Excuse my ignorance on what probably sounds like a really stupid question, but if an algorithmic stablecoin was developed that was pegged to the $ and couldn't be depegged, why not just use $'s. I mean - what's the point, where is the value in that, and how is that better than just using $'s ?
@letitroll explains it very well. So a typical activity would be sell XYZ crypto and buy ABC crypto. Apparently it is more convenient to park the proceeds of the sale in crypto space rather than going out into the real world and back again into crypto space.Excuse my ignorance on what probably sounds like a really stupid question, but if an algorithmic stablecoin was developed that was pegged to the $ and couldn't be depegged, why not just use $'s. I mean - what's the point, where is the value in that, and how is that better than just using $'s ?
The other interesting thing about crypto "markets" that shouldn't be lost on people........is they are open 24 hours day, they literally never close....other such 24 hour 'establishments' outside of petrol stations...........casinos & whorehouses
You have Burgess PLC based out of Dublin - with international subsidiaries all over the place. Wouldn't international settlement be much simpler if it was direct from HQ to subsidiary company? The conventional settlement process might involve a number of intermediaries, implicate settlement risk and take a few days and cost a lot. It doesn't have to. Furthermore, you're finding that you have trapped liquidity in various currencies that's proving to be a wholly inefficient use of capital.Can you not buy sterling and dollars 24 hours a day somewhere in the world?
I can't see how that is relevant in any way.
Brendan
Wow this question honestly blows my mind. I guess we're still that early.Excuse my ignorance on what probably sounds like a really stupid question, but if an algorithmic stablecoin was developed that was pegged to the $ and couldn't be depegged, why not just use $'s. I mean - what's the point, where is the value in that, and how is that better than just using $'s ?
Exactly. If money trees actually existed folk could simply plant a few (one would be enough actually) and nobody need ever work again. Crypto paradise - bring it on.The real question is if the perfect stable coin for dollars existed why would you ever use non-stable-coin dollars again? I would be closing all my bank accounts.
Exactly. If money trees actually existed folk could simply plant a few (one would be enough actually) and nobody need ever work again. Crypto paradise - bring it on.
Almost? Can you not extend to a full endorsement? If not, where's the variance?I agree with pretty much everything here and we should all appreciate having this post for the here and now.
Hilarious with what goes on in the conventional world, NOW in this example you have an issue with who benefits from seigniorage!Anybody like to disagree that an algorithm that produces digital entries out of thin air with an indestructible link to the $ is at least as good as, nay better than a money tree.
Wow, such unnecessary condescension - I guess you must be the smartest guy in the room.Wow this question honestly blows my mind. I guess we're still that early.
1) You no longer need to worry about whether today starts with an 'S' when making a transaction and considering when it will arrive.
2) Geography becomes irrelevant for transactions.
3) You can self custody your digital dollars without counter-party risk.
The real question is if the perfect stable coin for dollars existed why would you ever use non-stable-coin dollars again? I would be closing all my bank accounts.
I'm sure you'd agree that your experience is not likely to be representative of every individual or corporate entity everywhere in the world in this respect. Why should we restrict ourselves if the ability exists to transact all days - not some days?1) I never worry about whether there is an S in the day when I'm making any transactions.
According to your first point, it doesn't happen every day. On barriers to trade, are capital controls barriers? Is access to international banking a barrier? (and before you consider that, step out of your own shoes and consider that from the point of view of folks in the developing world). There's certainly friction in the current system. Do you think its reasonable for me to pay $100 for a wire transfer that takes an age as I did some months back? Why should we involve intermediaries that add fees and slow down transaction time if we can do so ourselves directly in real time?2) Global trade happens every day, and most of the barriers to global trade aren't to do with currency
I'll refer you back to my response to your first point on that one.3) I don't actually want to self-custody my assets.
That might be relevant in another discussion but not in a discussion on an algorithmic stablecoin that can't be depegged. Other than that, your mattress storage comes with its own risks.I'd rather self-custody hard cash under my mattress than leave it lying in a digital wallet somewhere where that I have no idea what it will be worth when I wake up in the morning.
How about assets kept in a sovereign currency that fails when its impossible to store in a leading fiat currency such as USD, Euro, etc (due to the implementation of capital controls)? What about the failure of banks? Each to their own but I'm with DiP on this one. Once there's no more need, I'll pull away from banks entirely and self custody.Counter-party risk is relatively small for the average person if they are sensible about where they keep their assets.
I'm not sure if you're referring to risks relative to self-custody. If so, I agree that there's great responsibility in that instance. However, once more user friendly products based on multi-sig - where there are a number of signers required to effect a transaction - are introduced, that risk will go away also.As compared to the risk of holding crypto, which in my view (not the smartest guy in the room) is very, very, very high risk.
"Show stopper" @tecate....your not reading or understanding my posts.........I'm trying to help you understand that there will be no showstopper moment that the BTC crowd can rally against.......no Joe Biden in the Rose Garden saying Bitcoin is banned because of ransomware attacks....no link I can point you too....get that idea out of your head and certainly dont assign it to me or my posts.........the way 'the system' works is by slowly constricting and starving its target of oxygen using the various apparatuses of the state......DOJ, FTC, SWIFT, FED, FINRA, SEC, ECB, ESMA, FCA..........your comment on the ebbs & flows of regulation is interesting.......you havent spotted the change in the mood music since Colonial/JBS & HSE attacks.....see BTC/crypto has been a sideshow & the ebb and flow you mention is because frankly, up until this point, regulators / leaders had better things to do than take a philosophical position on BTC. The change I've detected is because national security has been threatened, more importantly US national security...........& the USA's return to multilaterlism & global institutions has brought global coordinated action back in fashion (see global minimum tax rate). I can assure you that regulators/political leaders have now been forced to take a view on BTC/cypto and that view is being led by US leadership and it isnt positive ..............Operation Constriction has begun.................I can assure you.
And there it is ...that AAM boomer arrogance that I first found on this topic on this forum back in late 2017. Anyone worth listening to would never talk in absolutes. Your wager is far from in the bag! - most especially because what you or I think or believe doesn't control the outcome. Additionally, you have a short memory. I recall a previous wager expressed with exactly the same certainty on your part re. the outcome - where you went missing for six months after your 'thesis' on that occasion failed. You'd imagine that would nurture a bit of humility re. your future predictions but evidently, that's not the case.my 2030 wager with you on BTC price is already in the bag I feel
This must be a lie. Tecate has said that BTC is resistant to goverment censorship.Binance has been taken to the woodshed by the US government (DOJ, treasury & SEC next)......its toast and likely functionally bankrupt over time.....in a very real sense all Binance is now is a data repository for the US government to collect historical intelligence information for the flow of illicit funds globally over the last number of years (Hamas etc.). Its an AML depository. CZ has thrown his main customers (criminals & money launders) under the bus to try and save himself.
You're a tad confused (even if deliberately so). Binance is a centralized business. Any centralized business can be kicked around by government. Bitcoin is not a centralized business, its a network and a decentralized asset. If it was a business, the CEO of Bitcoin would have been locked up years ago.This must be a lie. Tecate has said that BTC is resistant to goverment censorship.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?