Ok, so we’ve got a single stable coin that’s been fairly stable for 5 years, good start.
Now, how do I know which ones that were around 5 years ago…would be this stable, 5 years back in time?
How do I know this one will be stable for another 5 years?
Is there… some kind of objective analysis I can do here, of all stablecoins, to at least have an idea of this, or am I throwing darts while blindfolded?
Businesses tend to like certainty and predictability when it comes to the fundamentals of their operations.
USDC and USDT have also been stable for quite some time.
USDC might be the only one I’d really trust though. Since it’s backed by Coinbase and Circle, it seems extremely unlikely to break down in any way. Because the powers at be wouldn’t allow it. Too much institutional investment.
This is an extremely unreasonable paradigm to expect a business, or really any kind of enterprise or endeavor beyond a fairly low stakes hobby to be built off of and operate from.
A good manager can address this problem by hiring engineers who understand what they’re talking about. There’s no score for decentralization because there’s a lot of moving parts; it’s not just a single percentage score.
Every single large scale retailer I am aware of, that has attempted to offer an ability to buy at least some segment of its goods via a crypto coin, directly… has abandoned this attempt after a few years.
You just assert this problem is solved by hiring ‘competent engineers’, yet no one has actually figured out how to do this, beyond basically black/gray markets, and hyper niche privacy oriented digital services.
Again, the managers, the CEOs of this business… would still need some way of objectively assessing what is and is not ‘competent engineering’.
I… assume you are not familiar with modern software related hiring processes, where it has been a running joke for over a decade that HR has literally no comprehension of what they ask for in job postings, and thus has no real way to evaluate candidates by competency, they often cannot even come close to even describing the actual nature of the job.
Yeah they all have depegged at some point I guess and Tether offloads the risk of the shitty Chinese bonds or whatever they’re investing in on you as a token holder.
Circle is SEC regulated which makes USDC a bit more trustworthy but if we have learnt anything from the banking crisis then that this is no guarantee. Plus they depegged to like 0.87 once I think.
My biggest issue with stables is actually that they all have asset freezing mechanisms built into their smart contracts which goes completely against the idea of decentralization. Not to mention that they’re a privacy nightmare as well.
I totally agree with you that they’re not a long term solution but they can be useful if you just use them to send / receive money vs actually keeping them in your wallet. In a perfect world we’d be all using Monero at Solana speed & cost.
I am not as well versed on Solana, but yeah, as best I can tell, and I’ve been following crypto since Satoshi’s paper dropped, since before Mt Gox became a trading house…
Monero is the only crypto that is really even close to kind of being the bare minimum starting point that Satoshi wanted Bitcoin to be.
And… we still don’t have any kind of broad, tangible uses case for any crypto… other than scams, gray/black market stuff, money laundering, extremely privacy focused services, and extremely speculative investing.
Crypto is basically a problematic solution, still searching for an actual problem it can actually solve better than what has come before.
Solana is awesome in terms of tech, it does everything that ethereum can do but faster and cheaper. The problem is that the foundation has unlimited voting power and it’s unclear if that’s ever gonna change. So the protocol is decentralized but the economics are only decentralized if the foundation keeps listening to the community.
IMO the use cases are there, I can send Solana instantly and at ridiculously low fees around the globe. Let’s say I wanna wire 10k USD to Europe from anywhere else, if I go through my bank it’s insanely expensive and will take days if not weeks.
Another use case is that as long as I hold native token, they’re mine. If Trump declared me a political enemy and freezes my assets, well, he can’t freeze my XMR or SOL, so that’s another use case, protecting yourself against malicious governments.
Finally, as for XMR the use case is private internet money. With cash transactions becoming rarer this is super important.
So I think decentralization is the use case. But I’m worried that it’s never gonna happen because corpos are gonna lobby promising projects like Solana and XMR is gonna get abandoned
Ok, yeah, I can absolutely see at least some real, relative utility in Solana then, if it is basically the fastest transacting and also least energy intensive crypto…
Though yeah, being essentially monopolized in terms of governance is a pretty big flaw, in a lot of possible scenarios.
At this point, I just wanna genuinely thank you for being the least deluded and most reasonable crypto person I’ve talked to in a long while… you seem to have a much more realistic view on all this than the vast majority of others I encounter.
=D
Yeah I think we agree that XMR is currently the best option in terms of… actually private and secure transactions…
But of course, it is still fairly difficult to actually pull XMR out as a standard currency, or buy into it, in a way that is actually not traceable.
Quick question, which stablecoins have actually been stable for 5 years?
10?
Ok, so we’ve got a single stable coin that’s been fairly stable for 5 years, good start.
Now, how do I know which ones that were around 5 years ago…would be this stable, 5 years back in time?
How do I know this one will be stable for another 5 years?
Is there… some kind of objective analysis I can do here, of all stablecoins, to at least have an idea of this, or am I throwing darts while blindfolded?
Businesses tend to like certainty and predictability when it comes to the fundamentals of their operations.
USDC and USDT have also been stable for quite some time.
USDC might be the only one I’d really trust though. Since it’s backed by Coinbase and Circle, it seems extremely unlikely to break down in any way. Because the powers at be wouldn’t allow it. Too much institutional investment.
Yes, by which ones are peer to peer and which ones are centralized. That’s also why there doesn’t need to be a bunch of them.
Cool, how do I determine that?
Is there some kind of… universal metric, a p2p to centralized scale, that is accurate, transparent, and stays basically the same… for a deacde?
Unfortunately not, it’s like picking the right Unix-like OS in 2003.
It’s always been BSD, it’ll always be BSD.
… and that is my point.
This is an extremely unreasonable paradigm to expect a business, or really any kind of enterprise or endeavor beyond a fairly low stakes hobby to be built off of and operate from.
A good manager can address this problem by hiring engineers who understand what they’re talking about. There’s no score for decentralization because there’s a lot of moving parts; it’s not just a single percentage score.
Every single large scale retailer I am aware of, that has attempted to offer an ability to buy at least some segment of its goods via a crypto coin, directly… has abandoned this attempt after a few years.
You just assert this problem is solved by hiring ‘competent engineers’, yet no one has actually figured out how to do this, beyond basically black/gray markets, and hyper niche privacy oriented digital services.
Again, the managers, the CEOs of this business… would still need some way of objectively assessing what is and is not ‘competent engineering’.
I… assume you are not familiar with modern software related hiring processes, where it has been a running joke for over a decade that HR has literally no comprehension of what they ask for in job postings, and thus has no real way to evaluate candidates by competency, they often cannot even come close to even describing the actual nature of the job.
Yeah dude convert that shit as soon as you get it, don’t hold it. I’m not a fan but for receiving salary or processing payments in USD it does the job
See my point here is:
Stablecoins are not actually meaningfully stable, they are not a realistic solution.
Yeah they all have depegged at some point I guess and Tether offloads the risk of the shitty Chinese bonds or whatever they’re investing in on you as a token holder.
Circle is SEC regulated which makes USDC a bit more trustworthy but if we have learnt anything from the banking crisis then that this is no guarantee. Plus they depegged to like 0.87 once I think.
My biggest issue with stables is actually that they all have asset freezing mechanisms built into their smart contracts which goes completely against the idea of decentralization. Not to mention that they’re a privacy nightmare as well.
I totally agree with you that they’re not a long term solution but they can be useful if you just use them to send / receive money vs actually keeping them in your wallet. In a perfect world we’d be all using Monero at Solana speed & cost.
I am not as well versed on Solana, but yeah, as best I can tell, and I’ve been following crypto since Satoshi’s paper dropped, since before Mt Gox became a trading house…
Monero is the only crypto that is really even close to kind of being the bare minimum starting point that Satoshi wanted Bitcoin to be.
And… we still don’t have any kind of broad, tangible uses case for any crypto… other than scams, gray/black market stuff, money laundering, extremely privacy focused services, and extremely speculative investing.
Crypto is basically a problematic solution, still searching for an actual problem it can actually solve better than what has come before.
Solana is awesome in terms of tech, it does everything that ethereum can do but faster and cheaper. The problem is that the foundation has unlimited voting power and it’s unclear if that’s ever gonna change. So the protocol is decentralized but the economics are only decentralized if the foundation keeps listening to the community.
IMO the use cases are there, I can send Solana instantly and at ridiculously low fees around the globe. Let’s say I wanna wire 10k USD to Europe from anywhere else, if I go through my bank it’s insanely expensive and will take days if not weeks.
Another use case is that as long as I hold native token, they’re mine. If Trump declared me a political enemy and freezes my assets, well, he can’t freeze my XMR or SOL, so that’s another use case, protecting yourself against malicious governments.
Finally, as for XMR the use case is private internet money. With cash transactions becoming rarer this is super important.
So I think decentralization is the use case. But I’m worried that it’s never gonna happen because corpos are gonna lobby promising projects like Solana and XMR is gonna get abandoned
Ok, yeah, I can absolutely see at least some real, relative utility in Solana then, if it is basically the fastest transacting and also least energy intensive crypto…
Though yeah, being essentially monopolized in terms of governance is a pretty big flaw, in a lot of possible scenarios.
At this point, I just wanna genuinely thank you for being the least deluded and most reasonable crypto person I’ve talked to in a long while… you seem to have a much more realistic view on all this than the vast majority of others I encounter.
=D
Yeah I think we agree that XMR is currently the best option in terms of… actually private and secure transactions…
But of course, it is still fairly difficult to actually pull XMR out as a standard currency, or buy into it, in a way that is actually not traceable.