►
From YouTube: Governance and Risk Meeting: Ep. 57
Description
Governance
- Richard Brown: Ecosystem and Governance implications of Multi-Collateral Dai launch
- LongForWisdom: Governance at a Glance
Risk
- Cyrus Younesssi: The migration process and its implications for Risk.
- Vishesh Choudry: State of the Peg
We'll then spend the rest of the time in a general Q&A session.
Discussion Threads: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/660
Podcast version: https://feeds.soundcloud.com/playlists/soundcloud:playlists:623643288/sounds.rss
Summaries: https://community-development.makerdao.com/governance/governance-and-risk-meetings/summaries
Transcripts (Delayed by 48 hours): https://community-development.makerdao.com/governance/governance-and-risk-meetings/transcripts
Foundation Proposal: https://community-development.makerdao.com/governance/core-principles
Governance and Risk Framework - Part 1: https://community-development.makerdao.com/governance/governance-risk-framework/part-one
Website: https://makerdao.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/makerdao
Forum: https://forum.makerdao.com/
Chat: https://chat.makerdao.com/home
Email: info@makerdao.com
A
Well,
everyone
welcome
to
the
October
17th
for
most
people,
edition
of
the
scientific
governance
and
risk
meeting.
My
name
is
Richard
Brown
I'm,
the
head
of
community
development
at
Maker
Dao.
We
are
going
to
have
a
special
theme
to
call
today
we're
going
to
talk
about
migration,
which
has
been
a
hot
topic
in
certain
circles,
as
certainly
at
maker
dev
for
the
last
couple
weeks
before
we
launch
into
things
again.
Let
me
do
the
preamble,
then,
so
we
have
lots
more
people
in
the
call,
a
lot
of
very
interesting
opinions,
lots
of
interesting
viewpoints.
A
So
if
you
have
questions
or
comments,
please
feel
free
to
ask
them
interrupt
us.
We
don't
mind
if
you
don't
have
access
to
a
microphone.
Please
type
your
question
in
the
chat
at
the
side
and
we
will
read
that
when
the
opportunity
arises
and
or
we
can
deal
with
any
off-topic
questions
at
the
end
of
the
the
top
of
the
next
hour
when
we'll
spend
20
or
30
minutes
in
a
general
Q&A
session,
I
think
that's
the
it
for
my
preambles
right
now.
A
What
I
want
to
do,
though,
is
switch
gears
and
start
talking
about
something
that
is
interesting,
very,
very
interesting.
So
the
idea
is
that
for
the
uninitiated
we
have
launched,
we
didn't
much.
We
announced
they'll
launch
the
impending
launch
of
multi
collateral
dive.
That's
coming
up
soon.
We
have
five
or
four
or
five
calls
between
now
and
then
so.
From
a
governance
perspective,
this
is
rapidly
approaching,
and
so
there's
things
we
need
to
begin
to
discuss.
I've
been
warning
the
community
for
a
while.
A
I
want
to
talk
about
what
MCD
is
all
about,
because
it's
easy
to
lose
track
of
initialisms
in
this
space
and
what
their
implications
actually
aren't
so
multi
collateral
dieting
is
a
big
deal
for
maker
downs,
a
big
deal
for
the
protocol.
It's
a
big
deal
for
the
ecosystem
for
numerous
reasons.
It's
hard
to
actually
keep
them
all
in
your
head
at
once,
sometimes,
but
make
it
ultimately
what
it
must
make
a
Down,
MCD,
ultimately
symbolizes.
A
The
fact
that
the
maker
Dow
is
now
open
for
business,
and
this
this
is
represents
a
critical
shift
in
the
life
cycle
of
the
organization,
because
up
until
this
point
we
don't
talk
about
this-
that
much
but
yeah
anymore,
but
single
collateral
dive
was
a
proof
of
concept.
So
it's
a
beta
test
of
a
protocol
that
has
a
great
deal
of
aspirations
to
be
far
greater
than
it
is
right
now
and
the
thing
that
constantly
is
consoling.
A
The
back
of
my
mind
is
that
we
have
a
stable
coin
and
that
coin
is
remarkably
stable,
but
in
my
mind,
the
problem
with
that
stable
coin.
Is
there
isn't
enough
of
it?
80
million
died
in
circulation
is
an
achievement,
but
ultimately
for
from
on
a
global
stage.
That's
a
hobby
hobbyist
token,
that's
it's
beyond
niche!
A
What
MCD
allows
us
to
do
is
to
it
opens
up
the
door
to
taking
that
the
death
suing
that
we've
been
working
with
in
10
or
100
xìng
that
and
once
we
have
significantly
more
die
in
circulation.
We
will
begin
to
see
some
interesting
things
and
I
always
want
people
again.
It's
predicting
the
future,
but
I'll
do
it
anyway.
So
this
opens
the
door
to
allow
the
partners
that
we've
been
incubating
over
the
last
couple
years.
A
The
big
partners
to
finally
begin
to
engage
with
the
system
because
eating
on
the
dog,
80
million
diet,
is
a
nice
number,
but
pick
your
average
payment
gateway
and
that's
actually
just
a
rounding
here.
That's
not
going
to
be
enough
to
to
bring
significant
volume
and
liquidity
into
the
system.
So
what
we
need
to
do
is
we
need
to
expand
the
scope
of
our
operations
and
MCD
allows
us
to
do
that
by
allowing
us
to
add
more
collateral
types,
consistent
with
them,
isn't
I'm
sure
Cyrus
will
agree.
A
It's
as
simple
as
that,
it
also
includes
some
other
new
mechanisms
that
are
going
to
be
important
to
us
in
the
future.
One
of
the
things
that
goes
remarked
often
is
the
fact
that
the
stability
fee,
the
accrues
on
a
regular
basis,
as
opposed
to
hanging
out
and
waiting
for
dye
to
be
returned
to
the
system,
and
if
you
take
a
quick
tour
of
ethers,
dan
and
I
started
out
ethers
named
insted
app
and
the
tool
sets
they
have
there.
You
can
see
that
yeah,
the
single
largest
CDP
in
existence
right
now
has
just
broken.
A
The
700,000
died,
stability,
feat
outstanding
and
that's
something
that
isn't
reflected
in
the
day-to-day
metrics
that
we
gather
for
the
system
and
multi-core
oath
I
will
begin
to
see
those
things
on
a
regular
basis.
That's
going
to
be
a
big
change
for
us,
the
onboarding
of
new
collateral
types,
as
I
mentioned.
It's
a
huge
thing.
It
allows
us
to
begin
to
engage
with
the
real
world
and
that's
that's
going
to
be
important
for
the
for
the
future
of
the
ecosystem
and
particularly
for
the
future
of
our
protocol.
A
It
also
allows
the
maker
token
holders
the
governance
system
to
begin
to
build
a
portfolio
of
assets,
and
that's
that's
something
that
we'll
be
talking
about
in
the
future
more
than
we
have
in
the
past
because
of
portfolio
existed
aetherium,
but
the
collateral
asset
pool
the
collateral
assets
that
will
be
ingesting.
This
system
can
be
viewed
as
a
portfolio
and
they
have
a
relationship.
Those
assets
have
relationships
with
each
other.
A
They
have
relationships
that
somewhere
correlated
snow
run,
correlate
some
have
recourse
issues,
some
don't
they
need
to
be
balanced,
but
once
you
balance
those
things
you
end
up
gear
asking
and
the
perception
that
adding
additional
collateral
assets
and
increases
the
risk
in
the
system.
I
think
is
this:
in
my
opinion,
is
unfounded.
It
can't
be
ignored.
A
B
A
Itself,
what
we've
done
is
with
the
the
implementation
of
the
PSR,
we're
altering
the
base
layer
of
Defy
in
some
significant
ways,
we'll
see
a
currency
that
has
earning
baked
into
it,
learning
that's
value,
transfer
from
stability
fees
and
suitably
owners
to
stability
seekers.
That's
a
significant
paradigm
shift,
there's
also.
It
also
opens
the
doors
to
some
other
interesting
behaviors.
A
We
might
begin
to
see
where
one
of
the
primary
frictions
in
our
space
is
that-
and
this
is
by
design-
is
the
whole
point
of
this
thing,
but
every
activity,
every
action
on
chain
cost
and
incurs
a
constant,
and
when
you
want
to
employ
on
board
people,
explain
to
them
that
these
new
costs
are
a
great
thing,
can
be
a
tough
sell.
The
DSR
allows
organizations
the
players
in
the
Defy
space
to
begin
to
subsidize
or
explore
opportunities
for
subsidizing
activities
on
their
own
gaps,
which
is
it's
going
to
be
fascinating
to
watch
and
I'm.
A
Looking
forward
to
that,
so
we
have
a
lot
of
things
coming
on
with
MCD.
The
integrations
teams
are
hard
at
work,
coordinating
ecosystem
actors,
exchanges,
aggregators,
the
impure
of
the
world,
the
liquidity
providers,
helping
them
to
understand
the
complexities
of
what
it
is
that
we
have
coming
down
the
pipe.
A
The
entity
also
introduces
stronger
security
models,
and
these
are
things
that
definitely
outside
the
scope
of
the
time
I
have
allotted
to
me,
but
governance,
security
modules,
Oracle
safety
modules,
emergency
shutdown,
modules,
there's
there's
a
far
larger
tool
set
of
to
the
governance
ecosystem,
which
a
significant
number
of
levers
that
we
can
use
to
help
mitigate
risks,
the
system
and
incentivize
its
use.
So
there's
so
much
going
on
right
now.
A
But
ultimately
we
had
the
single
universe
to
deal
with
and
now
or
not
now,
as
if
keep
on
jumping
ahead
in
the
next
four
weeks
or
so
we're
gonna
have
two
universes
and
that
changes
things
for
us.
We'll
have
the
single
collateral
value
universe
and
we'll
have
the
multi
collateral
value
universe,
and
when
we
launch
multi
clarify
the
single
collateral,
die
universe
doesn't
go
away,
so
we
have
two
two
worlds
two
to
manage
here,
and
so
we
need
to
start
answering
some
questions
fairly
rapidly
and
in
the
chemicals.
Come
up.
A
No
surprise,
though,
to
people
that
have
been
in
these
calls
for
a
while
button
here,
I'm
not
going
to
provide
a
lot
of
answers,
but
I'm
going
to
provide
a
lot
of
questions
here.
Some
of
the
questions
we
need
to
figure
out.
How
long
is
this
group,
the
governance
ecosystem?
How
long
is
the
ecosystem
in
general
we're
going
to
support
these
two
universes?
How
long?
How
much
overhead
operationally
from
a
governance
perspective
from
the
ecosystem
perspective?
A
A
How
do
we,
as
a
governance
group,
remain
agile
enough
and
responsive
enough
to
respond
to
these
new
challenges
and
I'm
not
going
to
get
into
Cyrus
will
well
tell
us
about
those
new
challenges,
but
we
have
two
pegs
we
need
to
to
maintain
and
we
had
one
peg
before
so
two
pegs
twice
as
hard,
at
least
in
order
to
that.
Some
of
the
levers
that
we're
introducing
that
will
allow
us
to
maintain
the
multilateral
universe
are
going
to
be
new
to
us.
We
have
a
different
asset,
our
collateral
pipes.
A
We
have
the
addition
of
the
DSR.
We
have
a
new
set
of
oxygen
parameters.
These
are
all
things
that
we
need
to
begin
to
build
up
processes
and
figure
out
how
we're
going
to
manage.
That's
that
is
going
to
be
the
rule
of
or
the
order
of
the
day.
We
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do
so.
The
question
now
is:
how
do
we
move
ahead
in
a
way
that
guarantees
stability
for
the
ecosystem
and
ensure
success
of
the
protocol
allows
us
to
maintain.
A
If
you're
a
software
developer,
if
you're
lucky,
you
have
the
privilege
or
the
opportunity
to
release
an
application
and
that
people
uninstall
the
old
application
they
install
the
new
or
they
upgrade
in
place,
that's
complicated,
but
it's
not
the
worst
thing
in
the
world.
It's
important
to
understand.
That's
maker
Dow
is
different
in
many
ways,
and
one
of
the
ways
that
we
are
different
is
that
we
have
a
core
protocol.
We
have
various
supporting
networks
that
manage
their
argument.
That
protocol
like
the
Oracle
systems.
A
We
also
have
a
series
of
gaps,
though
that's
depend
on
that
or
or
that
core
protocol
directly
and
essentially
there
are
in
many
ways
and
I
might
be.
This
may
sound
like
a
modest
but
I'll.
Do
it
anyways.
You
can
consider
the
the
CDP
engine
and
the
the
diet
of
myself
as
being
part
of
a
core
API
for
the
defy
space,
and
so
that
means
we
have
obligations
to
the
rest
of
the
ecosystem
to
manage
this
upgrade
process.
A
Responsibly,
know
how
we
do
that
responsibly
is
ultimately
I.
Think
a
question
of
good
governance
and
the
risking
of
that
process
and
de-risking
is
not
my
it's
not
my
wheelhouse.
It
is
Cyrus's
and
the
risk
to
us
so
I
think
I'm
going
to
end
my
speech
of
lying
there.
That
was
more
than
I
had
expected.
If
people
have
questions,
please
feel
free
to
jump
in
and
ask
them
now
or
take
them
in
the
chat.
C
And
I
think
I'm
about
to
go
on
a
fairly
long
rant
as
well.
So
if
there
are
questions
either
speak
up
or
post
them
in
the
chat,
I'll
be
I'll,
be
keeping
an
eye
on
that
as
well,
but
I
think,
as
Richard
said,
there
is
plenty
to
talk
about
so
yeah
I'm,
just
gonna
get
right
into
it,
so
rich
I
think
did
a
really
good
job
kind
of
describing
all
of
the
new
improvements
and
upgrades
that
are
coming
with
MCD
and
I
think
there
are
even
more
that
he
still
has
yet
to
mention.
C
So
from
a
newcomer
perspective,
it's
fairly
straightforward.
I
think
we
can
all
expect
that
new
users
in
the
defy
ecosystem
will
probably
just
start
out
with
multi
collateral
die.
They
won't
necessarily
even
be
aware
of
kind
of
what
came
before
it.
But,
of
course
there
is
this.
This
big
question
of
the
existing
single
collateral
die
users
and
the
CDP
owners,
as
well
I
said.
C
Actually,
this
questions
has
been
around
global
settlement,
and
essentially,
what
is
the
lifecycle
of
single
cloud
will
die,
so
I
think
I
want
to
just
kind
of
tackle
that
from
the
start
and
get
that
out
of
the
way,
because
I
think
that's,
maybe
one
of
the
more
concerning
aspects
to
the
broader
community
and
the
broader
ePHI
ecosystem.
Although
I
don't
think
it's
one
of
the
biggest
issues
on
the
risk
side.
C
C
Ultimately,
the
MKR
holders
are
responsible
for
safeguarding
of
the
user
base
and
part
of
that
responsibility,
I
think,
could
involve
kind
of
trying
to
take
care
of
the
existing
users
as
optimally
as
possible
without
forcing
their
hands
necessarily
with
minimum
disruption
and
I
think.
Essentially,
the
idea
of
global
settlement
becomes
more
of
a
kind
of
a
almost
a
business
decision
than
a
risk
decision
per
se,
because
there
are
certainly
various
ways
to
go
about.
It.
C
I
think
our
job
on
the
wrist
team
is
to
kind
of
just
explore
the
various
proposals
and
describe
the
trade-offs
and
the
risks
involved,
and-
and
certainly
we
will
be
doing
that
in
the
in
the
coming
weeks.
I
do
I
think
I
do
want
to
say
that
multi-cloud
old
I
has
and
sort
of
been
the
kind
of
the
full
vision
or
realization
of
maker
Dow
from
from
the
very
start,
whatever
it
was
four
or
five
years
ago,
yes,
rich
said
sed
was
almost
kind
of
an
intermediary
backstop
of
sorts
and
I
mean
I.
C
If
the
community
really
wanted
to
keep
this
single
collateral
dye
product
alive,
I
think
there
are
various
ways
to
do
it,
one
of
which
rune
kind
of
had
mentioned
in
the
past
few
weeks
is
something
called
purity
dye,
just
kind
of
an
embedded
siloed
version
inside
of
MCD,
but
though
I
think
the
global
settlement
and
sed
discussions
are
there's
something
that
we
can
kind
of.
Keep
coming
back
to
over
the
coming
weeks
and
months.
It's
certainly
not
something
that's
going
to
happen
anytime.
Soon.
C
Migration
can't
be
forced
upon
anybody.
It's
not
just
gonna
arbitrarily
happen
and
yeah
I
mean
I
think
certainly
will
I
think.
Certainly
we
should
come
to
a
plan
for
what
to
do
sooner,
rather
than
later,
for
the
benefit
of
the
overall
ecosystem,
so
especially
kind
of
the
broader
defy
partner,
so
everybody
kind
of
know
what's
coming,
but
nothing
has
to
be
actually
enacted
in
the
immediate
future,
so
anything
about
dates
or
six
months
or
or
anything
like
that.
C
D
As
I
understand
it,
like
from
previous
governance
votes,
say
it's
a
stability
fee,
the
way
that
the
new
state
of
the
system
is
passed
say
we
want
to
enact
an
8%
stability
theme
we're
currently
at
10%.
The
votes
in
favor
of
8%
need
to
outweigh
the
10%
in
order
for
the
new
one
to
get
enacted.
That's
how
continuous
voting
works
so
for
global
settlement.
How
does
that
work
because
currently
I
don't
think
any
nkr
is
currently
voting
for
the
single
collateral
die
system?
So
how
would
a
global
settlement
vote
be
passed.
C
C
So
the
mechanisms
behind
how
global
settlement
is
triggered
I
think
is
a
bit
more
of
a
technical,
it's
kind
of
more
of
a
technical
aspect
than
a
governance,
one
so
to
speak.
So
I
think
the
general
idea
is
that
I,
if
the
communities
to
trigger
global
settlement
via
a
governance
poll
and
and
so
forth,
I
think
it
would
be
pulled
for
and
then
enacted,
I'm
actually
not
even
100%
sure
on
the
engineering
aspect
of
it,
which
is
I'm
interpreting
your
questions
so
I,
because
I
don't
want
to
kind
of
spread
misinformation.
C
I
would
defer
to
one
of
the
developers,
but
I
can
say
that
functionally
it
would.
It
would
occur
how
we
would
do
kind
of
any
standard
governments
poll
and
that
it's
a
community
decision
and
it's
not
something-
that's
just
going
to
arbitrarily
happen,
barring
any
of
course
other
attacks
or
technical
risks
or
whatever
I
know.
That's
not
a
necessarily
answer.
You're
looking
for,
but
I
think
that's
the
best
I
can
say
right
now:
okay,.
E
E
C
C
C
There
are
ways
that
this
could
go
less
than
ideally
so,
for
example,
a
very
naive
way
of
doing
a
migration
is
to
tell
all
the
sai
holders
to
sell
their
sai
on
the
open
market
and
then
buy
up
dye
right.
That's
just
a
very
kind
of
rough
way
to
do
it
and,
of
course,
you'd
end
up
causing
a
whole
bunch
of
slippage
volatility.
Just
be
it
just
be
kind
of
a
mess
all
around
right
and
similarly
for
CDP
owners.
C
C
This
really
awesome
tool
called
the
migration
contract,
and
this
was
actually
posted
a
few
weeks
ago
as
part
of
the
github,
when
I
just
posted
a
link
in
the
chat,
basically
in
upgrade
an
upgrade
guy,
a
migration
guide,
and
we
don't
really
get
any
questions
or
feedback
on
this
within
the
community
on
the
rocket
jet
anywhere
so
I'm
just
kind
of
assuming
no
one
has
really
read
through
it.
Yet
so
I'm
just
gonna
kind
of
explain
it
and
go
from
there.
C
C
C
C
I
have
a
hundred
sy
I,
can
deposit
into
this
special
CDP
and
draw
out
dye
against
it,
and
I'm
basically
done
on
my
way
and
then
rich
might
have
a
CD
rich
was
a
CD,
P
open
with
say
a
hundred
sigh
of
debt
can
basically
click
a
button,
and
the
migration
contract
will
take
the
side
that
I
had
deposited
use
it
to
pay
down.
His
death
move
his
cloud
over,
and
then
we
establish
a
CDP
with
an
equivalent
died
debt
of
a
hundred
and.
C
There
are
a
few
caveats
with
this.
First
is
that
there
needs
to
be
sy
in
the
deposit
contract
to
facilitate
the
migration,
so
I
have
not
migrated.
First,
then
rich
cannot
migrate
himself
and
then.
The
second
is
that
there's
the
issue
of
the
stability
fee
that
needs
to
be
paid
off
first
and
MKR,
because
that
is
the
only
way.
The
only
way
to
remove
collateral
is
if
the
the
MKR.
C
Governance
fee
has
been
paid
off
first,
and
so
the
migration
contract
will
essentially
check
your
wallet
to
see.
If
you
have
sufficient
MKR
and
if
you
don't,
then
it
will
actually
facilitate
purchasing
some
mkr
from
some
from
a
decks
like
oasis
in
the
back
end
and
I.
Think
there's
going
to
be
a
there's,
gonna
be
special
migration.
I'm
Kay,
our
liquidity
there
and
I
believe
that
the
integrations
team
is
also
releasing
a
a
is
open
sourcing
in
arbitrage.
Bot
that
can
run
on
the
decks
is
for
I'm
Kara
liquidity
as
well.
C
So
I
know
that
that
may
have
been
a
mouthful,
but
essentially
it's
it's
actually
really
simple.
Sigh
holders
can
migrate
with
one-click
and
CDP
owners
can
also
migrate
with
one-click,
given
that
there
is
Sai
in
the
deposit
contract
and
they
have
enough
em
care
to
pay
off
their
their
accrued
stability
fee.
B
C
B
C
Right
so
to
be
clear,
no
one
needs
to
use
the
migration
contract
to
migrate.
Although
it's
of
course
much
easier,
CDP
owners
could
migrate
manual
if
they
wanted
to
that
being
said
and
I
think
this
will
come
next
week
with
kind
of
more
specific
detailed
proposals,
but
pretty
much
any
sort
of
DSR
say
you
know:
2%
DSR
should
kind
of
prime
the
pumps
for
Sai
holders
to
want
to
migrate
over
prior
to
the
CDP
owners.
C
C
Yeah
we've
we've
done:
we've
done
a
fair
amount
of
work
in
kind
of
mapping
out
the
different
dependencies
and
what
we
can
do
to
get
ahead
of
potential
pitfalls.
So,
for
example,
I
mentioned
MKR.
Liquidity
on
on
the
decks
is
to
kind
of
prevent
any
major
slippage
from
occurring
during
the
CDP
migration,
sila
quiddity,
of
course,
and
a
few
other
things
as
well.
C
C
So
yes,
so
the
risk
aspect
of
it
is
it's
essentially
kind
of.
We
need
to
build
consensus
within
the
community
on
how
we
want
to
do
it,
and
this
is
kind
of
why
they
mean
rich.
Keep
referring
to
that.
This
will
be
a
conversation
that
cannot
finish
today
and
it'll,
probably
take
several
weeks
to
play
out
and
I
think,
hopefully,
next
week
we'll
be
able
to
put
out
some
specific,
some
more
specific
documents,
with
kind
of
scenario,
analysis
and
contingent
plans.
Essentially,
the
idea
is,
though,
at
least
one
idea,
which
is
possibly.
C
Optimal
from
a
perspective
of
safety
or
a
minimal
disruption
is
to
I
think
we
spoke
about
this
on.
The
rocket
chat
right
is
to
kind
of
have
the
DSR
positioned
in
a
way
that
we
can
kind
of
ensure
syla
quiddity
is
there
prior
to
CDP
owners
wanting
to
to
migrate
over
and
I
think
if
we
just
kind
of
take
some
care
with
the
with
the
DSR
I,
don't
I,
don't
anticipate
liquidity
issues
there,
because
I
think
I
think
there's
just
naturally
more
benefits
for
SCI
holders
to
be
migrating
over
prior
to
see.
A
This
is
anyways
what
I
was
referring
to
earlier
about
the
agility.
There's
going
to
be
some,
we
have
levers
available
to
us
and
it
depends
we're
largely
going
to
be
driven
by
the
activity
of
a
large
group
of
stakeholders,
excuse
motivations
and
actions.
We
can
act
completely
predict.
So
if
lots
of
people
move
lots
about
die
immediately,
we'll
have
to
respond
in
one
way
and
if
not
many
people
move
it
all
will
have
to
respond
in
different
ways.
A
E
C
There's
some
interesting
mechanics
there
as
well
in
terms
of
the
relative
price
of
sided.
I
sigh
should
pretty
much
never
be
below
the
dye
price
because
you,
because
you
can
always
move
from
side
to
die
using
the
special
CDP
and
then
the
reverse
also
holds
true
as
long
as
there
is
Sai
in
the
deposit
contract,
so
I'm
not
expecting
any
relative
price
deviations
between
Sai
and
I,
although
of
course
there
might
be
deviations
relative
to
the
dollar
peg
and
then
so
that's
where
we
have
to
start
thinking
about.
C
Well,
this
actually
just
kind
of
sags
into
my
next
section,
which
is
as
long
as
we
prepped
for
contingency
plans,
I,
think,
I'm,
confident.
Then
things
will
be
totally
fine,
but
some
of
the
things
we
have
to
worry
about
are
essentially
monetary
policy
for
for
Sai
and
die.
How
and
yeah
our
agility
with
governance
calls
if
we
need
to
increase
the
cadence
if
we
need
to
carve
out
any
special
procedures
for
any
kind
of
spontaneous
governance,
calls
should
the
need
arise.
C
C
C
C
What
be
an
interesting
thing
to
manage
right,
because
I
know
that
I
know
a
bunch
of
centralized
exchanges
are
essentially
getting
ready
to
do
a
upgraded
token,
whatever
they're
gonna,
basically
be
switching
from
sided,
die
and
I.
Believe
the
Oasis
app
is
also
a
move
from
site
to
die,
and
so
essentially
I
do
think
that
very
quickly
after
launch
die,
will
kind
of
have
a
very
sizable
chunk
of
liquidity
attached
to
it.
That
would
be
beneficial
for
CDP
owners
going
forward.
C
Of
course,
we'll
have
to
see
how
that
plays
out.
But
that's
that's
the
goal,
so
so
it's
I.
So
yes,
so
the
idea
is
that
there
are
there's
numerous
advantages
for
migrating
for
every
the
whole
ecosystem
right
and
then
we
just
kind
of
have
to
worry
about
the
edge
cases
and
build
out
some
contingency
plans
and
then
share
them
with
the
community.
C
All
right
so
then
I
guess
the
last
thing
I
want.
That
is
how
the
whole
migration
governance
cycle
plays
into
kind
of
the
more
standard
risk
models
that
we've
been
kind
of
building
up
to
four
MCD
for
a
while.
Now,
as
you
know,
myself,
vishesh
promotion
and
a
few
others
have
been
hard
at
work,
kind
of
building
out
some
collateral
risk
models,
and
these
were
supposed
to
kind
of
be
this.
The
standard
operating
procedure
going
forward
and
I
think
under
normal
circumstances.
C
C
Think
ensuring
the
stability
of
the
peg
is
the
primary
concern
kind
of
the
way
the
way
I
think
about
it
is
that
when
you
look
at
any
collateral
asset,
you
can
kind
of,
you
can
evaluate
it
and
determine
its
risk
premium.
But
then
you
have
to
balance
out
the
monetary
policy
aspect
afterwards
right
through
DSR
or
stability
fee
adjustments
and
of
what
we've
been
doing
all
year.
Really,
in
this
case,
doesn't
matter
if
the
asset
is
something
super
safe
like
Treasuries
or
whatever
something
super
risky
or
just
eath
or
whatever.
C
The
fact
that
we
are
bringing
in
such
a
potentially
large
amount
of
dye
at
inception
kind
of
necessitates
a
special
migration
risk
and
governance
cycle,
where
we
were,
we
kind
of
select
risk
parameters
that
are
most
suitable
to
to
that.
So,
for
example,
if
you
know
if
our
new,
if
our
new
stability
fee
was
designed
to
be
something
say,
5%
I
think
it
would
be
kind
of
careless
to
just
start
off
with
a
spread
that
large
and
trigger
some
enormous
amount
of
potential
refinancing
or
whatnot
right.
C
C
Which
probably
take
maybe
a
couple
weeks,
probably
through
mid-december,
at
the
very
very
earliest,
and
then
of
course,
we
hit
the
holidays.
So
my
expectation
is
that,
starting
in
the
new
year,
we
can
start
to
work
on
more
proper
risk
and
governance
cycles
and
and
and
and
we
still
plan
on
putting
out
all
of
our
documentation
in
the
coming
weeks.
I
just
don't
think
they
will
be
very
applicable
to
their
to
the
unique
situation
we're
facing
ahead
of
us
right
now.
So
so.
E
Cyrus
is
all
about
to
say
that
that
a
lot
of
the
parameters
that
are
going
to
be
there,
for
example,
like
with
the
eath
CDP
in
MCD,
are
gonna
be
set
in
a
way
that
is,
is
probably
conservative
and
more
safe,
rather
than
accurate.
So
like
the
the
risk
modeling
and
then
afterwards,
governance
can
tune
it
more
towards
the
actual
risk
models
that
those
collateral
types
and
parameters
kind
of
demand.
C
Yeah
yeah,
something
like
that
I
think
that's
just
along
the
lines
of
thinking,
oh
cool,
and
to
be
clear
what
those
migration
risk
parameters
might
be.
That's
still,
of
course,
an
open
question,
I'm
sure
we
will
revisit
this
discussion
next
week.
You
know
kind
of
after
the
communities
had
some
time
to
digest.
All
this
and
I
mean
if
you
spend
some
time
thinking
about
it,
there's
actually
multiple
ways
to
do
migration.
C
Kind
of
becomes
an
operational
question
of
what
is
what
is
our
objective?
What
are
we
trying
to
optimize
for?
Is
it?
Is
it
the
pace
of
the
migration?
Are
we
trying
to
get
this
in
as
fast
as
possible?
Are
we
optimizing
for
the
safety
of
our
existing
user
base,
which
is
what
I
would
expect
it
is,
or
something
else
entirely
right.
C
A
D
D
So
that's
interesting
to
note,
but
yeah
this
is.
This
has
been
a
pretty
steady
trend.
I
mean
you
can
sort
of
see
here
on
the
longer-term
graph,
like
the
the
majority
of
the
dye
being
traded,
is
trading
above
a
dollar
and
this
trading
about
halfway
between
the
dollar
and
the
dollar
and
cent,
and
with
a
few
moments,
sort
of
of
some
run
up
above
or
some
run
up
below,
but
generally
more
run
up
about
over
the
past
month
or
so
so
interesting.
D
When
we
spoke
last
week
we
kind
of
touched
on
was
there
was
this
recent
spike
in
the
amount
of
died
drawn
out,
and
we
were
curious
to
see
what
would
happen
to
the
supply
from
there.
It's
basically
sustained
most
of
that
run
up
and
then
come
down
very
slightly
with
a
few
large
whites,
also
a
few
small
draws,
but
more
or
less
standing
out
to
a
slight
decrease
in
supply.
D
As
far
as
collateral
goes,
so
there's
been
some
fluctuation
a
little
bit
more
than
usual
recently,
where
there
was
a
fair
amount
of
clutter
that
was
removed,
but
also
some
collateral.
That
was
added
netting
out
to
just
a
slight
increase
in
the
amount
of
collateral
in
the
past
week.
But
that's
just
following
a
a
slight
decrease
last
week,
so
basically
more
or
less
level
in
terms
of
the
amount
of
collateral
the
system-
and
this
is
following
essentially
a
slight
run-up
in
prices
and
then
coming
back
down.
D
You
know
maybe
a
majority
of
that
distance
anyway,
so
a
little
bit
of
a
parabolic
arc,
although
I
would
call
that
pretty
quiet
activity
just
going
back
up
some
of
these
longer-term
trends.
So
essentially
the
amount
of
collateral
being
blocked
has
kind
of
been
consistently
growing
over
time.
The
amount
of
collateral
that
was
being
removed,
as
we
noted,
was
growing
more
quickly
and
then
basically
around
August,
started
to
slow
down
and
has
maintained
that
slightly
slower
rate.
D
As
far
as
the
amount
of
dye
being
drawn
out
that
we
had
noticed
had
slowed
down
around
the
beginning
of
August
and
this
kind
of
maintained
that
new,
sustained
rate,
but
the
amount
of
dye
being
wiped,
also
slowed
down.
It
just
slowed
down
to
a
slightly
lower
level,
so
we
saw
a
slight
overall
increase
in
supply,
basically
over
the
past
month
or
so
jumping
over
to
a
couple
of
the
relationship
graphs.
So
essentially
again.
D
3D
solid,
sustained
relationship
between
eath
price
and
liquidations,
so
essentially,
when
we
see
these
more
volatile
moments
of
a
jump
following
a
dip
in
eath
price
that
tends
to
coincide
with
when
we
see
more
liquidations
occurring
so
very
few
liquidations
in
the
last
few
weeks
as
far
as
collateral
and
eath
price.
So
again,
the
users
of
the
system
tend
to
maintain
this
more
or
less
inverse
relationship
between
what
happens
with
eath
price
and
the
nominal
amount
of
collateral.
That's
put
into
the
system
so
effectively.
D
That's
risk
management
in
action
and
then
the
dye
supply
with
these
price.
So,
as
mentioned,
the
eye
supply
is
kind
of
fluctuated
a
bit
more
than
usual
lately,
even
though
the
eath
price
had
only
slightly
run
up
and
then
slightly
dipped.
So
it's
interesting
I
think
in
the
last
month,
or
so,
we
saw
a
little
bit
more
responsiveness
of
the
supply
to
changes
in
eath
price
curious
if
that's
kind
of
a
renewed
appetite
for
activity,
and
then
people
are
just
trying
to
find
the
right
prices
at
which
they
want
to
take
those
actions.
D
D
Usually
this
was
arbitrage
away
or
resulted
in
a
large
quantity
of
refinancings,
but
this
has
actually
kind
of
been
sustained
for
them
for
the
past
couple
weeks,
so
it'll
be
interesting
to
continue
to
watch
if
it
does
ever
dip
back
below
or
if
we
just
kind
of
hit
that
that
floor.
So
the
borrow
volumes
again.
This
contributes
to
why
there
hasn't
been
a
huge
change
in
those
rates.
D
The
supply
volume
has
very
very
slightly
increased
over
the
past
week
and
again
so
tiny
changes
in
borrow
and
supply
volume
leading
to
relatively
no
change
in
rates.
The
utilization
rates
again
very
slight
increase
in
the
XS,
so
a
very
slight
dip
in
the
utilization
rate,
but
yeah
actually
all
I'm.
All
pretty
quiet,
I
would
say.
A
Alright,
let's
let
people
stay
on
it
for
a
second,
then
just
another
reminder
that
we're
gonna
have
the
Q&A
at
the
end
of
the
call
collect
any
migration,
MCD
or
state
of
the
pet
questions
you
have,
and
then
we
can
get
them
all
taken
care
of
at
the
end,
there's
one
question
from
Aaron
fish
I
show
you
in
the
in
the
mood
for
giving
us
guidance
visits
may
be
the
day
when
you
tell
us
what
to
do.
I.
D
Mean
the
there
is
very
few
there's
very
little
activity
in
terms
of
the
metrics
in
the
past
week
or
so
so
that
really
to
me
doesn't
speak
to
any
need
for
any
changes,
especially
considering
the
fact
that
the
compound
bar
rate
is
still
above
the
civility
fee
so
like
to
me.
That
speaks
to
market
conditions
that
really
don't
assess
state
any
changes
at
the
moment,
but
curious
to
know
if
anybody
has
any
different
thoughts.
Well,.
A
A
Interested
in
continuing
to
lower
the
stability
fee
and
one
of
the
things-
and
this
isn't
a
leading
question
I'm.
Actually
this
done
so
I,
don't
understand
what
the
motivation
is
to
optimize
for
hundreds
of
a
percent
of
the
peg
and
maybe
I'm
missing
something.
So
do
you
think
that
it
is
there
and
there
people
just
naturally
inclined
to
want
to
like
create
some
symmetry
on
them
that
they'd
be
round
or
we.
C
D
As
simple
as
we
would
like
to
make
these
things,
they
are
always
generally
more
complex
than
we're
all
willing
to
admit.
So
one
of
the
things
I
would
consider
is
there's
trade-offs
to
everything
right.
So
if,
if
it
is
consistently
known
that
died
or
sigh
actually
trades
consistently
above
a
dollar,
then
my
guess
and
and
I
we
haven't
heard
from
any
market
makers
on
these
calls
in
a
little
while.
D
D
So
that's
definitely
a
trade
off
and
I'm
saying
you
know,
I,
don't
think
that
the
people
that
generally
are
always
pushing
for
the
stability
fee
to
be
lowered
are
necessarily
consisting
that
I
love
that
looks
just
shared.
That
transaction,
the
timing
is
perfect,
but
yeah
I
mean
so
there
there
are
people
that
are
consistently
pushing
for
rate
decreases,
I'm,
not
sure
that
those
people
are
necessarily
considering
that
use
case,
but
there
are
also
people
on
both
sides
of
the
the
peg
I
guess
that
that
are
equally
polarized
right.
D
So
that's
what
I've
noticed
about
the
maker
communities,
it's
very
good
at
polarizing
opinions,
and
so,
like
you,
have
those
that
are
consistently
always
pushing
for
a
decrease,
and
you
have
those
that
are
consistently
always
pushing
for
an
increase
and
what
I've
noticed
at
least
from
chats,
Twitter
etc.
Is
that
it
tends
to
be
like
one
group
that
has
a
dominant
voice
at
the
time
and
then,
at
a
later
time,
other
groups
will
have
a
dominant
voice
and
it
kind
of
switches
off
and
kind
of
a
funny
thing
to
observe.
D
But
I
think
at
the
moment
it
we're
kind
of
in
a
state
where
those
that
are
pushing
for
an
increase
feel
more
comfortable
being
louder.
I,
sorry,
you're
pushing
for
a
decrease,
our
feel
more
comfortable
being
a
bit
louder.
I
think
that's
one
of
the
things
that
we
do
tend
to
notice
at
this
time.
I
don't
know
if
it's
necessarily
because
they're
chasing
you
know
two-tenths
of
a
percentage
point
on
dye,
our
on-site
peg
so
much
as
well.
D
It
makes
the
use
case
of
drawing
out
more
supply
a
little
bit
more
attractive
and
I'm
sure
it
makes
certain
lines
of
business
and
certain
products
a
little
bit
easier,
because
there's
a
little
bit
less
cost
and
I
would
guess
that
that
would
be
more
of
the
motivation.
I,
but
I
do
think.
A
lot
of
people
tend
to
use
the
the
maintenance
of
the
peg
as
a
justification.
I,
wouldn't
imagine
that's
what
everyone's
always
optimizing
for.
A
It's
an
interesting
thing
to
watch
yeah
I,
the
I
think
this
is
something
we're
gonna
see
more
and
more
of
in
the
future.
Is
that
this
a
brighter
line
between
the
Hawks
and
the
doves
and
the
CP
owners
and
I
hope?
There's
no
arrests
with
it
yeah
I
guess
maybe
I
wasn't
looking
at
it
as
deeply
as
you
obviously
happened.
I
was
wondering
if
there
was
just
people
failing
to
zoom
out
far
enough
on.
C
A
B
Yeah,
it's
not
been
demos.
There's
not
been
that
much
discussion
on
the
forums.
It's
been
pretty
quiet
again,
I
didn't
know,
folks,
like
Def,
Con,
hangover
or
or
just
people
are
kind
of
shell-shocked
from
the
MCD
announcement,
but
but
yeah.
So
there's
been
a
little
bit
discussion
about
the
some
of
the
collateral.
Awarding
proposals
like
the
fund,
one
especially
bunch
of
people
were
discussing
that
and
then
Alex's
third
about
the
pide
got
revived
a
couple
of
worlds.
Mister,
some
thoughts
on
that.
B
B
See
ya
we
had
56%
I
was
remembering
rights
consensus
to
go
with
option
3,
which
was
commitment
to
increase
the
sed
debt
ceiling
by
10
million
each
time
the
total
supply
of
Dyer
comes
within
10
million
of
the
current
debt
ceiling,
which
is
interesting
because,
rather
than
being
a
single
thing,
that's
that
we
can
now
do.
This
is
kind
of
ongoing
commitment
that
someone
needs
to
need
so
up
like
operate
so
I
guess.
What's.
B
B
Exactly
and
I
think
it's
probably
good,
because
it's
leading
us
away
from
doing
lots
of
government
sites
which
it's
kind
of
beneficial,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
way
for
everyone,
so
so
yeah
I
don't
know
if
we'll
see
more
of
that
coming
up,
maybe
with
the
migration,
but
we'll
see
how
it
goes
specifically
with
this
one
like
implementation
kind
of
comes
down
to
us.
Probably
you.
A
Know
more
work
for
me:
I
guess
so.
This
raises
some
really
interesting
questions,
though,
because
the
the
language
in
these
debates
or
these
discussions
that
we
have
in
the
forums
are
important
because
changing
the
language
and
or
modifying
them
at
the
eleventh
hour
can
be
viewed
as
being
shade,
I,
guess
or
manipulating
government,
so
that
the
way
that
the
process
was
framed
is
in
SCD.
A
We
will
do
this
and
into
this,
and
that's
the
example
was
to
raise
it
that's
and
when
we
get
close
to
the
debt
ceiling.
So
the
question
I
think
for
the
community
right
now
is:
is
this
something
that
we
still
feel
strongly
about?
In
light
of
the
fact
that
the
migration
is
coming
and
MTD
launch
is
coming,
there's
obviously
pros
and
cons
on
both
sides
that
need
to
be
discussed.
A
A
single
cloud
or
psy,
as
various
I
should
get
on
on
script
here,
so
I
might
be
around
for
a
while.
So
there's
it's
entirely
possible
with
the
destiny
will
still
need
to
be
managed
of
all
things
go
according
to
plan.
Presumably
every
week
the
debt-ceiling
narrative,
the
amount
of
circulating
side
will
decrease.
That's
so
and.
C
We
wanted
to
kind
of
help,
Shepherd
this
migration
and
potentially
minimize
any
risks
associated
with
it
right
and
so
one
one
asset.
One
aspect
there
might
be
to
actually
reduce
the
debt
ceiling
every
few
weeks.
Right-
let's
say,
let's
say
this:
I
Supply
has
dropped
to
60
million.
Then
maybe
at
that
point
you
consider
reducing
the
side
debt
ceiling
from
100
to
80,
for
example
like
it.
C
If
that's,
what
was
perceived
to
be
the
safer
migration
strategy
that
I
really
wanted
to
go
with
so
there's
kind
of
competing
competing
strategies
here
for
how
we
want
to
deal
with
so
I.
That
is
entirely
dependent
on
the
appetite
or
the
pace
of
migration
and
the
safety
of
migration
that
that
we
want
to
set
collectively
right
because,
like
let's
say
size,
the
buys
down
to
20
million,
and
you
leave
that
80
million
buffer.
There
then
right,
you
could
conceive
of
some
issues
there,
so
yeah.
What.
A
C
Well,
I
know
for
I
know
for
MCD
it's
it's
definitely
a
risk
due
to
the
Oracle
security
module,
the
one
hour
delay.
So
if
there's
a
huge
price
crash,
well,
let's
say
NASA
drops
to
zero.
Then
anyone
would
have
an
hour
to
basically
max
out
the
the
borrowed
die
before
the
price
feed
reflects
it
and
the
more
empty
debt-ceiling
room
there
is
the
more
they
can
abuse
that
so
certainly
an
MCD
there
has
to
be
kind
of
as
minimal
slack.
That
is
tolerable.
There.
C
Apply
to
a
CD
but
I
think
just
in
general,
like
you,
wouldn't
want
to
leave
open
this
scenario
where
someone
can
just
create
80
million
die,
80
million
sigh
right,
I
haven't
exactly
thought
it
through
them.
Generally
speaking,
it's
just
an
idea.
I'm
not
saying
we
that's
the
right
right
path
to
go,
but
I
think
now,
with
the
migration
and
with
MCD,
launched,
certainly
room
for
re-evaluating
the
debt
ceiling
poll
as
it
was
put
forth.
The
community.
B
C
B
E
B
C
C
If
it's
better,
that's
a
great
point
and
I
think
the
answer,
at
least
in
my
opinion,
certainly
has
to
do
with
mkr
holders
and
their
prerogative
to
manage
kind
of
the
entire
maker
Dow
ecosystem
in
the
manner
that
they
think
is
best
for
the
community
for
dye
holders
for
M
care
holders
for
everybody
right
both
from
risk
perspective
and
a
growth
perspective
and
and
so
on.
Well,
the
interesting
question.
A
Here
is
what
does
convergent
the
I
hate
to
do
this.
This
is
what
married
to
do
all
the
time,
but
what
does
converge
actually
mean
so
it
like
it's
not
going
to
be
binary,
we're
not
going
to
I,
don't
think
we're
ever
going
to
reach
a
point
where
there's
literally
zero.
So
if
you
lating
sigh
right,
that's
at
some
point
you
have
to
the
community
needs
to
decide
like
okay,
like
at
this
point,
1
million
circling
site
is
this
now
and
officially
it
dead
ecosystem.
In
that
we
have
to
do
something
about
that.
A
C
I
mean
I
think
some
some
best
best
estimates
are
had
to
do
with
kind
of
liquidity.
Transaction
volume
transaction
count
that
kind
of
stuff
what
the
thresholds
are
think
we
can.
We
can
figure
out
later,
but
actually
I,
think
the
person
I
I,
think
the
the
kind
of
the
interesting
part
of
that
question
actually
is
just
a
variant
of
why
MCD
in
the
first
place.
Why
do
we?
Why
do?
Why?
Does
anybody
need
to
upgrade
to
MCD
if
SC
D
is
working?
Just
fine
and
I
do
think
that
there
are.
C
E
C
C
C
Like
hard
parameter,
estimates
for
for-4
MCD
risk
parameters
for
not
only
for
eath
but
for
the
special
sized
CDP,
as
well
as
what
isn't
certainly
intended
to
be
a
launch
collateral
type,
which
is
a
that
basic
attention.
Token,
so,
I
think.
Next
week
we
can
kind
of
maybe
put
out
a
plan
for
good
risk
parameters
with
the
objective
of
a
safe
migration.
I
think
the
week
after
that.
E
E
A
C
F
Have
run
through
that
that
was
not
plan
that
I
was
intending
to
leave
all
the
work
to
you
guys,
but
the
white
paper,
the
white
paper,
it's
kind
of
a
big
word.
What
it
will
be,
probably
is
just
an
a
corrected
version
of
the
the
white
paper.
That's
currently
online
and
linked
on
our
website
and
I
know.
Runa
has
been
working
on
it
when
it
will
be
ready,
I'm,
not
sure
it's
something
yeah
yeah.
F
F
C
A
F
E
E
A
E
A
F
The
the
corrected
papers-
it's
something
that
we
can
I,
can
get
out
pretty
quickly.
I
think
one
other
thing
to
note:
that's
important
is
that
usually
the
white
paper
it
functions
as
documentation
right,
but
of
course,
since
we're
in
the
situation
where
things
have
already
been
implemented,
we
have
we
actually
have
much
more
specific
documentation
with
all
the
details
that
you
would
usually
look
into
the
white
paper
for
but
yeah
we
have
the
the
specific
technical
documentation.
F
A
F
Yeah,
the
the
white
people
definitely
does
not
imply
code
freeze,
it
implies
freeze
of
the
functionality,
but
that's
something
very
different,
and
so,
as
we
are
progressing
through
our
security
roadmap.
So
we
are
still
processing
the
results
of
the
the
different
audits
that
we've
done
and
we're
still
like
changing
some
minor
details,
as
as
we
are
working
through
the
exact
mechanisms
of
definitely
of
the
migration
and
also
how
the
smart
contracts
interact
with
the
higher-level
layers.
F
So
the
functionality
won't
change
anymore.
It's
just-
and
there
might
be
some
details
that
change
like
maybe
an
additional
method
being
added
to
disbar
contracts
for
convenience
reasons
or
a
specific
event
being
emitted
that
because
it
was
really
difficult
to
get
some
particular
piece
of
data
from
the
smart
contracts,
those
kind
of
things
and
then
up
with
the
security
improvements
like
additional
assertions,
additional
checks,
whatever
things
that
are
strictly
speaking,
not
necessary,
but
that
are
just
an
improvement
in
terms
of
security
and
reliability.
F
F
Yeah
and
I
guess
the
the
reason
why
people
would
say
that,
after
the
security
audits
that
there
will
be
no
changes,
anymore
is
because
then
you
might,
if
it's
a
significant
change,
then
you
might
have
to
redo
like
part
of
the
security
audit,
but
those
are
not
definitely
the
kind
of
changes
that
we're
still
doing
so.
The
changes
are
very
minimal
and
specific
to
these.
F
E
Maybe
another
question
for
you
out
or
would
be
the
status
of
formal
verification
on
the
contracts
outside
of
the
core
contracts
would
like.
What's
the
process,
I
know
that
not
all
the
contracts
with
mcg
launch
are
formally
verified
and
that's
okay,
but
what's
the
process
of
like?
Is
it
just
like
a
sign-off
or
if
we
do
want
them
to
be
formally
verified
or
like
improve
the
code
somehow
post-launch
would
there
need
to
be
like
governance
actions
to
amend
that
code,
yeah.
F
Yes,
so
we're
at
a
point
where
the
core
contracts
are
formally
verified
and
the
most
important
ones
outside
of
that
core.
In
particular,
we
do
have
a
contract,
that's
called
the
CDP
manager,
which
is
like
and
a
front-end
contract.
That
makes
it
more
convenient
to
use
the
functionality
of
the
core
and
that
one
will
also
be
formally
verified.
F
But
contracts
cannot
be
formed
fully
formally
verified
because
it
would
imply
full
formal
verification
of
the
entire
token
contract
and
the
system
that
sits
behind
it
right
so
that
that's
the
kind
of
restrictions
I
was
talking
about.
That
being
said,
our
security
roadmap
is
an
ongoing
effort,
so
our
bug
bounty
program,
for
example,
will
continue
unchanged
until
you
after
the
launch.
So
there
is
no
end
date
and
as
we
will
be,
adding
additional
modules
to
the
system,
and
indeed
those
will
have
to
be
voted
in
through
governance.
E
Nice
thanks
and
then
I
have
one
more
question.
Sorry
for
keeping
you
guys
so
long,
but
the
in
regards
to
Diaz
chief
and
how
voting
is
gonna
happen
between
both
systems?
Is
it
gonna
be
one
d
s
chief
controlling
the
two
systems?
Is
that
like
on
a
technical
level,
yeah?
What's
the
role
of
DS
chief?
Is
there
gonna
be
two
DS
Chiefs
or
yeah.
F
As
you
might
remember,
the
core
contracts
have
been
designed
from
the
ground
up
in
a
way
that
is
particularly
well
suited
for
formal
verification.
This
wasn't
done
for
D
s
chief,
so
we
would.
If
we
would
create
a
new
formal,
verified
version,
then
it
would
be
slightly
different.
The
functionality
would
be
the
same,
but
the
code
would
be
different
now
I'm.
F
So
what
we
want
to
do
is
once
once
the
system
has
been
deployed
in
the
beginning,
it
will
be
tested,
ESG
version
that
we
have
current
in
line
and
then
at
one
point
in
the
future,
we
would
upgrade
to
a
new
formally
verified
version
of
D
as
chief
one.
That
might
also
add
some
additional
functionality
to
improve
the
upgrading
process,
because,
as
we
are
progressing
in
our
thinking
about
these
systems,
what
we
are
paying
more
and
more
attention
to
is
upgrade
ability
and
obviously
we're
learning
from
experiences
such
as
the
GST
upgrade.
F
That
happened
some
time
ago,
due
to
the
vulnerability
that
was
this
discovered
and
yeah.
We
saw
that
it.
It
wasn't
the
easiest
thing
to
upgrade
to
yes,
chief
and
we
could
actually
think
about
some
mechanisms.
First
of
all,
as
I
mentioned
formally
verify
it
and
then
secondly,
to
do
also
facilitate
the
upgrading
process.
So
yeah
we're
still
very
much
thinking
those
things
true,
but
that
is
something
that
we're
planning
to
do
at
one
point
got.
E
It
so
am
I
right
in
saying
that
the
governance
of
the
two
systems
will
still
be
able
to
be
handled
by
one
dashboard
and
that,
like
I,
know
our
product
team.
We
discussed
on
the
off
site
that
boats
and
stuff
will
be
tagged
with
like
SC
D
versus
MCD,
but
everything
will
basically
be
handled
on
on
one
contract,
so
the
governance
will
not
be
like
fractured
in
any
way
between
systems.
Migration,
yes,.
E
A
That
might
be
a
good
place
to
end
things
for
the
week.
That
was
an
action-packed
fall
lots
of
information
to
process.
As
we
talked
about
the
top
of
the
hour,
the
previous
hour,
we're
going
to
be
launching
into
a
migration
cycle
for
governance,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
things
to
discuss
and
Cyrus
will
be
bringing
us
some
more
information.
F
A
Some
more
resources
to
the
next
column.
We
can
begin
digging
in
to
the
the
mechanics
of
the
operation.
So
it's
going
to
be
a
good
call,
so
I
look
forward
to
seeing
everybody
again
next
week,
Thank
You
Cyrus
through
your
recap:
Thank
You
uncle
wisdom
and
vishesh
for
your
summaries
as
well
Thank
You
louder
for
providing
a
technical
insight,
I'm
going
to
actually
invite
you
explicitly
to
all
these
calls
from
now
on
so
enjoy
that,
and
thanks
ivory
for
joining
us
see
you
next
week.