That sounds like banking or payment processing. Albeit with later Paypal has proven that you do not always need to return funds, but still there is regulatory history on that...

Stable coins are new enough and have not catastrophically crashed yet so there is less oversight.

▲

DrBrock 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

The Terra-Luna stablecoin crash wiped out $50 billion of notional value https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S15446...

It's also a very open secret that the largest Tether stablecoin is not actually 1:1 backed with USD, as they very often claim https://paymentexpert.com/2025/07/24/tether-stablecoin-regul...

▲

notatoad 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

so the short answer to the question of "why crypto" is just to work around regulation, to be able to act as a bank without the regulations that apply to banks?

▲

mondrian 6 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah and this is codified in the GENIUS act which passed recently. It enables tech companies to act like banks in certain dimensions, without being regulated like banks.

▲

notatoad 5 days ago | parent [-]

ah, okay, i see the part i'm missing here. the GENIUS act doesn't let "tech companies" act like banks, it specifically lets stablecoin issuers act as banks. so this is stripe's play to take advantage of that.

	▲	boringg 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Nothing better than more financial de-regulation - I can't see that going awry.

▲

boringg 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Stable coins are new enough .... and it's in their name... Stable! :)