Bitcoin Forum

"Fiat-backed stablecoins are therefore rarely actual cryptocurrencies, which causes them to inherit their main characteristics and shortcomings from the centralised banking system. Ultimately, they function in the same manner as fiat, backed by what amounts to an IOU."

Danial Daychopan wrote a short article linked below that has got me thinking. Are stablecoins bad for the cryptocurrency ecosystem because they are essentially fiat in digital form, or are they beneficial as they provide stability in an extremely volatile market? Curious to hear your thoughts, give it a read and let me know your angle on it.

https://medium.com/@DDhopn/stablecoins-3b93b4f1ddc5

I honestly feel that stablecoins like Tether etc are indeed a necessary evil. They do pose problems for the cryptocurrency market(Tether controversy etc), but they will still be in demand as long as the market is extremely volatile.

Once the volatility lowers in the long term, the demand for these coins will most likely fall which is why they are a necessary evil at present.

In the beginning there was only Tether. And it was enough for everyone. As you already know, the bull from 2017 was also very effective. But the obvious mistakes they made came here. Today, the number of stablecoins on the market is increasing day by day and I am not sure how much they are necessary anymore.

Necessary evil because of controversy but necessary for us to be safe on our trades. It is a safe-haven for our trades. Since they are stable, if we are on loss we can simply put our btc on tether in order for us to be safe on the continuous downfall.

If they are giving protection against volatility, They are helping to increase liquidity then I do not think terming them "evil" is correct.
I do not think our dependence on them is going to reduce because market will not like to reduce the liquidity.

They are good for the market atm. They give some stability on this volatile market af. Atm, of course as the market is still very much immature and at early stage. Once the market develops and one other actual cryptocurrency (probably BTC) develops in a way that it will be big enough to be stable, then we will have no need for stablecoins.

Tether is already enough and considerable but when another stablecoins out in the market it already pisses me and questioning why these coins popping out yet
it isnt really necessary for them to be used. One stable coin is enough but more than that has no sense at all.Stable coins might oppose or fully contradict crypto system but we cant
deny on the fact that this coins are useful for fast conversion to secure out or save out yourself from volatility.

It depends. There's this stablecoin, DAI, from the MakerDAO platform, that isn't backed by fiat, but is actually backed by ETH(and will have an option to be backed by BTC in the future). Tether(USDT) though? Well, that's another topic. We really don't know for sure if USDT is actually really backed by fiat in banks; which is very scary in my opinion, as they can definitely easily abuse their power.

To my mind stablecoins are good at some point, for example imagine Monero with stable price. This way you won't have to worry on price movement if anonimity and privacy is important for you rather than profit from holding/trading cryptocurrencies. This means you have analogue of usd but with crypto opportunities, doesn't sound bad to my mind. I don't talk about tether and etc.

If we see it from this perspective then I guess stable coins are necessary to be present in the crypto market. Just think about it in this way, when the market is too volatile and the prices are going down, you will need a stable coin to save your investment because if the coin is not stable then your portfolio will have significant decrease anyway. So in order to keep the investment safe we do need stable coins like tether which are backed by fiat currencies.

Stablecoins are necessary but only if they were decentralized. we are in a decentralized world after all and we should avoid any kind of centralization in this world which will include using centralized altcoins, stable coins, exchanges, wallets, payment processors,... so far we have alternative to all of these that are decentralized too but people have to always get bitten and lose a lot of money in the centralized sector before they start looking for a solution. which is why centralized things are still at large!

It's a compromise traders have to agree with in order to safeguard their assets if they want to spend a day or two not doing anything or transferring funds in between exchanges/platforms. The controversy only arose since Tether cannot really show its assets amounting to every USDT they have printed, and so some people have questioned whether they are being true to their claims or not. I don't think stablecoins are really a necessity in the whole of cryptomarket, but rather an optional feature/token that people can use if they want a temporary hedge against the market's volatility.

I disagree. People can release all the coins they want obvious but they are not really necessary at least from a progressive point of view more than an economic/profit/greed one.

Bitcoin will be stable in the future too, but a long time is still ahead of us for that to happen. They are not necessary at all. Now, the people who want to profit from them i wish them luck, i hope it goes well. For my part i won't invest in them in the future.

I disagree, they don't function similar to fiat at all!
while fiat is being printed by the government and banks and they run the show, that gives fiat a very good level of security. for example if you are using USD you know that tomorrow morning USD is not going to be wiped off the face of the earth.
in comparison centralized stablecoins are controlled by a company that may not even be legal not to mention that when they "print money" it is not allowed in most countries around the world. so you can and probably will wake up one morning to see them disappear. that means they are not secure at all.

no they are bad because they are centralized. if they were decentralized then it was an entirely different story.
as for their benefits, if you are only using them for trading for example to transfer funds from one exchange to another with a lower fee compared to transferring fiat, or if you are using them in an exchange that  does not have fiat market but you want to temporarily exit that coin and go to a fiat like coin that keeps its value then they are good but other than that usage of them is a very bad idea.

I prefer security tokens to stable coins because of the involvement of the centralized financial institutions in the operation of the stablecoin, and at that the stable coin will not offer any thing new from the traditional centralized mode operation which lack anonymous and decentralization/ freedom from third party involvement from either the bank or government.

This is where stablecoin plays a role, Stablecoin cryptocurrency that gets more appeal has a much more stable value than normal cryptocurrency. This is because the value is pegged to other assets such as US dollars or gold. Stablecoin on the other hand, utilizes the benefits of cryptocurrency such as transparency, security, eternity, digital wallet, fast transactions, low costs, and privacy without losing the guarantee of trust and stability that comes using fiat (such as US) dollars or Euros.

Stablecoins attracted a lot of investor interest because of its stability as FIAT and received support from FIAT. But if Stablecoins don't have big exchange floors and attract investors, it will become Shitcoin, and the price will fall sharply.

They are especially useful if you live in a country where you don't get free access to those fiat currencies which is nearly none in this world, but for those unfortunate souls that have to live under the oppression of a socialist economy, they are indeed quite useful, if only for trading inside an exchange.

Ironically i have found them unsuitable for normal coin use, what with them needing a second crypto just to pay fees. Most of them need to pay tx fees in Etherereum, which is a big letdown for regular use.

I mean, if you are going to bother having to fill your wallet with both Ethereum and, say, usdc, why not just stick to ETH alone? Sure its safer to use someone else's big blockchain, but you must admit its a major inconvenience, unless you went and teach everyone how to use a token with its parent coin; or worse, tell them to use the online wallet of an exchange that "magically" hides these fees (in another coin) from them.

No.

They either turn out in two versions - total obfuscation like Tether where we have no idea whether there's any actual money behind them, or you have the legitimised ones that are so uptight they'll cut you off from your ability to redeem them if they think you've been spotted on Chaturbate.

If you want to park money in a stable form go to an exchange with real fiat and park it there. There's plenty of them and the barriers to entry are no higher than alt only places.

I think one of the reasons why people use stablecoins instead of exchanging to fiat on exchanges is that it's either:

• They don't trust their local currency
• They don't trust the exchange

And I really can't blame them to be honest; due to the lots of exchanges fiascos in the past. Though I'm really not sure if storing your money on stablecoins is any better. Personally though, I'd rather leave my money on DAI(a lesser known stablecoin); even though the price is fluctuating a lot between $.97-1.01. Which is a downside I'm willing to take compared to holding the more centralized stablecoins like USDT. I know a good number of people will disagree with me, but yea.

Kraken only rejects residents of these countries - Afghanistan, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Japan, North Korea, Tajikistan.

They have real Euros and a perfect security record so far. I have no idea why anyone would choose some fuckhole with potentially non existent money over that. I'd rather take the hit on exchanging whatever alt to something I can sell into EUR on Kraken rather than stay put in USDT for any period of time.

Maybe I'd do it for a few hours but if I was sitting out an apocalypse no way would I take the risk.

I do not consider stable coins to be evil in any form. Stable coins are very necessary for us, because they serve the activity of a real cryptocurrency. In fact, stable coins are not full-fledged cryptocurrency, they have only a cryptocurrency shell, but in fact they are a digital copy of the currency of a particular state that they represent.

I don't know either. But I assume the reason why they trust USDT so much is that it ran fine for years, with a bit of price hiccups here and there. Not to mention that some people might actually think they're holding actual USD. Don't underestimate ignorance I guess. 🤷‍♂️

i never understand those stablecoins.how come their price are not equal to usd?and another thing is they cause to inflation.i dont see any good effect to market.

Whether we like them or not it was inevitable that stable coins will appear, if you are a trader and you want to get out of the market because you think it is going to go down your only option before was to sell your coins for fiat and this was a huge problem for those that wanted to retain their privacy because now they will need to go through KYC, but now stable coins offer you the possibility to get out of the market without getting out of the market.

Agreed, an important difference to note. However, the article is saying that means they are inheriting many of the negative attributes of regular fiat currency which could be bad for the crypto ecosystem as a whole.

They are not evil, we really need some stable coins on this market. It is a pretty great thing if you want to stay out of the market, but you need you funds to be ready to invest directly from an exchange. The only thing I do not get, do we really need 10 stable coins?

I agree stablecoins are necessary, but are they actually backed by the dollar and stable?

I think that this is so. And they really pose a threat, because stable Coins in general are not related to cryptocurrencies, which are limited. This needs to be understood and that is exactly what separates cryptocurrencies from fiat money.

Evil is a strong, subjective word. They are just an assets trading on the same exchanges as cryptos. They are not cryptocurrencies but they obviously have their use cases, otherwise they would not be needed.

Very interesting article, and I completely agree that they are necessary for the growth of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, despite potentially being the crypto equivalent of the federal reserve bank.

I do not see anything wrong with stable coins as the market attracts a lot of investment due to them. This type of tokens is created so that you can fix your capital and not be afraid for it.

stablecoins are not an evil but a tool for crypto/fiat transfers and there is no danger from them for traditional cryptocurrencies.

I think people still need stablecoins to hold their money on before and buy with after crypto coins, because is better to hold money on stable, not 100% safe, maybe in future something will happen and stablecoins will die, who know.

Holding USDT is the same as holding real money so they will be more trusting it is compared to altcoins who have good potential, so they don't underestimate anything.

Any crypto asset backed with a physical item is tricky thing. No one grantee o you that that item really exist. or that you will really get it when you will want to redeem it.

What I don't understand about the cryptocurrency space is why people have an either/or mindset. You cannot have decentralization everywhere - if you are an intruder I will neutralize you on my property - acting as a centralizing agent within my space. I will expect central authorities to be in charge of things around my community or county. I expect central authorities to be involved in the computer made for me - at an organizational level - to type on now. NOT EVERYTHING HAS TO BE DECENTRALIZED.

Similarly, not all currencies have to be decentralized. We can have decentralized and centralized cryptos working together.

To use an analogy, imagine the wheel. The wheel was important for civilization and advantages in war. Now imagine crowds awestruck by the wheel insisting everything has to be round. "Why are you using arrows? They are not shaped like the wheel!" "Why are you using bricks for the house? They are not shaped like the wheel!"

Well, the wheel has a specific purpose. The wheel is not for everything.

unfortunately the stablecoin are obligatory with this market too variable, i use them to get out from the altcoin at the end of the evening, at the end of the day trading...

It is completely against the crypto currencies but it is good thing for traders,so these coins can never be used for holding long term.

I think the competition is important here so when stable coins are not here in our society there will be no development up with the cryptocurrencies happen in the current situation both are very important for the people to make their life peaceful.

Stable coins, of course, are very useful for working with our cryptocurrency. It would even be very good if we had stable coins linked to our national currencies, and not only to the currencies of the main world states. Today, using cryptocurrency for ordinary people is still difficult and stable coins, along with other functions, can partially solve this problem.

If you deep drive, stable coins are the ones investors look at always when investing on other coin with more fluctuations. Its anther best choice to increase the profit as well. When the value goes up and you sell the altcoin into USDT, and the value goes down. Here you are safe and you can buy the same altcoin bit more. 

If the stable coins were not useful, I guess would not be as much volume (look tether). On the other hand, there is also possibility that they may be scam, and the majority is afraid.

If we want mass adoption and  this is what we aim for then stable coins are a necessary evil. How could merchants deal with a volatile crypto coin which can lose 50% from it`s value a day. Merchants cannot accept that risk in real economy.

pitifully they are necessary !, but tether should leave the market, there are other more transparent establishments like TrueUSD ... although the coins backed with fiat money is not the best! (it is as if it were the gold backed dollar), if the fiat begins to disappear, will they remove that support and print coins in an unlimited way? Is the story going to be repeated? ... I think a stablecoin backed by cryptocurrencies is better (it can be in bitcoin or another strong crypto) and that it can be verified in the blockchain

I think they are worth having right now especailly as we transition from fiat to crypto entirely. We've seen it as more people are getting paid in strictly crypto what happens over time

 they might be a necessary evil  but for now they are good because of volatility.  The volatile nature of the market now has made it necessary that you trade qnd store your crypto asest using stable coin

A gold-backed stablecoin would be amazing

Unfortunately, I can't imagine Bitcoin ever becoming stable enough to warrant stablecoins useless, not for the foreseeable future anyway.

I don't want to imagine crypto market without stable coins. It is very necessary because of market volatility, it helps traders maintain their capital during a sudden market dump.

Which is the way stable coins should be used, holding those coins for the long term is the same as holding fiat and unless the currency of your country is doing very badly then there is not a reason to hold those coins for the long term, but when we consider the volatility of the market and the amount of money that you can lose by simply being away from your screen monitor in an hour then it is easy to see why stable coins perform a necessary job for many traders around the world.

I'm a trader and I keep telling people, stable coins are very important in this space especially for traders like me. Sometimes you just have to convert to USDT or TUSDT when you suspect there'll be a downtrend per say. I understand there are so many concerns about stable coins, but for me, it's OK.

I do not think that stablecoins is evil. I think that steyblecoiny is convenient and the development of stablecoins who can be trusted is very important for the market.

Stablecoins are really needed in the crypto space to help be this ecosystem balanced.  They usually serve as the best option for other cryptocurencies to be paired with to help reduce the volatile nature of that crypto coin. But in my own opinion, i think stablecoins are the real definition of digital currencies. They are not volatile and constantly have a fixed market value.

But tether has a lot of possibilities to become a scam consider about there was no real result for the audit to the reserved funds of tether itself. Majority of the stable coin gets manipulation by the creator and tether could be the best example to tell everyone about how it works.

The main idea of ​​that today, the fixing of the deposit is the main reason for the existence of all these stable tokens. I think, and I hope that all the same, fixing the deposit will not be the last operation.

With the current volatile and young state of the crypto market, yes they are. However I believe stablecoins are something we'll outgrow with enough time. Need that paradigm shift to occur!

Stablecoins are still a safe place for investors when the market is volatile and no investment decision is made yet! Everything is risky, but the possibility of stablecoins in the short term is quite low!

I think stable coin doesn't got the same idea with Satoshi and it kind of ruin the decentralised feature, but the investors and traders need those coins, when the market is bad the investors like to keep their coin into stable coin form and the traders need stable coin for the trade pairing, so although it tainted the crypto idea it proved that its a very useful coin

I don't see why they are evil, but they are necessary.

They can help with shorting crypto, or purchasing to account for volatility.

Eventually, you might not even want to have a stablecoins pegged to USD or another fiat. If you prefer, you could have a stablecoin pegged to the price of gold or silver if you don't like the idea of crypto still relying on fiat as the benchmark for value or stability.

I actually think a stablecoin pegged to gold or another auditable product like that could be really useful.

Stable coins like Tether (USDT) are necessary for the crypto market. Stable coins provide easy and negligible fee (as compared to fiat) to transfer between different exchange and wallets. Good stable coins are hard to manipulate and remain equivalent to 1 USD maximum times. Stable coins play an important role in the upcoming bull run and mass adoption.

Although I don't like the concept of stablecoins, I don't want to demonize them. Since BTC and the other cryptos are highly volatile, some of the users might be tempted to convert at least a part of their holdings to Stablecoins such as USDT. And this situation will remain the same as long as the crypto market remains volatile.

I think stablecoin needed to measure the value of bitcoin. Beside that, daily traders must be need stablecoin to convert their asset in fiat when bear market. I dont think crypto will replace US Dollar or fiat money because we are living with government and every people trust on government money

I think its ironic to say, "necessary-evil" let us focus on saying, stable coins are savior in my opinion. Not considering the fact that these stable coins are better in business and investments. I am just using it to save my profit on a downfall of my altcoins. As simple as that.

In order to successfully track and predict the rates of many altcoins, a binding to any coordinate system is necessary.
Bitcoin is often the starting point.
But the thing is that it often has very high volatility and that is why stable coins are necessary in order to track the fluctuations in the rate of the Bitcoin itself, without resorting to direct binding of cryptocurrency to FIAT.

That is a nice idea and something I would like to see but there have been many attempts to try this in the past and all of those attempts ended in a scam so it is understandable why many people do not really trust in the possibility of that happening in the future, however stable coins backed by fiat are good enough in my opinion even if there have been some controversies about whether or not those coins are actually backed by the amount of dollars their developers claim.

If you deeply look into, stable coins are the ones investors look at always when investing on other coin with more fluctuations. Its another best choice to increase the profit . When the value goes up and you sell the altcoin into USDT, and the value goes down. Then with the USDT earned, you can very well buy more coins with what you have. 

They are needed for trading and  for mass adoption of crypto as merchants do not want to deal with
volatile coins. Stable coins are needed, but what I do not like that most of them is centralized.
Would like to see more decentralized solutions like DAI

Every day, more and more stablecoins are being created. I think many of them cannot be trusted. It will be very bad if it adversely affects the market.

I still regard stable coins as a joke to cryptocurrency world. Just recently a scandal broke out involving Tether and Bitfinex which could be the reason for today's price of BTC in a sudden plunge. Here is the news about it. - https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitfinex-used-tether-reserves-to-mask-missing-850-million-probe-finds-11556227031 and I think it could send crypto prices downward for a couple of days until it will become stabilized or resolved.

actually the existence of a coin stable really helps a trader or a holder to secure his assets.
but what I don't like, a lot of stable coins have appeared, this should be a problem,
I think 1 to 2 stable coins is enough,
but this is just my opinion.

I think that is because, they are promoting large business and to invite big businessman here on the cryptocurrency space? Because if we are going to look at the situation, when investors think about a stable market price, they might buy and accumulate huge amount of it. Disregarding other crypto's leaving behind.

For what I observed, stable coins are very helpful for mass adoption for cryptocurrency. Since, some new people will try to use those stable coins to buy crypto, such as Bitcoin. And it is the best on stable coins are backed up with currency like USD, AFAIK, like USDT is backed up on USD. Since last year, a lot of stable coins are popping out.

I will not be precise to say that stablecoins are evil but if they are really not backed up by dollars then that's very bad. personally, I do not hold stablecoins because any news is negative about that stablecoin is not backed up by a real dollar leading to panic and falling prices. although I like that for example, usdt can be translated between exchanges

I believe stablecoins is necessary. It is allow traders and people who invest in crypto save their funds. It is good for market actually. But i am not sure is it necessary to exist that much stablecoins as now. May be after selection in the end there leave only few the best.

Ideally, stablecoins should serve on that purpose and I agree with what you've mentioned but its a bit ironic now that a well known stablecoin such as Tether turns out to be unstable at all and all its outstanding purpose seems to have been compromised and was easily manipulated unbeknownst to the crypto community. I may not be surprised at all if there will be another issue that will surface involving another stablecoin soon though I hope I'm wrong with that. :)

Stablecoin should be used for trading purpose. But if stablecoin can used for withdrawal to the banks, i think its getting more better. Tether price unstable because investor dont trust on the audit and i think tether should be transparant to keep investor trust.

Literally they were just useless since we already have fiat money in the digital for so having virtual centralized currency is also just same as those but it is more worse to hold stable coins which is created by someone rather than banks or you government.

If you do not like stable coins that is fine since no one is going to force you to use them but they are far away from being useless, their main use is to allow the users of cryptocurrencies to get a form of fiat that is easy to convert back and forth without incurring huge fees or having to give explanations to your bank about where you got your money, since there have been many instances in the past in which as soon as a bank found out of your operations with cryptocurrencies they will cancel your account.

Personally, I find this really a lack of stable coins. They need to be upgraded and overcome, I think. However, they help people feel easier when joining crypto world. That's why it is both necessary and dangerous.

For me, i think people fail to give these stable coins the credits they deserve, they have done well for the space, look at BTC for example people lost millions investing into it but no one in their right sense criticize it for being rubbish or nothing, but something that give you guarantee on your money is painted black, do you know how much is charge to get in and out of crypto using credit cards

As far as cryptocurrencies are concerned, I think they are needed, because most businesses lthat have their platforms platforms integrated to blockchain love to convert their proceeds to stable coins in order to avoid the aftermath of the high level of volatility experienced in the space

I am not a supporter of moving capital into stable coins. For me, Bitcoin itself serves as a very stable and liquid coin! I believe only in Bitcoin!

For traders, this is the only way not to use cryptocurrencies. You understand what exactly so today people try to use stable tokens. Who knows how stable they are? Probably no one will ever know.

I think the existence of stable coins in the market has been of great influence as regards creating awareness and making the crypto space easier for these business men to operate. If we look at the cryptocurrency world and its volatility, we will realize that this period only favors more of investors and not institutions or an individual that wishes to use the crypto strictly for utility token.

As these businessmen gets acquainted to using stables coins for savings and making necessary payments without the fear of volatile or the value of the fund they intend using for some particular payment settlements plunges overnight, it will become easier for all of them to migrate to BTC easily in near future when it becomes stable too.

Stablecoin backed by Fiat are very necessary .
It's estimated that the tether stable coin has a daily volume of billions.
This is a testament to the fact that there's a demand for the development of more stable coins here.
Stable coins would accelerate mainstream Adoption of cryptocurrency.

This is an interesting article. I believe crypto is here to stay! Crypto with lower volatility is also needed. We need stablecoins for that, to make some apps (dapps) function better and stable.

I wonder how much criticism and dissatisfaction with stable coins. And at that time, when it is clearly visible that they greatly facilitate the work with cryptocurrency. Nobody forces anyone to use them. I am very pleased with the appearance of stable coins. This is really a new stage in the development of cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrency continues to evolve. Perhaps, in the future, something more perfect will appear, but for now we have stable coins in their form.

Well one thing about stablecoins, you might not make any money - but you'll never lose any money either ;)

Unless its USDT, then maybe you will when the house of cards crumbles...

And this is the biggest issue with coins backed by something, they are centralized which means that is very easy for the ones emitting the coin to defraud the trust of their investors in a way similar to banks and governments, if the recent news are correct then each tether is only backed by 74 cents and while many probably do not mind this investors were assured they were investing in an asset completely backed by US dollars, so it will not surprise me if USDT disappears during the next years as people lose trust in the coin.

Why hold stable coin, when I can keep my money in fiat currency, stable coins are not cryptocurrency. Stablecoins are regulated and centralized which is not a feature of any cryptocurrency.

For liquidating the winning trading position we need to re-think about the our views on the stable cryptocurrencies. Altcoins have higher volatility and these type of stable coins can solve these problems.

I do not consider them to be evil until now. as the principal is almost the same as a coin on water. support if you put 1coin on the boat and then sail the boat into the water. it will float and even jump on the water but as the coins weight increases, the boat will become more stable and at a point when the coin becomes too much valued the boat is even gonna sink into the water and not gonna move anymore.

A stable coin is something that we need to measure the cryptocurrency with fiat value.
But too much stable coins is not good, because some of them maybe turned to be a scam coin.
There is no profit from holding stable coin, so it is not necessary to be created more of them.

Indeed stables coin are very much needed neccesary evil. If not for all everything stable coins offer but for the fact that stable coins is a safe haven for trader during continuous down trends. It more than neccesary to have them around I ll say it's compulsory for our safety

Stable coins make it easier to work with cryptocurrency. They are not really intended for a long storage period. It is convenient to use them when you need to quickly withdraw funds from a particular  cryptocurrency, but the time has not yet come to invest these funds in other coins or to withdraw them in fiat.
At the same time, if someone does not like to use them, it is their right.

My opinion is that they are actually good especially to attract more adopters who might be afraid of loosing money due to an unstable market when they do business transactions. Imagine using btc,  the one who accepts it will rather loose or gain when the market rises of falls. Apart from the accusations around USDT I'm sure stable coins are very cool

The fact is that I can not understand why the author considers stable coins as evil.  In any case, These coins enable many users of cryptocurrency to minimize their losses.  I have repeatedly used USDT when another cryptocurrency market collapsed and I was able to stall my capital level at a certain place.

Currently, stablecoins can create many problems in the market. This may have strong negative consequences. But in general, I think that the stablecoins are useful for the development of the market.

It seems that stable coins are very useful for trading and for merchants to avoid high volatility of crypto. I am not confident of the backing mechanism of stable coin which are centralized like Tether, and prefer decentralized solutions like DAI.

The best decentralized approach would be what BitBay.Market is trying to achieve.

As far as I know 99.99% of stablecoin projects think they have to be hard-pegged to a currency or commodity.
They don't. And this is their biggest weakness.

If anyone trades forex, they will know that the dollar value is not hard pegged. Its value is dynamic. The only difference is that it exchanges within a low volatility market. This low volatility is to a point where people are willing to accept it as a medium of exchange. A 5 dollar burger is still a 5 dollar burger at a restaurant, even if on a bad day in forex, the dollar possibly loses over 1/2% in value against gold or the Euro, etc.

Therefore the most robust stablecoin is one that tries to establish itself as a decentralized cryptocurrency that's value is independently determined. Bitcoin can already do this except it most likely has years even possibly decades  before it will ever become stabilized enough to be considered a medium of exchange.
So the only real step bitcoin is missing is a way to stabilize it's price. Paul Donovan, chief global economist of UBS, said it best back in an interview published in Nov. 2018, "Every economist knows a store of value is about balancing supply and demand, and with cryptocurrencies you cannot control the supply in response to a drop in demand."

And he nailed it on the head! While he was trying to be a smart ass about the future of crypto and why he thinks it will fail, he also provided the solution to fix the rampant volatility in the industry.
This is programmable money, never underestimate what can be hard coded into a blockchain - never say never.

BitBay.Market will be the first cryptocurrency that will solve this. Rather than complicate itself with hard pegging itself like 99.99% of others are doing. BitBay is simply applying a decentralized peg protocol that will allow coin holders to vote to freeze or unfreeze the total coin supply. Each coin has a memory, and can either be a liquid coin or a reserve coin depending on the voters consensus. This way it doesn't have to print new coins or burn existing coins. It simply takes the majority consensus and freezes or unfreezes the liquid supply so that it can "balance with dynamic demand". BitBay will prove Paul Donovan wrong.
This means price is not hard pegged. It can reach new values and hold these values. And why not? Pegging a stablecoin to the dollar, which has been steadily losing value since God knows how long, doesn't make any sense. If anything, decentralized cryptocurrencies that have a limited supply with or without regulated inflation should always be able to gain in value against fiat as long as demand growth is constant.

Will the price be volatile? In the beginning most likely, yes, it will. But over time, the ability to balance supply with demand should keep trade ranges contained with a minimal amount of volatility.

How is this possible? Bitcoin can take anywhere from 1-2 years for a bear market to end. With BitBay, voters can freeze roughly 80% of the total liquid supply in just 8 days! It would be hard pressed for a bear trend to last longer than 8-12 days at most. Some traders wouldn't even call that a trend, just a hiccup!

When investors can fight back against speculators, they have much more incentive to want to invest and stake which pushes out the volatility speculators so love.

There are many goals for this decentralized peg as I've already states some above, but one other major goal is to create a low-volatility coin is always independent of any other coin, currency or commodity.
Voters have the power to create either a positive or a negative correlation to bitcoin's price action. This could allow BitBay to be used as a volatility hedge against bitcoins price action. But people must remember also that since BitBay is not hard pegged, the profit potential does not stop once a trader hedges. For example, if bitcoin goes up in a bullish mini trend, but then traders feel that it could retrace, they now have 2 options: either sell their btc for a hard pegged stablecoin or sell their btc for BitBay. If they choose the former then for the most part, their ability to continue to increase their equity is done (unless they have access to margin trading and short). If they chose BitBay, their is the 'potential' that the new demand for BitBay from btc hedgers could actually cause BitBay to go up in value against BTC. This way they have the potential to continue profiting on top of their btc profit taking! There is risk obviously since nothing is guaranteed. But remember if any losses get out of control with BitBay, then voters will start freezing to protect their equity!

It should make for one hell of an interesting trade game.

BitBay.Market is just about 2-4 weeks away from presenting the decentralized peg to exchanges to test and integrate. The coding is done, it's been done since Nov. 2018.  They just have to finish up the exchange integration coding.

Hope this helps some people open up their eyes to some of the possibilities that are about to enter the industry!

That is false, we can compare and trade cryptocurrencies directly against fiat so stable coins do not serve that purpose as you claim, however it does not mean that stable coins are useless, they have their function since they allow you to get something similar to fiat without using banks, but as we have seen during the last week they have the same weakness as fiat in which you need to trust a third party to hold the parity between the coin and fiat, and that is a huge weak link that cryptocurrencies were supposedly trying to solve.

They have a place in crypto. I can't say evil but they are not an investment.

They are just a way to trade.

Fiat-backed, the problem is with the word "FIAT".
Cryptocurrencies were created to fight with FIAT money. FIAT is an evil that infiltrated cryptocurrencies and try to dump them all  :D.