Sjt pfp

Sjt

@sjt

47 Following
13 Followers
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
Philip II the Great šŸ˜‰
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
Hi Ciniz! I own two items from the set. Hams please! šŸ™
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
reported for impersonation
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
can I has some Degen ser? šŸ„²
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
Followed. https://imgur.com/a/N4py2Wn My friendtech https://www.friend.tech/0x9fbca0e967da30b64431a25f294825cb5e9b3e80
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
https://warpcast.com/sjt/0xe69607e8
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
IMO, the target rate proposal will have consequences similar to LPā€™ing on Uniswap v2-> v3. Despite V3 LPā€™ing being more capital efficient, the additional complexity implies solo stakers will leave. Primary reason for this being, large LST operators can remove/add ETH from their pool to target a certain outcome.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
n/n Wouldn't this hurt couple of goals of the proposal: 1. reduce centralization 2. increase naked ETH liquidity I can discern how the proposal addresses the "paying too much for security" aspect, but I am not following how it encourages solo stakers and improves naked ETH liquidity
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
4/n As heyETH becomes more dominant, sometimes they can even choose to stake beyond the target and get negative yield if that means competitors get killed off. They can offset the loss by yields on the rest of their non-staked ETH.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
3/n Say a token named heyETH is the most dominant LST. The heyETH developers can choose to accept unlimited ETH for deposits, and only stake the target or below-target amount to get ETH staking yield, and just keep the remaining deposits in plain ETH or pursue other yield mechanisms like LPing, lending.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
2/n As a Rocketpool NodeOperator (let's pretend I'm a solo staker for now), now providing and managing stake has more factors to consider incl. negative yields and likely needs acitve monitoring. In a scenario like this, my hypothesis is everyone who wants to stake will gravitate towards one liquid staking solution.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
1/n I hope @caspar and @ansgar.eth have some more energy to engage on questions related to their proposal: IMO, the proposal changes staking in a way providing liquidity to AMMs changed from Uniswap V2 to V3 i.e., it becomes more complex
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
Any US based node operators here run back up node and primary node on the same network? how does that impact your network consumption, essentially doubles, right? if you are on xfinity, curious what plan you are on I'm looking to setup a backup node at my house
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
welp, if you're using MEV-Boost, looks like they released a new client too, which is also a required upgrade if you have MEV-Boost enabled
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
PSA: If you're a Node Operator, Smartnode v1.11.8 has been released today. It is a mandatory update for all users as it enables the Deneb/Cancun ("Dencun") Mainnet upgrade, which will occur at March 13, 2024, 01:55:35pm UTC. Check Rocketpool discord's releases channel for the announcement
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
ah, warpcast can preview multiple links, nice! a lot of apps just preview the first link
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
nevermind, looks like I need 1.25.4 of Nethermind https://github.com/NethermindEth/nethermind/releases/tag/1.25.4 and 5.0.0 of Lighthouse https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/releases/tag/v5.0.0
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
Am I dencun ready if I have v1.25.3 of Nethermind and v4.6.0 of Lighthouse running? Thx!
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
Metamask!! Metaaaaaamasskkkkkkk!
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sjt pfp
Sjt
@sjt
200 $degen
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction