5 ms·
I agree, there is no such thing as a stablecoin
by sumeno 4y ago
I agree, there is no such thing as a stablecoin
- biztos 4y agoBut there could be, right? It’s just that actually backing your PLNC 1:1 with actual Złoty[0] you can actually retrieve, leaves very little room for the people behind the coin to get rich. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_złoty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_złoty
- TheCoelacanth 4y agoWhy would anyone bother running a real stablecoin? Even real banks don't maintain 100% reserves, because if they did there would be no way for them to profit.
- criddell 4y agoIn the US, banks also pay FDIC insurance premiums. A stable coin could run the same way - buy insurance on the portion of the deposits that they gamble with.
- scoopertrooper 4y agoWouldn't really work. Stablecoins operate in highly correlated markets, so if one goes down then presumably, others should go down. Also, the government is a highly diversified insurer that can create more the underlying asset it is insurring.
- criddell 4y ago> Stablecoins operate in highly correlated markets Do they have to? Is there any reason they couldn't hedge that money?
- sumeno 4y agoYet again cryptocurrency advocates independently rediscover why financial regulations exist and are good
- lm28469 4y agoIt reminds me of junior devs reimplementing existing functions thinking they'll be faster just to discover that they're either slower or not completing the task, but instead of losing a few hours of work we're playing with billions of $
- rsync 4y agoBecause it would be fun ? If I wasn’t fully occupied with rsync.net I would love to run some kind of utility exchange/market/bank service … … and I’m not involved or invested in crypto in any capacity.
- TheCoelacanth 4y agoThat would be a very expensive hobby.
- t_mann 4y agoBecause once you've deployed the smart contract, you don't need to run it anymore, it's just out there for everyone to use. That part is actually interesting about smart contracts (but unclear why it would attract so much VC interest). The Liquity stablecoin actually works that way, they don't even have an own web app.
- reedjosh 4y agoMaybe someone should make a stablecoin that aims to trade $1 to $.9999 and the operators take their cut purely for auditing and maintaining the backing. Thus a true backed stablecoin where the operators have proper incentives.
- rsync 4y agoOr you could run it exactly 1:1 with 7 day redemption- and charge varying extra percentage fees for faster redemption…
- reedjosh 4y agoSure, that'd be cool too. Basically just make the incentive not about using the backing to gain money.
- tyrfing 4y agoThat's a unicorn that doesn't exist because after you set up your Proper Incentives and take it to the Proper Government Agencies to get Proper Approval, they'll tell you "no". Then the project gets shut down and you get back in line to wait another 5 years for government regulations to maybe happen. And that's how you get sketchy companies in Bermuda holding $100 billion in Schrodinger's assets, as well as other oddities like mining companies holding billions in assets because an ETF holding billions in assets would be illegal.
- charcircuit 4y agoTether kind of already does this by taking a cut on redemptions.
- lordnacho 4y agoWrapped coins are actually stable, aren't they? You get one for one, and both sides are on a blockchain. In real life there's no stablecoin. Even fully backed deposits can be traded at some other amount than 1:1, for whatever reason. Totally depends on whether you actually think the exchange can be done, and there are various reasons it might not.
- zionic 4y agoDAI would like a word.