Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

DAI track record for the last 4.5 years had proven you wrong. It’s either

1)centralized and has all these centralization risks (USDT had frozen 360M on ether alone),

2) crypto-overcallaterized that has less centralization risks but limits in stability.

3) or something else, that usually doesn’t work (terraUSD)

I keep 99% on my money in crypto (plus I recently got pretty much excluded from banking system) so i have my money where my mouth is: DAI. I don’t like everything about it, like lots of USDC is collateral, or ineffective liquidation system, and for that reason I’m participating in StableUnitDAO to build far-better alternative (feel free to join us, i bet all my lifesavings on this project) but for sake of this argument it’s not good fiat vs bad crypto stablecoins. For lots of people it’s strictly opposite.




I think I am spending a couple of hours every day here arguing with the barrage of web3 skeptics, trying to spread the message that crypto can be a net positive for society without replacing traditional finance.

That the important thing is giving people an option, and not just some high-stakes casino.

And then:

> I bet all my lifesavings on this project.

You are not helping me, dude. You are not helping anyone...

> I recently got pretty much excluded from banking system

Does it have anything to do with xSigma, perhaps?


> DAI track record for the last 4.5 years had proven you wrong.

4.5 years is not a lot of history. I wouldn't fit a basic credit model on that much data.

open disclosure, I know nothing of DAI (indeed little of crypto). But if I want a dollar-like asset, a risk free asset, then "limits in stability" is not compatible with that.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: