If DeFi is not casually providing you with financial services that were almost exclusive to the elites, it’s not DeFi

Share:

One of the worst things I hate about NFTs is the doxxing, you got one of the hottest NFTs on the market? try flexing it without showing everyone what you own. Even if you get rid of that NFT, the fact that it’s so unique makes it traceable back to your wallet.

What do we do then to regain back anonymity in a space that’s being dominated by non fungible, uniquely identifiable tokens? We turn to zero knowledge proofs. The thing about ZK is that it’s so versatile beyond just scaling, it can be used to mask an individual’s identity regardless of how known the NFT they hold is. Polygon is demonstrating how this can be done with Polygon ID, while Concordium is letting trusted identities on the blockchain do private transactions. I also feel that ZKSync and StarkWare have a few surprises to drop, while Loopring’s devs have been working silently and will show us a great use of ZK in the long term.

Anonymity aside, there are a few “DeFi” dapps at the moment blocking people in certain countries from using them… how the f**k is that DeFi? How do you promise to bank the unbanked then block access to protocols that should not be controlled by a single entity? It’s horrible, there should be aggregator dApps that would integrate all the protocols without blocking access to anything.

If DeFi involves putting your identity at risk, or gaining/losing the ability to access certain protocols based on where you live, then it’s simply not DeFi. Please don’t try to convince me otherwise, I am a frog.

submitted by /u/latolat2
[link] [comments]

Generated by Feedzy