Hope

The founder of MakerDAO hopes that MKR holders will vote on the Sky brand and make a firm decision

ChainCatcher news, according to CoinDesk, MKR token holders are currently voting to assess their opinion on whether MakerDAO should "rebrand" the Maker brand and abandon the new name "Sky" adopted in August. This non-binding vote currently shows that token holders support retaining the Sky brand, although participation is relatively limited at this time.MakerDAO founder Rune Christensen remained neutral on the branding issue during an interview but urged the community to resolve the branding controversy and refocus on growth. He stated, "The most important thing is to make a decision and focus on what matters, which is the product." Christensen emphasized that changing the name to Sky is not just superficial, "far from just renaming," but part of Maker's "endgame strategy," which has launched new products like the USDS stablecoin.Christensen mentioned that one way to track the success of this stablecoin is to observe the proportion of USDS that is idle and not earning rewards. Among the over $1 billion in circulation, although the amount is not large, it is noteworthy that a portion is not earning rewards—this indicates it is held by real humans rather than bots, as this idling behavior suggests genuine use, since real users treat USDS as cash, holding it temporarily without seeking to maximize returns. However, despite this move still being seen as successful and the launch of the USDS stablecoin exceeding expectations, Christensen also acknowledged that the rebranding to Sky faced challenges that affected community perception and market confidence. This round of voting will last until November 7. The next step will be a binding governance vote.

Vitalik: I hope to see applications that are sustainable and do not compromise on principles like decentralization

ChainCatcher message, Vitalik Buterin responded to a netizen on social media, stating: "The type of applications I want to see are those that operate in a sustainable way; applications that do not sacrifice principles (such as permissionless, decentralized, etc.).I think DEXs are great, and I use them every week. I believe decentralized stablecoins (like RAI) are fantastic. I also think Polymarket is good.I think USDC is not as good as RAI, but as a practical matter, we have to respect that it is very convenient and many people are using it. It is very useful for me personally when making international donations, much more convenient than banks. We are trying to make the global economy and society more open and free, and the ability for people in emerging markets to trade freely with stablecoins is a real use case that is happening everywhere.USDC on Ethereum is also much better than account-to-account transfers within centralized exchanges, which happens often. If we get a lot of people using USDC, it will create a situation where it is easier for people to transition to other more decentralized stablecoins.What I 'do not' respect are basically those things whose appeal comes from some temporary sources, with no sustainability. I am not excited about the liquidity mining craze of 2021 because it was clear that it came from fundamentally temporary token issuance.If someone tells me: 'Put your money here for a good return', my question is always: 'Where does the return come from?' Who is on the other side of the trade, who is paying the return? If there is a concrete answer to this question and a good reason to believe that this answer will still be correct in 5 years, then I would be very excited about it."
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovators