This is the Problem that Nash is Solving!

Just came across this discussion on Reddit about the Binance partnership with Brave.

What they discuss is exactly what people think of DEXs right now in the crypto space, and this is the exact problem that Nash is solving. What do you think, can Nash change the mind of people like this?


Nash should partner with Brave after GA :rocket:

In case anyone wanted to see the thread that I am referring to:

Unfortunately it is not up to Nash only.

As Nash becomes more known and popular, we as a community should push this from time to time until Brave changes their mind.

I did get an answer from Brave in Reddit at the time:

Last but not least, when promoting Nash we should insist on its being non-custodial and not mention the term DEX. I’ve explained why I think this is important in this thread.

Additionally here’s a recent example why promoting Nash as a DEX can trigger negative reactions from certain people:


While I agree this is true, I just wish there was a better way of explaining what Nash really is. Maybe we can say hybrid? Because it is more than just non-custodial. It is not a centralized exchange that lets you hold your keys, it has a mathcing engine where things are non custodial, open sourced, and everything eventually gets posted to the chain.

Also from what I have seen its only about a group of 10-20% of people that will rip on Nash and call it not a DEX, but the other percentage accept that it is a DEX.

too bad, brave already partnered with binance and is probably on at least a year contract.

1 Like

For what i remember the term decentralized exchange was discussed a lot during the MtGox meltdown in 2013 by BTC OG’s regarding that CEX being the bottlenecks for true crypto, what they really ment was at that time was that we needed non-custodial exchanges like the term they(we) still use 'not your coins not your crypto '…however the term DEX at that time became a narrative.

Nash is solving this thats why I’m still around and promoting non-custodial exchange to new retail and business, its the only save way to go into the next decade in crypto!

the main problem i see is that there is no real leqiudity on the cex.
they are all just databases with no real value. basically, the entire crypto system is based on debt. if 70% of the customers suddenly withdraw their btc from the cex, the entire system would collapse or the btc price would increase to such an extent that some exchanges would not be able to pay off their customers.
Nash and the other Dex are the real candidates to convey real values ​​without a system of debt (you can’t even print a few bitcoin to maintain lequidity)

1 Like

@Hatertots is correct, Nash is solving the issues introduced by the first and second generation of DEXs:

  • Their low liquidity (due to poor fundamentals on market micro-structure)
  • Their awful UX/UI that requires a lot of preexisting knowledge regarding crypto.
  • Their requirement of holding a specific coin for access and shitcoin pairs only.

But what buth @Upinayah and @COINDER said is also absolutely true. If you search for Satoshi posts and emails you will see the issues are always the fractional-reserve banking system and the custodial nature of it. What @COINDER says is that DEXs were thought as a solution for the custodial issue, and what @Upinayah describe is that current CEXs are re-creating a fractional-reserve system by making use of the fact usually withdrawals are in aggregate lower than deposits - which are two problems Nash also solves.


Just advertise Nash as the best of both worlds?