About a week ago Uniswap blocked torn trading in ui and this problem also affects previous versions of uniswap ui because Uniswap interface fetch blocked tokens list from updatable source.
Older version like 4.15 are usable with old uniswap ipfs but there is no smart routing and other features and anyway it should be changed to work on official Tornado ipfs, because Uniswap default RPC works only on allowed sites
What i did
I created uncensored version of Uniswap for torn trading -
- All blocked tokens allowed
- All warnings about tokens disabled
- Torn added to default tokens list (you do not need find token with search, just select from default list)
- Proprietary rpc changed
Uncensored Uniswap repo: https://git.tornado.ws/ButterflyEffect/uniswap-interface-uncensored
Add uncensored uniswap version as official swap for torn with ens name swap.tornadocash.eth (does not exist now)
For what? At first many users prefer uniswap for torn as easiest swap with biggest dex liquidity on torn/eth pair and do not want to pay comission to aggregators like 1inch or cow. Secondly (this was my issue and for this reason i did uncensored Uniswap version) many Tornado users care about privacy and interact with protocol over Tor, but 1inch.io, cow.fi, sushiswap and their ipfs versions do not work over Tor - only Uniswap allowed it but now it prohibited torn and is was only available option to make uncensored version.
Proposal code: https://git.tornado.ws/ButterflyEffect/proposal-43/src/branch/master/contracts/Proposal.sol
Proposal tests: https://git.tornado.ws/ButterflyEffect/proposal-43/src/branch/master/test/Proposal.js
Proposal contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x5C724aC4c1b4039696867541e818540450340151#code
For transparency i placed ipfs hashes and conversion library right in proposal code and anyone can verify it just need to copy from contract code
Who want to test the site - you should use version with v1 ipfs cid: https://bafybeidr6rlekv2vbokv55p735lms6h4m7gbvw6qe6t3jzmqudhh4ja6ie.ipfs.cf-ipfs.com
Results after proposal: swap interface will be available by link swap.tornadocash.eth.link and i think we can add link to it to official ui in future. Also i as developer will receive 200 torn as compensation for deployment, proposing, execution and other costs related to this proposal
why 200 this time?
I paid to pinata paid plan to host ipfs, I paid for vps to host for tests, I paid for test swaps to be sure uncensored uniswap works as intended, I paid for ens name tornado-uniswap.eth for tests etc etc
And proposal code is large so deployment is expensive
This is very convenient for users, thank you for your hard work. Please have the auditors conduct an audit.
我抛几块砖，引玉来。为什么社群应该为 Uniswap 克隆的开发和维护付费？我们有很多方法来交易 TORN，例如简单地阻止 Cloudfare 域名。谁将审查克隆以及为什么社区应该信任如此复杂的软体。我们的社区面临更重要的任务。开发工作必须针对 Tornado Cash UI 和过时的工具。对了，提案应该在提交之前进行讨论。提案一定是罕见的。
I propose a TORN token burning mechanism. Withdrawals and deposits must burn 0.5%~1% of the amount of TORN, so as to ensure the long-term stability of the DAO.
I read the link you posted, and I don’t quite agree with the views in it. I still think my proposal is easier to implement.
- All withdrawals must go through the repeater.
- 0.5%~1% of the withdrawal amount needs to be bought into torn and burned.
In this way, the value of the entire project will quickly increase, and it will also bring more absolute privacy to users. It is a win-win solution for all parties, isn’t it?
“1. All withdrawals must go through the repeater.”
i hear it from you fifth time and you still can not understand that it is impossible?
The combustion model will lead to an increase in coin prices, but the changes will not be too obvious bcs torn was delisted from Binance. I think it is more reasonable to discuss the combustion model after the team sells the tokens, and there is still a high possibility that it may not pass. It is not the time yet.
As for Liubaozi0531’s speech, I think he is too greedy and doesn’t even understand Torn’s operating mode, discussing blindly.
If you are not greedy, should you let the price of TORN fall on its own? If the price is too low, DAO will be at risk. And the rise in tokens also gives people confidence.
All right. I don’t know programming, so I don’t understand. In the front-end deposit process, 0.5%~1% of the tokens must be purchased and destroyed. Is this possible?
if price will be so high everyone just start using alternatives or avoiding fees
First of all, 0.5% is not a high ratio, we all know this.
In addition, I don’t think it will be replaced, because the biggest advantage of the currency mixing industry is the existing funds. There cannot be a second TORNADO CASH, I bet.
monero is an alternative and monero fee is lower than 1% (but higher than 0.5%) if you include crosschain costs
First of all, the cost of Monero will be higher, because buying at CEX will reveal your identity, there will be insufficient liquidity on dex, and there will be handling fees.
Thirdly, regardless of the price of torn, users only need to purchase 0.5% of the amount of mixed coins, so there is no impact on users.
If I were a user, I would think you are fucking sick！
Wasting users’ time and wasting users’ costs！
Self-righteous guy, you are not looking at privacy needs at all, but just for your own pocket!
Who do you think the users are? I don’t understand why you are so excited. It’s only 0.5%. According to the “users” you mentioned, do you think they will care?
Let me reiterate again, the price must be raised. This is the best choice for a win-win situation for both parties.
monero and back costs less than 1% with atomic swaps or trocador
and there is no point to discuss impossible things e.g. force users to buy tokens bcs smart contracts are immutable
Then change it like this: after the relayer deducts TORN, 50% is destroyed and 50% is distributed to the pledgers. What do you think of this idea?
i am for 25% destoying but no now
i executed proposal sry for delay