DAOUSDT
DAO Maker / Tether USD
crypto Composite

Hey everyone,
I’ve been working on a project that tries to solve one of the biggest issues in DeFi right now: unwarranted liquidations caused by temporary exchange flash-crashes and market noise.
Most traditional oracles just pass raw aggregated spot prices to smart contracts. To fix this, I built **Antigravity**: a First-Party Oracle powered by a Spiking Neural Network (SNN).
**How it works under the hood:**
* **The AI:** Instead of Deep Learning, I used an SNN. Because it processes discrete "spikes", it’s naturally suited for time-series data and is incredibly aggressive at filtering out short-term market anomalies in the order book before they hit the spot price.
* **The Backend:** The inference engine runs on a dedicated A1 ARM64 server built entirely in **Rust** for memory safety and ultra-low latency.
* **The Blockchain Layer:** I integrated it using API3's Airnode architecture. This means it’s a true first-party oracle—the data goes straight from my Rust node to the blockchain without third-party node operators acting as middlemen.
It’s currently live and tested on **Optimism Sepolia**, and I’ve just submitted a proposal to the API3 DAO to get it integrated into their official dAPIs for BTC/USD.
I built a small landing page explaining the architecture and demonstrating the live latency spikes:
I would love to hear feedback from smart contract developers or AI folks here. Do you think DeFi protocols would benefit from using AI-filtered price feeds for their liquidation engines?
Any feedback is greatly appreciated!

URGENT! The US Must Pass the Clarity Act Now! | Tron DAO's Adrian Wall

Respectfully, that is not a fair characterization. The list includes [summer.fi](http://summer.fi), Raydium, Curve, Gnosis Pay, Gravity Bridge, Stake DAO, Polymarket, Thorchain, Kelp, Drift, Aave, Moonwell, Aperture, Yearn, Euler, Balancer, Silo, ...
I got bored going through the list. Point is, many of those protocols have been around for years, had hundred of millions or billions in TVL, had respectable teams, were not anonymous, had VC funding, top tier audits, etc, and still got hacked. So no, I don't think it's fair that "big defi protocls have proven their anti-fragility", to me they've proven the exact opposite.

The main plague of DeFi is the trustless operating model - it's inherently prone to breaches. Take the recent Kelp DAO hack.
My question is: how is it even possible for someone to show up, mint 300M almost instantly, withdraw it, move it to another protocol, use it as collateral, borrow against it, and instantly withdraw again? 300M is not small money, even for the big protocols. There should be brakes, cooldown periods. As long as instant, trustless withdrawals of sums that size are possible, there will always be room for hacks. This kind of thing can't happen at a bank precisely because of those brakes and cooldowns, which buy you time to catch it and intervene before the money is gone.
That said, I had funds in Kelp, and I'm pleased with how all parties handled it. That's a serious step up and it builds trust. But it's still a problem if someone has to cover a loss like that - it shouldn't happen in the first place.

Same energy as the Aave mess a few months back honestly. Labs quietly rerouted a
big chunk of swap-fee revenue away from the DAO treasury, and the founder loaded
up on a pile of AAVE right before the big vote. Different mechanism, same move as
the ENS delegation thing.


what gets me is every DAO, big or small, eventually hits this same greed check on
the founder. we all say we're building for the people, but the second there's
real money on the table we get scared to actually hand over control, and start
looking for ways to keep more of it for ourselves. kinda just human nature I
guess.