Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ponder Surveys pfp
Ponder Surveys
@survey
Should smart contracts be modifiable by devs? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Other Question by @0xasdf https://i.imgur.com/l7D5kkQ.jpeg
20 replies
1 recast
11 reactions
Ponder Surveys pfp
Ponder Surveys
@survey
The survey results are in! https://warpcast.com/survey/0x85fa
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Jacob pfp
Jacob
@jrf
2. No, my code is always perfect and can secure billions in TVL upon deployment, no edits
0 reply
0 recast
8 reactions
iSpeakNerd πŸ§™β€β™‚οΈ pfp
iSpeakNerd πŸ§™β€β™‚οΈ
@ispeaknerd.eth
2 not by default. Proxy is acceptable workaround
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Jonny Mack pfp
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
3 1 = api 2 = protocol good use cases for both
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Colin Johnson πŸ’­ pfp
Colin Johnson πŸ’­
@cojo.eth
1. But I can see some instances where 2 is extremely valuable.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Dean Pierce πŸ‘¨β€πŸ’»πŸŒŽπŸŒ pfp
Dean Pierce πŸ‘¨β€πŸ’»πŸŒŽπŸŒ
@deanpierce.eth
2. I wish more projects would go the Uniswap route of just deploying solid contracts every once in a while with a reasonable migration path between them. Design contracts so they don't need to be upgraded. Just pause and redeploy in the event of an emergency. Malicious upgrade risk is rarely worth the benefits IMO.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Tayyab - d/acc pfp
Tayyab - d/acc
@tayyab
3. All that matters is security and censorship β€œability” should be easy to verify. If it is a proxy contract then it should have safeguards from switching implementation all of a sudden.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Francesco | andreolf.ethᡍᡐ pfp
Francesco | andreolf.ethᡍᡐ
@andreolf
3. depends which dev.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
GΓΆkhan Turhan pfp
GΓΆkhan Turhan
@gokhan.eth
3. depends.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
π’‚ _𒍣𒅀_π’Š‘ pfp
π’‚ _𒍣𒅀_π’Š‘
@m-j-r
3 smart contracts definitely should be upgradeable, especially in testnet, and especially to account for critical security/mechanistic failure. On mainnet, it helps to show immutability in most circumstances. this is really context-dependent and both sizes fit all w/ sufficient precision.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Cartographer 🎩 pfp
Cartographer 🎩
@cartographer
1. Some of them certainly should be to accommodate the complexities of global commerce.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
freeboy pfp
freeboy
@789
1. At the beginning, it is always possible to score only 80 points. Modifications must be made later, which is the scientific way.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Ben Adamsky πŸ’­ pfp
Ben Adamsky πŸ’­
@ba
3 depends on the use case, eg immutability is necessary when it comes to building protocols
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Joethebeast.eth 🎩🍱 pfp
Joethebeast.eth 🎩🍱
@joethebeast1221
1. But depends on the usecase + needs to be accepted by the community committee
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Amanda pfp
Amanda
@amandakeay
3. the devs already hold too much power ;)
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Joshua Hyde pfp
Joshua Hyde
@jrh3k5.eth
1, but always with transparency so that the public can audit the changes
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Chukwuka Osakwe pfp
Chukwuka Osakwe
@chukwukaosakwe
1.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
TommyJo pfp
TommyJo
@tommyjo.eth
3 - I know this is a boring answer...but completely depends on the situation. Protocol level vs. app level is the most obvious but there are more
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
SeaFlagCrypto pfp
SeaFlagCrypto
@seaflagcrypto
3. It should be purely depends on the situation and the need. But, the consent should be taken through governance voting.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction