In the long history of DeFi development, few protocols dare to rewrite their underlying code when managing over 4 billion USD in assets. It's like an airplane in flight suddenly needing to change its engine—sounds crazy, but Lista DAO has deliberately done just that.



They plan to gradually migrate from the current MakerDAO fork model to Liquity's codebase. On the surface, this appears to be just a technical upgrade. But in reality, it involves a deeper transformation: moving from "human governance" to "code governance."

Many users may not care about these details and only focus on whether returns can be stable. But to understand how critical this move is, one must first grasp the core advantages of the Liquity model.

**Upgradable vs Immutable**

Currently, Lista DAO, like most DeFi protocols, is upgradable. This sounds flexible—if there's a bug, it can be fixed; if parameters are unreasonable, they can be adjusted. But the problem is, this also introduces risks. In theory, anyone holding the management keys or gaining control through governance attacks can modify contract parameters.

Once migrated to Liquity's architecture, the entire logic is reversed. Once the core smart contracts are deployed, they are permanently locked. No backdoors, no risk of admin private keys being stolen, no possibility of governance attacks. Sounds extreme? But this is precisely Liquity's design philosophy—pushing security to the utmost.

**From Financial Product to Public Infrastructure**

From another perspective, most DeFi protocols are still "managed financial products." The project team holds the rights to upgrade and adjust parameters, while users trust the chain downstream. But Lista DAO's migration is fundamentally about evolving from a "managed product" into a "decentralized public infrastructure" like Bitcoin—once rules are set, no one can change them.

What does this mean for DeFi users? It means your funds are no longer dependent on a team's decisions but are protected by immutable code. Risks become more predictable and transparent.

Of course, everything has a cost. Fully immutable systems also mean that bugs cannot be quickly patched once discovered. But Liquity minimizes this risk through rigorous code audits and minimalist contract design.

Lista DAO's move appears to be a technical migration, but in essence, it is a choice of direction: sacrificing flexibility for absolute security. In this still uncertain DeFi era, this choice is worth paying attention to.
LISTA-7.03%
LQTY-2.62%
BTC-2.04%
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
DeFiAlchemistvip
· 01-07 10:02
ngl this immutability transmutation sounds beautiful on paper but... who's actually gonna catch the bugs before they drain the protocol? the philosopher's stone of defi remains elusive...
Reply0
RektRecordervip
· 01-07 07:51
Changing engines mid-flight, this is indeed crazy... but betting $4 billion on "rule of law," I believe in it. Immutable sounds exciting, but I'm just worried that one day if a bug is found, we can only watch helplessly. This logic is a bit like, maximum security but losing operational flexibility, it depends on whether Liquity's audit is reliable.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-44a00d6cvip
· 01-07 07:51
Changing engines mid-flight? Lista, this guy really dares to do it—$4 billion just to make a change. Immutability sounds safe, but what if the audit doesn’t find the bug? Then there’s no way to cry about it. Relying on code to protect the market is always better than relying on team reputation, this must be acknowledged. Liquity’s approach is actually a trade-off—flexibility for security. It depends on which one people care more about. Honestly, I’m more concerned about whether the annualized returns will plummet. No matter how high the security, if the returns disappear, it’s all pointless.
View OriginalReply0
MEVSandwichMakervip
· 01-07 07:49
Changing engines mid-flight? This guy really dares to do it, betting 4 billion USD like that. But on the other hand, going from "rule of man" to "rule of law" sounds great, but what if a real bug appears? It all depends on code audits for safety, and the pressure is entirely on Liquity. Whether the returns are stable or not is the real issue; no matter how secure the code is, I still need to make a living.
View OriginalReply0
OnlyUpOnlyvip
· 01-07 07:49
Changing engines mid-flight? Awesome, but to be honest, there's a bit of gambling involved here. The key is whether the bug has been discovered and cannot be fixed, which would require some serious toughness. But thinking about it, it makes sense. Instead of letting someone hold the power of life and death, it's better to let the code do the talking, at least it's transparent. I'm just worried that if something goes wrong, no one can save the situation, and that would be real despair. Lista is doing a confidence vote this time; if users dare to follow, it means they really believe. Just looking at the over 4 billion USD involved, either they're extremely smart or extremely reckless. I bet it's smart.
View OriginalReply0
ConsensusBotvip
· 01-07 07:39
This is outrageous. Changing the engine mid-flight—aren't you afraid of crashing? But on the other hand, immutable contracts do eliminate the risk of human manipulation, I have to admit.
View OriginalReply0
gaslight_gasfeezvip
· 01-07 07:22
Changing the engine mid-flight is indeed a bit intense, but thinking about it that way actually makes sense. But then again, does anyone really care about these underlying logics? I think most people are still focused on the annualized returns.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)