galgitron

@DgtlNumismatist @TheNaturalCube Sure, and they'd be breaking the law. Easy.

@TheNaturalCube @galgitron All exchanges have to do is change the wording. Called a subscription or rewards and make you press a couple buttons or do some other lame activity. Easy.

This is not a compromise. Banks win again. x.com/LuckyStar589/s…

@DgtlNumismatist @TheNaturalCube Missing the entire point. People have money in bank accounts already, not being invested. They don't want to risk those funds so they stay in bank accounts. If they had another option to earn 5% without adding risk, then they would take that. Nothing to do with speculation.

@TheNaturalCube @galgitron 5% stablecoin yield or crypto runs wild, crushing all time highs with worldwide corporate adoption. Seems like a pretty simple choice to me. Even if you have 100k of stablecoins and receiving 5% interest. You’re getting 5k a year, that’s lame.

@CRYPTO_hitman You're missing the point that if millions of people move their money out of banks into crypto because they are chasing higher yields, then everything goes through the roof

@galgitron I'm not too worried about yield on stables, I want the legislation in place before it gets too late. This was always going to be handed off to the banks, they'll custody your crypto and pay us very little yield. I'm here for the multi X appreciation, not 4%

@CryptoDonkey5 The specific product category is low-risk yield for liquid savings, directly competing with bank accounts. Nothing to do with volatile assets

@galgitron Doesn't matter - crypto is much more than earning passive yield. If thats all someone cares about, let me introduce them to the S&P 500.

@DgtlNumismatist It's a big deal because we want big banks to capitulate and offer fair yields. Capitalism is supposed to be about competition.

@galgitron What is so complicated about this? We cannot earn yield on “ Passive holding” of stablecoins. But we can gamify it. We can be part of a “subscription” model. We can earn something other than “yield”. This is no big deal, we just have to be creative.

@iMustBeNewLOL That's the difference that the banks want to keep. They don't want to compete with liquid savings yield

I mean staking your stables would be the same as a savings account. It's there an you don't touch it. So in theory all you need to do is lock them up somewhere, even if it's on coinbase or whatever...a wallet using defi on the backend, etc ... Really the same way it is now, only diff being they're locked for however long, no?

@dumbletwit Crony capitalism is the only capitalism there is or ever can be. Human nature won't allow the dream version.

@galgitron Crony capitalism is what it is. Not pure capitalism. Without arguing for either or any :)

@chuff7se7en bro, good practice to read entire threads before commenting

@galgitron Check out convex.

@chuff7se7en Never heard of it

@galgitron There are plenty of ways to chase yield via defi.

@ccowan41 Nah, most people are so technically nincompooptent that they'd never even begin dipping into crypto. Their object here is to prevent bank-like company that abstract away all the complexity of crypto.

@galgitron Banks will end up realizing DeFi does the same thing but with more risk. People will go where the money is getting yield in DeFi pools.

How are we all loving capitalism so far?

And this isn't about capital flight as much as it is the banks not wanting to pay more yield to compete, which they could easily afford, but won't unless their hand is forced. The banking oligopoly is truly a criminal enterprise.

@bchainreader My guess is that lock-in staking would be allowed to generate yield. Banks don't want any competition for liquid cash yield.

@galgitron Any guess how long it will take them to fight about what will be deemed passive vs active? I mean that again could drag things out, no?

@Cryptocruzifier yes, absolute bullshit

@galgitron This is some bullshit.

@bchainreader I'm sure savings stablecoins (yielding stables) from centralized issuers would also be disallowed. So Kraken or Tether couldn't offer this.

@galgitron Ok, I didn't get that, thanks! I read it like it would prevent stable coin issuers from materializing yield directly into our wallets. But if this really extends to vault products then I'm as well unable to spot that so called compromise.

@bchainreader This is what they want to prevent exactly

@galgitron What i meant was that e.g. Kraken could build some sort of 1 click deposit product (vault ?) which internally is setup to leverage a stablecoin pool.

@bchainreader What you do with your own stablecoins is your business. This is entirely about preventing competing businesses from offering higher yield than banks.

@galgitron Would yield from a defi pool like usdc / usdt be considered active ?

@GVOCollective you know what I know at this time, but it shouldn't come as a surprise; it's the world's most powerful cartel.

@galgitron Interesting, that is a bummer, how about “staking” in some shape or form or using some crypto as a security mechanism and pad rewards etc… also is it JUST stable coins affected by this?