A subreddit initially designed for off-your-chest rants, now mainly for interacting with a very rude bot. Come have fun you little retard! ***** I've also found that Reddit search is based on the description. I'm going to add a *fuck* ton of tags so that all you guys find my sub! Tags; robot reddit sub crypto bitcoin cryptocurrency trump obama politics humor funny cute derp retard btc eth ethereum nano help ripple runescape 2007scape meme 4chan dank game wtf monero
I lie here in my apartment, dumplings stains on my clothes and a bit of soy sauce still at the corner of my mouth from last night's dinner. I finally crashed at 4:00 AM Pacific time and woke up at 11:00 PM. I'm still getting paid my full time salary, no work to speak of in the near future. I'm bored.
In my mid-morning delirium, I stumble around Reddit with half assed political revolution comments and when things are nice and stirred up I check my Robinhood account. My investment in Dogecoin is still stagnant after that Tik Tok pump and dump.
Flipping back to Reddit wondering if I should've stayed in Litecoin for all these years, I notice I've been on this app for the good part of 18 hours over the last 3 days. There's nothing to look at that's new. Then I look at my profile section and boom. Some bullshit about moons. moons. moons. moons.
What is it? I don't have a clue. Do I want it? Yes. I quickly give Reddit my face ID and slam accept on a bunch of "I'll never read" privacy and disclosure agreements. Gimme the moons. I'm a pretty smart guy despite my degenerate lifestyle but even after reading through the moon picture book of explaining blockchain ethereum crypto networks I'm still sitting here with my 54 moons wondering when I'll be able to buy my Lamborghini. And then I see the thing. The thing that says this isn't convertable to money and yet I'm an owner in something. The community it says. What does that mean? I'm already a member in the community so what comes with being an owner? I still don't get it. Can someone tell me wtf moons do?? I get the whole weighted commenting/posting thing but this is a sub with minimal weight needed. I mean we're just talking about different cryptos right?? Why would I need "weight" to say hey guys I think BTC will MOON soon? It's not like we're voting on business decisions or a theme makeover. WHAT IS THIS FOR?
submitted by I've heard that
founder of MakerDAO is not strictly against KYC. I have a message to whole community and specifically to a founder of MakerDAO Rune Christensen. I will explain using concrete examples why having KYC in MakerDAO is a grave mistake and it will lead to MakerDAO fork.
Many people in the first world never actually understand why
financial privacy and
financial inclusion is important. Even people (in the first world) who seemingly supportive of such ideas are not able to provide any concrete examples of why it's actually important.
Unfortunately, I was born in a
"wrong" country (Uzbekistan) and I experienced first hand what financial exclusion actually means. I know first hand that annoying feeling when you read polite, boilerplate rejection letter from financial institution based in first world. So I had to become practical libertarian. I'm going to give you
concrete examples of financial discrimination against me. Then I'm going to explain fundamental reasons why it happens. And finally, I'm going to explain my
vision for DAI.
Back in 2005, I lived in Uzbekistan. I had an idea to invest in US stocks. I was very naive and I didn't know anything about investing, compliance, bank transfers, KYC etc. All I knew is nice long term charts of US stocks and what P/E means. I didn't contact any US brokerage but I checked information about account opening and how to transfer money there. I approached local bank in Uzbekistan and asked how to transfer money to Bank of New York. Banker's face was like - WOW, WTF?!?! They asked me to go to private room to talk with senior manager. Senior manager of local bank in Uzbekistan asked me why I wanted to transfer money to US. They told me that it's absolutely impossible to transfer money to US/EU and pretty much anywhere. I approached nearly every local bank in the town and they told me the same.
In 2012, I already lived in Moscow and acquired Russian citizenship. I got back to my old idea - investing in US stocks. I called to many US brokerages and all of them politely rejected me. Usually when I called I asked them if I can open an account with them. They told me to hold on line. After long pause, I was able to speak with "senior" support who politely explain me that Russia in their list of restricted countries and they can't open an account for me. Finally, I was able to open an account with OptionsXpress. Next challenge was to convince local Russian bank to transfer money to US. Back then in 2012, I was able to get permission to do so. So you might say - is this happy end?
Fast forwarding US brokerage story to 2017, OptionsXpress was acquired by Charles Schwab. I was notified that my OptionsXpress account will be migrated to Charles Schwab platform. In 2017, I already lived in the Netherlands (but still having Russian citizenship). I wasn't happy with my stupid job in the Netherlands. I called Charles Schwab and asked if I quit my job in the Netherlands and have to return to Russia, what will happen with my account. Schwab told me that they will restrict my account, so I can't do anything except closing my account. So even if I was long term customer of OptionsXpress, Charles Schwab is not fully okay with me.
Going back to 2013, I still lived in Russia. I had another idea. What if I quit my job and build some SAAS platform (or whatever) and sell my stuff to US customers. So I need some website which accept US credit cards. I contacted my Russian bank (who previously allowed me to transfer money to OptionsXpress) about steps to make in order to accept US credit cards in Russia. I've been told explicitly in email that they won't allow me to accept US credit cards under any circumstances.
Back then I still believed in "the free west". So I thought - no problem, I will just open bank account abroad and do all operations from my foreign account. I planned vacation in Hong Kong. And Hong Kong is freest economy in the world. Looks like it's right place to open bank account. I contacted HSBC Hong Kong via email. Their general support assured me that I can open bank account with them if I'm foreigner. I flew to Hong Kong for vacation and visited HSBC branch. Of course, they rejected me. But they recommended me to visit last floor in their HQ building, they told me that another HSBC branch specializes on opening bank accounts for foreigners. I went there and they said minimum amount to open bank account is 10 mil HKD (1.27 mil USD). Later I learned that it's called private banking.
When I relocated to the Netherlands, I asked ABN Amro staff - what's happen with my bank account if I quit/lose my job in the Netherlands and have to return back to Russia. I've been told that I can't have my dutch bank account if I go back to Russia even if I already used their bank for 2+ years.
I still had idea that I would like to quit my job and do something for myself. The problem is that I'm Russian citizen and I don't have any residency which is independent from my employment. So if I quit my job in the Netherlands, I have to return back to Russia. I wanted to see how I would get payments from US/EU customers. I found Stripe Atlas, it's so exciting, they help you to incorporate in US, and even help with banking, all process of receiving credit card payments is very smooth. But as usual in my case, there is a catch - Russia in their list of restricted countries.
Speaking of centralized compliance-friendly (e.g. KYC) crypto exchanges. This year I live and work in Hong Kong. Earlier this year, I thought it would be nice to have an account at local crypto exchange in Hong Kong so I can quickly transfer money from my bank account in Hong Kong to crypto exchange using FPS (local payment system for fast bank transfers). What could go wrong? After all Hong Kong is freest economy in the world, right? I submitted KYC documents to crypto exchange called Weever including copy of my Hong Kong ID as they requested. They very quickly responded that they need copy of my passport as well. I submitted copy of my Russian passport. This time they got silent. After a few days, they sent me email saying that Russia is on the US Office of Foreign Assets Control sanction list, so they just require me to fill a form about source of the funds. I told them that the source of my funds is salary, my Hong Kong bank can confirm that along with my employment contract. They got very silent after I sent them a filled form. After a week of silence I asked them - when my account get approved? They said that their compliance office will review my application soon. And they got very silent again. I waited for two or three weeks. Then I asked them again. And I immediately got email with title - Rejection for Weever Account Opening. And text of email was:
We are sorry to inform you that Weever may not be able to accept your account opening application at this stage.
Exactly the same situation I had with one crypto exchange in Europe back in 2017. Luckily I have accounts at other crypto exchanges including Gemini, one of most compliance obsessed exchange in the world. Although I don't keep my money there because I can't trust them, who knows what might come into head of their compliance officer one sunny day.
By the way, I'm living and working outside of Russia for quite a few years. The situation with crypto exchanges is much worse for those who still living in Russia.
I give you a few other examples of financial discrimination is not related to troubles with my Russian citizenship.
Back in 2018, I still lived in the Netherlands. I logged in into my brokerage account just to buy US ETFs as I always do - SPY and QQQ. I placed my order and it failed to fill. I thought it's just a technical problem with my brokerage account. After a few failed attempts to send buy orders for SPY and QQQ, I contacted their support. What they told me was shocking and completely unexpected. They said I'm not permitted to buy US ETFs anymore as EU resident because EU passed a law to protect retail investors. So as a EU resident I'm allowed to be exposed to more risk by buying individual US stocks but I'm not allowed to reduce my risk by buying SPY because ... EU wants to protect me. I felt final result of new law. By the way, on paper their law looks fine.
And the final example. It's a known fact that US public market become less attractive in recent decades. Due to heavy regulatory burden companies prefer to go public very late. So if successful unicorn startup grows from its inception/genesis to late adoption, company's valuation would be 3-5 orders of orders of magnitude. For example, if valuation of successful company at inception is 1 Mil USD, then at its very latest stage it's valuation would be 10 Bil USD. So we have 10'000 times of growth. In the best case scenario, company would go public at 1 Bil USD 5-10 years before reaching its peak 10 Bil USD. So investors in private equity could enjoy 1000 fold growth and just leave for public only last 10 fold growth stretched in time. In the worst case scenario, company would go public at 10 Bil USD, i.e. at its historical peak. But there are well known platforms to buy shares of private companies, one of such platforms is Forge Global. You can buy shares of almost all blue chip startups. You can even invest in SpaceX! But as always, there is a catch - US government wants to protect not just US citizens but all people in the world (sounds ridiculous, right?). US law requires you to have 1 Mil USD net worth or 200'000 USD annual income if you want to buy shares of non-public company. So if you are high-net worth individual you can be called "accredited investor". Funny thing is that the law intends to protect US citizens but even if you are not US citizen and never even lived in US, this law is still applies to you in practice. So if you are "poor loser", platforms like Forge Global will reject you.
So high-net worth individuals have access and opportunity to Bitcoin-style multi-magnitude growth every 5-10 years. Contrary to private equity markets, US public markets is low risk/low return type of market. If you have small amount of capital, it's just glorified way to protect yourself from inflation plus some little return on top. It's not bad, US public market is a still great way to store your wealth. But I'm deeply convinced that for small capital you must seek fundamentally different type of market - high risk/high return. It's just historical luck that Bitcoin/Ethereum/etc were available for general public from day one. But in reality, viral/exponential growth is happening quite often. It's just you don't have access to such type of markets due to regulatory reasons.
I intentionally described these examples of financial discrimination in full details as I experienced them because I do feel that vast majority of people in the first world honestly think that current financial system works just fine and only criminals and terrorists are banned. In reality that's not true at all.
99.999% of innocent people are completely cut off from modern financial system in the name of fighting against money laundering.
Here is
a big picture why it's happening. There are rich countries (so called western world) and poor countries (so called third world). Financial wall is carefully built by two sides. Authoritarian leaders of poor countries almost always want full control over their population, they don't like market economy, and since market forces don't value their crappy legal system (because it works only for close friends of authoritarian leader) they must implement strict capital control. Otherwise, all capital will run away from their country because nobody really respects their crappy legal system. It only has value under heavy gun of government. Only friends of authoritarian leader can move their money out of country but not you.
Leaders of rich countries want to protect their economy from "dirty money" coming from third world. Since citizens of poor countries never vote for leaders of rich countries nobody really cares if rich country just ban everyone from poor country. It's the most
lazy way to fight against money laundering - simply ban everyone from certain country.
Actually if you look deeper you will see that rich countries very rarely directly ban ordinary people from third world. Usually, there is no such law which doesn't allow me to open bank account somewhere in Europe as non-EU resident. What's really happens is that US/EU government implement very harsh penalties for financial institutions if anything ever goes wrong.
So what's actually happens is that financial institutions (banks, brokerages etc) do
de-risking. This is the most important word you must know about traditional financial system!
So if you have wrong passport, financial institution (for example) bank from rich country just doesn't want to take any risks dealing with you even if you are willing to provide full documentation about your finances. It's well known fact that banks in Hong Kong, Europe, US like to unexpectedly shutdown accounts of thousands innocent businesses due to
de-risking.
So it's actually
de-risking is the real reason why I was rejected so many times by financial institutions in the first world!!! It's
de-risking actually responsible for
banning 99.999% of innocent people. So governments of rich democratic countries formally have clean hands because they are not banning ordinary people from third world directly. All dirty job is done by financial institutions but governments are well aware of that, it's just more convenient way to discriminate. And nobody actually cares! Ordinary citizens in rich countries are never exposed to such problems and they really don't care about people in third world, after all they are not citizens of US/EU/UK/CH/CA/HK/SG/JP/AU/NZ.
And now are you ready for the most hilarious part? If you are big corrupt bureaucrat from Russia you are actually welcome by the first world financial institutions! All Russian's junta keep their stolen money all across Europe and even in US. You might wonder how this is possible if the western financial system is so aggressive in
de-risking.
Here is a simple equation which financial institution should solve when they decide whether to open an account for you or not:
Y - R = net profit Where:
Y - how much profit they can make with
you;
R - how much regulatory
risk they take while working with you;
That's it! It's very simple equation. So if you are really big junta member from Russia you are actually welcome according to this equation. Banks have special name for serving (ultra) high-net worth individuals, it's called
private banking. It's has nothing to do with the fact that bank is private. It's just fancy name for banking for rich.
So what's usually happen in real world. Some Estonian or Danish bank got caught with large scale money laundering from Russia. European leaders are ashamed in front of their voters. They implement new super harsh law against money laundering to keep their voters happy. Voters are ordinary people, they don't care about details of new regulations. So banks get scared and abruptly shutdown ALL accounts of Russian customers. And European voters are happy.
Modern money laundering laws are like shooting mouse in your house using bazooka! It's very efficient to kill mouse, right?
Now imagine world without financial borders. It's hard to do so because we are all get so used to current status quo of traditional financial system. But with additional effort you can start asking questions - if Internet economy is so global and it doesn't really matter where HQ of startup is located, why they are all concentrated in just a few tiny places like Silicon Valley and ... well, that's mostly it if you count the biggest unicorns!
Another question would be - why so many talented russian, indian, chinese programmers just go to the same places like San Francisco, London and make super rich companies like Amazon, Google, Facebook, Apple to get even richer? If all you need is laptop and access to internet, why you don't see any trade happening between first and third world?
Well actually there is a trade between first and third world but it's not exactly what I want to see. Usually third world countries sell their natural resources through giant corporations to the first world.
So it's possible to get access to the first world market from third world but this access usually granted only to big and established companies (and usually it means not innovative).
Unicorns are created through massive parallel experiment. Every week bunch of new startups are created in Silicon Valley. Thousands and thousands startups are created in Silicon Valley with almost instant access to global market. Just by law of large numbers you have a very few of them who later become unicorns and dominate the world.
But if you have wrong passport and you are located in "wrong" country where every attempt to access global market is very costly, then you most likely not to start innovative startup in the first place. In the best case scenario, you just create either local business or just local copy-paste startup (copied from the west) oriented on (relatively small) domestic market. Obviously in such setup it's predictable that places like Silicon Valley will have giant advantage and as a result all unicorns get concentrated in just a few tiny places.
In the world without financial barriers there will be much smaller gap between rich and poor countries. With low barrier of entry, it won't be a game when winner takes all.
Whole architecture of
decentralized cryptocurrencies is intended to remove middle man and make transactions
permissionless. Governments are inherently opposite to that, they are
centralized and
permissioned. Therefore, decentralized cryptocurrencies are fundamentally incompatible with traditional financial system which is full of middle mans and regulations (i.e. permissions).
Real value of crypto are coming from third world, not the first world. People are buying crypto in rich countries just want to invest. Their financial system and their fiat money are more or less already working for them. So there is no immediate urgency to get rid of fiat money in the first world. So the first world citizens buying crypto on centralized KYCd exchanges are essentially making side bet on the success of crypto in third world.
Real and natural environment of cryptocurrencies is actually dark OTC market in places like Venezuela and China. But cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum have a big limitation to wide adoption in third world -
high volatility. So the real target audience is oppressed (both by their own government and by first world governments) ordinary citizens of third world countries yet they are least who can afford to take burden of high volatility.
Right now, Tether is a big thing for dark markets across the world (by the way, dark market doesn't automatically imply bad!). But Tether soon or later be smashed by US/EU regulators.
The only real and working permissionless stable cryptocurrency (avoiding hyped word - stablecoin) is
DAI. DAI is the currency for post-Tether world
to lead dark OTC market around the world and subvert fiat currencies of oppressive third world governments.
Once DAI become de-facto widespread currency in shadow economy in all of third world, then it will be accepted (after many huge push backs from governments) as a new reality. I'm talking about 10-20+ years time horizon.
But if MakerDAO chooses the route of being compliance friendly then DAI will lose its real target audience (i.e. third world).
I can not imagine US/EU calmly tolerate someone buying US stocks and using as a collateral to issue another security (i.e. DAI) which is going to be traded somewhere in Venezuela! You can not be compliance friendly and serve people in Venezuela. Facebook's Libra was stupidest thing I've seen. It's extremely stupid to ask permission from the first world regulators to serve third world and create borderless economy. Another stupid thing is to please third world governments as well. For example, Libra (if ever run) will not serve Indian, Chinese, Venezuelan people. Who is then going to use stupid Libra? Hipsters in Silicon Valley? Why? US dollars are good enough already.
submitted by TL:DR: My fixed term loan with Nuo was liquidated.
When I signed up for the loan, it was not disclosed anywhere that this was possible.
My two key pieces of evidence are
this screenshot where Nuo admits to only adding the disclosure after I took out my loan, and
this comment from me that shows this information was more than likely not listed anywhere on the website at the time of the loan. I was blindsided by the fact my loan was liquidated, resulting in financial harm to myself.
I allege that Nuo acted grossly negligent by not disclosing these risks, not just inadequately, like not even buried in their terms of service.
Full story: Excuse this post if my tone comes off as enraged. It's because I am.
I know I share some responsibility in what happened here, ranging from 100% to 0%. I'll let you decide how much.
The story goes is that I had used Nuo to take out a loan against an ERC20 they accept as collateral. I had done this months ago as well, took out a 60 day loan, and paid it back on day 59, with interest. I took out a term loan and borrowed against my own assets, and repaid it. Cool! DeFi! I love it.
I then immediately took out another loan against the same collateral, this time however they didn't let me borrow as much as they did before despite the collateral being worth the same. They maximized the size of the loans either based on risk management or liquidity pool size, that's fine. I borrow less than I did before and locked it up for another 60 days. That was about 6 weeks ago. A couple days ago I go and check on my loan to double check how much time I have left to pay to be sure not to miss it. I login and I am shocked at what I saw. All of my loans have been liquidated!!! WTF? I didn't even know it was possible for these fixed term loans to be liquidated. I thought the entire point of Nuo choosing the collateral, the leverage ratio, the total amount borrowed, the limited term window etc. all served to minimize the risk for Nuo to be able to issue a fixed term loan in the first place! I was under the impression that unlike a revolving open loan like Maker and Compound where obviously the value of your collateral matters at all times, it wouldn't matter in a fixed loan, and they had sufficiently adjusted the parameters to adjust for the risk of the collateral being devalued over that time period. If they're so worried about it not making it the 60 days, which I would understand, limit the term! Choose 30 days or 7 days or 1 day where you're confident that the collateral won't be devalued.
Why have a fixed term loan in the first place if you won't honor the loan to the term!
If I take out a car loan for 5 years and the car is used as collateral and I completely destroy it, I still owe the $ for the car loan! You give me a chance to repay before you put a lien on my house.
I thought I had an agreement! That agreement was to repay a debt after a certain amount of time or they will keep my collateral.
I was completely blindsided by this function of the loan I had no idea existed.
How could this have happened?
So I poke around and check the loan tab in the screen and I see a prominent "Your loan will be liquidated at 0.75x ratio".
I had never seen that before. If I had, I might not have ever taken out the loan, let alone not checked up on it during this downturn! Having knowledge of this fact would have completely changed my behaviour and given me a chance to avoid being liquidated.
I could have sworn that this was never disclosed to me at the time of taking out the loan.
I try and reach out to the team and after a couple days finally get a meaningful response from them.
I express my concern that the risk of liquidation was not adequately disclosed,
and they say that they added copy of the disclosure on the loan page "a month or so ago". I took out my loan more than a month or so ago!!! Where does that leave me? I feel I have been totally taken advantage of in regards to what my impressions of the risks were as I took out the loan. I feel completely misled.
In writing this post I stumbled across more proof that Nuo was lacking not only adequate disclosures of risk, but any disclosures!
I found a reddit post from me from 3 months ago seeking clarity on this exact issue! Check out my 2 comments. The ultimate irony being that it was in a thread that was calling Nuo a scam! And even worse, responding to a comment where a Nuo team member made a plea about how they will be better about disclosing risks! You can't make this up.
My post shows I was trying to reach out across multiple channels to answer this question and was ignored, and that if I'm asking this question, clearly the disclosure was not mentioned during the loan flow, but I also reference it was nowhere on the website at all as the only relevant question in the FAQ was a dead link!
Between Nuo admitting they added the disclosure 'a month or so ago', and the fact I tried multiple channels to ask this exact question only to be ignored, with an explicit timestamped mention of the FAQ not working, I feel strongly that Nuo acted with gross negligence when offering this loan.
I realize that I should probably have never taken out the loan I wasn't 100% sure how it worked. That's my mistake. I also could have personally looked through the smart contracts and seen the mechanics there, but truthfully I lack the technical knowledge to meaningfully do so.
What I can say is that I am very familiar with the theory and practicalities of how Ethereum and DeFi work. I can tell you the Maker oracle system and how it works and what an oracle attack would look like. I know smart contract bugs are real and it could all be stolen in a flash. I'm aware of risk mitigating options like Nexus Mutual. I literally spend nearly all my free time learning about Ethereum and new applications. So how is it possible that whatever category I fall into, 'passionate early adopter' that I could have been so blindsided by the risks inherent with this loan? If I, someone with a decent level of knowledge of how these systems work can be so blindsided, what chance do normal users have?
MEW, Mycrypto, Maker CDPs all make it extremely clear what the risks are when interacting with the system. UX is so bad they have bent over backwards to create mandatory click throughs, pop ups, highlighted text, etc. That's being responsible. I even reference the clarity of liquidation in Maker CDPs in my linked comment!
Not only was this never prominently displayed in the loan process with Nuo, it wasn't displayed at all, anywhere!
I am just in shock at the negligence of the lack of disclosures of this significant risk.
I have incurred significant financial harm as a result of this negligence through refinancing costs and repurchase of the tokens.
I want compensation for the financial loss I have incurred as a result of this. I feel that Nuo's admitted lack of disclosures was negligent and has caused me direct financial harm.
Whatever happens with my claim to recoup losses from Nuo. I want to let the community be aware of what they are doing in case you are also under the same impression that I was.
I also want to reiterate and implore the community and dapp developers to ADEQUATELY DISCLOSE THE RISKS of using your platform. Nobody should ever be blindsided like I was. I can tell you it is an absolutely shitty UX and I'm really pissed, and you won't find someone more pro Ethereum and DeFi than me! Perhaps I would be better off using a centralized service so I have some legal recourse in regards to this. I might have some legal recourse here but I don't want to be a lawsuit guy, I want to be a guy who uses an app who actually tells you under what conditions you could incur serious financial losses. Fwiw I think it's bs that Nuo or any crypto company dodges liability and hides behind smart contracts and decentralization to not taking responsibility when a member of the community gets misled. I don't care if you're a DAO, you still are a group providing a service!
In conclusion, Nuo was grossly negligent about disclosing key risks, and it has cost me untold amounts on money.
submitted by TL:DR: Nuo Network was grossly negligent in not disclosing the risks of fixed term loans being liquidated.
Excuse this post if my tone comes off as enraged. It's because I am.
I know I share some responsibility in what happened here, ranging from 100% to 0%. I'll let you decide how much.
The story goes is that I had used Nuo to take out a loan against an ERC20 they accept as collateral. I had done this months ago as well, took out a 60 day loan, and paid it back on day 59, with interest. I took out a term loan and borrowed against my own assets, and repaid it. Cool! DeFi! I love it.
I then immediately took out another loan against the same collateral, this time however they didn't let me borrow as much as they did before despite the collateral being worth the same. They maximized the size of the loans either based on risk management or liquidity pool size, that's fine. I borrow less than I did before and locked it up for another 60 days. That was about 6 weeks ago. A couple days ago I go and check on my loan to double check how much time I have left to pay to be sure not to miss it. I login and I am shocked at what I saw. All of my loans have been liquidated!!! WTF? I didn't even know it was possible for these fixed term loans to be liquidated. I thought the entire point of Nuo choosing the collateral, the leverage ratio, the total amount borrowed, the limited term window etc. all served to minimize the risk for Nuo to be able to issue a fixed term loan in the first place! I was under the impression that unlike a revolving open loan like Maker and Compound where obviously the value of your collateral matters at all times, it wouldn't matter in a fixed loan, and they had sufficiently adjusted the parameters to adjust for the risk of the collateral being devalued over that time period. If they're so worried about it not making it the 60 days, which I would understand, limit the term! Choose 30 days or 7 days or 1 day where you're confident that the collateral won't be devalued.
Why have a fixed term loan in the first place if you won't honor the loan to the term!
If I take out a car loan for 5 years and the car is used as collateral and I completely destroy it, I still owe the $ for the car loan! You give me a chance to repay before you put a lien on my house.
I thought I had an agreement! That agreement was to repay a debt after a certain amount of time or they will keep my collateral.
I was completely blindsided by this function of the loan I had no idea existed.
How could this have happened?
So I poke around and check the loan tab in the screen and I see a prominent "Your loan will be liquidated at 0.75x ratio".
I had never seen that before. If I had, I might not have ever taken out the loan, let alone not checked up on it during this downturn! Having knowledge of this fact would have completely changed my behaviour and given me a chance to avoid being liquidated.
I could have sworn that this was never disclosed to me at the time of taking out the loan.
I try and reach out to the team and after a couple days finally get a meaningful response from them.
I express my concern that the risk of liquidation was not adequately disclosed,
and they say that they added copy of the disclosure on the loan page "a month or so ago". I took out my loan more than a month or so ago!!! Where does that leave me? I feel I have been totally taken advantage of in regards to what my impressions of the risks were as I took out the loan. I feel completely misled.
In writing this post I stumbled across more proof that Nuo was lacking not only adequate disclosures of risk, but any disclosures!
I found a reddit post from me from 3 months ago seeking clarity on this exact issue! Check out my 2 comments. The ultimate irony being that it was in a thread that was calling Nuo a scam! And even worse, responding to a comment where a Nuo team member made a plea about how they will be better about disclosing risks! You can't make this up.
My post shows I was trying to reach out across multiple channels to answer this question and was ignored, and that if I'm asking this question, clearly the disclosure was not mentioned during the loan flow, but I also reference it was nowhere on the website at all as the only relevant question in the FAQ was a dead link!
Between Nuo admitting they added the disclosure 'a month or so ago', and the fact I tried multiple channels to ask this exact question only to be ignored, with an explicit timestamped mention of the FAQ not working, I feel strongly that Nuo acted with gross negligence when offering this loan.
I realize that I should probably have never taken out the loan I wasn't 100% sure how it worked. That's my mistake. I also could have personally looked through the smart contracts and seen the mechanics there, but truthfully I lack the technical knowledge to meaningfully do so.
What I can say is that I am very familiar with the theory and practicalities of how Ethereum and DeFi work. I can tell you the Maker oracle system and how it works and what an oracle attack would look like. I know smart contract bugs are real and it could all be stolen in a flash. I'm aware of risk mitigating options like Nexus Mutual. I literally spend nearly all my free time learning about Ethereum and new applications. So how is it possible that whatever category I fall into, 'passionate early adopter' that I could have been so blindsided by the risks inherent with this loan? If I, someone with a decent level of knowledge of how these systems work can be so blindsided, what chance do normal users have?
MEW, Mycrypto, Maker CDPs all make it extremely clear what the risks are when interacting with the system. UX is so bad they have bent over backwards to create mandatory click throughs, pop ups, highlighted text, etc. That's being responsible. I even reference the clarity of liquidation in Maker CDPs in my linked comment!
Not only was this never prominently displayed in the loan process with Nuo, it wasn't displayed at all, anywhere!
I am just in shock at the negligence of the lack of disclosures of this significant risk.
I have incurred significant financial harm as a result of this negligence through refinancing costs and repurchase of the tokens.
I want compensation for the financial loss I have incurred as a result of this. I feel that Nuo's admitted lack of disclosures was negligent and has caused me direct financial harm.
Whatever happens with my claim to recoup losses from Nuo. I want to let the community be aware of what they are doing in case you are also under the same impression that I was.
I also want to reiterate and implore the community and dapp developers to ADEQUATELY DISCLOSE THE RISKS of using your platform. Nobody should ever be blindsided like I was. I can tell you it is an absolutely shitty UX and I'm really pissed, and you won't find someone more pro Ethereum and DeFi than me! Perhaps I would be better off using a centralized service so I have some legal recourse in regards to this. I might have some legal recourse here but I don't want to be a lawsuit guy, I want to be a guy who uses an app who actually tells you under what conditions you could incur serious financial losses. Fwiw I think it's bs that Nuo or any crypto company dodges liability and hides behind smart contracts and decentralization to not taking responsibility when a member of the community gets misled. I don't care if you're a DAO, you still are a group providing a service!
In conclusion, Nuo was grossly negligent about disclosing key risks, and it has cost me untold amounts on money.
submitted by This is an indirect response to the following article by Afri Schoedon, a developer for the Parity Ethereum client, written less than a year ago: I want to make it clear that I have respect for… r/ethereum: Next-generation platform for decentralised applications. Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts Before you go, check out these stories! 0. Start Writing Help; About; Start Writing; Sponsor: Brand-as-Author; Sitewide Billboard Ethereum Reddit. ETHOnline Summits: Infrastructure and Scaling: 12-6 PM ET Friday (Oct 9)! Talks from Alexey Akhunov, Phil Daian & Georgios Konstantopolous, and more; The Data Union framework has now moved from public beta and is fully live, as of today! Selling my moons I got for upvotes on an internet forum that I mainly use whilst taking a dump for over $1000. Messed up thing is, this will probably age like milk and they'll be worth insane amounts more in 5 years. Still, getting paid for going to the toilet seems pretty nice after 2020. Cheers everyone. submitted by /u/jpreddit200 [link] [comments]
Ethereum is a platform that makes it possible for any developer to launch next-generation applications, available worldwide in a completely decentralized fas... The next video is starting stop. Loading... Watch Queue Cryptocurrency Ether could potentially prove more lucrative than Bitcoin. It's been flying in Bitcoin's shadow, but investors are taking notice of its powerf... Trading Bitcoin - WTF Was That! $BTC Crashes $1k+ on TD 9 Sell 👉 Subscribe so you don't miss the next one: http://bit.ly/2QKVDdV Check below for events an... WTF Ethereum? Snap Chart Reading Of Ethereum's Fall (The Cryptoverse) ... Ethereum to 10k minimum + SEC Securities - Duration: 29:09. Digital Asset News 24,385 views. 29:09.