📜 [專欄新文章] Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth
✍️ 田少谷 Shao
📥 歡迎投稿: https://medium.com/taipei-ethereum-meetup #徵技術分享文 #使用心得 #教學文 #medium
Once again the game-changing DEX 🦄 👑
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Outline
0. Intro1. Uniswap & AMM recap2. Ticks 3. Concentrated liquidity4. Range orders: reversible limit orders5. Impacts of v36. Conclusion
0. Intro
The announcement of Uniswap v3 is no doubt one of the most exciting news in the DeFi place recently 🔥🔥🔥
While most have talked about the impact v3 can potentially bring on the market, seldom explain the delicate implementation techniques to realize all those amazing features, such as concentrated liquidity, limit-order-like range orders, etc.
Since I’ve covered Uniswap v1 & v2 (if you happen to know Mandarin, here are v1 & v2), there’s no reason for me to not cover v3 as well ✅
Thus, this article aims to guide readers through Uniswap v3, based on their official whitepaper and examples made on the announcement page. However, one needs not to be an engineer, as not many codes are involved, nor a math major, as the math involved is definitely taught in your high school, to fully understand the following content 😊😊😊
If you really make it through but still don’t get shxt, feedbacks are welcomed! 🙏
There should be another article focusing on the codebase, so stay tuned and let’s get started with some background noise!
1. Uniswap & AMM recap
Before diving in, we have to first recap the uniqueness of Uniswap and compare it to traditional order book exchanges.
Uniswap v1 & v2 are a kind of AMMs (automated market marker) that follow the constant product equation x * y = k, with x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y in a pool and k as a constant.
Comparing to order book exchanges, AMMs, such as the previous versions of Uniswap, offer quite a distinct user experience:
AMMs have pricing functions that offer the price for the two tokens, which make their users always price takers, while users of order book exchanges can be both makers or takers.
Uniswap as well as most AMMs have infinite liquidity¹, while order book exchanges don’t. The liquidity of Uniswap v1 & v2 is provided throughout the price range [0,∞]².
Uniswap as well as most AMMs have price slippage³ and it’s due to the pricing function, while there isn’t always price slippage on order book exchanges as long as an order is fulfilled within one tick.
In an order book, each price (whether in green or red) is a tick. Image source: https://ftx.com/trade/BTC-PERP
¹ though the price gets worse over time; AMM of constant sum such as mStable does not have infinite liquidity
² the range is in fact [-∞,∞], while a price in most cases won’t be negative
³ AMM of constant sum does not have price slippage
2. Tick
The whole innovation of Uniswap v3 starts from ticks.
For those unfamiliar with what is a tick:
Source: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tick.asp
By slicing the price range [0,∞] into numerous granular ticks, trading on v3 is highly similar to trading on order book exchanges, with only three differences:
The price range of each tick is predefined by the system instead of being proposed by users.
Trades that happen within a tick still follows the pricing function of the AMM, while the equation has to be updated once the price crosses the tick.
Orders can be executed with any price within the price range, instead of being fulfilled at the same one price on order book exchanges.
With the tick design, Uniswap v3 possesses most of the merits of both AMM and an order book exchange! 💯💯💯
So, how is the price range of a tick decided?
This question is actually somewhat related to the tick explanation above: the minimum tick size for stocks trading above 1$ is one cent.
The underlying meaning of a tick size traditionally being one cent is that one cent (1% of 1$) is the basis point of price changes between ticks, ex: 1.02 — 1.01 = 0.1.
Uniswap v3 employs a similar idea: compared to the previous/next price, the price change should always be 0.01% = 1 basis point.
However, notice the difference is that in the traditional basis point, the price change is defined with subtraction, while here in Uniswap it’s division.
This is how price ranges of ticks are decided⁴:
Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf
With the above equation, the tick/price range can be recorded in the index form [i, i+1], instead of some crazy numbers such as 1.0001¹⁰⁰ = 1.0100496621.
As each price is the multiplication of 1.0001 of the previous price, the price change is always 1.0001 — 1 = 0.0001 = 0.01%.
For example, when i=1, p(1) = 1.0001; when i=2, p(2) = 1.00020001.
p(2) / p(1) = 1.00020001 / 1.0001 = 1.0001
See the connection between the traditional basis point 1 cent (=1% of 1$) and Uniswap v3’s basis point 0.01%?
Image source: https://tenor.com/view/coin-master-cool-gif-19748052
But sir, are prices really granular enough? There are many shitcoins with prices less than 0.000001$. Will such prices be covered as well?
Price range: max & min
To know if an extremely small price is covered or not, we have to figure out the max & min price range of v3 by looking into the spec: there is a int24 tick state variable in UniswapV3Pool.sol.
Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf
The reason for a signed integer int instead of an uint is that negative power represents prices less than 1 but greater than 0.
24 bits can cover the range between 1.0001 ^ (2²³ — 1) and 1.0001 ^ -(2)²³. Even Google cannot calculate such numbers, so allow me to offer smaller values to have a rough idea of the whole price range:
1.0001 ^ (2¹⁸) = 242,214,459,604.341
1.0001 ^ -(2¹⁷) = 0.000002031888943
I think it’s safe to say that with a int24 the range can cover > 99.99% of the prices of all assets in the universe 👌
⁴ For implementation concern, however, a square root is added to both sides of the equation.
How about finding out which tick does a price belong to?
Tick index from price
The answer to this question is rather easy, as we know that p(i) = 1.0001^i, simply takes a log with base 1.0001 on both sides of the equation⁴:
Image source: https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php
Let’s try this out, say we wanna find out the tick index of 1000000.
Image source: https://ncalculators.com/number-conversion/log-logarithm-calculator.htm
Now, 1.0001¹³⁸¹⁶² = 999,998.678087146. Voila!
⁵ This formula is also slightly modified to fit the real implementation usage.
3. Concentrated liquidity
Now that we know how ticks and price ranges are decided, let’s talk about how orders are executed in a tick, what is concentrated liquidity and how it enables v3 to compete with stablecoin-specialized DEXs (decentralized exchange), such as Curve, by improving the capital efficiency.
Concentrated liquidity means LPs (liquidity providers) can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish, which causes the liquidity to be imbalanced in ticks.
As each tick has a different liquidity depth, the corresponding pricing function x * y = k also won’t be the same!
Each tick has its own liquidity depth. Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Mmm… examples are always helpful for abstract descriptions 😂
Say the original pricing function is 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k), with the price of X token 1000 / 100 = 10 and we’re now in the price range [9.08, 11.08].
If the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is the same as [9.08, 11.08], we don’t have to modify the pricing function if the price goes from 10 to 11.08, which is the boundary between two ticks.
The price of X is 1052.63 / 95 = 11.08 when the equation is 1052.63 * 95 = 100000.
However, if the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is two times that of the current range [9.08, 11.08], balances of x and y should be doubled, which makes the equation become 2105.26 * 220 = 400000, which is (1052.63 * 2) * (110 * 2) = (100000 * 2 * 2).
We can observe the following two points from the above example:
Trades always follow the pricing function x * y = k, while once the price crosses the current price range/tick, the liquidity/equation has to be updated.
√(x * y) = √k = L is how we represent the liquidity, as I say the liquidity of x * y = 400000 is two times the liquidity of x * y = 100000, as √(400000 / 100000) = 2.
What’s more, compared to liquidity on v1 & v2 is always spread across [0,∞], liquidity on v3 can be concentrated within certain price ranges and thus results in higher capital efficiency from traders’ swapping fees!
Let’s say if I provide liquidity in the range [1200, 2800], the capital efficiency will then be 4.24x higher than v2 with the range [0,∞] 😮😮😮 There’s a capital efficiency comparison calculator, make sure to try it out!
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
It’s worth noticing that the concept of concentrated liquidity was proposed and already implemented by Kyper, prior to Uniswap, which is called Automated Price Reserve in their case.⁵
⁶ Thanks to Yenwen Feng for the information.
4. Range orders: reversible limit orders
As explained in the above section, LPs of v3 can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish. Depending on the current price and the targeted price range, there are three scenarios:
current price < the targeted price range
current price > the targeted price range
current price belongs to the targeted price range
The first two scenarios are called range orders. They have unique characteristics and are essentially fee-earning reversible limit orders, which will be explained later.
The last case is the exact same liquidity providing mechanism as the previous versions: LPs provide liquidity in both tokens of the same value (= amount * price).
There’s also an identical product to the case: grid trading, a very powerful investment tool for a time of consolidation. Dunno what’s grid trading? Check out Binance’s explanation on this, as this topic won’t be covered!
In fact, LPs of Uniswap v1 & v2 are grid trading with a range of [0,∞] and the entry price as the baseline.
Range orders
To understand range orders, we’d have to first revisit how price is discovered on Uniswap with the equation x * y = k, for x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y and k as a constant.
The price of X compared to Y is y / x, which means how many Y one can get for 1 unit of X, and vice versa the price of Y compared to X is x / y.
For the price of X to go up, y has to increase and x decrease.
With this pricing mechanism in mind, it’s example time!
Say an LP plans to place liquidity in the price range [15.625, 17.313], higher than the current price of X 10, when 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k).
The price of X is 1250 / 80 = 15.625 when the equation is 80 * 1250 = 100000.
The price of X is 1315.789 / 76 = 17.313 when the equation is 76 * 1315.789 = 100000.
If now the price of X reaches 15.625, the only way for the price of X to go even higher is to further increase y and decrease x, which means exchanging a certain amount of X for Y.
Thus, to provide liquidity in the range [15.625, 17.313], an LP needs only to prepare 80 — 76 = 4 of X. If the price exceeds 17.313, all 4 X of the LP is swapped into 1315.789 — 1250 = 65.798 Y, and then the LP has nothing more to do with the pool, as his/her liquidity is drained.
What if the price stays in the range? It’s exactly what LPs would love to see, as they can earn swapping fees for all transactions in the range! Also, the balance of X will swing between [76, 80] and the balance of Y between [1250, 1315.789].
This might not be obvious, but the example above shows an interesting insight: if the liquidity of one token is provided, only when the token becomes more valuable will it be exchanged for the less valuable one.
…wut? 🤔
Remember that if 4 X is provided within [15.625, 17.313], only when the price of X goes up from 15.625 to 17.313 is 4 X gradually swapped into Y, the less valuable one!
What if the price of X drops back immediately after reaching 17.313? As X becomes less valuable, others are going to exchange Y for X.
The below image illustrates the scenario of DAI/USDC pair with a price range of [1.001, 1.002] well: the pool is always composed entirely of one token on both sides of the tick, while in the middle 1.001499⁶ is of both tokens.
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Similarly, to provide liquidity in a price range < current price, an LP has to prepare a certain amount of Y for others to exchange Y for X within the range.
To wrap up such an interesting feature, we know that:
Only one token is required for range orders.
Only when the current price is within the range of the range order can LP earn trading fees. This is the main reason why most people believe LPs of v3 have to monitor the price more actively to maximize their income, which also means that LPs of v3 have become arbitrageurs 🤯
I will be discussing more the impacts of v3 in 5. Impacts of v3.
⁷ 1.001499988 = √(1.0001 * 1.0002) is the geometric mean of 1.0001 and 1.0002. The implication is that the geometric mean of two prices is the average execution price within the range of the two prices.
Reversible limit orders
As the example in the last section demonstrates, if there is 4 X in range [15.625, 17.313], the 4 X will be completely converted into 65.798 Y when the price goes over 17.313.
We all know that a price can stay in a wide range such as [10, 11] for quite some time, while it’s unlikely so in a narrow range such as [15.625, 15.626].
Thus, if an LP provides liquidity in [15.625, 15.626], we can expect that once the price of X goes over 15.625 and immediately also 15.626, and does not drop back, all X are then forever converted into Y.
The concept of having a targeted price and the order will be executed after the price is crossed is exactly the concept of limit orders! The only difference is that if the range of a range order is not narrow enough, it’s highly possible that the conversion of tokens will be reverted once the price falls back to the range.
As price ranges follow the equation p(i) = 1.0001 ^ i, the range can be quite narrow and a range order can thus effectively serve as a limit order:
When i = 27490, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹⁰ = 15.6248.⁸
When i = 27491, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹¹ = 15.6264.⁸
A range of 0.0016 is not THAT narrow but can certainly satisfy most limit order use cases!
⁸ As mentioned previously in note #4, there is a square root in the equation of the price and index, thus the numbers here are for explantion only.
5. Impacts of v3
Higher capital efficiency, LPs become arbitrageurs… as v3 has made tons of radical changes, I’d like to summarize my personal takes of the impacts of v3:
Higher capital efficiency makes one of the most frequently considered indices in DeFi: TVL, total value locked, becomes less meaningful, as 1$ on Uniswap v3 might have the same effect as 100$ or even 2000$ on v2.
The ease of spot exchanging between spot exchanges used to be a huge advantage of spot markets over derivative markets. As LPs will take up the role of arbitrageurs and arbitraging is more likely to happen on v3 itself other than between DEXs, this gap is narrowed … to what extent? No idea though.
LP strategies and the aggregation of NFT of Uniswap v3 liquidity token are becoming the blue ocean for new DeFi startups: see Visor and Lixir. In fact, this might be the turning point for both DeFi and NFT: the two main reasons of blockchain going mainstream now come to the alignment of interest: solving the $$ problem 😏😏😏
In the right venue, which means a place where transaction fees are low enough, such as Optimism, we might see Algo trading firms coming in to share the market of designing LP strategies on Uniswap v3, as I believe Algo trading is way stronger than on-chain strategies or DAO voting to add liquidity that sort of thing.
After reading this article by Parsec.finance: The Dex to Rule Them All, I cannot help but wonder: maybe there is going to be centralized crypto exchanges adopting v3’s approach. The reason is that since orders of LPs in the same tick are executed pro-rata, the endless front-running speeding-competition issue in the Algo trading world, to some degree, is… solved? 🤔
Anyway, personal opinions can be biased and seriously wrong 🙈 I’m merely throwing out a sprat to catch a whale. Having a different voice? Leave your comment down below!
6. Conclusion
That was kinda tough, isn’t it? Glad you make it through here 🥂🥂🥂
There are actually many more details and also a huge section of Oracle yet to be covered. However, since this article is more about features and targeting normal DeFi users, I’ll leave those to the next one; hope there is one 😅
If you have any doubt or find any mistake, please feel free to reach out to me and I’d try to reply AFAP!
Stay tuned and in the meantime let’s wait and see how Uniswap v3 is again pioneering the innovation of DeFi 🌟
Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth was originally published in Taipei Ethereum Meetup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
👏 歡迎轉載分享鼓掌
tvl crypto 在 台灣物聯網實驗室 IOT Labs Facebook 的最佳貼文
【專訪】人生就求九敗一勝!麻吉大哥黃立成跌倒再起,這次要用區塊鏈新項目CREAM勇闖DeFi世界
採訪:楊方儒、張詠晴/撰文:張詠晴
2020-10-29 16:15
「我覺得這就是我特色,可以跌倒,也可以繼續!」前人失敗的例子很多,面對瞬息萬變的市場,仆街了怎麼辦?該怎麼覆盤?黃立成坐直了說道,他當然想過會有再次失敗的可能,可即便CREAM可能會再度招來失望,他依舊無所畏懼,「因為要把理想變成現實,It's never easy!可是我不想要讓它阻擋我做新的事情。」
時代的洪流滾滾向前,90後世代可能不見得知道「麻吉大哥」黃立成,不曉得在1990年代海歸,把嘻哈音樂、饒舌、街舞元素帶進台灣音樂界的嘻哈先驅L.A. BOYZ是何方神聖。但總都聽過將素人變身網紅的「17直播」,知道有著台灣之光稱號,曾奪下電競《英雄聯盟》PCS職業聯賽冠軍的台灣電競團隊「Machi e-Sports」。
而這些都出自黃立成手筆,作為這些項目幕後的一大資金推手,他還曾經營過夜店及潮牌店、製作過國片、當過藝人經紀,更是一名台灣移動互聯網的先行者,先後推出過約會、交友、麻吉衣櫥等至少5款APP,這位大哥的事業很斜槓,斜槓到分不清楚哪個是他的主業。
但其實創業期間的起落,黃立成從沒少體驗過。
開夜店、拍電影、直播公司,還有幾個乏人問津的APP,以及近年來雷聲大雨點小,漸漸沒有了聲音的加密貨幣項目,都讓幾度慘賠的黃立成收斂起爽朗笑容,從中英台三國語言交雜的模式,轉換到中文模式,溫吞地說道,「那些失敗的沒有什麼人知道啦!就很像你寫一首很爛的歌、拍很爛的電影,但沒有人知道你失敗,因為沒人聽過、看過。」
談起這些失敗的項目,黃立成像談起自己一個個含辛茹苦拉拔長大,卻不成材的孩子。可他卻也沒因此停止嘗試,做十次新的嘗試,總會有九次失敗,但一次的成功往往是無數失敗的累積。
所以要讓失敗停止他向前?黃立成絕不接受!在接受《幣特財經》採訪這天,黃立成還興奮地說道,自己預備在M17賣出交友軟體Paktor之後,再瞄準疫情之後的「視訊約會」風潮,推出2個主打MVP推薦制、高端交友、夜間視訊、可添加濾鏡的新約會軟體,甚至考慮未來在其中加入虛擬貨幣元素,「我一直覺得Dating APP是一個還有很多空間進步的市場,畢竟現在有太多詐騙案件。」
從嘻哈藝人轉型成創業家的路上,黃立成一直和年輕人走得很近,也願意給年輕人足夠空間發揮,延攬人才不遺餘力,公司裡養著不少出自台大理工科的「台大底迪」。
「可以說大哥真的有放一些信任在我身上!」數位資產管理代辦平台Steaker創辦人Wilson如此說道。
Wilson從畢了業,就開始協助黃立成在區塊鏈世界中打天下,一手包辦了黃立成至今推出的三個區塊鏈項目產品設計、規劃與顧問角色。在他口中的「大哥」很願意聽年輕人說話,也常常親力親為參與產品的討論,當初甚至還是黃立成建議Wilson,可以放膽做想做的事,自己另外開一間新公司Steaker。
就像當年灑脫祝福直播APP《17》共同創辦人陳泰元有更好發展一樣,黃立成很開心Wilson可以在外闖出一番事業,也大手一揮,入主成為Steaker第二大股東,讓Steaker在成立初期就有豐厚資本。
黃立成之所以有「大哥」之稱其來有自,即便淡出演藝圈多年,他仍舊不改挺身為所愛的產業、為藝人出頭的大哥性格。從當年編寫饒舌歌曲《報應》捍衛台灣著作權法,到近日為挺藝人表演自由,不惜在臉書和網友開戰,先不論孰是孰非,黃立成態度始終不變,他依舊是那個富有正義感的街頭戰士,堅持做自己認為對的事,還是那一句「象來龍港款!來輸贏!」
不過自出道以來近30個年頭過去,黃立成不再將憤青個性,還有日常所思所想,融入歌詞創作並針貶時事,但他卻在這些年歲裡,把當年帶他走上舞台,這份無所畏懼、有話直說、盡情盡興做自己的嘻哈精神,帶到了新創領域,也在此將其發揮得淋漓盡致。
除了一邊打造年營收10億的17直播王國之外,2018年,黃立成也縱身躍進了區塊鏈領域,創立區塊鏈新創公司秘銀(Mithril),開發社交軟體App「Lit」,讓使用者可以用社交互動模式來挖礦,藉此獲得「秘銀幣(MITH)」作為獎勵。接著為打破如今音樂版權分潤不均的現況,黃立成也在去年,推出虛擬版權交易平台Machi X,讓粉絲可以透過虛擬貨幣或信用卡支持創作者。
不過黃立成後來發現,大家進來玩虛擬貨幣的原因,大部分都是希望可以藉此做投機生意,因此只會進行買賣交易,其實不太會利用MITH做支付。另外他也漸漸察覺,台灣民眾在乎版權的程度不高,其實不太願意為版權付費。
於是在今年8月份,黃立成跟上今年加密貨幣圈裡最夯的話題「去中心化金融(Decentralized Finance,DeFi)」,號召國內工程團隊,在以太坊上推出了去中心化借貸協議CREAM Finance。目前將資金放入CREAM的資金總額(TVL)為195,147,067美元,而平台上的月活躍用戶數(MAU)則達到23,015,CREAM也曾一度在數據網站DeFi Pulse上,名列全球鎖倉量第10大DeFi協議。
DeFi是什麼?Cream又在幹嘛?
早在幾年前,長期關注社群網路生態的黃立成,就曾多次抨擊Facebook和Instagram不尊重使用者的權益,他也在採訪中指出,抖音同樣有侵害創作者權益的問題,因為用戶上傳影片、獲得觀看數等作為,會讓這些App賺到廣告收益,但卻不會將這些錢,回饋給使用者甚至是創作詞曲的音樂人,「但在加密世界中,卻有這樣的觀念存在。」
「我認為Governance Token(治理代幣)的概念很酷!」黃立成強調,其實DeFi之所以能崛起,根本原因在於它「還權於民」,把用戶放多少幣、裡面有多少資金流動、賺多少收益的權利,從銀行這樣的中心化金融機構,轉移到了每一個持幣者身上。
正是因為被DeFi背後邏輯吸引,黃立成創立了CREAM Finance,這個貌似跟鮮奶油有些關係的項目名稱,靈感其實來自於美國嘻哈團武當幫(Wu-Tang Clan)的經典金曲《C.R.E.A.M.》,歌詞裡Cream指的是「金錢」。而黃立成則是把CREAM再多賦予了一層意義,即為「CRYPTO RULES EVERYTHING AROUND ME」的縮寫。
用嘻哈精神玩DeFi?
在嘻哈世界裡,鮮少有獨行的猛獸,更多的是成群結黨的好朋友,是各路人馬大顯神通,是為同一個目標,甘願一頭向前衝的純粹及熱血。而CREAM正是這樣一個一群人一起做,才能造出的成果。
原本黃立成想直接把CREAM建在主打高速交易、低成本的幣安智能合約鏈(BSC)上,而不是以太坊,但考量到BSC在9月才上線,可是由去中心化借貸平台Compound帶起的流動性挖礦風潮已經異常火熱,「還要等兩個禮拜欸!這樣我們等不了,所以決定先從以太坊版本開始做!」
決定上以太坊後,黃立成很快地先用Compound的程式碼進行分叉,推出CREAM,也在和Compound創辦人Robert Leshner相談甚歡後,決定給予彼此互惠條件,此後Compound順利成為CREAM的技術顧問跟資安夥伴。
「我弟弟聽到覺得不可思議,wait a minute,你複製他,但他還幫你備份?」黃立成笑著說道,其實大家都是秉持著「感恩的心」在做事,像是建立在以太坊上的Compound,原本想要把一部分的幣回饋給以太坊,CREAM同樣也是用這樣的心意在做項目,也因此得到了YFI創辦人Andre Cronje的背書及幫助,順利推出了全新AMM(自動做市商)CreamY。目前除了針對一般穩定資產提供低滑價、低費用creamY v1之外,也在creamY v2加入動態增減資產功能,以支援更多高收益穩定資產。
黃立成自信說道,「別人說我們就是double fork,no!我們是knife,一刀切,要走在最前面!」
而這樣的底氣也讓CREAM最終得償所願上了BSC主網,不過「CREAM以太坊版本」仍舊存在,用戶可以使用同一個Metamask地址錢包,透過轉換使用鏈別,CREAM的頁面上,就會自動顯示出符合各鏈別的使用畫面,未來CREAM也將開發讓用戶一鍵轉換鏈別的功能。
而由於CREAM的智慧合約歷經Compound備份及審核,並已通過雙方的無數測試,所以黃立成說自己對於資安機制有一定信心,不太擔心CREAM有被駭客攻擊的風險。
「不過半夜接到工程師打電話給我,還是會很挫!心裡想著不要是駭客拜託,有4億美金放在我們這裡欸!」黃立成說,現如今CREAM資金池內有不少資金,雖然不是自己的錢,都是投資人的錢,但對他而言,創立一個項目畢竟還是對投資人有責任,得要小心對待。
擔不擔心再失敗?
即便對於CREAM的各項發展充滿信心,但現在乘著DeFi熱潮向上攀升的項目越來越多,誰也不能預測,今天出現的新項目,究竟是產業中的領頭羊,還是只是另一個巨型泡泡,黃立成在推出CREAM之前,難道就沒想過失敗的可能性?
「我覺得這就是我特色,可以跌倒,也可以繼續!」前人失敗的例子很多,面對瞬息萬變的市場,仆街了怎麼辦?該怎麼覆盤?黃立成坐直了說道,他當然想過會有再次失敗的可能,可即便CREAM可能會再度招來失望,他依舊無所畏懼,「因為要把理想變成現實,Its never easy!可是我不想要讓它阻擋我做新的事情。」
一路走來,黃立成從不擔心自己的創業項目,會讓他付出多少資本,只擔心自己不夠快,沒跟上趨勢。
「我的態度是先打先贏,不要做你自己過不了的事情就好。」黃立成說,現在還沒有聽到監管部門要監管DeFi的聲音,那他就先做,要是未來有技術問題、法規問題,再來一個個解決。目標是吸納更多想進入DeFi世界的國際用戶,讓CREAM在這一年內達到十億TVL!
不過黃立成的終極目標還要更大些,他希望藉CREAM的成功,打響台灣優質工程人才的名號,「我們給人的印象,就是我們為了要做好事情都是不睡覺的,有那種要跟韓國、日本、美國,跟全世界打架的氣勢,我們一定可以打出一個地位!」
遙望未來,這個舉手投足間,都流露出悠然自在嘻哈魂的頑童笑著說道,或許一年後他就在好萊塢拍電影,不在虛擬貨幣圈了,不過只要他還站在這,就還是會不怕失敗也不放棄,持續追尋新趨勢,也會繼續招攬更多夥伴一起玩創新!
tvl crypto 在 TVL หรือ Total Value Locked คืออะไร?... - Bitazza Thailand 的推薦與評價
TVL หรือ Total Value Locked คืออะไร? TVL คือปริมาณมูลค่าสินทรัพย์ที่ถูกใส่เข้าสมาร์ทคอนแทรค หนึ่งในมาตรวัดที่บิทาซซ่าใช้ในการคัดเลือกเหรียญเพื่อมาลิสต์ใน ... ... <看更多>
tvl crypto 在 Crypto Unfiltered: The Game of 'Total Value Locked' (TVL) 的推薦與評價
Crypto Unfiltered: The Game of 'Total Value Locked' ( TVL ) ... Click here to read comments while watching the video. ... <看更多>