Rune Christensen, the founder of MakerDAO, tweeted: Oracle is a key infrastructure, isn’t diversity better?
Written by: Rune Christensen, @ChainlinkGod.eth 2.0, MakerDAO founder and Chainlink community ambassador, respectively. Translation: Lu Jiangfei
The most important DeFi protocol Maker on Ethereum and the most important oracle project Chainlink had a conflict between you and me, which caused a lot of controversy.
First, the important opinion leader in the Chainlink community and the Chainlink community ambassador “@ChainlinkGod.eth2.0” said on Twitter:
“The @MakerDAO oracle seems to sell the exclusive right to publish price data on the chain to a group of insiders. This group of insiders is the only entity that can immediately use the MakerDAO oracle to liquidate the position of the agreement. In this way, you can earn Take millions of dollars.”
@ChainlinkGod.eth2.0 wrote:
“The Maker oracles are either selling the liquidation rights to the Flashbot/BloXroute robot, or are using their power to obtain all the liquidation fees. This is because the MakerDAO oracles just sign the price data off-chain and only need a repeater to transfer it. Publish to the chain.
MakerDAO’s oracles allow MEV to be extracted from the agreement for liquidation. In contrast, Chainlink oracles publish price data directly on the chain, so the agreement can guarantee that liquidation is permission-free (such as Aave and Compound). “
@ChainlinkGod.eth2.0’s remarks aroused a lot of approval, and some people think that the statement is not accurate enough.
Later, MakerDAO founder Rune Christensen posted a tweet expressing his dissatisfaction with Chainlink, the oracle service provider. He said:
“When I claimed that there would be no Chainlink without Maker, I am very sorry for those who feel hurt. Obviously, I am a bit exaggerated when I say this, but I hope the Chainlink community can look at all the hatred spread in posts on different topics, and renew Consider whether it is a good marketing strategy.
Undeniably, Maker pioneered the medianizer decentralized oracle design and the off-chain aggregation design, and Chainlink also adopted these two designs. There is no doubt that Chainlink has paid attention to the features that Maker has already delivered and has benefited from it.
I certainly have no objection to this, in fact this is the whole point of open source and blockchain! But I just don’t understand why the Chainlink community has been attacking Maker as a target for many years, and it has spread many lies and hatred…
All these “crimes” are committed by this decentralized oracle network that claims to be the longest time allowed in the world. Does anyone really want only one oracle to monopolize all top DeFi agreements? As a critical infrastructure, isn’t diversity better? “
In response, @ChainlinkGod.eth2.0 also responded, saying:
“I still have some follow-up content, because on this issue, some of my previous thoughts may be wrong, and now I need to make some clarifications.
I want to say that I am a fan of MakerDAO and have never attracted any hatred. I have seen some relevant information and hope to bring transparency. Given the additional background, it is not as bad as I originally thought, and I am sorry for the confusion that has been caused.
My understanding is that before other people can access the data and route it through the private memory pool, the Maker oracle data update will be bundled with the dYdX clearing in the same transaction. But there are background situations that I don’t know.
Before the Libp2p integration was completed, the licensed Scuttlebutt network was a temporary fix to the previous problem. The use of Flashbots relay caused the price data to not be placed in the public memory pool, which is the reason for this type of transaction.
I know very well that the Maker Oracle does not and will not sell exclusive rights to signed price data. However, the transactions we have seen are only the result of specific circumstances. There is logical engineering reasoning behind this structure. “
Source link: twitter.com
Disclaimer: As a blockchain information platform, the articles published on this site only represent the author’s personal views, and have nothing to do with the position of ChainNews. The information, opinions, etc. in the article are for reference only, and are not intended as or regarded as actual investment advice.
