Dan Elitzer

So we just all need to level up.

And that's the answer.

It's like it just needs to be safer so that we can have grandma use it and not have to understand these things because these things really aren't possible because of the layers of security that we build into the system at every level.

Everybody's, right?

Everybody involved has some amount of fault.

Where should the buck stop?

Well, I think that's for each of them to individually determine.

So within, I think the big question has been,

The KelpDAO team basically has the ability to decide, hey, we've got this ETH backing.

Are we going to treat the bridged RS ETH and the native RS ETH on Ethereum as exactly the same and give everybody equivalent haircuts if we need to haircut this?

Or are we going to say that really this was a bridge exploit?

We're actually going to push all of the haircut to the L2s and say that we're going to fully back the L1 RSE.

And that has ripple effects for they in terms of how they need to handle this.

What I will say is we're all speculating right now.

None of us, as I believe, are in the rooms where there are, I'm sure, negotiations and deals and capital injections and things like this that are being discussed.

I think it's unfortunate that whatever those discussions are taking as long as they have.

But I do expect that at least a couple of the parties involved will have some form of

deal or injection or negotiated thing happening to help them be less impacted, but they're ultimately responsible for their own users and the decisions that led to those users being hurt.

I want to push back a little bit on the blame here going to the architecture.

Like, could the architecture have been better to give us better options within Ethereum and Ethereum's L2 ecosystem?