I do not think most people are even slightly familiar with what transpired this year with regard to stablecoins. The biggest players that move money are going forward with it. This means Amazon, Walmart, and numerous other big players. They don't like paying credit card companies, and why should they. It's going to be a game changer.

▲

ceejayoz 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

If you want an Amazon stablecoin, fund an Amazon gift card with an ACH. (They already offer this, and they love it, as it bypasses the credit card companies. I often get offered a bonus for recharging this way.)

Because that's fundamentally what it's gonna wind up being.

▲

OutOfHere 6 days ago | parent [-]

It's not about what I want. It's about what Amazon wants, has said they will institute, and what is already legal.

Yes, in a manner of speaking it could be like that, except that stablecoins can be self-custodied, safely be sent to others, and be exchanged for other stablecoins and forms of money, etc. I will not apologize for the cluelessness of other people.

▲

ceejayoz 6 days ago | parent [-]

> except that stablecoins can be self-custodied

I will not apologize for the cluelessness of other people, like those who think Amazon is gonna make and promote a stablecoin they don't deeply control.

Even Tether freezes addresses. Amazon absolutely will.

> It's about what Amazon wants, has said they will institute…

That applies to a whole bunch of things they eventually gave up on. (Like https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/3/24190410/amazon-astro-busi...)

▲

OutOfHere 6 days ago | parent [-]

The freezes apply only under direction from the federal government. It's not something that the issuer does without this instruction. Tether has no control of its own here, and Amazon won't either.

Amazon is just an example. Dozens are coming.

▲

ceejayoz 5 days ago | parent [-]

> The freezes apply only under direction from the federal government.

Tether chose to build in a freeze capability.

> Tether has no control of its own here, and Amazon won't either.

Neither can say "no" to a legal order from a government with jurisdiction over them. Both can say "no" to you voluntarily, even absent a court order.

An Amazon stablecoin will exist for the purpose of Amazon's own benefit, not consumers'.

▲

OutOfHere 5 days ago | parent [-]

There is no incidence of any stablecoin wallet being frozen without the government's order. To do so would invite a lawsuit.

As for what Tether chose to do in the past, that's irrelevant, as the legislation now requires it. The only grandfathered stablecoin that doesn't have freezes is DAI, but it has poor liquidity in comparison.

▲

ceejayoz 5 days ago | parent [-]

https://tether.to/en/legal/

> Tether may suspend or terminate your access to the Site or any of the Services, freeze any Tether Tokens held by you, or terminate your Tether Token Wallet, as required by applicable Law or where Tether, in its sole discretion, determines it is prudent to do so or where you have violated, breached, or acted in a manner inconsistent with any provision of these Terms or Applicable Law.

They will comply with valid court orders. They can also do it on their own volition.

> To do so would invite a lawsuit.

Oh, no, not another one!

	▲	OutOfHere 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Never has Tether frozen a wallet without an order from the government. If some crazy person decides to attack the Tether network, then yes, it would make sense for Tether to freeze their wallet.

▲

squigz 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I've never really understood this idea that banking should be free, as if it's ran on magical fairy dust and not computers that cost money, ran by people who need money themselves.

	▲	OutOfHere 6 days ago \| parent [-]
		No here one except you said it will be free, but the amounts paid to Visa and MasterCard are altogether atrocious. Anything more than a few cents per electronic transaction is unreasonable.