Shawn
July 20, 2024, 3:23pm
3
Yes and Yes.
Zcashd gone is the first step towards getting ZSAs running. There’s no point in building infrastructure for ZSAs on Zcashd if Zcashd is going to be depreciated.
I’m a big fan of adding use cases and attracting users to Zcash. IMHO, ZSAs are a win-win-win situation for Zcash holders, Zcash users, and ZSA users:
Zcash holders benefit by adding demand for ZEC to issue/spend/burn ZSAs.
Everyday Zcash users benefit by increased activity in and out of the shielded pool, thereby increasing privacy.
ZSAs users benefit by having assets in a massive private pool: ( https://x.com/jswihart/status/1812931693311062226?t=iBF63lQ7-rnPZzsRFhkfSQ&s=19 )
Digging up a few previous posts about ZSAs (previously called UDAa) :
I think a better whale question would be “should I transfer my BTC to ZBTC so I can gain some privacy?” How about my ETH to ZETH?
As a whale
(The following is my personal perspective and does not represent the view of ZOMG as a whole).
I believe that in the long run the two things that will help Zcash gain adoption and strength is a transition proof-of-stake and the inclusion on programmability at some layer. I believe that ZSAs are a great step in the right direction and should be put as a high priority for the 6th fork.
There have been some questions and discussions around the economics of ZSAs. My general view on this is that:
…
I’m really excited broadly about ZSAs - I think they bring a lot of good attention and expanded use cases for Zcash. I also get the feeling that a lot of people around these parts are, or at least claim to be, price agnostic, which I think is a mistake. The use case for ZEC as a private store of value/means of exchange relies on parties wanting to hold ZEC, as no one is going to feel comfortable about storing their savings or accepting payment in a depreciating asset, regardless of the other a…
3 Likes