Two questions that's been on my mind, would love people's thoughts here.

1. Does the moneiness of a derivative of ETH (eg LST) translates into the moneiness of ETH?
2. Does the moneiness of ETH translates into the moneiness of a derivative of ETH (eg LST)?

views are my own, protocol @ eigen labs; prev working on decentralization @ gitcoin, llama, stanford medicine.

Please expand ser. What is one example of the moneiness (moneyness?) of a derivative influencing the moneyness of ETH? What do you define as moneyness?

Robust Incentives Group @ Ethereum Foundation

https://rig.ethereum.org

If we wanted to eliminate the opportunity cost of staking and have more ETH around to use as collateral, why wouldn't we prefer to target some amount at stake?

would argue that an LST with sufficient liquidity and integrations (stETH) eliminates the opportunity cost of staking (locking) your ETH, thus increasing ETHs underlying utility (especially as a collateral money), which proliferates the use of ETH as money -- moneyness 🆙

what

1. Yes I believe it's fine. I roughly think of moneyness as network effects (MoE)/what am I more comfortable to hold(SoV) principally I suppose, though I don't like to use abstractions that I haven't unbundled 😈
2. It's needed as collateral yes, but doesn't fulfil other functions at the same time

I think that is my question as well. 1. How people define moneyness might be different and that is fine. 2. I do not see how derivative adds moneyness of the underlying asset, but maybe it does since the base asset is still need.

PS: Is that how you spell moneyness 😂 Good to know!