Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

97% of the tokens are scams so it is safe to use? Or am I misunderstanding your point?


If you go to Uniswap right now you won't see any of these tokens. You run no risk of getting scammed by using Uniswap unless you go out of your way and manually add them.


Looking at the paper abstract, it says the identified scams by looking at transactions. So it seems at least some people are manually adding them and getting scammed. Or are you saying anyone who does that is by definition using Uniswap wrong and shouldn’t be counted as being scammed on Uniswap?


If you are a scammer, you would typically do wash trading (or hire someone to do wash trading) for your own token to make it look like there is legitimate activity. Just because these tokens have been swapped doesn't mean this was done by retail. The vast majority of these tokens are probably "failed scams" where the scammers tried but failed to generate traction.


Remember that you can be aware of something being a scam but still trade it, since you believe that the thing won’t collapse just yet. A very risky behavior of course, but it doesn’t mean that you have been scammed yourself.


They are not using it wrong the same way someone being scammed by Nigerian prince spam are not using email wrong.

Uniswap filters the tokens available the same modern email providers filters email. If you go looking in the spam folder and fall pray to a scam there, it is your fault, not the fault of the email provider.


That makes sense, but would you say email then is safe? Or is it something you should watch out for scams on?

I am mainly wondering about Uniswap being described as safe.


The paper does not analyze the transactions directly unless I'm missing that piece. There are a number of reasons accounts would interact with the scam tokens such as the scamming group filling up the liquidity pool, creating fake volume to add legitimacy, and other steps to complete the scam.

There's also the obvious case of the scammers getting a user to actually buy the token (perhaps through spam email or "pump groups" that give explicit instructions on how to perform the swap) which I'm not saying has never happened but I do claim is more rare. Even the obviously silly scam emails do have the occasional person click on them and lose their money. The upside is that getting scammed on Uniswap is actually harder as you need to manually bypass safety features.


> The paper does not analyze the transactions directly unless I'm missing that piece.

It looks at transactions and attempts to classify coins as scam or not.

It doesn’t make any claims about the volume in scam coins. That’s more a clickbait headline and HN thread thing.

It’s most trying to contribute an algorithm for identifying scam coins.

See the appendix for features from the transactions that they used for their algorithm.


Does Uniswap prominently advertise that as a warning to users?

I don't know anything about the space, but it sounds like a fact and statistic that should be front and centre in peoples face all the time.


Yes, when you add a token manually, you’re warned that anyone can add a token and that you should exercise caution.


Which you have to do to use Uniswap, right?


No. Uniswap will display the Uniswap Labs default list from Token Lists[0], which covers a lot of the legitmate tokens. Token Lists has additional lists from other protocols if you want to expand the listings. Unless a token is playing a long con (FTT I guess) it’s unlikely to be listed in these.

If you want to trade an unlisted token by adding the contract address manually, sure you can do that. But then it’s on you if you get scammed, like if you follow through on a solicitation from a spam email.

[0] https://tokenlists.org/




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: