|
|
|
|
|
by rglullis
1973 days ago
|
|
On one hand, yes, you are right. This "it's turtles all the way down" approach regarding valuation of tokenized assets is a huge source of systemic risk and those that want to be able to get greenbacks will be better off by using centralized stable tokens (like Circle's USDC or STASIS' EURS) On the other hand, any project that can be transparent about its reserves (whether though "smart contracts" or plain old armies of bean counters writing actual compliant reports to Uncle Sam) is welcome by my book. Anything that can take the influence and dominance from Tether in the crypto market should be brought to the table and considered for analysis. > The only purpose of this currency is to enrich those who invented it. Isn't that exactly what's happening with the existing relationship between governments, their central banks and the financial elites? I'm not a fan of Reserve either, much less of this Silicon Valley idea of governance, but as long as they they make good on their deals and make their money by providing stability in exchange of absorbing risks, I don't see anything immoral or unethical about the fact that private individuals and organizations can go on to try to create an alternative to central banks. |
|