跌幅超百倍 曾经的DeFi明星协议Olympus DAO发生了什么？

Seeing him rise from Zhu Lou, seeing him entertain guests, seeing his building collapse, there are two hobbies for peach blossom fans to do research. One is to search for early projects with high quality and high potential, and to find their high-quality innovations. The other is to find out how those outdated projects have ebbed and flowed, and to analyze how they got up from high-rise banquets. This is to reflect on what happened to the star agreement that fell by more than 100 times. Today, we are going to talk about this guest named it, although the currency price has not returned to zero, it still seems to be the highest point compared with 2008. Some ups and downs have made it brilliant, and what doomed it to plummet. Listen to me slowly. In the preface, a key perspective is to understand the relevant mechanisms behind it and how they have affected the historical ups and downs of this token. From the initial rapid appreciation to the subsequent crash, it reveals the performance of its unique economic structure in the dynamic market. This paper focuses on discussing the initial core mechanism, including its strategy adoption. Analyze the operation principle that we can understand more comprehensively and the challenges and opportunities faced by the encryption market of similar agreements. The project introduces what happened to the star agreement that fell by more than 100 times. It is the original token of the agreement. Its purpose is to become a reserve currency with stable value. We can understand it as an algorithm. Compared with the algorithm aimed at controlling the price, the stable currency such as or the stable currency directly pegged to the US dollar, if only one is promised, it will get a price as a reserve. There is no upper limit control. It aims to achieve stability by maintaining stable purchasing power rather than fixed exchange value, and strives to reduce dependence on traditional markets and liquidity providers. Theoretically, the relevant protection measures are right. Through agreements, the value supported by these assets has been increased, and the price has been provided with practical support. Users lock specific assets in the agreement and establish a binding relationship. These assets are locked in the agreement as their reserves as exchange users to obtain tokens, which is actually ultra-short-term. Zero coupon bond allows users to get the tokens at a price lower than the market price, not all of which are immediately distributed to users, but gradually released during the so-called ownership period. This design aims to balance the market supply and price stability, and in this way, it increases the long-term value of its asset reserve, which is helpful to maintain, and the healthy development and mechanism of the agreement theoretically make the token value adjust through the automatic increase and decrease of the supply. When it is used together, the reward is usually distributed to users. It means that even if the total supply of tokens increases, the supply in circulation may not increase because these new supplies are mainly distributed to pledge users. For the pledgees, they will obtain their pledges in the agreement and increase the number by obtaining the so-called if the market value is higher than the target value mechanism, and the sources of these increases will be inseparable. When the bonds are sold, because the agreement stipulates that only one needs to be endorsed. The buyer's contribution to the reserve fund, excluding the amount distributed to the buyer, is regarded as the income of the agreement. When these incomes are generated, new ones will be cast according to these incomes, and then these newly cast ones will be distributed to the pledgee according to the agreement. For example, assuming that a stable currency with a market value of 0 can be purchased, the agreement will issue another token to this mechanism to protect the pledgee from the dilution effect of bond issuance, which is the main value accumulation and anti-dilution strategy, which also means that the agreement provides and controls the market. Comments on most liquidity projects on the market ask why only one endorsement unit price can climb to the above level. From the simplest point of view, selling a currency in large quantities will make its price fall, while strong demand will make it appreciate relatively. From the mechanism of cooperation, neither of them belongs to selling, even if it can theoretically increase supply and depreciate, but because no one sells, it will not have much impact on the price. Only more and more people will increase because of the crazy price provided. In addition, when it started to rise, the marketing of the so-called game theory strategy also turned into a natural choice for investors, which helped the price rise. What caused the collapse? Unsustainably high and high selling pressure were natural factors that attracted funds, but they also brought inflationary pressure. Once the market sentiment changed or the sustainability of the agreement was questioned, it would lead to the outflow of funds, which led to a collapse, and huge selling led to a sharp drop in prices. According to the experience of the market, once the algorithm currency hits the bottom from the high point, it is difficult to return to the original level without the support of the owner behind it. Although there are many assumptions behind the displayed game matrix, we can still simply modify its parameters under the condition that its assumptions remain unchanged, and we can see the clues. If people do not participate, they will theoretically get more answers. Under such circumstances, it is easy to get answers that are different from the official ones. What happened to the previous star agreement when it was balanced? It is no longer that investors reduce or stop the pledge, which leads to the decrease of the total amount of pledge of the agreement. When investors withdraw from the pledge, they will return to the market to increase the circulation supply, which may put downward pressure on the price of the agreement. At the same time, a large number of investors choose to withdraw, which may be interpreted by the market as a signal that they are not optimistic about the future, thus affecting the behavior summary of other investors. For designing an agreement similar to Ponzi, the short-term success basically includes the following strategies to provide high amounts, which attract a lot of capital to participate in the agreement. It provides a preliminary capital impetus to control the supply of tokens through relevant mechanisms, effectively preventing selling pressure, for example, by locking assets in exchange for high returns, reducing the circulation of tokens in the market, and at the same time reducing the selling pressure in the market by extending the capital release period. For participants who want to benefit from this agreement, the strategy may include adding the potential and risks of identifying projects at the early stage of the agreement, participating as soon as possible in order to obtain higher returns, making use of market fluctuations to invest and buying at low prices. However, it should be noted that this is accompanied by high risks, especially the uncertainty of the behavior of big bankers. Generally speaking, the success of this agreement depends on whether it can balance the high-return commitment to attract investors and the ability to maintain long-term sustainability. Participants need to carefully evaluate the potential risks and returns when they set foot in such projects. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=63015