GNS

>GNS
What's the catch here? I just read the docs and it completely debunks all the fud I've seen here.
From what I've gathered, this is a rare crypto project that generates real revenue and distributes it to holders.
I'm still apprehensive because of the whole GFarm1/2 thing but that seems to have been a year and multiple versions ago.
What am I missing? Why is this being fudded so hard? Why hasn't the price been moving? Why shouldn't I go all in?

Attached: sivlv6l2trg81.jpg (598x598, 25.59K)

Listen buddy it's a great project, definitely could be worth 1B which is a 10x from here. But we were a bunch of people who scooped up GFARM at 100$ (or GNS at 0.1$) which means a lot of people (me included) sit at 30x profit or more. That means a lot of us takes profit too, doesn't mean we won't run further up.

I personally put in around 50k and now I got over 500k, so GNS is definitely helping me retire before 30 which is nice. But I havn't sold all, it's truly a great project. However if you read too much fud you will most likely sell, fud can really get in your brain.

Oh one more thing: it's still a risky play, I can see several obvious risks with the project. But where else would I park my money? It's one of the top 5 crypto picks for 2022 I would say.

Thanks user.
What are some of the obvious risks you're talking about? I approach every crypto investment with the attitude that it could all be gone in a day. That's the price you pay for the possibility of a 10-20x.

can you elaborate more into those obvious risks? I think i know one of them but yea it’s kind of like not ‘risky’ if that makes sense it’s a low af chance to happen, like rolling 100 dice all the same or something, but yea what are some you can think of?

As with any crypto project the "obvious" risks I'm talking about are smart contract risks. What if the minting function gets exploited, or the dai vault. That would probably put a huge -80% red dildo in the project in a day. The most likely smart contract risk I see lies in the DON's probably.
And then of course we got the single user dev risk, what if he dies? Or what if he decides to rug? No multisig, no decentralisation (yet).

But with that being said, I still think these risks are VERY SLIM. So the risk reward is still very very good, I don't try to spread fud but any crypto project without huge backing or a very established treasury is a risky play. But with risk comes reward... I still think it's like 90% chance we reach 1B.

good approach

yeah the risks I see are slim as you say, but would be detrimental to the project.
I don't see this project getting beaten by any other competitor as a risk

Thanks for the elaboration.
I guess smart contract risk is the risk inherent in any crypto.
And I checked out the TG today and the dev was actually talking about how the whole platform (including decentralisation) should be done in about 6-12 months IIRC.

I agree that it's good to talk about these risks, discussing realistic downsides shouldn't be considered fud, otherwise you just end up with a cult.

Anyway, I'll watch the chart for a couple of days and will probably buy soon.

At this point, basically just smart contract attacks. I'm an OG and speak with Seb and the other OGs often. Seb is planning on hiring a second blue chip auditing firm to put a second pair of eyes on it and will be doing a bug bounty soon. Other than that, people worry about a bunch of whales coming and winning too much. I recommend reading about all the backstops Seb has put in place (DAI Vault, Max OI, Min Leverage, etc). That FUD has basically long since left my worries.

The token model/revenue distribution of GNS will be a case study and prototype for how decentralized projects will have to structure themselves in the future. Pay attention

>I agree that it's good to talk about these risks, discussing realistic downsides shouldn't be considered fud, otherwise you just end up with a cult.

Absolutely. These things need to be recognized and addressed in order to prevent. All of the smart guys who have been in the project long term discuss them often with Seb. Trust me, he's working very hard to make these non-issues.

>What's the catch here?
No catch. Innovative protocol. Best in class trading features (no kyc, no scam wicks, no price impact, guaranteed SL, etc) combined with incredible yield offerings (based on, like you mentioned, real revenue), combined with deflationary tokenomics.

>I'm still apprehensive because of the whole GFarm1/2
Those were pre-audit days and a lot less eyes looking things over. Seb gives more time to testing than feature development. Might have been a blessing cause it left an impression.

>What am I missing?
Nothing.

>Why is this being fudded so hard?
What FUD campaign you talkin about? It's gotten so low from my POV now it's focused on Polygon. They just announced ZKEVM testnet in ~3 months so it's proving worth to establish a partnership with them.

>Why hasn't the price been moving?
Whales taking profits and hedging risk. They've been in for a while, let them do it. Gives you time to get in.

>Why shouldn't I go all in?
You should. I am.

The whale winning risk is keeping me out. I know people who trade stocks with an edge but they are limited in how much they can exploit the edge due to the order book. In synthetic trading there is no order book to worry about so an edge trader could hypothetically arbitrage this and endlessly exploit their edge on gTrade while draining the pool

> the whole platform (including decentralisation) should be done in about 6-12 months IIRC.
IIRC, This should all happen

> book. In synthetic trading there is no order book to worry about so an edge trader could hypothetically arbitrage this and endlessly exploit their edge on gTrade while draining the pool
What? How would this work when there’s an open interest, max collateral, max profit cap at place?

Well, why don't you tell those traders to come trade here if they're so good. Stocks are about to be added here, it might be a product they really like.

Anyway, like I said, go read about how the max open interest works. Each pair has a max open interest and each asset class has a cumulative one. Think about it this way... A whale might have an edge trade per day. He could max out the OI on that pair, meanwhile there is still way more failing OI being eaten up by shitty traders.

Basically for every succesful whale there are dozens more degen ones who screw it up and balance the equation.

There's almost a year of data to prove this now.

Pic related is PNL since it was first tracked in Oct. Since then, literally only 2 day have been profitable enough for traders to have to mint GNS.

Attached: Screen Shot 2022-02-09 at 12.29.11 PM.png (1386x770, 111.69K)

These problems can be at least prevented on a long enough time scale to destroy the project, but at least in theory a one time event is possible...

>What? How would this work when there’s an open interest, max collateral, max profit cap at place?
Sometime before an earnings report, a trader could start strategizing on capturing all OI for an asset by spreading out low leverage trades across multiple wallets. Anytime interest is closed the bot would be the first to deploy it. Surely max profit x max OI would tear through the pool. Especially if, say, for every stock there was someone doing this.

Max collateral x max leverage x xax profit x max OI x # of assets...

>Basically for every succesful whale there are dozens more degen ones who screw it up and balance the equation.
This is in no way a guarantee. Someone could bot themselves into being all OI over a long enough time horizon, like above. Which is why funding fees have been raised as a counter.

>There's almost a year of data to prove this now.
GNS has nearly no professional traders nor does it support stocks. Data up until this point is irrelevant.

Nice, was there ever any info released on what gCasino would look like?

Yes, exactly. The very admission that edge traders exist and don’t have to deal with normal order book dynamics to keep their position scaling in check on a synthetic platform means GNS has to prove how this hypothetical exploit can be prevented. What about this simple example of market manipulation:
>whale has $100m of ETH
>takes out a huge ETH short on gTrade
>dumps all his ETH on uniswap
>price drops, big profit on gTrade position
>close gTrade position
>buy ETH back on uniswap
>still has same amount of ETH

IMO the best counter to this FUD is to attract a shit ton of traders so OI is always being used.

>Sometime before an earnings report, a trader could start strategizing on capturing all OI for an asset by spreading out low leverage trades across multiple wallets. Anytime interest is closed the bot would be the first to deploy it. Surely max profit x max OI would tear through the pool. Especially if, say, for every stock there was someone doing this.

Do you not understand what max OI means? Yes they could win... But its purposely kept low per pair for exactly this reason, there is also max profit.

So lets do some math on an example pair like CRV/USD:

>Max OI is $2M
>Max Collateral is about $65K (currently)
>Min leverage is 5x
>Max Profit is 900% (a 10x)
>65K x 5X is 325K
>2M / 325K is 6.15

So from that we know a whale could potentially open 6 Max col min lev positions

6 x 65k x 10 = 3.9M

That wouldn't even clear out the DAI vault.

Further, the scenario I just described which is very possible would be super rare. Only large caps are going to be added. The idea that some insider could perform this more than once is absurd. Meanwhile we'd still see a shit ton of degens fuck up, and yes it would impact that GNS price, but in reality the platform would carry on after a few months as is if nothing had happened.

Lastly, I would bet good money seb will force a higher min leverage for stocks and lower OI per pair.

Yeah to add to this: The scenario I outlined would mean NOBODY else is trading that pair.

Do I think it can happen? Absolutely. Do I think it could happen many times... no. After the first time, parameters would be changed and risk tolerance would be lowered platform wide.

Dont forget the whale would have to perform this before the market knows it. He'd still be exposing a good chunk of capital that could be liquidated.