Can the business model (using interest to fund ops whilst issuing non-yield bearing tokens) work if there's negative interest? (as was briefly the case with Euro)
Interesting argument—the centralization debate is very much alive, especially as institutions enter crypto. The tension between old systems and decentralized ideals has never been sharper. My newsletter this week unpacks why institutional adoption is happening now and what it means for both sides of this debate. Would value your thoughts!
The problem I see is the overburden of regulators ... much like how the tax code is full of cruft, regulators are going to add on various access/adoption proscriptive measures which just widens the potential attack surface without any gains in performance or reliability
- eg black/white lists - from one perspective its just a convenient hook for civil foreiture but view from other side, its financial exclusion.
- a certain delulu draft dodger wants to impose currency haircuts ... next will be asking if accounts are communist or not
- the ERC20 is designed to be irrevocable, but if courts want to insert their powers, it means asking for an interposing layer ... we've seen how NorthKorean crackers sniff out the cracks in the traditional banking system so bring that into DeFi is going to be a concern
A pure DeFi solution not tethered to any single jurisdiction can focus on technical excellence, laying the global financial plumbing but that means taking a common carrier / universal transactor ... it might flow monies to undersireable activities but that is happening irregardless in the TradFi sector.
> We are going to release another flagship report on stablecoins.
you might be interested in this study, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/par-perish-shaswata-kapat-wjgif
Can the business model (using interest to fund ops whilst issuing non-yield bearing tokens) work if there's negative interest? (as was briefly the case with Euro)
thanks for sharing!
Interesting argument—the centralization debate is very much alive, especially as institutions enter crypto. The tension between old systems and decentralized ideals has never been sharper. My newsletter this week unpacks why institutional adoption is happening now and what it means for both sides of this debate. Would value your thoughts!
The problem I see is the overburden of regulators ... much like how the tax code is full of cruft, regulators are going to add on various access/adoption proscriptive measures which just widens the potential attack surface without any gains in performance or reliability
- eg black/white lists - from one perspective its just a convenient hook for civil foreiture but view from other side, its financial exclusion.
- a certain delulu draft dodger wants to impose currency haircuts ... next will be asking if accounts are communist or not
- the ERC20 is designed to be irrevocable, but if courts want to insert their powers, it means asking for an interposing layer ... we've seen how NorthKorean crackers sniff out the cracks in the traditional banking system so bring that into DeFi is going to be a concern
A pure DeFi solution not tethered to any single jurisdiction can focus on technical excellence, laying the global financial plumbing but that means taking a common carrier / universal transactor ... it might flow monies to undersireable activities but that is happening irregardless in the TradFi sector.