We need more decentralized stablecoins

[Ucy]

So you just want to have another tool just for the sake of the illusion of choice? Not bad not bad.
Yes, some addresses are blacklisted but do you want the market to be safer? You won't be blacklisted just like that, so this is a dubious argument.
And I see no reason to do another one stablecoin, we already have enough . Or do you want to repeat the flood of the crypto market with a bunch of useless and even just fraudulent coins as it was at the rise of this story? No thanks, let's skip it.

OP made a good point. 
I have no problem with blacklisting in Crypto space though, as long as it's not done in secrecy. My major problem with the centralized blacklisting is that it probably happens in secrecy, or it's not transparent. I won't be too bother if we have a decentralized stablecoin that have clear rules that can result in users getting blacklisted if they're violated. And the community where the blacklisting happens has to transparent, decentralized, permissionless, etc. Whenever blacklisting rules are changed, users have to agree to them before they can continue using the stablecoin.

[1714832321]

1714832321

[1714832321]

1714832321

[1714832321]

1714832321

[1714832321]

1714832321

[jcarlo]

But how though. Decentralized stablecoin also carry its advantage and disadvantage, my main concern is how that stablecoin could reserve money? is it by letting some people staking usdt and let them earn from fee or what? the reason behind why so many stablecoin is centralized is because they could provide money to reserve for their stablecoin and i can't see that kind of thing is an easy feat for decentralized stablecoin.

I agree with this opinion, stablecoins are basically backed up by US Dollars or certain country currencies and this requires a large amount of funds when people are going to exchange fiat to stablecoins to transact on exchangers. USDT or other stablecoins are centralized because there is a large reserve that guarantees the availability of funds when people withdraw to bank accounts

[ReiMomo]

We will definitely need to have more decentralized stable coins in the future because when global adoption happens and making it as a replacement to fiat then the demand will be sky-high.

Around the globe, every individual will soon be needing these coins, and bitcoin and other existing decentralized stable coin may not suffice the need of everyone, for we all know that bitcoin has a limitation on the number of coins that can be mined. Centralized stablecoin has no difference with fiat that is subject or being controlled by a financial institution which is far different from the main idea of decentralized currency.

[Ryushin]

good idea In my opinion. decentralized stablecoin could compete with centralized ones in privacy sector unlike centralized that owned by private company although the stablecoin right now already fills our need but always welcome new innovation

We don't need more stable coins, the most popular among the list of all stable coins we have is USDT, USDC and DAI but we have many more like

1. TUSD (True USD)
2. Paxos Standard
3. Ndau
4. HUSD
5. Stasis Euro
6. Binance USD ( BUSD)

Don't you think we already have enough?

what were talking here are decentralized stablecoin which differ greatly from centralized.

Ndau is decentralized stable coin like DAI, though others are centralized but not ndau, honestly I don't see any reason to build another stable coin because DAI is just the best if you don't like centralized stable coins, after USDT I would chose DAI

[target]

DAI's market capitalization is also getting bigger and this is just on Ether. There is also decentralized stablecoin on the EOS network. 
For some of us there wouldn't be a difference between centralized and decentralized though as long as it can be used to preserve the value of their money, it serves its purpose. 

Would it give them enough reason to freeze an account if you have like $1M USDT on your account? 
Its going to be a problem if your MEW is going to be frozen, is it possible?

[Eddyc]

In my opinion, we already have a reasonable amount of stablecoin and if that number increases it can generate a certain barrier and security in the market, transforming the cryptocurrency market into a daily stock market. Stabilizing prices at a time when we need energy to rise to a higher, stablecoin may delay this moment. Maybe when everything is confirmed we can increase the amount of stablecoin.

Remember that it is my opinion.

[Ryker1]

Well for me, the main idea of decentralized stablecoin is being free from any central authority like a financial institution that is being controlled or ruled by the government which is the absolute opposite of centralized stablecoin -- because it is still subject to the hegemony of private company or possibly by the government as well. Centralized stablecoin doesn't give security of the assets since that the information is being kept and mange by a single or a group of persons. Perhaps, it is not wise to use the centralized stablecoin at all if you already own and started investing in a decentralized one like bitcoins.

[MiningBattalion]

Stablecoins should all be decentralized. If they are not decentralized, they better not exist at all. They are just posing unnecessary risks to their users who are mostly clueless of how they work.

If possible, these stablecoins should not even exist at all. They're fiat after all. They do not belong to the world of cryptocurrencies.

Only decentralised coin may be came a stable coin.But not all the stable coin are decentralized one in nature.USDT was the stable coin with good price and it's not a fiat.It is based on the ETH and doesn't a real USD used in United States.

[kevinzxz]

Stablecoins should all be decentralized. If they are not decentralized, they better not exist at all. They are just posing unnecessary risks to their users who are mostly clueless of how they work.

If possible, these stablecoins should not even exist at all. They're fiat after all. They do not belong to the world of cryptocurrencies.

but in my opinion stablecoin are very important for people who trading, because myself use stablecoin to hold the value of my money in cryptocurrency to remain stable (not up and down) when I don't have coin that I want to invest or trading, because if I keep them in Bitcoin or altcoin, the price can go up and down, so it makes the value of my money used for trading unstable (the value of my money can go down when the price of Bitcoin or altcoin has a bear run).

[bits4books]

So you just want to have another tool just for the sake of the illusion of choice? Not bad not bad.
Yes, some addresses are blacklisted but do you want the market to be safer? You won't be blacklisted just like that, so this is a dubious argument.
And I see no reason to do another one stablecoin, we already have enough . Or do you want to repeat the flood of the crypto market with a bunch of useless and even just fraudulent coins as it was at the rise of this story? No thanks, let's skip it.

OP made a good point. 
I have no problem with blacklisting in Crypto space though, as long as it's not done in secrecy. My major problem with the centralized blacklisting is that it probably happens in secrecy, or it's not transparent. I won't be too bother if we have a decentralized stablecoin that have clear rules that can result in users getting blacklisted if they're violated. And the community where the blacklisting happens has to transparent, decentralized, permissionless, etc. Whenever blacklisting rules are changed, users have to agree to them before they can continue using the stablecoin.

And then such a black list mechanism-completely transparent, decentralized, etc. - can be used to harm. What's stopping me from just uploading reports to one of random wallets just because I can? Nothing. Unfortunately, such mechanisms cannot exist in a direct democracy.
Today you make a similar mechanism - and tomorrow a group of friends gathers and starts sending letters demanding to pay them money, otherwise they will block your wallet. How are you going to deal with this?

[Francis Freeman]

Stablecoins should all be decentralized. If they are not decentralized, they better not exist at all. They are just posing unnecessary risks to their users who are mostly clueless of how they work.

If possible, these stablecoins should not even exist at all. They're fiat after all. They do not belong to the world of cryptocurrencies.

I understand the logic in asking for decentalised stable coins as it decrease the risk involved but it also raises the question about who is responsible and governing the decentralized stable coins. For this decentralized governance should be established to managed them in the first place.

[Abiky]

Can someone explain to me how it all works, I mean I understand that market keeps it at that level, but what makes it stay that way? Why do we trust it stay that way? USDT is something I dislike very much because I think Tether as a company is too much powerful and they have 10+ billion dollars just from us and they claim it is 1 to 1 backed but that's about it, if they run with it tomorrow we do not have anything we can do, they will have 10+ billion dollars in their name and we can't do anything about it, or maybe their bank will seize it with the government help and they won't even be able to do anything.

However when it comes to stuff like DAI, I do not trust my money will be 1 to 1 back forever neither, it is not feeling like it is something I can feel comfortable about at all, the whole idea of stablecoin is scary to me a bit.

Agree. Bitfinex is too powerful with its USD-backed stablecoin named Tether. They continue to print new USDT like crazy in order to pump its market cap. Right now, Tether is the largest stablecoin on the market with many dApps and exchanges supporting it. With the market dominance attributed to Tether, the company can do as they wish greatly determining the future of the stablecoin industry. While there are decentralized alternatives such as DAI and bitUSD, they're not as comparable as centralized stablecoins due to their lack of liquidity and mainstream acceptance. People will continue to fall for Tether's scheme, as they only care about making money in the least time possible. The ones who care about decentralization are the minority in the crypto/Blockchain space.

With Bitfinex "freezing" USDT addresses at will, I doubt people will trust stablecoins ever again. It's like bringing centralized banking to the crypto/Blockchain space. This will lead people to rely directly on banks (instead of stablecoins) for peace of mind. Unless regulators take action on Tether, Bitfinex will continue to increase its dominance in the industry. Heavy-handed regulations will make Bitfinex think twice before "freezing" someone's assets at will. At least, there are a wide array of options available on the crypto market. For what I know, investing in a stablecoin is NOT a guarantee that it'll always be pegged to the value of a US Dollar. Most of the stablecoin issuers have shady practices when it comes to backing their coin with USD reserves. They need to be thoroughly regulated in order to give investors some level of confidence. The risk is higher with decentralized stablecoins as they're backed (collaterized) by crypto assets on the Blockchain. While there's the need for more decentralization in the stablecoin industry, the risk of losing the peg will always be there.

Nonetheless, I hope we get to see more decentralized stablecoins that will improve their way towards perfection. The day when decentralized stablecoins become truly stable, will be such when the crypto market experiences greater liquidity in the future. Just my opinion

[btc-facebook]

We will definitely need to have more decentralized stable coins in the future because when global adoption happens and making it as a replacement to fiat then the demand will be sky-high.

yes, sooner or later a decentralized stablecoin will be needed as the worldwide adoption of cryptocurrencies gets wider.

Around the globe, every individual will soon be needing these coins, and bitcoin and other existing decentralized stable coin may not suffice the need of everyone,

When many people realize that crypto prices have high volatility, stablecoins are needed, so that stable coins will function as a means of payment.

[Argoo]

We will definitely need to have more decentralized stable coins in the future because when global adoption happens and making it as a replacement to fiat then the demand will be sky-high.

Around the globe, every individual will soon be needing these coins, and bitcoin and other existing decentralized stable coin may not suffice the need of everyone, for we all know that bitcoin has a limitation on the number of coins that can be mined. Centralized stablecoin has no difference with fiat that is subject or being controlled by a financial institution which is far different from the main idea of decentralized currency.

The Chinese government is now drafting documents on the legal support of the circulation of its digitized yuan.  They declare the digital yuan to be the property of China and prohibit its use by others as a means of providing other stablecoins.  It is possible that other states, over time, may also follow China's example.  Then stable coins of various forms of ownership, except for state ones, will be outlawed.  Decentralized stablecoins will have to look for other ways of collateral.  It could be gold, cryptocurrency, or something else.

[Salauddin1994]

Fiat currency cannot be replaced by anyone both are needed at work bitcoin is a decentralized transaction it is not valid everywhere fiat is used all over the world there will be many problems in the way of daily life without centralized exchange. Without a decentralized stable currency there would be no problem in the world the demand for bitcoin is higher than the fiat currency if it becomes more global its stable connection will be far away. Even if china itself introduces digitized yuan it will take a long time to replace the journey.

[JHORN]

 I'm satisfied with USDT, USDC and DAI, I'm very familiar with these three stable coins and their use cases are the same, USDT has more exposure as a stable coin because it's not only available on Ethereum ERC20 buy others too, USDT has the highest volume over all and it's centralized just like USDC, the only decentralized stable coin here is DAI

[tvplus006]

...It's no secret that decentralized stablecoins like DAI and USDJ are the minority in the crypto/Blockchain space. ...

Just look at the capitalization of USDJ to understand that this decentralized stablecoin is practically not used by market participants. We see only 11 million USDJ on the market, against 18 billion USDT. Dai is slightly better represented on the market with a capitalization of 1 billion rubles. All this indicates that the majority of market participants use centralized stablecoins due to a lack of understanding of the functioning of decentralized stablecoins.

[Dariusburst]

I prefer USDT over the other stable coins, even DAI isn't better just because it's decentralized, I want something that works better and I don't see how USDT is a threat to my fund when I'm not a scammer or when I'm not into terrorist funding, you can only fear USDT if you are into unclean money making ways

[Skadi360]

We surely need some, lots decentralized coin now only last for a month or 2 at least. lack of community participation is the main problem and also from the lack of uniqueness of the project that attracts new and permanent member. Thats why we need stable for consistency.

[joseyphil82]

We need more decentralized crypto projects but not stable coins, every existing stable coins have same thing to offer so I don't see any need for new stable coins now, if you don't like centralized stable coin for one reason or another simply find dex stable coins, there is ndau and Dai