Great points @The_Crypto_Oracle. Honestly I just want to know my funds are safe, and Chainlink’s data sources/methods seem as reliable as it gets for mitigating risk in similar situations, and we can implement them quickly.
I’m happy to see that we have a COMP distribution proposal in the works. These sort of changes will be very useful. However, I can’t help but feeling like the oracle issue is a more pressing issue to resolve right now.
Agreed. @rleshner mentioned wanting to implement additional price feed safeguards on Discord last night, which is great, but I didn’t hear any specifics around what he is envisioning from a technical standpoint. It would be very helpful to get some more clarity here so we can get this conversation moving forward (and a fix in place ASAP).
How can happen outstanding debt in DAI?
The Variable Interest Rate Mechanism was not effective?
Because DAI borrowing interest rate was around 4% all time. Higher interest rates on borrowing assets incentivize users to repay high expensive positions.
I was personally borrow DAI because of lower interest rates than other stablecoins.
Can you, if it is not a problem, put a link where the DAI market is analyzed precisely because of that anomaly? And where are the potential risks presented? I would like to take a closer look at your argument.
Thank you
no, but they have had problems with it earlier.
@TennisBowling Could you provide more context? I hadn’t heard about this, what oracle or liquidation issues did Aave have recently?
I’ll echo the others in that it would be helpful if you could expand upon these concerns in any detail @TennisBowling.
I feel it is pretty clear the current oracle framework needs a rethink (I’m not seeing many here argue against this), and so far Chainlink sounds like the best solution proposed thus far due to the massively increased market coverage w/ minimal development. There have been other ideas floated (more reporters, tightening bounds etc.) that could improve the current situation, but IMO only nominally by comparison.
I’ve heard concerns about centralization, but it’s hard to understand those concerns when people seem ok using Coinbase Pro as our reporter, meanwhile CL is using a large network of independent data sources. I’ve also heard concerns about obfuscation, but again that is hard to understand when I can easily view granular node/feed data and reputation info.
I’ll admit the LINK marines/frogs can be a little much! Part of me feels like the negative sentiment here could be more a knee-jerk reaction to that than the technicals, which I feel that is a shame because from what I can tell the actual team is one of the most professional in the space, and the technicals are all that really matters.
Again if there is something I’m missing, I would love to know more details so we can discuss.
Chainlink is the best solution, but if in Chainlink exists some point of failure how we can improve that with the existing price discovery model?
Existing price discovery solution is centralized and every argument against failed because at some point in time DAI price on Coinbase Open Price Feed wasn’t aligned with the global DAI price. We can’t say that is because of outstanding debt in DAI on the protocol because in that scenario protocol has big impact on price at existing oracle model. If Compound caused stablecoin volatility on an existing oracle solution then it just doesn’t work.
Agree, there may be more constructive reactions when something like this happens again
FYI - Coinbase experienced a 60% deviation from the market-wide price yesterday on the SNX/USD pair:
Compare this to Coingecko:
Had SNX been a collateral type on Compound we likely would have seen another false liquidation event. We need to expand market coverage via Chainlink, plain and simple.
