[cuteboy19]

>DAI has multiple assets,

And so did Terra. They held AVAX, BTC, LUNA and a little bit of USDC.

>150% at a minimum

And for Terra this was 100% at a minimum. It makes 0 difference.

>independent from one another

Cryptocurrency are extremely correlated.

>it managed to recover

UST itself had recovered from a previous depeg event

[rglullis]

You know what is missing on your list? The 20% APR staking ponzi!

You keep pointing out the similarities, maybe it would help to realize that the problem was in the difference?

[cuteboy19]

Iron/Titan did not have any such high apy and still collapsed. In case of terra, I concur that the driving force was the Anchor ponzi, but it was the mechanism that failed.

[rglullis]

Iron was explicitly under-collaterized, and it was also trying to lure stakers by providing yield-farming. DAI is the opposite, stakers pay the stability fee to open a vault.

It did have a yield-farming component (you could mint DAI at 1% fee and put it in the DSR that would pay 2%), but that got completely knocked out in 2020. That crash was already a quite expensive lesson (tens of millions USD) for the MakerDAO team, and a lot of the investors had accepted a haircut in order to bring DAI back to the peg.

To repeat: I am not saying that DAI is bullet-proof. What I am saying though is that all the reasons you are using to make your case do not apply to DAI as it currently works.