Why should stablecoins be anchored to fiat currency?

From an evolutionary point of view, the third place should be decentralized applications. Who is after Bitcoin and Ethereum? According to statistics from Dune Analytics, as of March 21, the number of independent DeFi addresses has reached 1.6729 million. According to DappRadar's monitoring of the number of DeFi active-zce addresses, as of March 21, the number of active-zce addresses is about 42,500. As of March 21, Uniswap has the largest number of independent addresses, with about 1.126 million, accounting for 67.31% of the total number of independent addresses in DeFi, and is the most important application in the DeFi field. Secondly, the independent addresses of Compound, 1inch, Kyber and Balancer have also passed the 100,000 mark. According to data from DappRadar, the daily active-zce addresses of most DeFi protocols are currently very low. Uniswap, which has the most daily active-zce addresses this year, only has 33,300, which is a very significant difference in magnitude from the daily active-zce addresses of mainstream mobile Internet applications, which can easily reach hundreds of millions. But we should see the rapid growth potential of the daily active-zce addresses of each DeFi protocol. According to data from CoinGecko, the total market capitalization of cryptocurrencies has exceeded 2 trillion US dollars, setting a historical record. Among them, the market capitalization of Bitcoin has dropped to 54.2%, setting a new low in the past half a year, and the market capitalization of Ethereum has accounted for 12.13%. From the perspective of evolution, the third place should be decentralized applications based on Ethereum. Currently, only Uniswap has this qualification among the top ten. Of course, there will definitely be more awesome applications this year, which can surpass Uniswap. Must be higher frequency. I think this higher-frequency application is likely to be: the perfect combination of decentralized "social + finance". This year will be the beginning of the explosion of decentralized social networks. Now the total number of DeFi users is about one million. Decentralized "social + finance" will expand the number of decentralized application users tenfold to tens of millions of users . The market value of decentralized social networking will exceed the market value of decentralized exchanges in the future. Of course, it is more likely that the market value of a certain dAPP will be greater than that of Ethereum in the future. This is probably something that almost no one will believe, but I think it is very possible. The highest value is often a product that actually touches the user interface. It is normal for a certain mobile Internet APP to have a market value greater than that of the mobile Internet operating system, and this will also happen to dAPPs. Anonymous developers are an important force in blockchain innovation, and their existence is the most original encryption spirit. Because the projects they develop do not rely on celebrity platforms or well-known investment institutions as the background, but rely entirely on the strength of the project itself. If the project has vitality, it can naturally drive its own development. Opinion: The long-awaited stablecoin bill may be introduced in the next few months: Golden Finance reported that at the DC Fintech Week, Eun Young Choi, director of the US Department of Justice's Encryption Enforcement Team, said that encryption mixers are a challenge, but There is no "let's slow down". This caught my attention because we've heard a lot about the risk of anonymity in cryptocurrencies that could increase bad actors. Patrick McHenry, the ranking Republican member of the House Financial Services Committee, said that the long-awaited stablecoin bill may be introduced in the next few months, but there are still some differences around regulatory oversight and the way assets are stored. [2022/10/16 14:29:11] Many people like to look at the background of the team. Internet products may be very effective in this way, because they can fool more venture capital, but the high halo of blockchain projects is often a sharp weapon. Most of the high-level projects are very weak in innovation, and it can even be said that all the high-level projects are very weak in innovation, and none are particularly strong. It is not about technological innovation. Otherwise, there would not be countless new ideas, countless new entrepreneurs, and many angel investors in the world, and the diversity of seeds would have enabled the ecological prosperity. If this is the case, you only need capital to find a talented team to form a luxury team. During the upsurge of the mobile Internet in the past few years, many venture capital companies did indeed play this way. They specifically recruited BAT executives and even ordinary employees, and then formed a team to invest in them. This is also the case in the United States. In fact, the result is now known that the projects that most luxury teams do often end badly. Because the purpose of their halo team is not real innovation, not for real demand, but to attract the next round of investment. This is especially true for the blockchain, because in the past (especially the blockchain 2.0 infrastructure era), there were basically no products at the beginning, so being able to "fool" is the first survival force, so the role of the luxury team has become the most important. You need a great team, a luxurious investment institution, and a dazzling high-tech white paper. But in the era of decentralized applications, all this has returned to reality and the essence, that is, "applications", some people use them, and more people use them. The projects that are just needed must be of higher value. I really like what MOLLY, who worked with AC last year, said, only look at the product, only look at the code, don't look at who is behind it, and don't look at the platform. Just like the super ledger led by big companies, many years have passed and now it is basically useless. If you look at the super ledger, you will find a lot of admirable super companies, but these auras still can’t stop it from being useless. Reality, at least for now. The QiDAO team proposed to add the stablecoin MAI to Aave V3 on Polygon: On August 26th, the QiDAO Protocol core team initiated a proposal in the Aave community, proposing to add the stablecoin MAI launched by QiDAO to Aave V3 on Polygon. The risk parameters are set at a loan rate of 75%, a liquidation threshold of 80%, a reserve factor of 10%, and an initial debt ceiling of $2 million per chain. Voting will close in 9 hours. [2022/8/26 12:50:31] Data rights and decentralized identity WEB1 is information display, WEB2 is personal information release interaction, WEB individual data rights return to individuals (data rights include ownership, management rights, and control rights), Because data rights belong to individuals, these data are assets and privacy. Decentralized identity proof, fully disintermediated and allowing individuals or organizations to fully own their digital identities and their data. The identity of ownership, management and control. In short, users can prove their identity through a verifiable digital identity, and can access various blockchain projects with this identity, and the control and sovereignty of the account is in the hands of the user, ensuring security. and privacy are guaranteed. Decentralized users themselves may hate the so-called decentralized identity very much, and the concept of DID may be created by a large centralized company like Microsoft to continue the original centralized cognitive inertia. Maybe there will be a market for legal enforcement in the future, just Basically, no one uses it like the super ledger led by big companies. Compared with Ethereum, if you look at Hyperledger, you will find a lot of admirable super enterprises, but these halos still cannot stop the reality that it is useless, at least for now. The biggest problem with DID is insufficient demand. DeFi is currently based on the wallet account system, and the centralized application has no motivation to use it. Why should stablecoins be anchored to fiat currency? FEI is like a squirrel cage. Those who go in want to seize the opportunity to come out, but most of them are trapped in it. After FEI received US$19 million in financing from top investment institutions such as A16z, Coinbase Ventures, and Framework (obtaining 5% of TRIBE governance tokens), the attention of the FEI protocol began to soar. It seems that if any algorithmic stable currency has top venture capital, it may reach a very high market value. In fact, I don’t have any research on FEI, and I may have missed it a few days ago, because I am very disgusted with their PCV (Protocol Controlled Value) protocol control fund model, which is a very bad design idea. Your funds are controlled to achieve his goal of achieving stability, are you willing? The founder of The Block will join the Paxos team to expand its stablecoin business: On February 3rd, The Block founder Mike Dudas will join the Paxos team on February 9th as the vice president and head of Paxos stablecoin business development. It will be responsible for expanding Paxos' white-label business, which issues fiat-backed cryptocurrencies on behalf of other companies. (CoinDesk) [2021/2/3 18:49:47] Users’ personal funds are controlled by the protocol, and PCV violates the spirit of decentralization. The price fluctuation shown by FEI is relatively too large for the collateralized algorithmic stablecoin model, and it is incomparable with FRAX. FRAX is mostly between 0.98-1.1. The same is true when entering the death spiral. Now it is 1USD, which is super stable and can almost replace DAI. I have to sigh with emotion that the FRAX team is so awesome, they are simply geniuses. They invented this model. The key is that the performance of the product has not been surpassed by other algorithmic stablecoins so far. No matter how many users or players there are in other models, no matter what Other models have a lot of capital, which cannot be proved by the product itself. If the algorithmic stable currency is really as trivial as some people think, then this direction has no meaning, but in fact it is not. From AMPL to ESD/BASIS CASH, and then to FRAX\FEI, the whole field has been evolving and developing. Although FEI is bad, it has obtained the support of top venture capital after all. Professional investment institutions will only invest in this direction if they recognize this direction. Money itself is a direction. The most critical purpose of stable currency is "application", not "play", not "speculation". Many people even don't even think about the most essential things of currency. Since you want to use it, the first feature is "stability" relative to the current legal currency. Instead of creating a currency yourself and saying that you are stable, Bitcoin is of course stable compared to Bitcoin, but Bitcoin cannot be used as payment. Of course, because Merchants will be willing to accept his rise, but what if it enters a bear market? The real society is governed by the state, and the big countries already have de facto national trust. Only stablecoins anchored to fiat currencies can have the possibility of large-scale application. Just like USDT, but whether USDT’s own assets and the number of issuances match, there is not enough trust in it. USDC has obtained the license, so there is this trust. When it comes to DAI, everything is on the chain, and the trust is transparent. If there is a sharp drop in the assets of minted DAI, there is also a liquidation mechanism, all of which can actually be transformed and used in the next more advanced DAI+. On-site | Founder of Hong Kong Blockchain Association: Stablecoins are necessary: Jinse Finance live report, On January 14, the CHAIN 2020 World Finance Conference was held in Hong Kong, China. Regarding the future of capital markets and currencies, Liang Jieyang, founder and co-chairman of the Hong Kong Blockchain Association, said at the meeting that stablecoins are necessary. Previously, some blockchain companies cooperated with the government to propose stable coins, and they had government credit endorsement. They must comply with the rules of anti-money laundering. The wide application of currency is relatively friendly. For example, the Singapore government has done a lot of work on stablecoins, which complies with Singapore’s anti-money laundering regulations, so we have to cooperate with the government to introduce stablecoin-compliant rules to ensure the operation of digital currencies. [2020/1/15] Looking at it now, DAI+ seems to be an algorithmic stablecoin like FRAX, and of course it is more likely to produce a better algorithmic stablecoin than FRAX. From the perspective of evolution, we have used USDT\USDC\DAI in real applications. Compared with the over-collateralization of DAI, FRAX has actually achieved super stability based on greater efficiency of funds. In fact, FRAX can still be upgraded and improved to solve the "run" phenomenon caused by the decline. Of course, it can also be improved to solve the more terrifying problems caused by the plunge of mortgage assets (such as ETH). I have an idea that even sovereign countries that issue national legal digital currencies can also refer to the FRAX model. Many people seem to have faith in BASIS CASH. This belief is useless. Many people are obsessed with ideals, but the world is real. From centralized stablecoins to over-collateralized decentralized stablecoins, and then to partially-collateralized decentralized algorithmic stablecoins, it is already the maximum efficiency of capital in terms of super-stability performance. Unless the whole world does not adopt national legal currency, but the purely algorithmic stable currency (such as anchoring the global per capita purchasing power), that is the true ideal, but this conflicts with the dominance of the US dollar in the real world. This is the inevitability of benchmarking against the power of the US dollar in the real world. The rise of the encrypted economy must still be linked to the real world, just like why USDT is currently the largest stablecoin in the market value, the early demand and benchmarking against the US dollar. Just like someone uses the time node of Bitcoin halving to judge the transition between bull market and bear market. What about technology? What's more, the impact of the future bull market may not only depend on Bitcoin, Ethereum may also rise, and the proportion of influence will increase. The sudden large-scale use of other centralization (such as countries, such as super-large social networks) will even change the economic development process , At least for now, the price of Bitcoin has exceeded the highest point in history, and 20,000 US dollars as the node of the bull-bear transfer is a scientific basis for judgment. Sound | CFTC Chairman: Facebook's overall stablecoin design is "very smart": According to Crypto Globe, CFTC Chairman Christopher Giancarlo revealed that the overall design of Facebook's latest stablecoin plan is "very smart", and the main compliance issues that the project may face Will revolve around the existence of proper KYC and AML checks. While it's too early to classify Facebook's GlobalCoin as a specific type of financial instrument regulated by the CFTC, Giancarlo noted that if the social media giant's stablecoin was backed by the U.S. dollar, it might not be necessary to tie the currency to derivatives in Together. Giancarlo also mentioned that Facebook has not provided any details about GlobalCoin to the CFTC in writing. According to previous news, Facebook is negotiating with the CFTC on the digital currency plan.

Tags：

Tron