A (peac)

Happy you don't ask

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions

I don't understand. AMMs aren't even as liquid as CEXes and liquid asset exchanged aren't new (stock markets exist for a long time). Anything of low volatility (and high stability, and decentralized) is good money imho in the sense that we can quote prices in it.

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions

AMMs of the constant function type are are imo not going to be hyper-liquid but die for high volatility pairs (see my only cast). Logically, don't understand why anything would change given we already have liquid order book exchanges. Plus, my feeling is money is something else than what is mentioned in the post.

• 1 reply
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions

The irony that CFMM AMMs were invented by Hanson (and picked up by Vitalik) for thin prediction markets (because orderbooks suck) yet fail at anything that's not a stableswap, and now protocols try orderbooks. The future of fair on-chain trading is new *slow* orderbooks. For which you need CosmosSDK tree-based storage.

• 0 replies
• 0 recasts
• 0 reactions