So this article includes a background on the algorithmic stabilizing mechanism. >If UST’s market value was well above peg, say $1.10, an arbitrageur could purc

So this article includes a background on the algorithmic stabilizing mechanism. >If UST’s market value was well above peg, say $1.10, an arbitrageur could purchase $1.00 worth of LUNA and swap into UST via the on-chain mechanism — providing the $1.00 of LUNA in exchange for one newly minted UST, worth $1.10. ... >In the inverse scenario where UST’s market value was below peg, say $0.90, an arbitrageur could purchase the discounted UST and swap into LUNA via the on-chain mechanism. Am I reading that right? That sounds like the LUNA protocol is effectively writing two options: to convert 1 UST to $1 worth of LUNA at current market price, and vice versa. But writing an option inherently means exposure to a risk of significant loss from high volatility? I don't know where I'm going with this but it seems like writing those two options in any other context would be insane.