krrishd

5 ms·

31.
Scripts and Sole Proprietorships(text-incubation.com)
1 points by krrishd 9mo ago|0 comments
32.
Calling All Hackers: How money works (2024)(phrack.org)
341 points by krrishd 9mo ago|253 comments
33.
My internet money fixation: Psychoanalysis(text-incubation.com)
1 points by krrishd 10mo ago|0 comments
34.
"Airwallex, a Chinese backdoor into American data from AI labs and defense"(twitter.com)
4 points by krrishd 10mo ago|1 comments
35.
by krrishd 11mo ago
In case you’re curious why this might make sense: older HN thread/post on why you’d issue a custom stablecoin: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45237035
36.
Klarna to launch dollar-backed stablecoin as race in digital payments heats up(reuters.com)
2 points by krrishd 11mo ago|1 comments
37.
Why Wise and Airwallex aren't worried about stablecoins(text-incubation.com)
1 points by krrishd 11mo ago|0 comments
38.
Why Wise and Airwallex aren't worried about stablecoins(text-incubation.com)
1 points by krrishd 11mo ago|0 comments
39.
Real-Time Payments work better on the weekdays(text-incubation.com)
1 points by krrishd 1y ago|0 comments
40.
Real-Time Payments work better on weekdays(text-incubation.com)
1 points by krrishd 1y ago|0 comments
41.
by krrishd 1y ago
Previous HN thread / article re: _why_ you'd issue your own stablecoin: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45237035 TL;DR in this announcement seems to match: more control over rewards/yield (both in entitl
42.
Stripe and Bridge announce a new platform to launch your own stablecoin(stripe.com)
1 points by krrishd 1y ago|1 comments
43.
by krrishd 1y ago
Agreeing with your immediate hunch that the traditional rails are sufficient for agentic commerce, but still finding the x402/stablecoin etc work fascinating: Under which circumstances are the traditional rails actually off limits? S
44.
by krrishd 1y ago
>why people who actually like crypto would want paypal this snippet is everything: "to PayPal, Venmo, as well a rapidly growing number of digital wallets across the world that support crypto and stablecoins" this is effectively
45.
by krrishd 1y ago
I see, I misread: that’s interesting. I would assume the issuer would still be liable to resolve the backing, but yeah I could see how that poses systemic risk. I also don’t think such a risk could realistically remain hidden - this is stil
46.
by krrishd 1y ago
>unless such a product is much better than what banks offer, but that doesn't seem to be the case. I think you're basically correct here. I think the fear of the banks - and why they are insistent on prohibiting stablecoins f
47.
by krrishd 1y ago
>Now, why would anyone buy a branded stable coin that explicitly doesn't promise a return? In practice, you're not even buying these (or at least - that is not the presentation). What you're actually doing is making a de
48.
by krrishd 1y ago
I don't see why not - I'm sure the banks (or others more expert than me) would argue for stablecoins being somehow distinct in this regard, but yeah don't know why eg. Vanguard wouldn't also be a credible cause of deposi
49.
by krrishd 1y ago
>Assume the buyer/seller holds capital from sources that the majority of the market considers “illicit” and/or is legally sanctioned and/or physically frozen or restricted This is not feasible legally, and is where your
50.
by krrishd 1y ago
I think there is plenty of counter-evidence in how this is being approached: - The obvious: these are stablecoins, whose value is pegged to and 1:1 backed by fiat currency / is not capable of the cliche pump&dump dynamics of other
51.
by krrishd 1y ago
USDC gets me 4% on Coinbase, and USDB and other Bridge-issued custom stablecoins also give the customer rewards that they can pass onto the holder (thanks to MMF/similar cash equivalents behind the scenes etc). But yes - this is why ba
52.
by krrishd 1y ago
This was also where I initially landed after finding out that the custom stablecoin could not leave my Bridge instance. I think the role that crypto plays in enabling this is as a neutral, credible storage layer on which this token can be h
53.
by krrishd 1y ago
Yes, but McChicken futures :)
54.
by krrishd 1y ago
The theory, at least, is that everyone would eventually be incentivized to move deposits out of the banking system and into this. (I am not sufficiently expert here to comment on the odds of an outcome like that)
55.
by krrishd 1y ago
This is a great question, I actually don't even think it's strictly a matter of "more" yield. To dig into your example a bit deeper, there are a few general differences with an (eg.) Unit vs. Bridge. - With a BaaS like u
56.
by krrishd 1y ago
Yeah that's a good flag. To be even more specific though, "cash equivalent" and the sorts of treasuries that implies are specifically short-duration ones (ie. this cash cannot be parked in a 10-year US treasury either) Cash
57.
by krrishd 1y ago
> But then can you have a world where all the money is only stablecoins and backed by "something"? I think that has interesting implications for monetary supply and central banking This strikes me as among the biggest macro ris
58.
by krrishd 1y ago
> you can lend out the money you earn from selling someNiceCoin to services with higher yields. > And my expectation is that issuers of stablecoins can do even more risky types of lending than Silicon Valley Bank did. To be clear
59.
by krrishd 1y ago
Indeed, and good call out; one likely source of the "novel" counterparty risk I allude to (though really not even novel - "different" is probably the more reasonable word).
60.
by krrishd 1y ago
I think this is somewhat reasonable, but with plenty of asterisks / not the "arbitrage" this would imply. There is still a "real", regulated money-holder in the loop - it's just Bridge (the manager of the cash

More ›