12 ms·

Uniswap v3

154 points by dylkil 6y ago

teryyy 6y ago
Can someone ELI5 how this compares w/ SushiSwap?
- cdiddy2 6y ago
  At the moment SushiSwap has virtually none of the features listed in Uni V3. Sushi is coming out with its own new features that will differ from this named BentoBox and others. Both Uni and Sushi are innovating in their own ways which is great to see
- capableweb 6y ago
  There's a large difference, at least compared to Uniswap V3. Read the features to see what the new version has that SushiSwap doesn't. For the record, SushiSwap is a fork of Uniswap, so the initial features of SushiSwap was all that Uniswap had. By now, they mainly differ in that SushiSwaps governance seems to still go forward while Uniswap has been stuck since the requirement for doing proposals is too high.
- dylkil 6y ago
  All new features compared to SushiSwap. Interesting to note the updated license for v3, in an attempt to prevent another SushiSwap 'Uniswap v3 Core will launch under the Business Source License 1.1—effectively a time-delayed GPL-2.0-or-later license. The license limits use of the v3 source code in a commercial or production setting for up to two years, at which point it will convert to a GPL license into perpetuity'
  - splix 6y ago
    Since the SushiSwap was anonymous fork of Uniswap, I'm wondering how they plan to prevent an another anonymous fork just by using a different license?
    - VectorLock 6y ago
      Through the only avenue that licenses matter - litigation.
    - chizhik-pyzhik 6y ago
      Honestly they probably can't prevent forks. It's more of a discouragement, since as a forker you'd be subject to being sued if they can figure out who you are.
      - chrisco255 6y ago
        So basically this will prevent American citizens from forking, but international folks will have free reign to fork as they wish.
  - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
    One of the big selling points of the original uniswap was that everything was open source as opposed to bancor. I am disappointed by this.
ccamrobertson 6y ago
The use of the BSL 1.1 for Uniswap Core is one of the most interesting parts of this announcement. It will certainly slow wholesale cloning of their smart contracts.
- rodiger 6y ago
  Wonder how that will be enforced given the decentralized nature of these contracts.
  - dcolkitt 6y ago
    The smart contracts live entirely on the blockchain, and therefore cannot be shut down absent shutting down or hard forking the entire Ethereum network. However 99% of Defi users interact with these smart contracts through web-based front ends that are centrally hosted like any other site. In the case of a copyright violation, Uniswap LLC could get an injunction against any web front end that interacts with the forked DeX.
    - gruez 6y ago
      >In the case of a copyright violation, Uniswap LLC could get an injunction against any web front end that interacts with the forked DeX. How big of a problem is this? As we seen with piracy sites these court ordered blocks aren't exactly effective.
    - arberx 6y ago
      You can host on IPFS and there would be no way to stop the service. Just the routing to it perhaps. But you can go a step further and use a ENS domain and point it to your IPFS site. Truly permisionless and decentralized.
      - qqii 6y ago
        Technically the interface is still GPLv3 so just changing the smart contact locations isn't in violation of any licence agreements.
marsrover 6y ago
Very excited to see the move to L2. With the amount of transactions Uniswap produces, this will cut down on Ethereum fees by a good bit.
- dcolkitt 6y ago
  L2 really has nothing to do with Uniswap V2 vs. V3. As long as the L2 protocol is byte code compatible with the EVM, any contract that runs on main net can be ported to L2.
  - marsrover 6y ago
    It kinda does since there was no plan to move to L2 during Uniswap V2.
    - chrisco255 6y ago
      Presumably Sushi or some other fork will take this route if Uni doesn't.
gruez 6y ago
>Capital efficiency paves the way for low-slippage trade execution that can surpass both centralized exchanges and stablecoin-focused AMMs I'm skeptical of this. There was a story a few days ago[1] pointing out that AMM like these are vulnerable to getting front-runned, since there's a gap between when you broadcast your transaction and when it gets confirmed by the network. Other traders (especially with cooperation with miners) can exploit this to front-run your trades. Is this fixed in V3? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26514624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26514624
- qqii 6y ago
  The README links the following attack[0]. Uniswap v2 has a minimum ratio that rolls back the swap if the price has changed too much against your favour. For the most part this prevents front running trades. [0]: https://medium.com/coinmonks/demystify-the-dark-forest-on-ethereum-sandwich-attacks-5a3aec9fa33e https://medium.com/coinmonks/demystify-the-dark-forest-on-et...
tfang17 6y ago
Uniswap is the biggest current threat to Coinbase. Uniswap was trading more than Coinbase Pro during certain periods of 2020.
- m3kw9 6y ago
  Is that risk found in their S-1?
  - tinkerrr 6y ago
    It is, which is how you know it is not a real risk.
- wmf 6y ago
  Money has to enter and exit the system somewhere.
  - EduardoBautista 6y ago
    Exactly. As long as people have the need to pay in regular currencies, decentralized exchanges aren't an alternative to Coinbase, Kraken, etc.
  - blhack 6y ago
    Honestly this is something that somebody like fidelity/other banks are going to solve and push coinbase out. A friend is going through the following scenario (and reached out to me for help): they have over half a million dollars sitting in a coinbase account, but coinbase has lost the link between their coinbase account and their bank account. What this means is that they can't get their substantial amount of money off of coinbase and into their bank. In some banks, if you have that amount of money, you have a 24/7 number you can call where somebody will greet you by name and solve whatever problem you have immediately. On coinbase: post on reddit, annoy them on twitter, and try to navigate their knowledge base until you get an answer. Completely terrifying IMO. Here's my actual prediction: something that I think still includes coinbase in the process: Coinbase just becomes coinbase custody. My bank account now has a "cryptocurrencies" tab, with deposit and withdraw addresses. This all happened with debit cards, and it's going to happen with cryptos now as well. I'm still bullish on coinbase, but coinbase becomes visa. I never interact with them directly.
dcolkitt 6y ago
I predict this winds up as a giant gift to the arbitrage bots. Right now, the only real way to front run is to take liquidity ahead of a large order. Since swapping costs fees, this restricts front running to trades larger than 0.3% of the liquidity in the pair. In V3, it will now be possible for liquidity providers to “jump the queue”, by adding liquidity in a narrow range. If an arbitrage bot is monitoring the pending block, it’ll be able to predict exactly how much the price will move on the next block. It can then add liquidity at exactly that range, collect the lion shares of the LP rewards, then instantly remove the liquidity at the end of the block. The only remaining hurdle is the gas cost to add->remove liquidity (which on L2 will be virtually zero). I really hope they beta test this, because it could potentially be disastrous. Right now, front running really only costs money from large traders. Liquidity providers actually benefit from collecting fees on the extra swaps. But this has the potential to destroy the incentives to LPs, and drain all the liquidity out of the market.
- Tenoke 6y ago
  Is it really draining the liquidity or switching it to flash liquidity instead? That would make the estimates worse though.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  Can't these narrow ranges be misused by miners who can decide which transactions they want to put in the next block? I think it would make sense for them to start looking at the contracts themselves, not just the gas fees, and take part of providing liquidity. Even ordering the transactions matter a lot, as they could find arbitrage opportunities.
  - arberx 6y ago
    Yes, but this is solved by PoS. Also, there's https://libsubmarine.org/ https://libsubmarine.org/
    - gruez 6y ago
      >Yes, but this is solved by PoS. How so? Now rather than colluding with miners and/or mining pools they'll collude with stakers and/or staking pools.
squaredpants 6y ago
Still think pangolin on the avalanche network is a much better dapp than uniswap can ever be in PoW ethereum.
- EGreg 6y ago
  Links please
- arberx 6y ago
  Pangolin is basically a uni fork, on a different network. Uni v3 on L2 solves some of the gas issues seen on L1.
- companyhen 6y ago
  https://polkaswap.io https://polkaswap.io my friend, launches end of March :)
atarian 6y ago
I skimmed through the article and don't even have the faintest idea what this is about.
- exdsq 6y ago
  I work in the blockchain space and still don't know most of these DeFi terms, it's a whole world of its own.
- qqii 6y ago
  What is effectively a changelog of features for their new version is probably not the best place to start. If you'd like to know more then this [0] is a brief summary of Uniswap and this paper [1] is a good introduction to the formalism of the `x * y = k` market making model used by Uniswap. [0]: https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contracts/blob/uniswap/uniswap/x-y-k.pdf https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contra... [q]: https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contracts/blob/uniswap/uniswap/x-y-k.pdf https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contra...
xiphias2 6y ago
What's really interesting to me is that all these advancements could have been made by a centralized service for stock trading as well if the debt based system and T+3 days margin calls wouldn't be a requirement. DTCC owns most US stocks, so I don't see why they wouldn't be able to launch uniswap style contracts to allow better use of liquidity instead of just having simple limit order contracts.
- gruez 6y ago
  >What's really interesting to me is that all these advancements could have been made by a centralized service for stock trading as well uhh, what? The two features that were introduced were "Concentrated liquidity" and "Multiple fee tiers". I'm not sure how either of them are applicable to centralized exchanges. >and T+3 days margin calls wouldn't be a requirement. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26007414 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26007414
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    Concentrated liquidity is needed because of the huge cash requirement right now (as the link that you provide writes about it). Having guaranteed execution with real time clearing, real cash and smarter contracts is a sounder system than stupid contracts and margin trading with slow clearing.
    - gruez 6y ago
      >Concentrated liquidity is needed because of the huge cash requirement right now (as the link that you provide writes about it). Not really? The link says having T+0 settlement would make liquidity worse because market makers can only trade with whatever cash they have on hand.
      - xiphias2 6y ago
        We agree.
- phyalow 6y ago
seibelj 6y ago
Uniswap is one of the most useful and interesting projects in blockchain. Interested to hear why blockchain skeptics on HN think this project is totally worthless (as they claim everything in crypto is) given how much they have accomplished and how much value is traded on Uniswap every day. Huge proof and validation that blockchain / crypto is developing into something extremely useful. Here is a top-thread on HN from 7 months ago (before latest bull run) about how Blockchain is totally worthless, and my responses. Look at the hate! HN is absurd https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24182334 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24182334
- wmf 6y ago
  There has been amazing technical progress in DEXex/AMMs but ultimately they're used for 100% gambling.
  - arberx 6y ago
    While that might be the case currently, the capital efficency of DeFi is miles ahead of any traditional system.
  - phyalow 6y ago
    Not totally true, one can use them to yield farm. (*which I concede is gambling on credit risk, but only tangently)
  - chrisco255 6y ago
    From a cynical perspective that's true of any market.
    - vmception 6y ago
      there's nothing cynical about that, it is purely cultural for people to create a distinction that requires gambling and speculation being something lesser than other activities all markets function this way and it drives innovation and service providers. people choose not to respect crypto, while working for an ad retargeting conglomerate to pat themselves on the back saying "at least I'm doing something useful with my life", and thats all there is to it.
arthurcolle 6y ago
Where is @JumpCrisscross to give us the ex-money wizard take on these new financial innovations :)
tinkerrr 6y ago
Some highlights that stood out: - Range positioning for your capital. In the sweet spot, there is higher fee returns but higher impermanent loss (IL). - Range orders are possible. If the price goes out of range, it is effectively a limit order (but you need to remove liquidity before price comes back within range) - LP tokens will be NFTs instead of ERC20s. This will likely affect the way liquidity mining is done currently, or they'll move to Sushi/remain on Uni v2. - Moving to optimism L2 in the future. This would lower gas for all DApps on Ethereum. - More fee options for LPs - Hint of protocol fees for UNI holders - Business source license perhaps to disincentivize copies like Sushi Overall, this seems like a fairly substantial change. It will probably take time for the ecosystem around this to mature. Excited for the long-term implications of this update.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  > It will probably take time for the ecosystem around this to mature If the liquidity improvements are really significant in practice, I guess the whole transition will happen very fast
  - qqii 6y ago
    There's still going to be benifits to v2 until at least auto reinvement is developed.
- capableweb 6y ago
  Overall, good summary. Small nitpick: - "This would lower gas for all DApps on Ethereum" not really, the same amount of gas will still be used by other applications. However, the average gas _price_ will probably go down, as current Uniswap usage raises the gas price as people try to get their transactions executed faster.
EGreg 6y ago
Is a token going to have to choose between listing on Uniswap 3 and Uniswap 2? Is there any advantage for LP to list on Uniswap 2 in terms of being "first" on a platform, as there is for building on iOS or Facebook or soemthing?
- Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
  >Is a token going to have to choose between listing on Uniswap 3 and Uniswap 2? No. There be separate liquidity pools. >Is there any advantage for LP to list on Uniswap 2 in terms of being "first" on a platform There is no inherent advantage to being first. As soon as volume picks up, the other liquidity providers pile on and get their cut of it.
lupire 6y ago
Lots of undefined acronyms in there.
- qqii 6y ago
  Are there any specifics that you'd like to know? In context this is an accoucement of what is effectively a changelog for future features in a financial smart contact. Acronyms and specific knowledge are to be expected.
chizhik-pyzhik 6y ago
For those who aren't familiar, this post is referring to a decentralised trading system running on the Ethereum blockchain. The acronym "LP" refers to Liquidity Provider, which is anyone who locks up liquidity for two different assets to facilitate a trade.
russdpale 6y ago
yawn- tell me when the fees are cheap.
- phyalow 6y ago
  RTFA, May.
- cdiddy2 6y ago
  they are launching it on optimistic ethereum too. will be cheap fees there
qqii 6y ago
> Instead, LP positions will be represented by non-fungible tokens (NFTs). However, common shared positions can be made fungible (ERC20) via peripheral contracts or through other partner protocols. Additionally, trading fees are no longer automatically reinvested back into the pool on LPs’ behalf. On the face of it this seems like a gas tradeoff for the liquidity range feature. It seems to me that this will promote an ecosystem of management platforms and further aggregation of funds by proxy as long as L1 fees remain high.
- chrisco255 6y ago
  The LPs being represented as NFTs isn't a gas thing. There's no other way to represent your position since there are now infinite positions to take (since your range is completely customizable), they have to be represented as NFTs and not ERC20s. But the ecosystem of management platforms is correct. It's likely that protocols like Yearn will create managed liquidity pools that hold a collection of "NFLT" positions to represent a particular strategy.
  - qqii 6y ago
    Of course, that's the only valid representation but it makes me wonder about their claims of gas efficiency and how they compared it.
    - chrisco255 6y ago
      Yeah they said there was marginal gas improvements on L1, but not sure how. Haven't read the source code yet.
vmception 6y ago
> LP positions will be represented by non-fungible tokens (NFTs). However, common shared positions can be made fungible (ERC20) via peripheral contracts or through other partner protocols. This is wild, this is the biggest thing to be excited about, in my opinion! Farming is about to get crazy! errr, crazier! I never really understood NFT farming, or whether using NFT's to get other things or staking to earn NFTs, but with this I will.

Uniswap v3

154 points by dylkil 6y ago

teryyy 6y ago

Can someone ELI5 how this compares w/ SushiSwap?

cdiddy2 6y ago
At the moment SushiSwap has virtually none of the features listed in Uni V3. Sushi is coming out with its own new features that will differ from this named BentoBox and others. Both Uni and Sushi are innovating in their own ways which is great to see
capableweb 6y ago
There's a large difference, at least compared to Uniswap V3. Read the features to see what the new version has that SushiSwap doesn't. For the record, SushiSwap is a fork of Uniswap, so the initial features of SushiSwap was all that Uniswap had. By now, they mainly differ in that SushiSwaps governance seems to still go forward while Uniswap has been stuck since the requirement for doing proposals is too high.
dylkil 6y ago
All new features compared to SushiSwap. Interesting to note the updated license for v3, in an attempt to prevent another SushiSwap 'Uniswap v3 Core will launch under the Business Source License 1.1—effectively a time-delayed GPL-2.0-or-later license. The license limits use of the v3 source code in a commercial or production setting for up to two years, at which point it will convert to a GPL license into perpetuity'
- splix 6y ago
  Since the SushiSwap was anonymous fork of Uniswap, I'm wondering how they plan to prevent an another anonymous fork just by using a different license?
  - VectorLock 6y ago
    Through the only avenue that licenses matter - litigation.
  - chizhik-pyzhik 6y ago
    Honestly they probably can't prevent forks. It's more of a discouragement, since as a forker you'd be subject to being sued if they can figure out who you are.
    - chrisco255 6y ago
      So basically this will prevent American citizens from forking, but international folks will have free reign to fork as they wish.
- Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
  One of the big selling points of the original uniswap was that everything was open source as opposed to bancor. I am disappointed by this.

ccamrobertson 6y ago

The use of the BSL 1.1 for Uniswap Core is one of the most interesting parts of this announcement. It will certainly slow wholesale cloning of their smart contracts.

rodiger 6y ago
Wonder how that will be enforced given the decentralized nature of these contracts.
- dcolkitt 6y ago
  The smart contracts live entirely on the blockchain, and therefore cannot be shut down absent shutting down or hard forking the entire Ethereum network. However 99% of Defi users interact with these smart contracts through web-based front ends that are centrally hosted like any other site. In the case of a copyright violation, Uniswap LLC could get an injunction against any web front end that interacts with the forked DeX.
  - gruez 6y ago
    >In the case of a copyright violation, Uniswap LLC could get an injunction against any web front end that interacts with the forked DeX. How big of a problem is this? As we seen with piracy sites these court ordered blocks aren't exactly effective.
  - arberx 6y ago
    You can host on IPFS and there would be no way to stop the service. Just the routing to it perhaps. But you can go a step further and use a ENS domain and point it to your IPFS site. Truly permisionless and decentralized.
    - qqii 6y ago
      Technically the interface is still GPLv3 so just changing the smart contact locations isn't in violation of any licence agreements.

marsrover 6y ago

Very excited to see the move to L2. With the amount of transactions Uniswap produces, this will cut down on Ethereum fees by a good bit.

dcolkitt 6y ago
L2 really has nothing to do with Uniswap V2 vs. V3. As long as the L2 protocol is byte code compatible with the EVM, any contract that runs on main net can be ported to L2.
- marsrover 6y ago
  It kinda does since there was no plan to move to L2 during Uniswap V2.
  - chrisco255 6y ago
    Presumably Sushi or some other fork will take this route if Uni doesn't.

gruez 6y ago

>Capital efficiency paves the way for low-slippage trade execution that can surpass both centralized exchanges and stablecoin-focused AMMs I'm skeptical of this. There was a story a few days ago[1] pointing out that AMM like these are vulnerable to getting front-runned, since there's a gap between when you broadcast your transaction and when it gets confirmed by the network. Other traders (especially with cooperation with miners) can exploit this to front-run your trades. Is this fixed in V3? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26514624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26514624

qqii 6y ago
The README links the following attack[0]. Uniswap v2 has a minimum ratio that rolls back the swap if the price has changed too much against your favour. For the most part this prevents front running trades. [0]: https://medium.com/coinmonks/demystify-the-dark-forest-on-ethereum-sandwich-attacks-5a3aec9fa33e https://medium.com/coinmonks/demystify-the-dark-forest-on-et...

tfang17 6y ago

Uniswap is the biggest current threat to Coinbase. Uniswap was trading more than Coinbase Pro during certain periods of 2020.

m3kw9 6y ago
Is that risk found in their S-1?
- tinkerrr 6y ago
  It is, which is how you know it is not a real risk.
wmf 6y ago
Money has to enter and exit the system somewhere.
- EduardoBautista 6y ago
  Exactly. As long as people have the need to pay in regular currencies, decentralized exchanges aren't an alternative to Coinbase, Kraken, etc.
- blhack 6y ago
  Honestly this is something that somebody like fidelity/other banks are going to solve and push coinbase out. A friend is going through the following scenario (and reached out to me for help): they have over half a million dollars sitting in a coinbase account, but coinbase has lost the link between their coinbase account and their bank account. What this means is that they can't get their substantial amount of money off of coinbase and into their bank. In some banks, if you have that amount of money, you have a 24/7 number you can call where somebody will greet you by name and solve whatever problem you have immediately. On coinbase: post on reddit, annoy them on twitter, and try to navigate their knowledge base until you get an answer. Completely terrifying IMO. Here's my actual prediction: something that I think still includes coinbase in the process: Coinbase just becomes coinbase custody. My bank account now has a "cryptocurrencies" tab, with deposit and withdraw addresses. This all happened with debit cards, and it's going to happen with cryptos now as well. I'm still bullish on coinbase, but coinbase becomes visa. I never interact with them directly.

dcolkitt 6y ago

I predict this winds up as a giant gift to the arbitrage bots. Right now, the only real way to front run is to take liquidity ahead of a large order. Since swapping costs fees, this restricts front running to trades larger than 0.3% of the liquidity in the pair. In V3, it will now be possible for liquidity providers to “jump the queue”, by adding liquidity in a narrow range. If an arbitrage bot is monitoring the pending block, it’ll be able to predict exactly how much the price will move on the next block. It can then add liquidity at exactly that range, collect the lion shares of the LP rewards, then instantly remove the liquidity at the end of the block. The only remaining hurdle is the gas cost to add->remove liquidity (which on L2 will be virtually zero). I really hope they beta test this, because it could potentially be disastrous. Right now, front running really only costs money from large traders. Liquidity providers actually benefit from collecting fees on the extra swaps. But this has the potential to destroy the incentives to LPs, and drain all the liquidity out of the market.

Tenoke 6y ago
Is it really draining the liquidity or switching it to flash liquidity instead? That would make the estimates worse though.
xiphias2 6y ago
Can't these narrow ranges be misused by miners who can decide which transactions they want to put in the next block? I think it would make sense for them to start looking at the contracts themselves, not just the gas fees, and take part of providing liquidity. Even ordering the transactions matter a lot, as they could find arbitrage opportunities.
- arberx 6y ago
  Yes, but this is solved by PoS. Also, there's https://libsubmarine.org/ https://libsubmarine.org/
  - gruez 6y ago
    >Yes, but this is solved by PoS. How so? Now rather than colluding with miners and/or mining pools they'll collude with stakers and/or staking pools.

squaredpants 6y ago

Still think pangolin on the avalanche network is a much better dapp than uniswap can ever be in PoW ethereum.

EGreg 6y ago
Links please
arberx 6y ago
Pangolin is basically a uni fork, on a different network. Uni v3 on L2 solves some of the gas issues seen on L1.
companyhen 6y ago
https://polkaswap.io https://polkaswap.io my friend, launches end of March :)

atarian 6y ago

I skimmed through the article and don't even have the faintest idea what this is about.

exdsq 6y ago
I work in the blockchain space and still don't know most of these DeFi terms, it's a whole world of its own.
qqii 6y ago
What is effectively a changelog of features for their new version is probably not the best place to start. If you'd like to know more then this [0] is a brief summary of Uniswap and this paper [1] is a good introduction to the formalism of the `x * y = k` market making model used by Uniswap. [0]: https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contracts/blob/uniswap/uniswap/x-y-k.pdf https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contra... [q]: https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contracts/blob/uniswap/uniswap/x-y-k.pdf https://github.com/runtimeverification/verified-smart-contra...

xiphias2 6y ago

What's really interesting to me is that all these advancements could have been made by a centralized service for stock trading as well if the debt based system and T+3 days margin calls wouldn't be a requirement. DTCC owns most US stocks, so I don't see why they wouldn't be able to launch uniswap style contracts to allow better use of liquidity instead of just having simple limit order contracts.

gruez 6y ago
>What's really interesting to me is that all these advancements could have been made by a centralized service for stock trading as well uhh, what? The two features that were introduced were "Concentrated liquidity" and "Multiple fee tiers". I'm not sure how either of them are applicable to centralized exchanges. >and T+3 days margin calls wouldn't be a requirement. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26007414 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26007414
- xiphias2 6y ago
  Concentrated liquidity is needed because of the huge cash requirement right now (as the link that you provide writes about it). Having guaranteed execution with real time clearing, real cash and smarter contracts is a sounder system than stupid contracts and margin trading with slow clearing.
  - gruez 6y ago
    >Concentrated liquidity is needed because of the huge cash requirement right now (as the link that you provide writes about it). Not really? The link says having T+0 settlement would make liquidity worse because market makers can only trade with whatever cash they have on hand.
    - xiphias2 6y ago
      We agree.
phyalow 6y ago

seibelj 6y ago

Uniswap is one of the most useful and interesting projects in blockchain. Interested to hear why blockchain skeptics on HN think this project is totally worthless (as they claim everything in crypto is) given how much they have accomplished and how much value is traded on Uniswap every day. Huge proof and validation that blockchain / crypto is developing into something extremely useful. Here is a top-thread on HN from 7 months ago (before latest bull run) about how Blockchain is totally worthless, and my responses. Look at the hate! HN is absurd https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24182334 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24182334

wmf 6y ago
There has been amazing technical progress in DEXex/AMMs but ultimately they're used for 100% gambling.
- arberx 6y ago
  While that might be the case currently, the capital efficency of DeFi is miles ahead of any traditional system.
- phyalow 6y ago
  Not totally true, one can use them to yield farm. (*which I concede is gambling on credit risk, but only tangently)
- chrisco255 6y ago
  From a cynical perspective that's true of any market.
  - vmception 6y ago
    there's nothing cynical about that, it is purely cultural for people to create a distinction that requires gambling and speculation being something lesser than other activities all markets function this way and it drives innovation and service providers. people choose not to respect crypto, while working for an ad retargeting conglomerate to pat themselves on the back saying "at least I'm doing something useful with my life", and thats all there is to it.

arthurcolle 6y ago

Where is @JumpCrisscross to give us the ex-money wizard take on these new financial innovations :)

tinkerrr 6y ago

Some highlights that stood out: - Range positioning for your capital. In the sweet spot, there is higher fee returns but higher impermanent loss (IL). - Range orders are possible. If the price goes out of range, it is effectively a limit order (but you need to remove liquidity before price comes back within range) - LP tokens will be NFTs instead of ERC20s. This will likely affect the way liquidity mining is done currently, or they'll move to Sushi/remain on Uni v2. - Moving to optimism L2 in the future. This would lower gas for all DApps on Ethereum. - More fee options for LPs - Hint of protocol fees for UNI holders - Business source license perhaps to disincentivize copies like Sushi Overall, this seems like a fairly substantial change. It will probably take time for the ecosystem around this to mature. Excited for the long-term implications of this update.

xiphias2 6y ago
> It will probably take time for the ecosystem around this to mature If the liquidity improvements are really significant in practice, I guess the whole transition will happen very fast
- qqii 6y ago
  There's still going to be benifits to v2 until at least auto reinvement is developed.
capableweb 6y ago
Overall, good summary. Small nitpick: - "This would lower gas for all DApps on Ethereum" not really, the same amount of gas will still be used by other applications. However, the average gas _price_ will probably go down, as current Uniswap usage raises the gas price as people try to get their transactions executed faster.

EGreg 6y ago

Is a token going to have to choose between listing on Uniswap 3 and Uniswap 2? Is there any advantage for LP to list on Uniswap 2 in terms of being "first" on a platform, as there is for building on iOS or Facebook or soemthing?

Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
>Is a token going to have to choose between listing on Uniswap 3 and Uniswap 2? No. There be separate liquidity pools. >Is there any advantage for LP to list on Uniswap 2 in terms of being "first" on a platform There is no inherent advantage to being first. As soon as volume picks up, the other liquidity providers pile on and get their cut of it.

lupire 6y ago

Lots of undefined acronyms in there.

qqii 6y ago
Are there any specifics that you'd like to know? In context this is an accoucement of what is effectively a changelog for future features in a financial smart contact. Acronyms and specific knowledge are to be expected.

chizhik-pyzhik 6y ago

For those who aren't familiar, this post is referring to a decentralised trading system running on the Ethereum blockchain. The acronym "LP" refers to Liquidity Provider, which is anyone who locks up liquidity for two different assets to facilitate a trade.

russdpale 6y ago

yawn- tell me when the fees are cheap.

phyalow 6y ago
RTFA, May.
cdiddy2 6y ago
they are launching it on optimistic ethereum too. will be cheap fees there

qqii 6y ago

> Instead, LP positions will be represented by non-fungible tokens (NFTs). However, common shared positions can be made fungible (ERC20) via peripheral contracts or through other partner protocols. Additionally, trading fees are no longer automatically reinvested back into the pool on LPs’ behalf. On the face of it this seems like a gas tradeoff for the liquidity range feature. It seems to me that this will promote an ecosystem of management platforms and further aggregation of funds by proxy as long as L1 fees remain high.

chrisco255 6y ago
The LPs being represented as NFTs isn't a gas thing. There's no other way to represent your position since there are now infinite positions to take (since your range is completely customizable), they have to be represented as NFTs and not ERC20s. But the ecosystem of management platforms is correct. It's likely that protocols like Yearn will create managed liquidity pools that hold a collection of "NFLT" positions to represent a particular strategy.
- qqii 6y ago
  Of course, that's the only valid representation but it makes me wonder about their claims of gas efficiency and how they compared it.
  - chrisco255 6y ago
    Yeah they said there was marginal gas improvements on L1, but not sure how. Haven't read the source code yet.

vmception 6y ago

> LP positions will be represented by non-fungible tokens (NFTs). However, common shared positions can be made fungible (ERC20) via peripheral contracts or through other partner protocols. This is wild, this is the biggest thing to be excited about, in my opinion! Farming is about to get crazy! errr, crazier! I never really understood NFT farming, or whether using NFT's to get other things or staking to earn NFTs, but with this I will.