Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by More-nitors | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

More-nitors·

"self-correcting equilibrium" sounds like the whole thing is doing OK...

but after Luna-fiasco and self-proclaimed "stable" coins being unstable, how does anyone keep trust in crypto-coins?

View on HN

> after Luna-fiasco and self-proclaimed "stable" coins being unstable, how does anyone keep trust in crypto-coins?

After Chernobyl and self-proclaimed "stable" nuclear reactors being unstable, how does anyone keep trust in nuclear power?

The answer is that we analyze each design for soundness, rather than making blanket statements about an entire class of technology.

Believing a stablecoin to be stable because it has the word 'stable' in is like believing a country to be democratic because it has 'Democratic' in the name.

That is kind of apples and oranges. In the case of Bitcoin, the algorithm is only trying to maintain a consistent block creation rate of 1 per 10 minutes, not attempt to compensate for the price. If the price drops faster than the hash rate because all the minors are playing chicken with each other, well that will be interesting to watch.

By being able to look at how each individual one is designed and its mechanics, which allowed us to avoid Luna the entire time as well.

Dai hasn't moved an inch, what you're seeing is the collapse of investment vehicles that were stable in name only.

I still trust in crypto coins. In those that I hold in a wallet only I have the private keys to. Don't really care about all that fancy defi/nft/whatever stuff. Let idiots burn their money. But I still have trust in the concept of crypto currency.

Your currency is worthless if nobody else trusts it.

Well it's a good thing one other person still trusts it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com