DAOUSDT
DAO Maker / Tether USD
crypto Composite

> The current curve eventually results in negative real yield for solo stakers, that's unacceptable.
I keep seeing this claim but nobody will tell me why they think the issue here is the *real* yield. When I'm deciding whether to keep staking, my ETH is getting diluted or accreted whether I stake or not.
Also, if what you're saying is true and solo-staking is always less profitable pooled staking [*], I think it's also true of the other proposed curve? If my competitor is getting higher yield than me, and they keep adding funds until their yield is zero, and at that point my yield is necessarily negative. You can't fix this by futzing with the curve: If we're playing a zero-sum game and I'm worse at it than average, I'm going to make a loss.
The way to fix it is to get more usage, so we have lots of revenue from fees and/or MEV and we're playing a positive-sum game, but if you do that your "negative real yield" claim is false: You could have 100% staked and I could be worse than average than the competition and I'd still be making money in real terms.
[*] I think it's in fact false because you have to account for the amount that will be embezzled by custodians or DAO governance exploiters

Hay mejores soluciones de autocustodia en AlienFlowSpace DAO siempre barajamos todas las mejores opciones

Peak fud, bonk is on firesale
I'd be much more concerned if the 'hack' was encryption or smart contact related but some DAO proposal that went unnoticed is fair game

> The current curve eventually results in negative real yield for solo stakers, that's unacceptable.
I keep seeing this claim but nobody will tell me why they think the issue here is the *real* yield. When I'm deciding whether to keep staking, my ETH is getting diluted or accreted whether I stake or not.
Also, if what you're saying is true and solo-staking is always less profitable pooled staking [*], I think it's also true of the other proposed curve? If my competitor is getting higher yield than me, and they keep adding funds until their yield is zero, and at that point my yield is necessarily negative. You can't fix this by futzing with the curve: If we're playing a zero-sum game and I'm worse at it than average, I'm going to make a loss.
The way to fix it is to get more usage, so we have lots of revenue from fees and/or MEV and we're playing a positive-sum game, but if you do that your "negative real yield" claim is false: You could have 100% staked and I could be worse than average than the competition and I'd still be making money in real terms.
[*] I think it's in fact false because you have to account for the amount that will be embezzled by custodians or DAO governance exploiters

Hay mejores soluciones de autocustodia en AlienFlowSpace DAO siempre barajamos todas las mejores opciones

Peak fud, bonk is on firesale
I'd be much more concerned if the 'hack' was encryption or smart contact related but some DAO proposal that went unnoticed is fair game

You have to game the numbers quite carefully to reach that conclusion, because otherwise you run into what we would actually do at like 1% return, namely *stop staking*. You avoid this by assigning us preferences where we would continue to self-stake virtually for free, or more likely at a loss.
I wouldn't touch a shady crypto intermediary or anything involving DAO governance at less than 4%, and I'd stop staking below about 1%. A lot people who keep their money on Coinbase would, but they have a different worldview and risk assessment to us, that's why they're keeping their money on Coinbase instead of self-staking.
I think this is very obvious to a lot of self-stakers, which is why when you people say "we are going to promote self-staking by cutting your revenue to 1%" the response you're getting is shaped much more like "fuck you and your sophistry" than "this is an interesting proposal that may need more work".

1) security costs: even if ETH is worth 750 dollar it can survive a 10 billion attack that has 1/3 of Ethereum under control. Above that amount, there is still the possibility of a social recovery like with the DAO hack.
2) ETH is not gold. Gold is mentioned in the bible 400 times. ETH does not have this historic store of value character especially since it is so volatile. It trades like a tech stock that can’t keep up with the AI boom.