Transcript: Orbital Command X Anchor X Danku – Semi Dynamic Earn Rate Proposal

Anchor Protocol
Anchor Protocol

Finn 0:41
Hello and welcome to The Ether. Today is Wednesday, March 23rd 2022. This episode of The Ether is brought to you by Glow Yield. Glow Yield is the ecosystem of Terra decentralized apps like Lotto and Creators all powered by DeFi yields. Glow Creators helps artists and influencers give their fans exclusive perks through membership NFTs and more. Glow Lotto is a price link savings account with a weekly chance to win the big jackpot. Tickets are free and perpetual which means there’s zero chance to lose money. Be sure to follow Glow Yield on Twitter and join the Discord community to stay up to date with all the glowing projects and check them out online at This episode of The Ether is also brought to you by Talis. Talis Protocol is the NFT platform for independent artists on Terra. Talis helps to provide artists with the tools and resources needed to transition from traditional arts into the NFT world. With their V1 launch coming soon, Talis will be the place to see real world art reflected on Terra. Be sure to join their Telegram and follow Talis on Twitter for updates on their roadmap, validator, and other Talis news. Find your next favorite artist on TerraSpaces appreciates the support from all our sponsors. Today on The Ether, Orbital Command, Anchor, danku, they discuss the dynamic earn rate proposition. Let’s take a listen.

Shah 2:05
Hey guys, welcome we’re just giving a few minutes to populate up and inviting the speakers up.

danku_r 2:11
Hey, ser, what’s up?

Shah 2:12
What’s going on guys?

danku_r 2:14
Shah, good to talk to you. I just talked to Zion, I met him in person. Great to… I wished also to met you, but I mean, at least part of your team. [chuckle]

Shah 2:25
Yeah, I’m jealous. I’m actually coming to Spain. I’m flying to Spain tonight, but I’m not gonna make it to the Avalanche conference. I’m doing more girlfriend stuff in Spain so it’s gonna be more fun.

danku_r 2:37
Can you repeat? I don’t understand, you had to decide between girlfriend and crypto and you decided girlfriend? Not gonna make it, ser.

bitN8 2:43
I was just gonna say, [chuckle] you’re not a true degen. [chuckle]

Shah 2:49
[chuckle] You know what, one of my biggest regrets when I was living in Japan and the world World Cup came there. And I could have easily gone to some World Cup matches because it was in my city where I was living. And I decided to spend time with my girlfriend, and it was a good weekend. But now I’m regretting that I didn’t go to these World Cup games that I could have gone to super easily. But sometimes…

bitN8 3:13
Well, hopefully she’s not listening. [chuckle]

danku_r 3:21
Did you say, Nate, the first question is is it still the same one, right? [chuckle]

Shah 3:29
[laughs] That’s funny.

danku_r 3:31
It’s a great start, I would say, into this the Twitter Space. And also, Nate, how are you? I met Ryan Park, right, the most polite gentleman in the world which just basically built one of the most important applications of all time. Just amazing how those people who are just creating everything here are the most relaxed, chilled, and quiet, and polite people. It’s just amazing.

bitN8 3:54
I know, Ryan’s one of the most quietest dudes I’ve met but that’s ’cause his mind’s probably always doing all these advanced crypto mathematics while you talk. [chuckle]

Shah 4:05
Let’s see…

danku_r 4:06
Are more people joining or are we waiting?

Shah 4:09
Is there anyone else that I need to invite up? I think some of the… Maybe one of the Retrograde guys I thought was gonna join but I don’t know.

bitN8 4:18
Yeah, if he is on, he’s on the RetroPong handle. If he’s in here. If you’re out there, just request.

danku_r 4:33
And the Anchor account, should we just add him up here for…

bitN8 4:37
Yeah. I’ll add him on. He’s at a conference. Yeah. Zion’s at a conference right now. Cool. Hey, Pong. Great to have you on again.

Pong 4:46
Great to hearing from you again, Nate.

bitN8 4:48

Shah 4:49
Sam could you request. I think Sam wants to come on too, but I don’t know which one Sam is.

bitN8 4:55
He’s @Fyodor.

Shah 4:58
Let’s see… If you request to speak, Sam, then I’ll see your request and I can pop you up.

bitN8 5:05
And then I know RyanLion said that he might join. So if RyanLion, you’re out there request, come up on stage, this is really just a community inspired talk about the dynamic rate. So we’re just pulling people in from all over. We’ll open this up sooner than most AMAs to take questions.

danku_r 5:25
What? We we’re talking about that? I don’t understand.

bitN8 5:29
Yeah, because…

danku_r 5:31
I mean, Nate, while we’re waiting, right, in terms of… How is it in terms… I think all of us feel somehow for the ecosystem, in terms of we all want to understand it better, but you’re actively really being involved in a protocol, how is that, right? It’s more like, if you’re more involved, you’re anyway, also a community member, you know what I mean? I don’t know if there’s something different that you also are involved into something? I don’t know, if you want to reflect on that.

bitN8 5:57
Yeah, it’s a tough line to walk, right. Even though I’m part of the Anchor team, that doesn’t mean I’m not a part of the community, right. Everyone on the Anchor team is part of the Anchor community, even though we’re employed by TFL. And so I kind of walk that closest line, I think, because I was one of the most active community members before joining TFL. And so pulling that community perspective in is often tough. I can kind of see my perspective change after working in the community, and then working at TFL, there’s certain restrictions and capacity constraints that always exist that you aren’t necessarily aware of when you’re in the community, right, it’s really hard to understand what a team of people is doing if you’re not working with them every day. That’s just really the downfall of where we’re at right now. And obviously, that’s not the end goal, every day we move closer to decentralization. And ultimately, we’ll be at a point where we start hiring community members as part of the actual team that’s building this, and they can be more involved on the forums in discussing these things, and having a more decentralized way to do it. So this is just one step of the process of getting there, so it’s hard to sort through. And that’s kind of my role is to try to bridge that and try to temper expectations about like, yes, that’s a great idea but we’ve got stakeholders that are invested in Anchor, right. We have to understand that there’s some big Anchor token holders, right. And they’re part of the community too. They bought a lot of tokens because they believed in Anchor and they have a vision as well. And they’re going to vote. So there’s a lot of lines to walk. It’s kind of like politics in a way too, right, we can’t get away from that. So yeah, it’s interesting.

danku_r 7:51
Yeah, I see your point in terms of I think all of us don’t like in terms of politics of you need to take care of stakeholders and people, but that’s what we anyway do all the time. It’s more like, do you do it to defend something or do you do it in terms of trying to accommodate them as much as possible, right. And I think, as we are trying to go into the same direction, hopefully, it’s not the second path, [chuckle] the positive politics, I call them myself. And yeah, it’s not easy, right? Because you don’t do something I guess from Anchor Protocol perspective to not benefit the community, right. But not everything works out as you also intended because if you would know everything perfect, why even having you, right?

bitN8 8:26
Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And it’s clear there’s a UST strategy too, right, that definitely falls into the mix, right. Anchor is part of the overall Terra ecosystem. And the success of UST is also important for the success of Anchor, right. So the success of Anchor is also now important for the success of UST. We have to start recognize that a little more too just so we’re all on the same page, right. I think that’s important, too.

Fyodor 8:56
And just to chime in here, I think it’s helpful to… Everyone has different perspectives on what the protocol should do from a community perspective. And there’s some things are, “Hey, this is a short term fix. This is a medium term fix. This is a long term fix.” So how do you balance those different prerogatives, and I think we’re trying to inch closer and closer to the ideal, and some people just want to kind of leapfrog there. And so I think that balance is also tough to maintain but we’re doing our best as a community.

danku_r 9:24
Yeah, got it. Can you guys maybe could you also share how big in the meantime, the Anchor team has become, because I think that’s stuff that people also don’t see, right. I don’t know if you can share that number. But maybe it’s interesting also to give a bit of understanding of how many people are right now working on this ship.

bitN8 9:39
That’s a hard question to answer because this is not just like me side skirting it. There’s really no Anchor team because Anchor is a decentralized protocol. So there are some people at TFL that focus on Anchor, and that is a lot of their focus, but there’s other people that their time is split, they might not necessarily just be on the Anchor team, they’re partly working on other core TFL stuff, right. Because TFL is huge in the sense of you’ve got validators, you’ve got business dev, you’ve got marketing. I mean, there’s just a lot of things there. In a lot of things there’s a core infrastructure, right. So it kind of gets mixed up. But I would say, I don’t know, maybe 12 people say, I’m not sure where we’re at there. And then we’ve got…

Fyodor 10:28
You’ve got 12 people? Pretty good.

bitN8 10:29
Something like that. Something like that. Between 10-12 people. Yeah, I mean, we’ve got more than that, actually. If you count all the people that are actively engaged in Anchor, maybe not every day, there’s definitely closer to 15-20 people that touch Anchor on the team in some kind of way, I would say.

Fyodor 10:52
But I mean, the community is the broader team, right. I mean, all the ideas that the devs are working on were sourced from the community. And so even though there’s a couple people kind of in the weeds, we really think about it hundreds if not thousands, or tens of thousands of folks that are actively participating in trying to move this forward as best they can.

bitN8 11:13
Yeah, exactly, I mean…

danku_r 11:16
Just putting it, Nate, in here. So today, I’m here in Barcelona, right, and shout out to us that I was able to talk to Ryan Park, SJ from TFL is here, Chris Amani’s doing an amazing job trying to get more and more community members involved. I think the ethos of what TFL is trying to make happen is amazing. There is Zion, also here. And so I don’t know if maybe few of you guys have seen Yahoo Finance, right, Zack Guzman who was the Anchor and doing a lot of crypto stuff. He decided to quit and go now full web3. And yeah, I was meeting him today on the conference. And then I said, “Dude, you need to talk to all of those people that are here,” right. And then afterwards, he came back to me, I hope it’s fine that I say this, and then he told me, “Now I get it why you’re so invested into this community. It feels like a big family.” Now maybe you can say, “Man, this guy is right now shilling too much,” but this positive vibe is truly… At least you feel it here, right. Even on the Avax conference where Terra is together, and the people are just helping out. It’s cool.

bitN8 12:17
Yeah, 100%. And it’s like, I don’t draw those lines. It’s like danku, you and I talk all the time, right, Shah you and I talk from time to time, and I feel like you’re on the Anchor team, you might as well be. And that’s the thing, you are, you actively…

danku_r 12:31
Um, don’t ape in Anchor tokens. Not financial advice. [chuckle]

bitN8 12:35
[chuckle] But I mean, getting to the core of this is, there’s been a big discussion in the community since almost after Anchor launched about what is this 20% going to look like if we look back from the beginning, you actually listened to Do. He did say it’s not gonna stay at 20 forever. He did say that several times. But a lot of people hear what they want to hear. But the majority of the committee really cares. And there were a lot of great solutions that were put up on how do we solve this. This is not an end state either, this is just a start to moving towards a more sustainable rate. And that’s why we’re kind of having this talk. It’s like, A, what does this look like, how is this new rate model gonna look, and more importantly, what can we look forward to in the future and how we can add to this, how we can augment it. So I think that it’d be a good way to kind of start this conversation out probably is, let’s kind of talk about the dynamic rate a little bit and what that’s gonna look like, because I think there’s probably a lot of confusion out there.

danku_r 13:44
Because you made a super complex formula, ser, instead of just saying five a month, which would make it easier. But maybe before you quickly hit it away because the guests that we have here, right, Mr. Pong, and also, I don’t know who is on the retrograde account, is it Tetris?

Grover 14:03
Hey, guys. No, it’s Detective Grover piloting the account today.

bitN8 14:06
Right on.

Grover 14:09
How’s it going, guys? Good to be here.

Pong 14:11
Yeah, thanks for having us. Excited to learn more about the dynamic earn rate changes.

danku_r 14:16
Well, I mean veANC is still out there, right. That’s probably one of the most interesting proposals which is discussed. Not bootstrapped by Mr. Nate. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen that one, right, something discussed on Anchor without Mr. Nate bootstrapping it. [chuckle]

bitN8 14:30
I know, that was one of the first amazing ones that really came through really strongly.

danku_r 14:37
So I don’t know, Shah, if you want to add something or how do we kick it off here, if not, maybe Nate you want to give a little bit of background what this dynamic rate means and how you also kind of came up with your logic and everything that went into this?

bitN8 14:51
Yeah, I think that’ll be a good way and then we’ll kick it over to Sam too, because he’s got a good way of dumbing down my over complexities. So how about we actually kick it over to Sam, have him put it in simplistic terms of what does this really mean just on a very higher level basic, and then I’ll dive in a little deeper for those that like to actually go into some of the formulas that we have there, and what those mean.

Fyodor 15:16
Perfect. Yeah, as Nate said, I’m not that smart. So I gotta dumb it down for myself mostly, and then pass it on to the community. But essentially, as we all know and love the yield deserve, we all love the yield reserve, and so effectively the way we look at that is, is kind of the profit and loss of the protocol. If the yield reserve’s going up, the protocol is making money, if the yield reserve’s going down, the protocol is losing money. And so in this proposal here we kind of look to that baseline P&L, profit and loss of the protocol and say, “Hey, if the protocol is making money, let’s raise the rate up, because we can support that.” And similarly, and where we obviously find ourselves, when that yield reserve’s going down it’s easy to basically reduce the rate a bit to take some pressure off that yield reserve. And so effectively, we’re going to kind of slow walk the protocol based on the health of the yield reserve. And so not surprisingly, the yeild reserve’s going down day after day after day. So in the short term, you’re not surprisingly, the rate will likely go down month over month. And so basically, every month, it’s a relatively quick formula, you look to the yield reserve, you say, “Hey, is it going up? Is it going down?” If it’s going down, probably makes sense to reduce that rate, take a little bit of the pressure off, and then pause a little bit, because there’s a lot of things going on in the background, there’s a lot of positive things happen on the borrow side. So we don’t want to all of a sudden snap that rate down, we don’t want to scare people, we can support certainly gradual decreases. Hopefully, at some point support gradual increases.

Fyodor 16:54
But that’s effectively in a nutshell, if the protocol is making a lot of money, we’d love to give more of it back to kind of the user base, but if the protocol is not making money right there, there’s no other way but to reduce those payouts. And so over time, obviously, that naturally leads to kind of a steady state of the protocol, where month after month we’re constantly checking whether or not the yield reserve’s going up or down, and then adjusting the rate accordingly. But again, not major moves, hopefully. We still want to keep it relatively stable, still want to have people project out and build models, and build businesses based off of Anchor. And so I think the committee is trying to do it as in the most responsible way as possible. But also, being very, very transparent about that 20% is currently not sustainable, with the dynamics on the Borrow side. And so as those Borrow side incentives and initiatives start to kick in, hopefully we can start to take the rate up, but certainly, I think as everyone’s well aware, the Earn side is definitely challenging for the yield reserve at the moment.

danku_r 17:58
Nate, what do you want to add now? [chuckle]

bitN8 18:01
I love that.

danku_r 18:04
Yeah, go ahead.

bitN8 18:05
No, that was eloquently laid out, I could not have done it better. That’s why I nominated him to do that. So now I’ll confuse you all. Oh, no, I’m just kidding. So let’s look at that on a technical level what does that mean. And so to Sam’s point, this needs to be something that can be augmented and recalibrated. We just don’t want some hardline parameters coded in. So we need to be able to reassess what this is doing over time. So there’s four main parameters in the code, and you guys kind of look at it, but I’ll kind of distill that out for you. You have a frequency, a period of time and the number of blocks, which can be extrapolated out into days, weeks, months, in which you look at when this rate change is going to occur. And so ideally, that can be set. It looks like… Again, this is up to the community to vote, I think we’re gonna have to… What was laid out in the forum posts, which no one really seemed to challenge, was that we’ll look at it for a month. But this is something that can be changed, it can be pushed down to a week, it could be pushed up to three months, if it looks like we have a more sustainable runway. And it looks like we don’t need to change it as much, that would be really ideal. If it looks like we’re not changing it quickly enough, we can push that down to a week where it becomes a little more dynamic. So that’s what the frequency looks at.

bitN8 19:34
We also have a maximum and minimum APY. So kind of saying, “Okay, well, maybe we cap it at 25% APY,” so that the yield reserve has a chance to really buffer itself. And we don’t just pay that all out right away. And maybe we cap a floor at something that still looks more attractive than the rest of the savings and lendings space out there. So maybe it’s 5%, or 8%, or 7%, whatever the community thinks is great for that floor level.

danku_r 20:07
So maybe, Nate, maybe just quickly… Because I now was told how to pin something at a Spaces and I’m very proud on that. So what I did is I pinned up the official tweet from Anchor Protocol explaining four days ago the whole logic behind that. And what I’ve pinned also now additionally, is the 20th tweet, where there is the formula in, and the 21st then when people scroll down, they see an example. So I don’t know, if you want to base on the tweet number 20 go again through the formula. And then also you touch on those different things that you said, which I think is also very important. And then we’ll also probably open up an AMA in terms of why did you choose for now, as you said, a month, or it will be a week or so forth. Maybe that helps also a little bit more going into the details of the formula.

bitN8 20:54
Yeah, and so some of it’s changed a little bit, because the audit actually pulled out some things of complexity. So the actual delta seem to be a unneeded parameter. It’s really just if the yield reserves going up or down, the delta just added unnecessary code complexity. So we scratched that out of there. No need to open up more attack vector surface. The less complexity you can have, the better. So yield rate goes up or down. It’s yes or no. And so that would be…

danku_r 21:35
So you need to please write also in your tweet, Nate, ser. To get to get us all… So basically, what you’re saying is if in a month, the change is positive, you mean that the next month it would increase the payout? And if it’s negative, it would decrease the payout. Is that the easiest way to tackle this?

bitN8 21:54
Yeah, right. And it makes it a little simpler, right. [chuckle] Delta 3%, if it’s under 3%, as rightly challenged, that was a bit too complicated. So just up or down, everyone can understand that, it makes a lot of sense. So that would be the actual frequency, and the max change. And so we would have a final parameter that actually caps that at a max percent. And the reason for this, the thought process behind it is, okay, if the rate goes up, there’s a max cap of what was proposed was 1.5%, meaning it can only raise that per frequency of one month by 1.5%. Or conversely, if the yield reserved goes down, it can only lower it per month by 1.5%. And the thought process behind that is you don’t want to send shocks to the market. We don’t want to just drop the rate to 5% tomorrow, or 10% tomorrow, or have it snap to the actual dynamic money market rate. Because this is something that most people don’t understand, I think, so I’ll highlight this again. If the yield reserve goes to zero, Anchor doesn’t break, it doesn’t go to zero, it doesn’t become insolvent, as everyone seems to think. No, Anchor actually goes to a completely dynamic money market. So this puts us one step closer to not having to go to that point where the rate drops to the sustainable rate that it can actually pay based on the actual borrow collateral interest rate and the actual utility of that. So this will move more closer to that without creating any huge type of whipsaw motion.

bitN8 23:51
Because you got to remember, there’s a lot of things to consider here. And Sam mentioned this a bit, there’s a lot of protocols that are built on top of the Earn side, and they created marketing materials, they have a user base that they tried to plan for, you can’t just drop the rate 10% overnight, and shock the community in that kind of way. So that was kind of the thought process behind that. And so again, these are all governance parameters. So to be very clear, these are not set in stone. These are things that we have to look at, we have to monitor, they’re gonna have to go up to vote and possibly be rechanged and recalibrated.

danku_r 24:33
Okay, so to rephrase it for me, what I understood is basically, the proposal is now first of all, it looks up and down, then there is the 1.5% that it would move up or down based on which direction it takes. And then this is all based on a monthly basis for now. And what you’re saying is first of all, before this is decided… Well, now this will be decided on the one hand, but then once this is decided, those parameters that can be then adjusted later on, right. If people then say, “Well, maybe we go to 2% or just 1% change? Or we do it on a weekly basis? Maybe on a daily basis,” whatever, right. But then you’re also saying, it makes sense to have a timeframe. Why? Because other protocols are dependent, be it, I don’t know, soon Kinetic, Angel Protocol, right, which is still super important for the ecosystem and positive thing. So I don’t know, Shah or the Retrograde team, if you have any comments on this or your thoughts.

Shah 25:23
For me, it’s really funny and interesting to hear, I don’t know, Terra has come into the spotlight in a big way, in the last month or two as we’ve climbed the crypto market cap charts. And it’s funny to see Anchor come under… And the interest rate that it’s providing, come under such, I don’t know, like fire or scrutiny from the broader crypto community, who’s just discovering Terra and discovering Anchor really, in the last few months. Because I remember following the launch of Anchor, and all of us were anxiously awaiting what the interest rate was going to be for the lend side, and Do teased that it was going to be potentially double digits. And we were all like, “Oh my gosh, double digits, this is gonna be massive!” And then when it actually dropped 20%, I mean, the community was doing backflips. We’re like, “This is insane, and awesome.” And I just think it’s funny that it feels like everyone, I think, took what I thought was kind of this tremendous gift from TFL, this incredible rate to really market our ecosystem. And I think the broader community has kind of turned on that and created all this fodder around, “Oh, the sustainability of Anchor,” but it’s…

Shah 26:51
I don’t know, I’m excited to see that Anchor is coming into this kind of next stage of evolution where we’re creating that sustainability that people more recently have been worried about when it’s just been this really awesome thing that we’ve had for the last year that, I don’t know, I find it really incredible. What has been accomplished by Anchor, and like you’re saying, how many different dApps on Terra… It’s not 2 or 3, I mean, there’s… I would say off the top of my head, something more like 8-10 dApps that are known that have built off of Anchor interest rate, so there’s a lot of things that are connected to the changes that we make to this. And I think that that consideration is one of those things the community needs to think about.

Fyodor 27:38
Well, it’s funny you say that because it’s crypto and everyone’s a degen and some protocol comes out, it’s 10,000% APY, people are like, “Oh, yeah, totally makes sense. I get it, let’s do it.” And then we come out at 20%, people are like, “Well, blast me. That is… I don’t know what you guys are doing over there.” So you get both sides of the coin for sure. But certainly, I think, responsibilities, sustainability, and long term focus is definitely something that’s core to the mission at Anchor and hopefully resonates with the community.

bitN8 28:08
Yeah, and it’s funny that point you make. If you recall, people were speculating double digits was going to be 11%, 12%. It was like, “Wow. We could get 10% or 11%.” That’s what I was saying. I’m like, “This is awesome.” And now we got…

Fyodor 28:23
I 100% thought 11%, and I was super excited about it.

bitN8 28:28
Yeah, so the fact that we’re moving down from 20% slowly, I don’t think there’s gonna be too big of an issue there. [chuckle]

Fyodor 28:34
Yeah, exactly.

Grover 28:36
Yeah. Would you say it’s a fair analogy, that that 1.5% increasing that is like a bumpy landing, and decreasing it is a bit of a soft landing, maybe as an analogy, for decreasing the Anchor rate. I mean, we definitely see both sides of this discussion, like you guys are saying, business models are built on top of Anchor, and that 20% is a really good marketing tool to go out there and say, “Earn the best possible rate,” but then we’re really keen to see an increase in the value of the utility of governance tokens. So adding these few parameters, being able to vote on changing that rate. And also to just be able to tweak those things using governance on Anchor for a more mature DeFi ecosystem. I guess that’s what we need to do to exceed the growth of Ethereum DeFi. I guess that’s the end goal. So it seems like a necessary next step, but we definitely see both sides of the argument.

bitN8 29:38
Yeah, that’s actually a really good point. Over on Aave and Compound, you really just have a dynamic rate. Here, you actually create governance utility, and the main user function of the app. I mean, we just passed $17 billion on the protocol, which is just astounding. And we have $11.4 billion in user deposits. Getting that to take place in governance would be huge utility for the token itself.

Grover 30:11
Is’s a monster, Anchor is an absolute monster. [chuckle] That’s fair to say.

Pong 30:16
Yeah, it’s also been incredible to see, I would say, an increased focus on governance within Terra through all these community discussions. I think the Arca proposal that actually got rejected was one of the highest participation rates within any ecosystem.

bitN8 30:36
I was like, “How do we figure out how to get governance for that proposal? How do we get governance participants to replicate what happened for Poll 18? [chuckle] That was DeFi at it’s best, right. Everyone was involved, everyone cared, everyone was voting, everyone was on the forums, posting conflicting ideas, challenging each other, right. This is really the most… I don’t even think I have to say “go to the forums” anymore. I’d probably eat my words, but we had… So far, there’s nearly 30,000 views on the dynamic Anchor Earn rate. My job last week was literally just to read all of it. I’m eating my words now, telling everyone to go to the forum, but it’s just been amazing to see this.

danku_r 31:21
It’s great to hear that because… And I think it’s great to have also the Retrograde team in here in terms of… I think a lot of us said for a long time that governance is important. And the token power, which is also called “governance token”, has a ton of value. But of course, and more even in a bull run, I mean, everybody hopefully also was able to make a ton of money. Yeah, but if number is not going up, who cares? Governance… Yeah, but Anchor Protocol is right now wielding a ton of money. It’s one of the top five biggest DeFi protocols in the world. And if somebody is right now scooping up since a month cheap coins, because we’re just selling our rewards, well, he could have done serious damage to the whole ecosystem. So I think it’s great. Well, drama always helps. [chuckle] But if this was kicking off something bigger and gives also awareness of how important governance is, I’m happy also to hear your reflection, Nate, in saying that you’d basically don’t have a job anymore, right, you don’t need to post on the forum anymore. [chuckle]

bitN8 32:20
Let’s hope it continues. I won’t have much of a life anymore if it continues, but it’s good for the ecosystem. And what I hope is I won’t be one of the… There’s like… I should say for me myself, there’s several really active community members on there that really helped me. And they really do a good job of posting and responding conflicting ideas and things like that. So it’s getting a lot better and I want to see more and more people take up the role and and helping do that. So it’s really exciting in my mind.

danku_r 32:55
I mean, ser, if something is needed in terms of drama, again, we just create a new proposal from Barca instead of Arca, because it’s a second one and… [chuckle] We take this one. No, just kidding. So I think it’s good that we have more institutional investors also here. I don’t know Retrograde, do you want to reflect on the topic of governance quickly before we then, I would say also, maybe open up the floor to some community members asking some questions in terms of dynamic earn rate, etcetera.

Pong 33:21
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, once again, our focus is on building the master key for governance on the Terra ecosystem. And kind of what Nate’s talking about, part of our mission is to be able to highlight the importance of governance within the ecosystem, and to help unlock the value of governance to key ecosystem protocols, such as Anchor. As far as this proposal, I think that we really like this proposal, because it really does help make Anchor more sustainable, while also adding value and adding utility to Anchor holders. I think, really, we’re gonna see more alignment through this proposal. And we’re really excited to see what the community does in order to push this forward and to see the future of what happens on Anchor.

danku_r 34:11
Nice one, I can’t wait also to see your solution. When do you go live? Did you say that already? No?

Petyr Bælish 34:20
Yeah. We haven’t really released exactly the exact date when we’re going to go live. But we’re creeping closer and closer, week by week.

danku_r 34:29
Can’t wait for that one. Nate, Shah, what do you think? Should we open the floor here a bit and get some members up?

bitN8 34:37
Let’s do it. I think there’s gonna be a lot of questions.

danku_r 34:42
Very good. So everybody who has a question just request to speak, we had one or two people earlier, which faded in the meantime. Sorry for that. But I mean, in the beginning, usually it’s just a little bit of also talk and giving everybody a chance to speak but now if you have any questions… Whoop, and there they are coming up. [chuckle] Just a second and then people are… Just let me bring them in here as much as possible, and Shah, just chime in right and also stop me.

Shah 35:06
Yeah. So Nate, just while we’re waiting for people to kind of connect up.

Terra Pony 35:13
So once you removed the…

danku_r 35:16
Wait a second, Mr. Terra Pony, I just muted you. [chuckle] Give Shah a chance, and then you can reflect on the topic.

Shah 35:23
That’s okay, we can let Mr. Terra go ahead, Terra Pony.

Terra Pony 35:29
Okay. Thank you, guys. I have a question regarding the delta. Because if you disregard the delta parameter in the setting the rate change, then nearing the equilibrium rate, this can cause a flattering effect, where one month you get plus 1.5%, the other month minus 1.5%. So this can happen regardless of any actual dynamics, right, because once you’re at the equilibrium, a very tiny deviation can cause to cross the boundary one way or another. So do you have anything in mind to address that in the future?

bitN8 36:11
Yeah, I mean, it’s essentially hyperdynamic on a monthly timeframe at that point, right? Because if the yield reserve doesn’t really change that much, it’s only gonna… Let’s say the yield reserve is up 0.1%, that only changes the rate 0.1%. So that’s not really that significant of a change. So that’s kind of the point, it’s not a max 1.5% that it goes up and down. That’s the bounds of how much it can change.

Fyodor 36:41
But you’re absolutely right. I mean, if you take this equation, and I know there’s some math in there, but the programmers, all the devs tell me they need math to work on not words. And so if you do that, limit to affinity, you definitely go towards that sustainable rate over time. And so once you’re kind of there, month to month, it should be relatively stable. And that might be where the community says, “Hey, maybe it’s not up or down 1.5%, maybe it’s up or down 0.5%.” So that’s why I think a lot of these parameters are not fixed, and can be adjusted over time as the community sees fit.

bitN8 37:15
Right, and to that point, it doesn’t have to be a month either. So if we did get that effect of flippening, where it constantly is going back and forth by a few decimal points, then maybe we’d look at doing it every three months, because that means our parameter was too tight. Then that means we’ve got to change that to every quarter of changes. So that’s why the dynamic principles, because there are things we’re not going to see. We can model it out as much as we want, but the market’s really going to determine that and then we can recalibrate. So yeah, great question. Good things to think about and good things to look for.

Terra Pony 37:48
Well, thank you so much.

Shah 37:50
To follow up on that, that’s a question that I was kind of thinking of. What was the decision making process in the one month? Did it just feel like that’s enough times that it’s not changing too rapidly, but also adjusting in a reasonable amount of time so we’re not depleting the reserves too long if three months or six months goes by before the rate changes? Can you give us a little… Or do you guys know the thought behind that one month parameter?

bitN8 38:20
Yeah, I mean, it was like… The yield reserve is bleeding a lot. So it would be nice to do three months, but honestly, that is kind of just tokenism at that point, it’s not really changing much. And the thought with talking to a lot of dApps that use it, that going less than a month might be too radical as well at this time. So it really was just about intuitively talking to people if they know what they thought was best. And then if it doesn’t work, well, we’ll put up a governance proposal to quickly change it to something that does. Really the idea is just get it out so we can calibrate it.

Fyodor 39:05
I think just to piggyback on that a little bit, there’s so many things in the work. Anchor Protocol now is going to look a lot different than it will in May, in June, in September and December. So I think a lot of that ramp, if you will, that slow ramp was to give a lot of these great ideas and a lot of these great discussions and proposals time for them to kind of advance and see what happens with those. So that’s another reason why we didn’t do anything too drastic because there’s so many things in the pipe that can drastically alter kind of the shape of where Anchor goes.

danku_r 39:37
Cool. Thank you, Terra Pony, for the question also. Millennial, would like to go next?

Millennial12345 39:43
Yeah, thanks, guys for having me on here. I guess my question is pretty simplistic. I’m a relatively new investor in the Terra ecosystem. And my biggest fear with this is that we are going to disincentivize the big money and the hedge funds that are active piling into UST by messing around with the rate. The phrase that kind of comes to my mind is “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” As I understand it, the 20% rate is not sustainable and it’s kind of a marketing tool for the community. So if it’s working as a marketing tool, and UST is minting at the maximum possible rate right now, what is the justification in messing around with that when TFL still has tens of billions in LUNA holdings that we could potentially use to replenish the reserve in the future and take some kind of action like this maybe a year down the road as opposed to right now? Thank you.

bitN8 40:39
Yeah, no, it’s a fair question and there’s definitely both sides to argue, A, that’s not sustainable, that Anchor should perform on its own, and it shouldn’t require bailouts. But there’s also the point that 20% is a super top line number. And, actually, there is some reasoning behind this, if you look at the UST cross-chain exports, where we actually have to create some real utility behind this UST that’s not just parked in Anchor, they have to compete against that 20%. So when they’re going over to ETH, when they’re going over to Arbitrum, when they’re going over to Optimism, or Polygon, or even AVAX, especially AVAX in this case, these yield farms now have to compete with the incentives. So they have to pay out even more LUNA incentives. So the cost of getting real sustainable UST adoption is actually pegged much higher than it should be. And we could actually possibly get more UST adoption if the rate comes down a little bit. And we stopped competing our similar unified efforts.

danku_r 41:51
I like the question, but Nate, I don’t know if you want to also quickly reflect because I like your point in terms of it’s not only external, it’s also within the Terra ecosystem, right. If we have right now money markets, or they would like to call themselves credit market, like Mars Protocol and Edge, they need to probably raise a ton or ask for a lot of money if people want to lend out and borrow UST, because if not they are basically impossible to attract any liquidity, right. So I think now with Mars and Edge Protocol, it probably also helps out a ton the whole ecosystem if Anchor Protocol becomes more, let’s say, dynamic. I don’t know if you have reflected or would like to reflect on this topic in general but within Terra.

bitN8 42:31
That’s 100% true. And I guess I could say Mars actually did ask us like, “When are you guys lowering the rate? We don’t want to have to pay 20%.” It’s kind of crazy. And as we were talking about earlier, we don’t know the breaking point. But let’s look at some of the data from Compound and Aave. If you look at this, and Flipside has got some good data on this that they put out, people don’t move their money, regardless of what the rate does there. It’s parked there. The actual rate changes on a completely dynamic rate on Aave and Compound, and it’s like 3%, 2%, they’re not moving their money for the most part. And here we are paying 20% worried that if we drop it to 10% people are gonna move their money, yet people on Aave and Compound are getting paid 3%, they’re not even moving their money. So I think we probably have some runway to stop bleeding so much money. And let’s kind of figure out where that threshold balance exists.

Millennial12345 43:35
Yeah, and I think that’s a great point. I guess I would counter that with why do we feel that we need a dynamic rate, then? Why not just manually experiment with setting a fixed rate a little bit lower than 20%, and then seeing how that works, and then coming back, because by creating that dynamic rate, you’re essentially telling the big money who’s inflowing into the system that there will be no certainty in terms of yield. They can’t calculate the linear depletion rate of the UST reserve based on a dynamic rate. I mean, they can estimate it, sure, but they’re not going to have as much certainty regarding how much yield they could be paid out in a certain fixed period of time, which I think is kind of hitting that one of the most attractive features of the ecosystem right now, given the macro conditions we’re facing in the market. Just the fact that you have certainty of yield for as long as the UST reserve’s there. And even though the reserve might run out at a certain point, 4 or 5 months from today, big money investing into that pool and into UST understands that they will be paid as long as there is a reserve pool there. So I feel like injecting the additional uncertainty given the market conditions may not be a wise move right now.

danku_r 44:52
But do you think that 1.5% a month is a crazy uncertainty because the alternative would be yield reserve zero, drawdown to 5%. I don’t know, I think that’s a bigger risk, don’t you think so?

Millennial12345 45:04
I think it’s a reasonable proposal, don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s gonna create any huge moves in terms of increasing or decreasing valuation right away. But I just think that… I’ve heard so many times and I asked the question so many times of why is the yield reserve not sustainable, and finally getting comfortable with that fact myself, and now we’re messing around with it. And it’s just like, “Oh, here we go again,” I don’t know, I have mixed…

bitN8 45:37
Welcome to DeFi. Welcome to DeFi. [chuckle] But I mean, let’s think about it. It’s not that… Like danku said, it’s not that drastic of a rate. And you’re assuming this is dumb money. It’s not that hard to run some numbers to project what the yield reserve is doing right now, what your rates going to be in six months if nothing changes, there’s a reason why nobody offers a stable rate anywhere, unless you’ve locked in for a long period of time. It’s an unsustainable business model to guarantee a rate when everything else around it is hyper dynamic, especially in these kinds of environments. So we have to find a balance where we try to model it out ourselves so that it can be stable for a period of time so that investors have some confidence and be able to monitor out how that changes, like the Fed funds rate, it’s the same idea. People project that, they make expectations based on it, I think that’s reasonable expectation that any investor can model out what the Anchor rate is going to be. And there could be expectations on it, there can be bets on that. That’s what realistically, well-developed, mature capital markets look like. And that’s what we probably should be moving towards with a better model on top of that.

Fyodor 46:51
And part of this is psychological. I mean, I think it’s important to be transparent with the community for the community to understand that 20% is unsustainable. I think most people get it. But on the other side, I read crypto Twitter all the time and every week, there’s always folks saying. “20% forever, I’m going to count on this. I’m going to retire on this. I’m going to build businesses around this. I’m going to take advantage of this for the next five years.” And so I think partly it’s just moving a step in that direction so that the community understands, “Hey, 20% is probably not sustainable over a long period of time.” And we have to deal with that new paradigm.

danku_r 47:26

Grover 47:29
Sorry, guys. So maybe as a final note… [chuckle] Go ahead. Go ahead.

Millennial12345 47:35
Yeah, sorry about that, man. Yeah, just final note for me here. I think big money already understands that the yield isn’t sustainable. So any price action we’ve seen up to this point is going to already have reflected that. But yeah, thanks for the opportunity to speak and appreciate the feedback, guys.

Grover 47:55
Maybe one last thing about that. I think big money is, as you said, well aware. But also, it’s not confronted to any opportunity cost when it’s depositing into Anchor. So it can very well decide to deposit funds right now, enjoy the yield while it lasts. And as soon as it crosses a threshold, where it feels like it has better opportunities elsewhere, because there’s no lockup in Anchor’s Earn, it can just move the funds. So projection, obviously is an important part of their modeling and operation, but because there is no lockup, it’s not like they’re committing to something where they might actually not get enough to fulfill their mandates, for example. So I don’t think it’s such a deterrent to them, that the yield might move around slightly over time.

danku_r 48:48
Cool. So because Nate hasn’t said it yet, I mean, if you have feedback, and maybe you want to share it also with the now very big audience in the Anchor forum. Maybe I’ll see it same and I think it’s good to put as much information as possible into the Anchor forum. How can people go there, Nate, maybe you can [chuckle] give you a classic bit.

bitN8 49:08
Can we ask someone from the community to come up and say it? I don’t know if I’ve got more capacity for more comments. No, I’m just kidding. Go over there. Make a comment. I might not… [chuckle]

danku_r 49:19
Good one. Thank you Millennial. I think next was Mr. Xulian, go ahead.

xulian 49:24
Hey, danku. Thanks, guys. I wanted to talk a little bit about besides that TFL kind of funding that they did, what’s the overall expense on Anchor in general for development and kind of since the beginning, because I feel like it’s often short sighted. “Oh, TFL funded Anchor with $450 million.” When you compare Anchor to other startup businesses that are trying to gain market share, the recent example was DraftKings, that spend $400 million in the fourth quarter of 2021, and they’re expected to lose a billion in the next year. When you compare that to Anchor, sure TFL spent 400 recently, but if you look at the growth of Anchor and Terra overall, it seems more than justified. So I guess I want to understand overall the expected kind of spending, or if there’s either a cap or just something that’s kind of expected for growth, or growth measures that Anchor and Terra is kind of looking for?

bitN8 50:45
That’s a good question, it kind of goes back to that saying earlier, though, there’s no Anchor budget, because Anchor is a decentralized independent entity, whereas TFL is a centralized entity that allocates staff to work on that protocol as part of the community. So there’s no budget, like I said, there’s at least 10 people, maybe more on the TFL team that just kind of work on Anchor here and there. They might do this, they might do that, they might add some code here, but they’re not core Anchor team member, there’s really no core Anchor team member, even at TFL. It’s like even Sam and I, we work on core TFL stuff too. We were in talks with helping UST adoption, we get pulled into finance calls, we get pulled into UST cross-chain deployments. And those are just a few of the things that come to my mind right now. We all wear so many different hats over there. Matt, who’s “Anchor product manager”, I mean, he works on a lot of core deals over at TFL. He was big and making this reserve pool happen. So there’s no way of really calculating what the expenses on it, it’s really seen in the greater good of just making sure that Terra ecosystem flourishes. And that’s really the core mandate of TFL, LFG.

danku_r 52:16
Thank you, Xulian, and also for reflecting on this. I think I see, for example, LUNAomics right now listening, shout out to you, ser. Also in the last week reflecting on the topic of… There has been probably a lot of big companies, or are right now out there that are in their growth phase, which makes sense because they want market share, are negative for a while, and then long term there are the effects positively right, which payout. But I think it’s interesting that maybe Xulian, I mean, you gave me some ideas, maybe it’s interesting to do some research how much has been spent with the yield reserve, how much has it grown, how much can we expect long term. And like I said, if somebody has sAVAX, right now you can also put it down on Anchor Protocol, right. Maybe, Nate, I don’t know if you want to quickly shill your own sAVAX integration quickly. Maybe not everybody is aware of this. [chuckle]

bitN8 53:04
Yeah, I mean, let’s do it. It just went live yesterday. So everybody, you can go to the Anchor page. On the top right, you can now toggle between different chains, which is really exciting. You’re gonna see the AVAX option which you can connect to your Metamask wallet. And from there, you’re able to use Anchor natively on AVAX. You’ll want to get some sAVAX tokens, which is the BENQI liquid staking derivative, which they worked with Ava Labs to create. So you take your AVAX, you go over there, you stake it, you get your sAVAX, and from there you can go to Anchor Borrow, you can borrow against that, you can set safe borrow utilization parameter, ideally less than 70% but you can go all the way up to 75% if you want, take some UST out and have some fun right now. If you want to use the Earn side, this is one thing to be very clear on right now, we’re working on getting this change as quick as possible. This is the fun of having a million different cross-chain bridges. A lot of the UST on AVAX right now is Axelar wrapped. So you’d want to go to the Curve V3 pool to get Wormhole wrapped. Hopefully soon we’ll have a governance proposal up to change all that Axelar UST to Wormhole wrapped UST. On the Terra side, if you really want to you can send your AVAX to the Wormhole bridge and then deposit it on the Terra side. Or even more excitingly, now you go to the liquidation queue on the Terra side, bid on sAVAX, get a discount on it, and then borrow against it once you paid for that liquidation if it was executed.

danku_r 54:55
Yeah, I think right now we’re not even seeing kind of how big this is in terms of… It’s for the first time where one protocol is natively on a different protocol, and there are two kind of set of smart contracts on different chains interacting with each other’s assets, I think this is huge. Probably others will try to replicate this and I can’t wait. Maybe something because I’ve seen some questions in terms of also when I posted this topic, if you are LUNA native, you can take over sAVAX, bridge it from Avalanche over to the Terra blockchain and work from there. Like I said if you’re on the other side an Avalanche native, you can use it directly there. So it’s kind of not a need to move stuff over. And I guess soon, I don’t know, Nate, if you already talked to people like I don’t know, the Astroport team or so forth, there will be probably pools right in terms of wrapped asset. So vasAVAX against UST to make liquidations easier, or is there something planned?

bitN8 55:53
Yeah, they’re looking at that. Loop is looking at it too. They’re in talks with BENQI to get some pools going there. It’s not hyper necessary. I’ve also been in talks with Kujira and Lighthouse, the liquidation provider, and what I’ve been encouraging them to do is actually build out the liquidation queue natively on AVAX, so that users could bid natively with wrapped UST and get native sAVAX on AVAX. So it’s built on Wormhole, so essentially a bit of a reverse process. So hopefully, they’re telling me they’re building it. I don’t want to hold them to something that they haven’t completely confirmed yet.

danku_r 56:40
No, it’s okay. It’s confirmed, it’s fine. [chuckle]

bitN8 56:40
But I mean, they’re already working with Metamask integration. So they were already there. So it was cool to see that. And then maybe we should drop a little bit of alpha, just to keep people excited. We’re talking with Polygon, we’re going to probably be moving to Fantom, we’re obviously moving to ETH. And then further out we’ve got Solana and probably DOT. And we’re also looking at one click borrow to make borrowing just as easy as the Earn side, which is part of the reason we have this problem, it’s like borrowing is already complicated, just in the sense of people aren’t used to borrowing, so if we could simplify that process. Just got a lot of cool things coming out.

danku_r 57:30
Nice one. Can’t wait. That super, super cool. And yeah, so the moment you have a screenshot so you know where to send them. [chuckle] I’m happily bringing out the content about that because the one click borrow, yeah, can’t wait.

bitN8 57:45
Exactly. Exactly.

danku_r 57:46
Taking a look at the time, but I don’t know, Shah, how long you would like to go. We have Apathy and Whale up here. Does it make sense to have those two gentlemen addressing their questions, and then we cut it short or any plannings on your side?

Shah 58:01
Yeah, no, that sounds good. I think, a couple more questions, and then we’ll kind of wind it down.

danku_r 58:07
So we missed now Whale, he just said, “No, I’m out. I got enough alpha from Mr. Nate. So I’m dropping out.” Apathy, go next, please.

Apathy 58:17
Hey, yeah, thanks. I just really like the protocol, and really like what you guys are doing. I’ve been following Anchor for a while. Earlier you guys did answer my question, because I was just wondering why was AVAX chosen but I guess there’s a couple other protocols as well that you’re looking into. And I don’t know if this was asked earlier, but would it make sense to help if you can lock up a portion of funds on the ecosystem maybe for even a couple of weeks, or maybe even a year or so or even an increment if that would help with the yield? I don’t know if that makes sense.

bitN8 59:00
You’re talking like a yield curve time locked deposits?

Apathy 59:06
Yeah, yeah.

bitN8 59:08
There’s a lot of issues with code complexity with that. And it really jeopardizes the fungibility of aUST. I think you could create this in a simpler way. You could create a withdrawal tax of let’s say, 1%, which would mean your breakeven rate at 20%, right now something like 18 days, so that would require you to hold for at least 18 days, I think that might be one way to look at it as some kind of withdrawal tax. But again, it’s kind of clunky, in that way. It’s just not the best user experience. But in premise, I like that idea better than any kind of tiered yield reserve with different wallets investing times contract queries across chain, my god that would be a mess to send all that over Wormhole. It just would not work.

Apathy 1:00:00
Yeah, I would imagine that we would be too complex just… Well, I guess, having it be so complex wouldn’t be a good thing. I’m just wondering, a very simple way just to kind of provide someone who has large amount of funds, if they just want to kind of have a little bit of predictable yield just long term. So it’s just an idea that I just had.

bitN8 1:00:25
Yeah, appreciate it. Possibly something that could be looked at with uncollateralized leveraged lending with whitelisted contracts or something like that. Different lending market though, for that kind of stuff. But I think it’s stuff that we’ll have to look into with all the idle UST we have.

danku_r 1:00:40
Cool, thank you. And then I would say last question, hashtag no pressure. Petyr Bælish. Go ahead.

Petyr Bælish 1:00:47
Oh, geez. So when you talked about bringing over some of the other assets, you… Or maybe I missed it, you didn’t mention an ATOM. Is there any updates on when we could see bATOM?

bitN8 1:00:57
Go to the forum. [chuckle] Yeah, we’re gonna have a vote up for that this week. And so that would be about… We’ll get that vote up today or tomorrow, I mean, seven days vote, three days poll execution. So give or take 10 odd days?

danku_r 1:01:16
I think you could go on the testnet, you would see there a new icon which you would like, which indicates that it seems to be very, very close.

bitN8 1:01:24
Exactly, yep. There’s so many… We can’t even get away with putting something up. Within like seconds of putting something on testnet where someone finds it like, “Oh, my God.” [chuckle] There’s like no hiding it.

danku_r 1:01:38
And I mean, just for myself, because I was checking how much sAVAX already arrived on Anchor, right now the value I think it’s… Just let me refresh here. Because I mean, as I said, I’m making my numbers myself, trying to calculate the sustainability. So we have almost 6 million… Well, 5.3 million of sAVAX, I think that’s pretty interesting. And I don’t know if anybody noticed, but we have 1.3 billion in value of ETH already. I’m surprised how much it was going up. I don’t know, did you call some old ETH friend, Nate, and just said they need to deposit here?

bitN8 1:02:11
It was all Sam. Sam was talking about how he needed to make it better. And as soon as he started talking about it, it just started rocketing. So we’re gonna give Sam credit for that.

Fyodor 1:02:22
I like to go bAsset. Everyone’s got ETH, everyone’s got BTC. Like, well, we’ll waitlist at all. That’s my prerogative.

bitN8 1:02:30
Oh, yeah. There’s another little bit of alpha there. Did someone say wrapped BTC? [chuckle]

danku_r 1:02:37
Whoa, wait, I have connection issues. Again?

bitN8 1:02:41
You only get alpha once. So I’m leaving it there. [laughter]

danku_r 1:02:46
Left upper corner, it says “record”. And also I think we have forgot in last weeks… Or I myself a bit, we have down there usually recording a ton of Spaces. I’ve seen today the schedule is super filled up. So those guys are doing an amazing job. Give them a like, give them a follow. You can also donate some money if you don’t want to donate to the yield reserve. [chuckle] Go over at TerraSpaces will be also an interesting destiny. Super cool. Anything we have forgotten here? Somebody wants to add something? I don’t know, Anchor team, Shah, Retrograde?

Fyodor 1:03:21
Yeah, just real quick, just a public service announcement. Certainly at Anchor, I think a lot of people are noticing there’s a lot of scammers out there, a lot of fraudulent folks, a lot of malicious actors. There are a lot of Anchor sites popping up that are not the real Anchor site. So just please, please, please, double check what site you’re on. Never give out your seed phrase. We’re seeing a lot of that in the community and it pains us every single time that we see it. But literally, we can’t do anything about it. So everyone has to protect yourselves. And please be careful and make sure you’re interacting with the only one of the Anchor Protocol. And you don’t talk to any customer service folks, because they don’t exist.

bitN8 1:03:59
If you’re not talking to Sam and me on this AMA, it’s not Anchor. [chuckle] And yeah, Anchor’s $17 billion now, this sadly, unfortunately, is not going to end, they’re going to ramp up their efforts. It’s just a huge bull’s eye for any hacker right now. So just even if you’re a degen native, make sure you’re bookmarking stuff. Make sure you’re hyper aware of what’s going on. Don’t be just half assed typing in “A” to your browser and expecting the first Anchor link to come up to actually be Anchor. Sadly, we’re not at that stage anymore.

danku_r 1:04:34
So the seed phrase I sent to bitN8_ was not you yesterday?

bitN8 1:04:40
[chuckle] Well, that was actually the Anchor admin.

danku_r 1:04:43
Ah, there you go.

Grover 1:04:46
Anchor customer support.

danku_r 1:04:52
And I think a lot of people have seen the last days, because yesterday one of those NFT guys that seems to be very important on ETH, kind of lost a ton off money, I think NFTs in the value of 1.7 million. But he was also using a hot wallet, right. I think we… Yeah, I don’t know, Shah, do you have already in Orbital Command, I know you have a lot of great content, just maybe to finish it up, something already on the topic of security and hard wallet? Maybe we can guide people also there because I think it’s getting more and more important, right, with so much value that is also on Terra now.

Shah 1:05:22
Yeah, we don’t have a video or a course. But I think that’s come up a lot in the last couple of weeks. And I think it’s definitely worth us maybe working on a video or a little site that kind of tells people how to do good OpSec for their personal finances. I think certainly, those of us been in crypto for a few years have seen a lot of this stuff already. So we’d like to think that we’re aware of it, but I think these guys are so creative and I definitely highly recommend everybody that is bringing friends into this space, especially because Anchor is such a great place to get people started in crypto, definitely when you’re bringing your friends into Anchor, into Terra, just remind them that these things exist and that they have to be super vigilant.

danku_r 1:06:05
Great one. You wanna take it away, Mr. Shah?

Shah 1:06:09
Yeah, I want to thank everyone for coming out. These are the discussions that help move Terra forward and bring out incredible ideas that move our community and our space forward. I want to thank the Anchor team, Nate and Sam, for coming out and the Retrograde guys for coming out as well. And danku_r, we love you, you’re a fantastic host for these Spaces. And then I will plug our own thing and kind of drop some alpha. So Orbital Command, as some of you may know already, is planning this huge Terra event that’s going to happen in Austin, Texas, the 9th and 10th of June. We have at least 35 dApps, or Terra projects that have already committed to coming and being present at the space and networking and meeting with people, and it’s growing every day. We’ve got some incredible sponsors lined up and I won’t kind of drop all the names of the alpha, but there’s going to be a TeFi Alpha event there as well. So it’s going to be the biggest Terra event to date. So if you are free around the 9th and 10th of June, I highly suggest that you think about coming to our event, you’re going to see a lot more promotional stuff coming out in the course of the next couple of weeks. But excited to share that with you right now that that is happening and it’s shaping up to be pretty incredible. Alright, thanks guys.

danku_r 1:07:43
Alright. I hope to see you there, ser.

Shah 1:07:47
Yes, ser.

bitN8 1:07:49
All right. Very exciting. Hope to see you all there. And everyone, thanks for coming. Have a great rest of your week.

Shah 1:07:54
Bye bye, everybody.

Finn 1:07:55
Thanks for checking out another episode of The Ether. That was the Orbital Command Space with Anchor and danku discussing the Dynamic Earn Rate Prop. Recorded on Wednesday, March 23rd 2022. This episode of The Ether was brought to you by Orbital Command, a community validator on Terra dedicated to educating, expanding, and promoting the LUNAtic community. Visit OC’s What We Do page using the link in the show notes to take advantage of some of their other educational resources including weekly meetups to discuss Terra protocols, strategies, and concepts, the Terra Luna Intel Report on Telegram, and YouTube explainer videos on Terra concepts. You can also support their community efforts by considering them next time you’re delegating or redelegating your LUNA. Find out more at This episode of The Ether was also brought to you by Luart. Luart is the first gamified NFT platform built on the Terra network. Luart provides a seamless minting and trading experience all while earning you rewards just for being a user. Be sure to follow them on Twitter and join the community in the Discord server for the most up to date news and announcements regarding all the hot new NFT launches, platform upgrades, and new projects hitting the secondary marketplace. Are you ready to #PutYourHelmetOn and join the movement? Find out more at This episode of The Ether was also brought to you by WeFund. WeFund is a community crowdfunding cross-chain incubator on Terra and it’s the first launchpad that implements a milestone funding release system to protect investors. All money raised for projects is deposited in Anchor Protocol and it’s refundable, and all decisions are based on community voting power. WeFund is community focused and designed to be a user friendly experience for both project creators and investors. Be sure to follow them on Twitter and join the Telegram for more information. Links are in the show notes and check them out online at TerraSpaces appreciates the support from all our sponsors. For, I’m Finn. Thanks for listening.