by the vaccine each day. Please note ‘protected by the vaccine’, not ‘vaccinated’ – as we don't expect 100% protection after the first dose

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?