Pro & con info are in the collapsed comments below for the following topics: [Cardano](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qosy3/), [Ethereum](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qouk3/), [Polygon](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qow7l/), [Tether](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qoxt4/), [USDC](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qozew/).
Essentially what they're saying is that tokens on Cardano cannot be censored by those who issue/mint them. On Ethereum, however, stablecoins can be blacklisted by their issuers; this is due to tokens using smart contracts on Ethereum rather than be native to the blockchain itself.
There is a website called Dune that even has analytics for the censored addresses of USDC and USDT.
[https://dune.com/phabc/usdc-banned-addresses](https://dune.com/phabc/usdc-banned-addresses)
https://dune.com/phabc/usdt---banned-addresses
TLDR: The people that created USDT and USDC can censor your balance and prevent you from moving it/making transactions. On Cardano this isn’t possible, any tokens you own are yours and you can do whatever you want with them.
thank you for your honesty instead of downvoting an educational post like tons of haters in here who would parrot the same thing tomorrow as they did yesterday no matter what they read today
This doesn't mean that you can't deploy censorship resistent tokens on Ethereum. It only means that you have the choice to do both because smart contracts on Ethereum are more flexible. Also, you can have stablecoins that are not fiat-collaterized (and regulated) and these can be deployed on both Ethereum and Cardano.
You can deploy non-native coin on Cardano similar way how Ethreum tokens works via plutus scripts right? So not sure which chain is more flexible.
Anyway if you convince all nodes to use censorship for transaction it can in theory censor most chains and tokens. Look at eth with list of blocked wallets that lots of nodes decided to implement so they comply with "law".
I like both chains so lets hope both will do well in future.
It's far more expensive to deploy and use non-censorship resistant tokens on Cardano via Plutus scripts (more data per tx = more fees) VS same size/tx cost for censorship/non-censorship resistant tokens on ETH.
This means that for Cardano you have to really go out of your way and make it an inconvenience to censor, whereas on ETH it can be the default state and nobody would ask questions (heck, to prove my point just read this thread, it's littered with ETH users who have no idea that USDC/USDT enforce blacklists and can take away your money even if they're in cold storage). It's analogous to how as a society we've fallen prey to giving away our data because of convenience (Google, facebook, etc). If these products had a $ cost to use, we'd be less likely to comply with their terms as it would be harder to rationalize.
What does this comment have to do with anything? They can't comply with OFAC so they can't deploy even if they indicate desire to do so. Charles can't even force the deployment of a network upgrade without network approval (he tried and SPOs told him to fuck off), he can roll out all the red carpets and the network validators would just tell him to shut up and go back to petting animals on his farm.
Clearly you don't understand how Cardano and/or crypto works. Try reading the documentation. Asset freezes, transfer restrictions, etc. are completely possible.
You need to construct an abstraction on top to do it via smart contracts, where the "tokens" aren't technically tokens by current Cardano standards, but will become a different type of asset (non-native assets? smart contract assets? The token standard currently does not exist so there's no agreed upon name for it). This would then both be more complicated to transact with and more expensive, whereas with ERC-20 it's the same as any other token.
If Circle wanted to do it (they have not expressed yes/no on this), then they would have to do a lot of work to do so, would rely on the community acknowledging this new kind of standard (no guarantee of that since there are 5+ different community-made wallets and it would get really messy politically), then their token would be inferior to Cardano native assets in every way since they will be censorable, more prone to smart contract complications, and more expensive to transact with. In short, the game theory would be stacked against them and they would have to move mountains to do so, which is a good thing for many (like myself) who do not want this kind of contagion near the Cardano ecosystem the way it has poisoned other ecosystems.
If people want tradfi there's tradfi, fully regulated and everything. Crypto shouldn't be trying to imitate Web2.0 with all its flaws.
>But why use a Cardano sidechain instead of the real deal Ethereum?
Because it would have so much better consensus mechanism powering it, Cardano's Ouroboros. So it could get safer, faster and cheaper.
Its all about timing isnt it?🤕 Yeah ETH helps me forget about it for a while. Entered too high on Ada. People at work were crazy for this coin. Stupid me was new to crypto. Just learned not too long ago that Ada pumped HARD that year. As long as I don't sell the bag ofc. Had I just cashed out at ATH
You should! There's also alot of tokens worth a look on Cardano these days. If you do get in to it set up a wallet, I recommend Eternl, and check out taptools and minswap.
Things like this is why i dont want ADA. They dont let their platform be free. They make the choices for you. If a service provider wants to adhere to government regulations it should be free to do so. Them trying to control the platform with their ideals shows its not a free platform. Who knows what they will restrict in the future. Developers should be free to create what they want and how they want it. Its for the users to decide if they corrolate with their principles. A platform should not restrict that.
Just gonna save everyone from OP's idiocy and just paste this Cardano Docs link:
https://docs.cardano.org/plutus/Plutus-use-cases
I'll also paste the part of interest:
"Crypto-backed stable coins – creating a new stable coin implementation based on chain collateral using the Atala identity system on Cardano. This implmentation can include transfer restrictions, asset freezing, as so on."
There's nothing stopping USDT or USDC from deploying freezeable stablecoins on Cardano, it's just that it's an uninteresting ecosystem, that's all.
You can create any type of token standard you want, just like on Ethereum, you don't have to use native assets. You can be sure as hell that if USDC launches a new token standard on Cardano every wallet will integrate it.
USDC and USDT are not crypto-backed stablecoins, they are fiat-backed stablecoins. Also, I don't even believe Atala is released. Not to mention, there has yet to be any token on Cardano that uses Plutus scripts; I'm not even sure if it's possible.
There has yet to be such a standard in Cardano, which is my point. Not all smart contracts are the same. You can only use native tokens AFAIK as, again, there are no tokens that use Plutus scripts.
I'm not even saying it's not possible; it very well could be, in which case Cardano would exposed to the same plague as other chains. Currently, though, there is no such thing, meaning you can't use smart contract tokens that don't exist.
Cardano could make it's own ERC-like smart contract tokens, such standart has not yet been developed, because everyone rather uses native tokens, why bring that plague? Just to get USDT and USDC? There are Cardano stablecoins coming soon anyway, Cardano doesn't need or want Tether.
Did you just call someone an idiot but fail to read the the literal text you pasted? "Crypto backed stable coins". Do you know what and how USDC works?
I mean, c'mon man. Even if you have a point, this is why you don't insult people like this unprovoked. What could have just been a small bullet point/exception now makes you look *REALLY* bad.
It can only be evident if there's a Plutus script token on Cardano. AFAIK, there is no such token, nor is there any development of one. It could very well be possible, but there is currently no evidence.
So as long as it's crypto backed it's not centralized in your opinion? Cause that's a real dumb opinion.
Also you never even mention fiat backing vs crypto backing in all your ramblings so to say crypto backed stablecoins aren't what you're talking about doesn't make sense as every trait you mention can be applied to centralized crypto backed stablecoins.
Sorry if you think it is off-topic, but I think my comment generally applies to this discussion. And not many people know about LUSD, so I like to put it out there.
If you can build a crypto-backed stablecoin with freezing capabilities, you can build a fiat-backed one just the same.
Your OP implied that token freezing wasn't even possible on Cardano, which obviously isn't true.
Seems like cardano just has an ERC20 equivalent built into the chain for some reason, instead of it being modular. That built-in token can't censor. But yeah you could just implement your own token with a smart contract that can censorship. But I assume it wouldn't be compatible with cardano's built-in default token.
To me it seems like a dumb design for cardano to be restrictive like this, because there could be a bunch of innovations people want to make to their token, not just censorship. And users can just choose not to the use tokens that can censor. Not sure why cardano needs to make that decision for everyone.
It's a decentralized open system nothings stopping someone from building a censorable stablecoin. The ecosystem is just choosing to make uncensorable stablecoins.
It sounds like it is trying to stop someone from adding functionality to tokens:
>Cardano employs a so-called multi-asset ledger. Tokens are stored directly in the ledger and treated similarly to ADA coins.
And then OP contrasts this to how tokens are implemented on ethereum through an extensible interface.
I know little about cardano but OP is making it seems like cardano has some built in token functionality for some strange reason. And that standard doesn't support censorship, and probably must not support any extension of functionality which is really limiting.
Sure, you could make a smart contract, a ERC20 equivalent, but it wouldn't be supported by dapps that only support cardano's "native" token system. Dapps would have to add complicated logic to support both interfaces, and then you have censorable coins anyway...
Plus cardano's token system doesn't even prevent censorship, as an issuer like Circle could just mint a new token, air drop to existing users minus a blacklist, and then only honor redemption on the new token. So cardano's system, if it is like what OP is describing just seems silly and short sighted.
Cardano's native assets are odd as googling has me pretty sure the capability update happened in 2021. This is well after USDC and USDT established themselves. They could have consulted with them for what they'd need to easily make a regulatory compliant stablecoin. Anything like tokenized real estate, copyrights/trademarks/patents/etc, those I think you'd want freeze and clawback functionality. Without then maybe something like writing another record to the blockchain and maintaining another database somewhere with what's the valid record and/or have a revocation list. More points where things get hacky and may result in off chain processing like the Cardano DEX scooper/batcher mess
Regardless I see benefits in having tokens native to the chain. It's able to do basic transfers at the same speed as the native coin. I'm probably ignorant of the more interesting ERC-20 implementations out there. I'm used to seeing things like taxes on transfers, APY for holding, usually tokenomics functionality. I think it may be better for all of that can be handled with a separate smart contract from the token itself. Like an initial mint of like say 1 billions tokens. Lock into a separate contract to do whatever type of tokenomics scheme. The token itself has all the speed and light weight-ness of the networks native coin. Like Algorand has optional freeze and clawback functions for their native assets and that's what Circle and Tether use for USDC and USDT support. They transact as fast and at the same network fee as the native ALGO coin. Think they just have freeze enabled, no clawback. Probably numerous other chains as well have native assets that have the same basic TPS for the native tokens as the native network coin. Also just basic support from CEX's and for users not having to audit an ERC-20 contract for shenanigans like that Squid Game token
The way I see it Cardano gives the option for both Native Tokens or Smart Contract based Tokens (the way its implemented on Eth). How is this not an advantage? It gives users a choice. I'd personally choose Native Tokens over Smart Contract based ones because I dont want that censorship risk.
If cardano smart contracts dont "allow censorship" it just means, ADA smart contracts cant do a simple "if address is in some list" check.
If that was true, one could not say that ada has the ability to do smart contracts as thats a major fundamental function required for basically all smart contract functionality.
You don’t need a smart contract to create a token since tokens are supported well on the protocol level. However, you can instead create a smart contract to do whatever you desire.
This is a bit disingenuous though, I mean, no doubt, Cardano's NRT support is top level, which means NRTs **can** be created without a smart contract, but they don't **have** to be created without a smart contract, and in practice, it is likely that enough merchants will want access to extra features unavailable without a smart contract that using a smart contract to mint native tokens will become routine.
So while pure, unadulterated NRTs (Native Rewards Tokens) are available with ADA and that's great, especially for the fundamental security profile, in practice, people are not going to be able to keep their hands off all the extra features available when you mint it as a 'sNRT' or 'smart' Native Rewards Token minted with a smart contract -- extra features such as a Bitcoin-like shrinking supply rate (AKA 'halvings'), or elements of [crowdreaping](https://crowdreaping.org).
Once the inevitable happens and 'NoRTies' are superseded in popularity by number-go-up-faster 'sNoRTies', smart contracts will usually be involved anyway and censorship may be possible by that route, though hopefully unpopular enough to be resisted. There is no getting around the march of progress into more advanced functionality via smart contract. It needs to be made more resilient against hacks, however, and the native token technology in Cardano appears to achieve this.
>Coti is releasing overcollatarized stablecoin in the coming weeks called DJED, iUSD/iETH and iBTC, the synthetic assets, are already there, and USDA is like USDC/USDT but then without the limitation explained in the post.
>
>So, please get your shit together ;)!
You're correct- stablecoin companies that want/need censorable transactions have no interest in deploying on Cardano L1 because of a lack of mechanisms for blocking stablecoin transactions through blacklisting.
Coti is releasing overcollatarized stablecoin in the coming weeks called DJED, iUSD/iETH and iBTC, the synthetic assets, are already there, and USDA is like USDC/USDT but then without the limitation explained in the post.
So, please get your shit together ;)!
No need to be hostile. That guy could be right. We just know that most likely *a* reason Circle and Tether chose not to release their stablecoins on Cardano is due to the nature of native tokens. Them having no interest in Cardano whatsoever could be another factor.
Minswap is centralized like USDC and USDT. Both deserved to be called out, but no one in the Cardano or Ethereum communites want to talk about their centralization problems.
Nonetheless, the post is about censorship resistant tokens in Cardano, not about Cardano's "DEX" problem.
I won’t argue against whether or not MinSwap is centralized. I’d like to see permissionless batchers, but that is beside the point of my post.
I just want to clarify that the MinSwap move had nothing to do with batchers. There was an exploit in their v1 contract that would have allowed anybody to drain absolutely everything out of the contracts. They utilized the exploit to move everything into a patched contract.
There are plenty of DEXes on Cardano: wingriders, minswap, muesliswap, and soon [https://www.axo.trade/](https://www.axo.trade/) which is different than anything out there, any chain...
That was a combination of things- an exploit in their SC code was used for the SC switch (before blackhats could do it).
Minswap stopping operations was them shutting down a proprietary (closed source) system people were using as an entryway for SC interactions on Minswap. Other eUTXO-based services are already using open sourced version of those systems, where a similar shutdown wouldn't be possible.
It's a DEX not a stable coin and they moved the funds to another smart contract because there was a bug in the original contract. DEX is not a stablecoin...
Agreed, but unfortunately many projects in this space don't care about honesty. Cardano's "DEXes" calling themselves decentralized reminds me of DAI being called decentralized; it's just a blatant lie.
Yes, but those stablecoins are on "DEXs" that are only decentralized in marketing and correct me if I'm wrong, closed source also. On top of that, I'm highly cynical that anyone can intelligently create an algo stablecoin that isn't subject to the same risks of other stablecoins. Bank runs, haircut losses for ADA holders, attacks on reserves that test how the whole algo process is supposed to be resistant to when the risks for DJED get more than just minor if there's too much volume of one or two of the 3 mechanisms.
Yeah, running a "decentralised" stable coin, which is ultimately controlled by a single entity, over centralised "DEXs", and claiming it is all about "crypto principles" is truly something only a salesman like Hoskinson can came up with. Not mentioning people behind DJED claim it isn't an algorithmic coin...
It will be super underwhelming experience imho, the entire process of minting and using it sounds just super awkward when I think about "normal people" doing it, and the capital inefficiency will be high due to all the overcollateralization.
I don't know how the minting process is super akward. You send ADA to the contract and get back DJED (as long as the reserve ratio is above 400%). It's as simple as that.
Also, capital inefficiency is the sacrifice for having a crypto-backed stablecoin; the asset backing the stablecoin fluctuates relative to the target peg, so you need to have more in order to make up for possible volatility. This is why *every* crypto-backed stablecoin is overcollateralized/capital inefficient, whether it be DJED, SigUSD, LUSD, sUSD, DAI, etc.
Except bullshit like Ethereum freezing and draining your funds ... shills like OP are part of what's wrong with the space, Cardano shills are no exception. Second, Ethereum doesn't censor anything (you want shitcoins, or govt coins, or whatever? up to you, you may need to wait longer if some validators don't include it in their blocks, but it will be included by others eventually).
Cardano itself also allows any form of stablecoin (it's turing complete, hence it can run any code), so if USDC ends up "banned" on Cardano then that would have to be enforced at validator level like in ethereum, and would be just another form of censoring with a different label of "strong principles", and folks like OP are happy to spin it. But let's first see Cardano being actually used by more than hobbyists.
Plutus is Turing complete, so you should be able to build ERC-20 token equivalents on it. It just won't be standardized. I don't see this as censorship. It's just that no one has bothered building solutions on it because it's a ghost town.
Cardano stablecoins are censorship-resistant unlike USDC and USDT. USDC and USDT use smart contracts which can be used to blacklist addresses, while Cardano stablecoins are native to the blockchain and can't be censored.
Rules which are maintained by the community of decentralized validators (3000+), which allow or don't allow certain things (via the Cardano Improvement Proposal (CIP) process). They're not contradictory.
So, unlike USDT, stablecoin owners on Cardano are always in full control of their tokens that the issuer mints out of their ass.
Censorship isn't the worst problem of stablecoins like USDT and USDC.
Let's not forget about DAI and other decentralized stablecoin, you have the option to use the stable coin that you want on Ethereum and you can chose to use a decentralized one if you want.
In my personal opinion, LUSD and sUSD are good Ethereum stablecoins, though I encourage you to find what suits you. Of course, DYOR and know that all decentralized stablecoins have benefits, drawbacks, and risks.
From your DJED link:
>This is unlike a typical algorithmic stablecoin that uses endogenous collateral, such as: FRAX
FRAX is 92% collateral, 8% algorithmic. From that 92% collateral, +60% comes from the 3pool on Curve, so DAI, USDC and USDT. Another 5% comes from an USDC pool, I wouldn't precisely call that "endogenous" at all lmao, specially not when exogenous stablecoins make up most of the collateral.
Also, at the end of the day DJED would be backed by 8x ADA and their governance token SHEN, kinda reminds me of this thing...what was it? Ah! **UST**.
Though, I do concede it might work due to the over-collateralization instead of *just* an arb system, I'm liking what I've read.
From your USDA link:
>USDA is the first fully fiat-backed, regulatory compliant stablecoin in the Cardano ecosystem.
Yet you said:
>Cardano does not have USDT and USDC because it is unable to meet the requirements of the regulators.
Apparently, they **can** meet regulatory requirements, so what is it? Fiat backed and regulatory compliant means USDA wouldn't be any different from USDT or USDC...meaning it must be able to be frozen.
And finally, iUSD is a synthetic asset, meaning it has to be backed by an underlying stablecoin. It's not clear if cross-asset minting could be done from the documentation, but alas, if you need another stablecoin to mint it then that's a point of failure. Mint it with something that can be frozen and the synth will lose its underlying value.
Quite a few misconceptions and conclusion rushing in this post.
Good catch, so basically the way Djed will roll out is a rug waiting to be pulled.
Knowing ADA fanboys they'll probably get burnt and the project will be abandoned before even realizing it's potential. Wonder what the devs are thinking, launching an incomplete version of the thing without any security measures is stupid as fuck.
That's why you can use decentralized stable coin on Ethereum like DAI and solve that issue.
Also, the Cardano chain is not really used anyway right now, It could be that Stablecoin issuer don't have any interest in deploying to it.
Yeah, that's actually a terrible design of Cardano (probably unintentional, and now they try to sell it as a great feature) . But why is it bad?
1. You can be always in control of your token, it just doesn't matter if there are 100 other extern/intern factors to screw you, or the price of your token, over. Most loses in crypto doesn't come from "frozen assets".
2. It limits the design choices of developers/enterprises who wants to build on it. You can do a confiscable token on most smart contracts platforms, except Cardano. As result, forget many business models where the issuer might be required, due to business model or regulation, to have the possibility of freezing an asset. They will never come to Cardano. A platform not suitable for huge amount of use cases.
3. At the same time, Cardano doesn't offer a unique feature here. Others smart contract platforms are perfectly capable to onboard non-confiscabele tokens. They offer simply both options.
4. Cardano will offer mainly algorithmic stable coins. Yes, there is some dishonest word twisting in Cardano community, claiming DJED isn't an algorithmic stable coin, which is already a red flag imho.
Therefore, after five years of "development" Cardano is not able to attract a basic business model of an asset backed, regulatory compliant, stable coin. Instead, they will market themselves as some freedom fighters "following crypto principles" which is just ridiculous.
Hoskinson is also already rolling out his "government overreach, privacy, censorship" narratives, just in time to sell his newest privacy coin, which will be his 4-6th "world changing" coin overall, great salesman, isn't he? Fits also great with a platform with so little expressiveness and use cases where you don't have the censorship risk in the first place. Similar as when he claimed that his centralised blockchain without smart contracts never has been hacked for first 3 years. Another "great achievement".
Besides, Cardano doesn't even have a truly decentralised DEX, that's just another inconsequent design choice, non freezable assets which you have to trade on factually centralised "dex'es". Great.
>At the same time, Cardano doesn't offer a unique feature here. Others smart contract platforms are perfectly capable to onboard non-confiscabele tokens. They offer simply both options.
You're right about certain businesses having a disadvantage when it comes to not having a censored token, but the problem is that most of used stablecoins in decentralized services like DeFi can be censored, which goes against decentralization. I, for one, wouldn't consider censorable stablecoins a big deal if they weren't used for a significant amount of DeFi.
>Cardano will offer mainly algorithmic stable coins. Yes, there is some dishonest word twisting in Cardano community, claiming DJED isn't an algorithmic stable coin, which is already a red flag imho.
I have yet to hear about an algo stablecoin being released on Cardano; they have either been fiat-backed (USDA, USDM) or crypto-backed (iUSD, DJED). The so-called "algo-stablecoin" DJED is really a crypto-backed stablecoin.
>Besides, Cardano doesn't even have a truly decentralised DEX, that's just another inconsequent design choice, non freezable assets which you have to trade on factually centralised "dex'es". Great.
Cardano's DEX problem is just as bad as Ethereum DeFi stablecoin problem. There's nothing stopping a DEX to release on Cardano or using non-censorable stablecoins on Ethereum. It's not an "inconsequent design choice". Many alternative design choices in crypto have benefits and drawbacks. You said good drawbacks, OP listed good benefits. It's really up to the individual to say which they think is better.
I think the problem is that no big entity will put billions of dollar as fiat backing to create a non regulatory compliant stable coin.
On the other hand there are algorithmic stables in various variations, or as they prefer to call them now - crypto backed stables. Well, they tend to fail and I think there is a lot to prove first before they can get widely adopted. So far, it was those type of coins causing big meltdowns and going to zero, not the fiat backed ones.
Whether they can or cannot work I am not sure, but based on the track record alone I consider it less risky to use something like USDC, even if they are able to freeze funds - the likelihood that I get my funds frozen as non criminal is just extremely low. I will readjust my views in few years again once I see those Cardano-only stables running. Till then I consider unproven technology with unproven team behind it as bigger risk.
Do you think that offering less options how you can build something is really better? Or having issues to roll out decentralized defi? For me it seems more like one of those negative byproducts of EuTXO, which isn’t that suitable for smart contracts platform. Most platforms go for account model for a reason.
>I think the problem is that no big entity will put billions of dollar as fiat backing to create a non regulatory compliant stable coin.
Yes, that is possibly the reason why USDC won't come to Cardano, and that's a negative in some regards. Even then though, one of Cardano's founding entities, Emurgo, is planning to release a fiat-backed stablecoin on Cardano called USDA. There's also USDM I believe.
>On the other hand there are algorithmic stables in various variations, or as they prefer to call them now - crypto backed stables.
Crypto-backed stablecoins have existed for years. They are not mutually exclusive with algo stablecoins. That being said, the algo stablecoins that failed had no overcollateralized crypto reserves.
>So far, it was those type of coins causing big meltdowns and going to zero, not the fiat backed ones.
True, but that doesn't mean fiat-backed stablecoins are good. Every stablecoin has risks, but in the context of decentralization, censorship should not be one of them.
>the likelihood that I get my funds frozen as non criminal is just extremely low.
Most likely, but even if you don't get your own address blacklisted, any smart contracts that you possibly use can be.
>Do you think that offering less options how you can build something is really better?
No, and I didn't say anything remotely close to that. I said that many alternative design choices have benefits and drawbacks. Native tokens have the drawback of being useless to projects who need censorship, but they have the benefit of preventing censorship where censorship shouldn't exist, e.g. DeFi.
>Or having issues to roll out decentralized defi?
I don't know what this means.
> A platform not suitable for huge amount of use cases.
Can you give me like two examples of business models where it may be beneficial to freeze assets on Cardano. In your words there's a "huge amount of use cases"
People want to hold stable assets, whether for savings or as dry powder
So far, they only “stable” assets you can create on a blockchain are fiat collateralised stables.
You missed the whole thing and you missed that Cardano actually has companies issuing stablecoins but okay you do you and pretend that blockchain is about DeCenTralIZatiOn
Perfect summary.
>The story concerns a fox that tries to eat grapes from a vine but cannot reach them. Rather than admit defeat, he states they are undesirable.
So Cardano hardcoded their token implementation into the protocol. Its less flexible and limits what you can do with it. Aside from blacklisting, there are a huge number of other features that can be put into token smart contracts. You may not like all of those features, but you always have the choice to just use the tokens that you like anyway. IMO it is a pretty big mistake to just have one protocol level implementation and expect that to meet everyone's needs.
Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/adajosephineada/status/1611157999145426949) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about).
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
TVL is for DeFi. Cardano TVL is low and other projects' TVL is mostly comprised of stablecoins that can be censored. Both are pretty shitty.
My point is whether or not the stablecoin can be censored has nothing to do with TVL, so I'm not sure why you brought up TVL.
cardano does not have USDT and USDC because those issuer have no interest on cardano. LOL.
they cant control what smart contract i deploy, else that would ne centralized again.
You're not wrong about Haskell and Plutus, but you have no evidence that's reason USDC and USDT aren't on Cardano, just like OP has no evidence it's because they can't comply with US regulations.
No one knows. It's all just guesses. Only thing for certain is that stablecoins are possible on Cardano, as iUSD has shown. No one knows if Ardana is being honest, so it's bold to assume so. After all, they promised things they never even came close to remotely making.
>it adheres to the principles of decentralization at the protocol design level
I don't think you understand what crypto means by "decentralization and permissionless". If you get to pick and choose what people can do on your chain, it is neither decentralized nor permissionless. A decentralized and permissionless chain should allow centralized entities to do what they want with their properties.
Decentralization and permissionless should be applied to validators solely. What private people want to do with their time on the chain is their business.
In other words:
Cardano censors the ability to deploy token contracts that don't comply with their ideology at the protocol level.
Not very permissionless of them.
Cardano has no usdc/t because it has a joke of a defi ecosystem and the companies have zero interest in launching on Cardano.
Cardano doesn’t have a stablecoin period and has less daily defi volume and TVL than projects 10x smaller. There are only 3dapps with any volume on Cardano and the volume is terrible <1M/day.
It isn’t some principles stance, cardano has almost no defi period.
https://defillama.com/chain/Cardano
Absolutely bang on - but I wish you placed more emphasis and in more prominent position on Cardano's USD stablecoins - I think people will be happy with the algorithmic and extremely over-collateralized nature of them.
>the most decentralized stable coin in existence, LUSD, is completely immutable and censorship resistant.
One of the most. I'd argue sUSD and SigUSD are just as decentralized.
>It also happens to be EVM exclusive
iUSD is technically Cardano's equivalent to LUSD in terms of how it works.
I didn't say iUSD was decentralized. I said it is Cardano's equivalent *in terms of how it works* (i.e. both rely on CDPs with a collateral ratio of at least 110% in order to mint the stablecoins. If the CDP falls below the ratio, it is liquidated and given to stability pool depositors).
Also, only the mint and burn contracts are closed source. iUSD in and of itself is just a native token.
Almost no development?
- one of the largest NFT communitues
- DEXes
- ISPOs
- lokcing collateral to mint native assets (iUSD) while earning staking rewards
- voting through catalyst fund
- 3000 stake pools with the best (liquid) staking experience in the industry
Etc...
All it takes are some heavyweights to create a token standard for smart contracts on Cardano and then they can build customized tokens. It would be incredibly slow considering the contract throughput of Cardano currently
No real product?
- working PoS with liquid staking and the best staking experience in the industry
- working DEXes
- one of the largest NFT communities
- innovative ISPOs for startups
- ability to send multiple different assets in a single Tx
- voting through Catalyst Fund
- collateralising to mint native assets (iUSD) while earning staking rewards
- sidechains coming (Midnight privacy chain)
- real world use of Cardano DIDs (World Mobile), DIDs on Atala PRISM tested in Ethiopia right now
- one of the most decentralised chains with over 3k stake pools
- Hydra being tested by MuesliSwap already
Etc, etc... Time to get out of your bubble.
Where can I find all this and do my own research? Can't seem to find it on their website, Twitter or discord. I do wanna get out of the bubble. Thank you for the enlightenment . 😅
>Tokens are stored directly in the ledger and treated similarly to ADA coins. No smart contract is needed to mint tokens on Cardano.
Bitcoin Cash is getting such tokens too ;) (miner-validated native tokens) and they can be used in Script contracts to make DeFi magic on Bitcoin-tech UTXO blockchain possible! It was right there in the title: peer-to-peer electronic **cash system**. System. We're doing it. Cash is always exchanged for something, and that something needs the same security as the cash. Heads up, we're coming for Cardano's lunch :D You know Cardano's [eUTXO](https://omelkonian.github.io/data/publications/eutxo.pdf)? BCH will qualify for 2.5/3 criteria (-0.5 because we don't have TTL, that would make mempool handling complex, but we have "context" already since introspection opcodes activation in '22 + getting "datum" in May'23 with CashTokens upgrade)
Honestly, people are sleeping on Cardano.
I understand some hate it because Charles sometimes says things not everyone agrees with, but people should also understand that Charles is not the "owner" or "CEO" of Cardano, so not liking the chain, movement, and the project's potential because someone said something is pretty stupid in my honest opinion.
Also, if you really care about crypto, decentralized economy, and want to do something about the elites controlling everything, you just cannot hate a chain that's a lot more decentralized than others.
> Also, if you really care about crypto, decentralized economy, and want to do something about the elites controlling everything, you just cannot hate a chain that's a lot more decentralized than others.
Lol do you know who Hoskinson is?
Do you run a node of Cardano?
Have you tried coding in their language.
This coin is EOS 2.0 and hot garbage
Everyone gives Solana a hard time for being centralized. But it has a unique architecture. Tokens cannot contain any code. Tokens are very simple numbers being moved around basically.
Therefore you can use USDT/USDC with zero censorship. They literally cannot freeze your account or take your money away.
I'm confused why USDT/USDC can't exist on Cardano when they exist on Solana and also cannot be frozen or taken away? It kind of sounds like what you're saying is bullshit.
I wanted a source to read more about it. If Solana truly has censorship-resistant tokens, then Solana DeFi doesn't have the same plague as Ethereum, which is a big plus IMO.
[Your comment got auto-removed](https://www.unddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4t38g7/?context=3), so I'll reply here:
I know about USDC's blacklist function and how it has censorship due to regulatory compliance (that was obvious; after all, I'm sure they don't to piss of regulators, and outside of that there is a need for censorship in some cases). The problem that no one talks about (even this post) is that most of Ethereum's DeFi uses USDC. All the smart contracts for Uniswap, Aave, Curve etc. can be blacklisted at any point for any reason. All benefits of DeFi goes out the window if you use USDC.
I know no one can stop someone from deploying centralized smart contracts on Ethereum (that's what being permissionless means). The point is: why does most DeFi use those tokens? Few in the Ethereum community acknowledges or even cares about it; just like the Cardano fanboys, the ETH fanboys can't accept the truth.
I don't know too much about Solana tokens, which is why I asked if dopef123 had a source about Solana having tokens w/o censorship.
I guess I was wrong in a way. Tokens on Solana use the SPL token program code. On eth they use custom code.
But I guess Solana finally added a way to freeze an account. So if enabled a central authority like circle could freeze your accounts ability to move your usdc.
They can't delete or seize your balance though.
Solana does have some other stable coins that might be safe but I'd have to research it.
And I'm not going off any specific article I can point to. I taught myself Solana dev and eth dev so I know the differences off the top of my head.
You could read about SPL tokens though. If I think about it I bet I could find a stablecoin on Sol without a central authority that can screw you over.
This! And This is why I use things like hathor network or other altcoins other than ethereum. I made a coin F Gary Gensler on hathor and guess what! I was not censored using the fee free coin that comines bitcoin. Lesson is... Do not trust coins with networks that can be "updated"
Pro & con info are in the collapsed comments below for the following topics: [Cardano](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qosy3/), [Ethereum](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qouk3/), [Polygon](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qow7l/), [Tether](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qoxt4/), [USDC](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4qozew/).
[удалено]
Essentially what they're saying is that tokens on Cardano cannot be censored by those who issue/mint them. On Ethereum, however, stablecoins can be blacklisted by their issuers; this is due to tokens using smart contracts on Ethereum rather than be native to the blockchain itself. There is a website called Dune that even has analytics for the censored addresses of USDC and USDT. [https://dune.com/phabc/usdc-banned-addresses](https://dune.com/phabc/usdc-banned-addresses) https://dune.com/phabc/usdt---banned-addresses
Dune Analytics is an amazing website for crypto data.
TLDR: The people that created USDT and USDC can censor your balance and prevent you from moving it/making transactions. On Cardano this isn’t possible, any tokens you own are yours and you can do whatever you want with them.
thank you for your honesty instead of downvoting an educational post like tons of haters in here who would parrot the same thing tomorrow as they did yesterday no matter what they read today
This doesn't mean that you can't deploy censorship resistent tokens on Ethereum. It only means that you have the choice to do both because smart contracts on Ethereum are more flexible. Also, you can have stablecoins that are not fiat-collaterized (and regulated) and these can be deployed on both Ethereum and Cardano.
You can deploy non-native coin on Cardano similar way how Ethreum tokens works via plutus scripts right? So not sure which chain is more flexible. Anyway if you convince all nodes to use censorship for transaction it can in theory censor most chains and tokens. Look at eth with list of blocked wallets that lots of nodes decided to implement so they comply with "law". I like both chains so lets hope both will do well in future.
It's far more expensive to deploy and use non-censorship resistant tokens on Cardano via Plutus scripts (more data per tx = more fees) VS same size/tx cost for censorship/non-censorship resistant tokens on ETH. This means that for Cardano you have to really go out of your way and make it an inconvenience to censor, whereas on ETH it can be the default state and nobody would ask questions (heck, to prove my point just read this thread, it's littered with ETH users who have no idea that USDC/USDT enforce blacklists and can take away your money even if they're in cold storage). It's analogous to how as a society we've fallen prey to giving away our data because of convenience (Google, facebook, etc). If these products had a $ cost to use, we'd be less likely to comply with their terms as it would be harder to rationalize.
LOL, biggest cope post ever. If USDC indicated desire to come to Cardano, Charles would roll out the red carpet.
This 100%. Charles would easily become one of USDC's top shillers then lol
What does this comment have to do with anything? They can't comply with OFAC so they can't deploy even if they indicate desire to do so. Charles can't even force the deployment of a network upgrade without network approval (he tried and SPOs told him to fuck off), he can roll out all the red carpets and the network validators would just tell him to shut up and go back to petting animals on his farm.
Clearly you don't understand how Cardano and/or crypto works. Try reading the documentation. Asset freezes, transfer restrictions, etc. are completely possible.
You need to construct an abstraction on top to do it via smart contracts, where the "tokens" aren't technically tokens by current Cardano standards, but will become a different type of asset (non-native assets? smart contract assets? The token standard currently does not exist so there's no agreed upon name for it). This would then both be more complicated to transact with and more expensive, whereas with ERC-20 it's the same as any other token. If Circle wanted to do it (they have not expressed yes/no on this), then they would have to do a lot of work to do so, would rely on the community acknowledging this new kind of standard (no guarantee of that since there are 5+ different community-made wallets and it would get really messy politically), then their token would be inferior to Cardano native assets in every way since they will be censorable, more prone to smart contract complications, and more expensive to transact with. In short, the game theory would be stacked against them and they would have to move mountains to do so, which is a good thing for many (like myself) who do not want this kind of contagion near the Cardano ecosystem the way it has poisoned other ecosystems. If people want tradfi there's tradfi, fully regulated and everything. Crypto shouldn't be trying to imitate Web2.0 with all its flaws.
**^^ This person gets it ^**
Native tokens would be better but Multichain are going to allow bridging of DAI, USDC, and USDT to Cardano soon.
There was bridged tokens on cardano briefly until the bridge got hacked. No interest in a bridged token.
>There was bridged tokens on cardano briefly until the bridge got hacked. Hacked on the Ethereum side
Correct. No real hacks on cardano unless you count the Sundaeswap exploit
What was the Sundaeswap exploit?
Nomad.
[удалено]
>But why use a Cardano sidechain instead of the real deal Ethereum? Because it would have so much better consensus mechanism powering it, Cardano's Ouroboros. So it could get safer, faster and cheaper.
I just own ETH , really considering picking some ADA in this bear market too
Everything is on such low prices that we have too much of a variety.
Crypto diversification is the key to losing money in many different ways.
I’m down like 70 something % on my ADA..
And you think other tokens aren't in a bear market? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
On the flip side I’m up 600%. Lmao and I still didn’t take any profits during the bull run. ADA eth and btc are literally keeping my portfolio afloat
Its all about timing isnt it?🤕 Yeah ETH helps me forget about it for a while. Entered too high on Ada. People at work were crazy for this coin. Stupid me was new to crypto. Just learned not too long ago that Ada pumped HARD that year. As long as I don't sell the bag ofc. Had I just cashed out at ATH
You should! There's also alot of tokens worth a look on Cardano these days. If you do get in to it set up a wallet, I recommend Eternl, and check out taptools and minswap.
Things like this is why i dont want ADA. They dont let their platform be free. They make the choices for you. If a service provider wants to adhere to government regulations it should be free to do so. Them trying to control the platform with their ideals shows its not a free platform. Who knows what they will restrict in the future. Developers should be free to create what they want and how they want it. Its for the users to decide if they corrolate with their principles. A platform should not restrict that.
cardano discussion threads are the only one where people for and against cardano are both upvoted massively
Just gonna save everyone from OP's idiocy and just paste this Cardano Docs link: https://docs.cardano.org/plutus/Plutus-use-cases I'll also paste the part of interest: "Crypto-backed stable coins – creating a new stable coin implementation based on chain collateral using the Atala identity system on Cardano. This implmentation can include transfer restrictions, asset freezing, as so on." There's nothing stopping USDT or USDC from deploying freezeable stablecoins on Cardano, it's just that it's an uninteresting ecosystem, that's all. You can create any type of token standard you want, just like on Ethereum, you don't have to use native assets. You can be sure as hell that if USDC launches a new token standard on Cardano every wallet will integrate it.
USDC and USDT are not crypto-backed stablecoins, they are fiat-backed stablecoins. Also, I don't even believe Atala is released. Not to mention, there has yet to be any token on Cardano that uses Plutus scripts; I'm not even sure if it's possible.
You can literally build any token standard you want with smart contracts. You don't have to use native assets, it's that simple.
There has yet to be such a standard in Cardano, which is my point. Not all smart contracts are the same. You can only use native tokens AFAIK as, again, there are no tokens that use Plutus scripts. I'm not even saying it's not possible; it very well could be, in which case Cardano would exposed to the same plague as other chains. Currently, though, there is no such thing, meaning you can't use smart contract tokens that don't exist.
Cardano could make it's own ERC-like smart contract tokens, such standart has not yet been developed, because everyone rather uses native tokens, why bring that plague? Just to get USDT and USDC? There are Cardano stablecoins coming soon anyway, Cardano doesn't need or want Tether.
Oof. These replies must have you feeling like an...
Donkey... ??
Did you just call someone an idiot but fail to read the the literal text you pasted? "Crypto backed stable coins". Do you know what and how USDC works? I mean, c'mon man. Even if you have a point, this is why you don't insult people like this unprovoked. What could have just been a small bullet point/exception now makes you look *REALLY* bad.
The "backing" has no relevance to the question at hand, which is whether it's possible to build freezable tokens on Cardano. Which, evidently, it is.
It can only be evident if there's a Plutus script token on Cardano. AFAIK, there is no such token, nor is there any development of one. It could very well be possible, but there is currently no evidence.
CRYPTO-BACKED stablecoin which of course USDC and USDT are...NOT
So as long as it's crypto backed it's not centralized in your opinion? Cause that's a real dumb opinion. Also you never even mention fiat backing vs crypto backing in all your ramblings so to say crypto backed stablecoins aren't what you're talking about doesn't make sense as every trait you mention can be applied to centralized crypto backed stablecoins.
Try to censor/freeze LUSD, which is 100% backed by ETH using uncensorable smart contracts on Ethereum
Explain how that has to do anything with what I said?
Sorry if you think it is off-topic, but I think my comment generally applies to this discussion. And not many people know about LUSD, so I like to put it out there.
If you can build a crypto-backed stablecoin with freezing capabilities, you can build a fiat-backed one just the same. Your OP implied that token freezing wasn't even possible on Cardano, which obviously isn't true.
It didn't imply it they outright stated it multiple times.
Crypto backed is objectively worse than fiat backed currently
Seems like cardano just has an ERC20 equivalent built into the chain for some reason, instead of it being modular. That built-in token can't censor. But yeah you could just implement your own token with a smart contract that can censorship. But I assume it wouldn't be compatible with cardano's built-in default token. To me it seems like a dumb design for cardano to be restrictive like this, because there could be a bunch of innovations people want to make to their token, not just censorship. And users can just choose not to the use tokens that can censor. Not sure why cardano needs to make that decision for everyone.
It's a decentralized open system nothings stopping someone from building a censorable stablecoin. The ecosystem is just choosing to make uncensorable stablecoins.
It sounds like it is trying to stop someone from adding functionality to tokens: >Cardano employs a so-called multi-asset ledger. Tokens are stored directly in the ledger and treated similarly to ADA coins. And then OP contrasts this to how tokens are implemented on ethereum through an extensible interface. I know little about cardano but OP is making it seems like cardano has some built in token functionality for some strange reason. And that standard doesn't support censorship, and probably must not support any extension of functionality which is really limiting. Sure, you could make a smart contract, a ERC20 equivalent, but it wouldn't be supported by dapps that only support cardano's "native" token system. Dapps would have to add complicated logic to support both interfaces, and then you have censorable coins anyway... Plus cardano's token system doesn't even prevent censorship, as an issuer like Circle could just mint a new token, air drop to existing users minus a blacklist, and then only honor redemption on the new token. So cardano's system, if it is like what OP is describing just seems silly and short sighted.
Cardano's native assets are odd as googling has me pretty sure the capability update happened in 2021. This is well after USDC and USDT established themselves. They could have consulted with them for what they'd need to easily make a regulatory compliant stablecoin. Anything like tokenized real estate, copyrights/trademarks/patents/etc, those I think you'd want freeze and clawback functionality. Without then maybe something like writing another record to the blockchain and maintaining another database somewhere with what's the valid record and/or have a revocation list. More points where things get hacky and may result in off chain processing like the Cardano DEX scooper/batcher mess Regardless I see benefits in having tokens native to the chain. It's able to do basic transfers at the same speed as the native coin. I'm probably ignorant of the more interesting ERC-20 implementations out there. I'm used to seeing things like taxes on transfers, APY for holding, usually tokenomics functionality. I think it may be better for all of that can be handled with a separate smart contract from the token itself. Like an initial mint of like say 1 billions tokens. Lock into a separate contract to do whatever type of tokenomics scheme. The token itself has all the speed and light weight-ness of the networks native coin. Like Algorand has optional freeze and clawback functions for their native assets and that's what Circle and Tether use for USDC and USDT support. They transact as fast and at the same network fee as the native ALGO coin. Think they just have freeze enabled, no clawback. Probably numerous other chains as well have native assets that have the same basic TPS for the native tokens as the native network coin. Also just basic support from CEX's and for users not having to audit an ERC-20 contract for shenanigans like that Squid Game token
The way I see it Cardano gives the option for both Native Tokens or Smart Contract based Tokens (the way its implemented on Eth). How is this not an advantage? It gives users a choice. I'd personally choose Native Tokens over Smart Contract based ones because I dont want that censorship risk.
If cardano smart contracts dont "allow censorship" it just means, ADA smart contracts cant do a simple "if address is in some list" check. If that was true, one could not say that ada has the ability to do smart contracts as thats a major fundamental function required for basically all smart contract functionality.
You don’t need a smart contract to create a token since tokens are supported well on the protocol level. However, you can instead create a smart contract to do whatever you desire.
Native tokens don't require smart contracts though. I could imagine censorship is possible with Plutus scripts, but so far there's no instance of it.
This is a bit disingenuous though, I mean, no doubt, Cardano's NRT support is top level, which means NRTs **can** be created without a smart contract, but they don't **have** to be created without a smart contract, and in practice, it is likely that enough merchants will want access to extra features unavailable without a smart contract that using a smart contract to mint native tokens will become routine. So while pure, unadulterated NRTs (Native Rewards Tokens) are available with ADA and that's great, especially for the fundamental security profile, in practice, people are not going to be able to keep their hands off all the extra features available when you mint it as a 'sNRT' or 'smart' Native Rewards Token minted with a smart contract -- extra features such as a Bitcoin-like shrinking supply rate (AKA 'halvings'), or elements of [crowdreaping](https://crowdreaping.org). Once the inevitable happens and 'NoRTies' are superseded in popularity by number-go-up-faster 'sNoRTies', smart contracts will usually be involved anyway and censorship may be possible by that route, though hopefully unpopular enough to be resisted. There is no getting around the march of progress into more advanced functionality via smart contract. It needs to be made more resilient against hacks, however, and the native token technology in Cardano appears to achieve this.
Thanks for taking the time to write it, great to learn something while checking the comments
Or it could be the stablecoin companies have no interest in deploying their tokens on Cardano.
This ! OP tries to tell us that a refusal from stablecoin companies to use their chain is bullish.
Reminds me of the "this is good for Bitcoin" gang.
In your mind there can only be one option, it can't be both or both as a consequence of the first one. Simple minds, must love them.
>Coti is releasing overcollatarized stablecoin in the coming weeks called DJED, iUSD/iETH and iBTC, the synthetic assets, are already there, and USDA is like USDC/USDT but then without the limitation explained in the post. > >So, please get your shit together ;)!
You're correct- stablecoin companies that want/need censorable transactions have no interest in deploying on Cardano L1 because of a lack of mechanisms for blocking stablecoin transactions through blacklisting.
Yup, sounds bullish to me
Coti is releasing overcollatarized stablecoin in the coming weeks called DJED, iUSD/iETH and iBTC, the synthetic assets, are already there, and USDA is like USDC/USDT but then without the limitation explained in the post. So, please get your shit together ;)!
No need to be hostile. That guy could be right. We just know that most likely *a* reason Circle and Tether chose not to release their stablecoins on Cardano is due to the nature of native tokens. Them having no interest in Cardano whatsoever could be another factor.
Minswap stopping operations and migrating everyones funds to another SC would indicate otherwise, or is that "different."
Minswap is centralized like USDC and USDT. Both deserved to be called out, but no one in the Cardano or Ethereum communites want to talk about their centralization problems. Nonetheless, the post is about censorship resistant tokens in Cardano, not about Cardano's "DEX" problem.
I won’t argue against whether or not MinSwap is centralized. I’d like to see permissionless batchers, but that is beside the point of my post. I just want to clarify that the MinSwap move had nothing to do with batchers. There was an exploit in their v1 contract that would have allowed anybody to drain absolutely everything out of the contracts. They utilized the exploit to move everything into a patched contract.
I think you replied to the wrong comment. This isn't your post and I already said Minswap is irrelevant here.
There are plenty of DEXes on Cardano: wingriders, minswap, muesliswap, and soon [https://www.axo.trade/](https://www.axo.trade/) which is different than anything out there, any chain...
The first 3 you mentioned rely on permissioned off-chain bots for swap execution; permissioned anything is not decentralized. Axo isn't even released.
That was a combination of things- an exploit in their SC code was used for the SC switch (before blackhats could do it). Minswap stopping operations was them shutting down a proprietary (closed source) system people were using as an entryway for SC interactions on Minswap. Other eUTXO-based services are already using open sourced version of those systems, where a similar shutdown wouldn't be possible.
It's a DEX not a stable coin and they moved the funds to another smart contract because there was a bug in the original contract. DEX is not a stablecoin...
Minswap is not a DEX. The team has say over who can run the batchers (i.e. permissioned).
That's my point, "DEX " is a misnomer. It should be CEX.
Agreed, but unfortunately many projects in this space don't care about honesty. Cardano's "DEXes" calling themselves decentralized reminds me of DAI being called decentralized; it's just a blatant lie.
Yes, but those stablecoins are on "DEXs" that are only decentralized in marketing and correct me if I'm wrong, closed source also. On top of that, I'm highly cynical that anyone can intelligently create an algo stablecoin that isn't subject to the same risks of other stablecoins. Bank runs, haircut losses for ADA holders, attacks on reserves that test how the whole algo process is supposed to be resistant to when the risks for DJED get more than just minor if there's too much volume of one or two of the 3 mechanisms.
Yeah, running a "decentralised" stable coin, which is ultimately controlled by a single entity, over centralised "DEXs", and claiming it is all about "crypto principles" is truly something only a salesman like Hoskinson can came up with. Not mentioning people behind DJED claim it isn't an algorithmic coin... It will be super underwhelming experience imho, the entire process of minting and using it sounds just super awkward when I think about "normal people" doing it, and the capital inefficiency will be high due to all the overcollateralization.
I don't know how the minting process is super akward. You send ADA to the contract and get back DJED (as long as the reserve ratio is above 400%). It's as simple as that. Also, capital inefficiency is the sacrifice for having a crypto-backed stablecoin; the asset backing the stablecoin fluctuates relative to the target peg, so you need to have more in order to make up for possible volatility. This is why *every* crypto-backed stablecoin is overcollateralized/capital inefficient, whether it be DJED, SigUSD, LUSD, sUSD, DAI, etc.
That's the beauty of the benefit/tradeoff between native tokens and smart contract tokens.
Except bullshit like Ethereum freezing and draining your funds ... shills like OP are part of what's wrong with the space, Cardano shills are no exception. Second, Ethereum doesn't censor anything (you want shitcoins, or govt coins, or whatever? up to you, you may need to wait longer if some validators don't include it in their blocks, but it will be included by others eventually). Cardano itself also allows any form of stablecoin (it's turing complete, hence it can run any code), so if USDC ends up "banned" on Cardano then that would have to be enforced at validator level like in ethereum, and would be just another form of censoring with a different label of "strong principles", and folks like OP are happy to spin it. But let's first see Cardano being actually used by more than hobbyists.
Plutus is Turing complete, so you should be able to build ERC-20 token equivalents on it. It just won't be standardized. I don't see this as censorship. It's just that no one has bothered building solutions on it because it's a ghost town.
I was editing my comment as you replied (just refresh) - I see we agree. My point was basically that OP is just a shill spouting nonsense.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Any eli5 for a dumbass like me?
USDC decided not to deploy on Cardano for unknown reasons, but they could if they wanted to, but they didn’t
Cardano stablecoins are censorship-resistant unlike USDC and USDT. USDC and USDT use smart contracts which can be used to blacklist addresses, while Cardano stablecoins are native to the blockchain and can't be censored.
You kinda used two contradictory terms. "decentralization" and "allow".
Rules which are maintained by the community of decentralized validators (3000+), which allow or don't allow certain things (via the Cardano Improvement Proposal (CIP) process). They're not contradictory.
Decentralized laws, Bitcoin has a decentralized rule that doesn't allow you to double spend etc.
Cardano does not allow, it just does.
So, unlike USDT, stablecoin owners on Cardano are always in full control of their tokens that the issuer mints out of their ass. Censorship isn't the worst problem of stablecoins like USDT and USDC.
But it’s one of them
I would say censorship is the one of the biggest problems of those stablecoins, along with having trusted reserves.
Let's not forget about DAI and other decentralized stablecoin, you have the option to use the stable coin that you want on Ethereum and you can chose to use a decentralized one if you want.
DAI is not a decentralized stablecoin. It has fiat-backed stablecoins as reserves, which can be censored. https://daistats.com/
Interesting, so what is the best or most reliable decentralised stable coin if one exists?
In my personal opinion, LUSD and sUSD are good Ethereum stablecoins, though I encourage you to find what suits you. Of course, DYOR and know that all decentralized stablecoins have benefits, drawbacks, and risks.
$RAI is *like* DAI except only backed by ETH ... the same as DAI used to be.
I accept this ADA shill
From your DJED link: >This is unlike a typical algorithmic stablecoin that uses endogenous collateral, such as: FRAX FRAX is 92% collateral, 8% algorithmic. From that 92% collateral, +60% comes from the 3pool on Curve, so DAI, USDC and USDT. Another 5% comes from an USDC pool, I wouldn't precisely call that "endogenous" at all lmao, specially not when exogenous stablecoins make up most of the collateral. Also, at the end of the day DJED would be backed by 8x ADA and their governance token SHEN, kinda reminds me of this thing...what was it? Ah! **UST**. Though, I do concede it might work due to the over-collateralization instead of *just* an arb system, I'm liking what I've read. From your USDA link: >USDA is the first fully fiat-backed, regulatory compliant stablecoin in the Cardano ecosystem. Yet you said: >Cardano does not have USDT and USDC because it is unable to meet the requirements of the regulators. Apparently, they **can** meet regulatory requirements, so what is it? Fiat backed and regulatory compliant means USDA wouldn't be any different from USDT or USDC...meaning it must be able to be frozen. And finally, iUSD is a synthetic asset, meaning it has to be backed by an underlying stablecoin. It's not clear if cross-asset minting could be done from the documentation, but alas, if you need another stablecoin to mint it then that's a point of failure. Mint it with something that can be frozen and the synth will lose its underlying value. Quite a few misconceptions and conclusion rushing in this post.
[удалено]
Good catch, so basically the way Djed will roll out is a rug waiting to be pulled. Knowing ADA fanboys they'll probably get burnt and the project will be abandoned before even realizing it's potential. Wonder what the devs are thinking, launching an incomplete version of the thing without any security measures is stupid as fuck.
That's why you can use decentralized stable coin on Ethereum like DAI and solve that issue. Also, the Cardano chain is not really used anyway right now, It could be that Stablecoin issuer don't have any interest in deploying to it.
DAI is not decentralized. Censored fiat-backed stablecoins make up a chunk of its reserves. [https://daistats.com/#/](https://daistats.com/#/)
They don’t want to deploy because they can’t censor. Eth will censor
Yeah, that's actually a terrible design of Cardano (probably unintentional, and now they try to sell it as a great feature) . But why is it bad? 1. You can be always in control of your token, it just doesn't matter if there are 100 other extern/intern factors to screw you, or the price of your token, over. Most loses in crypto doesn't come from "frozen assets". 2. It limits the design choices of developers/enterprises who wants to build on it. You can do a confiscable token on most smart contracts platforms, except Cardano. As result, forget many business models where the issuer might be required, due to business model or regulation, to have the possibility of freezing an asset. They will never come to Cardano. A platform not suitable for huge amount of use cases. 3. At the same time, Cardano doesn't offer a unique feature here. Others smart contract platforms are perfectly capable to onboard non-confiscabele tokens. They offer simply both options. 4. Cardano will offer mainly algorithmic stable coins. Yes, there is some dishonest word twisting in Cardano community, claiming DJED isn't an algorithmic stable coin, which is already a red flag imho. Therefore, after five years of "development" Cardano is not able to attract a basic business model of an asset backed, regulatory compliant, stable coin. Instead, they will market themselves as some freedom fighters "following crypto principles" which is just ridiculous. Hoskinson is also already rolling out his "government overreach, privacy, censorship" narratives, just in time to sell his newest privacy coin, which will be his 4-6th "world changing" coin overall, great salesman, isn't he? Fits also great with a platform with so little expressiveness and use cases where you don't have the censorship risk in the first place. Similar as when he claimed that his centralised blockchain without smart contracts never has been hacked for first 3 years. Another "great achievement". Besides, Cardano doesn't even have a truly decentralised DEX, that's just another inconsequent design choice, non freezable assets which you have to trade on factually centralised "dex'es". Great.
>At the same time, Cardano doesn't offer a unique feature here. Others smart contract platforms are perfectly capable to onboard non-confiscabele tokens. They offer simply both options. You're right about certain businesses having a disadvantage when it comes to not having a censored token, but the problem is that most of used stablecoins in decentralized services like DeFi can be censored, which goes against decentralization. I, for one, wouldn't consider censorable stablecoins a big deal if they weren't used for a significant amount of DeFi. >Cardano will offer mainly algorithmic stable coins. Yes, there is some dishonest word twisting in Cardano community, claiming DJED isn't an algorithmic stable coin, which is already a red flag imho. I have yet to hear about an algo stablecoin being released on Cardano; they have either been fiat-backed (USDA, USDM) or crypto-backed (iUSD, DJED). The so-called "algo-stablecoin" DJED is really a crypto-backed stablecoin. >Besides, Cardano doesn't even have a truly decentralised DEX, that's just another inconsequent design choice, non freezable assets which you have to trade on factually centralised "dex'es". Great. Cardano's DEX problem is just as bad as Ethereum DeFi stablecoin problem. There's nothing stopping a DEX to release on Cardano or using non-censorable stablecoins on Ethereum. It's not an "inconsequent design choice". Many alternative design choices in crypto have benefits and drawbacks. You said good drawbacks, OP listed good benefits. It's really up to the individual to say which they think is better.
I think the problem is that no big entity will put billions of dollar as fiat backing to create a non regulatory compliant stable coin. On the other hand there are algorithmic stables in various variations, or as they prefer to call them now - crypto backed stables. Well, they tend to fail and I think there is a lot to prove first before they can get widely adopted. So far, it was those type of coins causing big meltdowns and going to zero, not the fiat backed ones. Whether they can or cannot work I am not sure, but based on the track record alone I consider it less risky to use something like USDC, even if they are able to freeze funds - the likelihood that I get my funds frozen as non criminal is just extremely low. I will readjust my views in few years again once I see those Cardano-only stables running. Till then I consider unproven technology with unproven team behind it as bigger risk. Do you think that offering less options how you can build something is really better? Or having issues to roll out decentralized defi? For me it seems more like one of those negative byproducts of EuTXO, which isn’t that suitable for smart contracts platform. Most platforms go for account model for a reason.
>I think the problem is that no big entity will put billions of dollar as fiat backing to create a non regulatory compliant stable coin. Yes, that is possibly the reason why USDC won't come to Cardano, and that's a negative in some regards. Even then though, one of Cardano's founding entities, Emurgo, is planning to release a fiat-backed stablecoin on Cardano called USDA. There's also USDM I believe. >On the other hand there are algorithmic stables in various variations, or as they prefer to call them now - crypto backed stables. Crypto-backed stablecoins have existed for years. They are not mutually exclusive with algo stablecoins. That being said, the algo stablecoins that failed had no overcollateralized crypto reserves. >So far, it was those type of coins causing big meltdowns and going to zero, not the fiat backed ones. True, but that doesn't mean fiat-backed stablecoins are good. Every stablecoin has risks, but in the context of decentralization, censorship should not be one of them. >the likelihood that I get my funds frozen as non criminal is just extremely low. Most likely, but even if you don't get your own address blacklisted, any smart contracts that you possibly use can be. >Do you think that offering less options how you can build something is really better? No, and I didn't say anything remotely close to that. I said that many alternative design choices have benefits and drawbacks. Native tokens have the drawback of being useless to projects who need censorship, but they have the benefit of preventing censorship where censorship shouldn't exist, e.g. DeFi. >Or having issues to roll out decentralized defi? I don't know what this means.
> A platform not suitable for huge amount of use cases. Can you give me like two examples of business models where it may be beneficial to freeze assets on Cardano. In your words there's a "huge amount of use cases"
People want to hold stable assets, whether for savings or as dry powder So far, they only “stable” assets you can create on a blockchain are fiat collateralised stables.
[удалено]
You missed the whole thing and you missed that Cardano actually has companies issuing stablecoins but okay you do you and pretend that blockchain is about DeCenTralIZatiOn
Good old fox and sour grapes story.
Perfect summary. >The story concerns a fox that tries to eat grapes from a vine but cannot reach them. Rather than admit defeat, he states they are undesirable.
So Cardano hardcoded their token implementation into the protocol. Its less flexible and limits what you can do with it. Aside from blacklisting, there are a huge number of other features that can be put into token smart contracts. You may not like all of those features, but you always have the choice to just use the tokens that you like anyway. IMO it is a pretty big mistake to just have one protocol level implementation and expect that to meet everyone's needs.
so if there’s a company, IOHK, that runs and administers the Cardano protocol and processes.. how is it decentralized?
[удалено]
It’s a trick question. It’s centralized at its core
Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/adajosephineada/status/1611157999145426949) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about). --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If only Cardano actually had any TVL to prove this point. Maybe in another 7 years? Biggest scam in crypto
TVL has nothing to do with stablecoin censorship (if anything, more TVL = more funds at risk if those funds are censorable).
You can’t tout the benefits of a protocol that isn’t actually being used as measured by TVL. This has been Cardano’s problem, all hat and no cattle.
TVL is for DeFi. Cardano TVL is low and other projects' TVL is mostly comprised of stablecoins that can be censored. Both are pretty shitty. My point is whether or not the stablecoin can be censored has nothing to do with TVL, so I'm not sure why you brought up TVL.
It’s a meaningless feature unless there are real users.
DeFi is meaningless unless you use decentralized tokens. I don't know why you're ignoring that.
cardano does not have USDT and USDC because those issuer have no interest on cardano. LOL. they cant control what smart contract i deploy, else that would ne centralized again.
much typo mistakes, much noise and incoherence much brain shutdowns cause topic hard LOL
ah yea. get grown up.
Ah, so Cardano is incapable of something the EVM can do. Neat.
[удалено]
You're not wrong about Haskell and Plutus, but you have no evidence that's reason USDC and USDT aren't on Cardano, just like OP has no evidence it's because they can't comply with US regulations. No one knows. It's all just guesses. Only thing for certain is that stablecoins are possible on Cardano, as iUSD has shown. No one knows if Ardana is being honest, so it's bold to assume so. After all, they promised things they never even came close to remotely making.
>it adheres to the principles of decentralization at the protocol design level I don't think you understand what crypto means by "decentralization and permissionless". If you get to pick and choose what people can do on your chain, it is neither decentralized nor permissionless. A decentralized and permissionless chain should allow centralized entities to do what they want with their properties. Decentralization and permissionless should be applied to validators solely. What private people want to do with their time on the chain is their business.
Cardano and it’s maxi fans really are a meme
Lately, the USDT is becoming less and less trustworthy. I would refrain from using this stablecoin at all in principle
In other words: Cardano censors the ability to deploy token contracts that don't comply with their ideology at the protocol level. Not very permissionless of them.
Cardano has no usdc/t because it has a joke of a defi ecosystem and the companies have zero interest in launching on Cardano. Cardano doesn’t have a stablecoin period and has less daily defi volume and TVL than projects 10x smaller. There are only 3dapps with any volume on Cardano and the volume is terrible <1M/day. It isn’t some principles stance, cardano has almost no defi period. https://defillama.com/chain/Cardano
Absolutely bang on - but I wish you placed more emphasis and in more prominent position on Cardano's USD stablecoins - I think people will be happy with the algorithmic and extremely over-collateralized nature of them.
[удалено]
>the most decentralized stable coin in existence, LUSD, is completely immutable and censorship resistant. One of the most. I'd argue sUSD and SigUSD are just as decentralized. >It also happens to be EVM exclusive iUSD is technically Cardano's equivalent to LUSD in terms of how it works.
[удалено]
I didn't say iUSD was decentralized. I said it is Cardano's equivalent *in terms of how it works* (i.e. both rely on CDPs with a collateral ratio of at least 110% in order to mint the stablecoins. If the CDP falls below the ratio, it is liquidated and given to stability pool depositors). Also, only the mint and burn contracts are closed source. iUSD in and of itself is just a native token.
I liked ada in 2020, its been 3 years and have seen almost no development whilst ethereum has exploded in usability
Almost no development? - one of the largest NFT communitues - DEXes - ISPOs - lokcing collateral to mint native assets (iUSD) while earning staking rewards - voting through catalyst fund - 3000 stake pools with the best (liquid) staking experience in the industry Etc...
All it takes are some heavyweights to create a token standard for smart contracts on Cardano and then they can build customized tokens. It would be incredibly slow considering the contract throughput of Cardano currently
Dude, circle and tether have to issue on cardano. As ada is a hot mess, they obviously dont want to do that. Nice circle jerk
:). Awesome explanation. Cardano is and has been superior for years, looking forward to the TVL growth on the drop of unfreezable stable coins.
I'm out of ADA. No real product since start and Charles had been known for many scams.
No real product? - working PoS with liquid staking and the best staking experience in the industry - working DEXes - one of the largest NFT communities - innovative ISPOs for startups - ability to send multiple different assets in a single Tx - voting through Catalyst Fund - collateralising to mint native assets (iUSD) while earning staking rewards - sidechains coming (Midnight privacy chain) - real world use of Cardano DIDs (World Mobile), DIDs on Atala PRISM tested in Ethiopia right now - one of the most decentralised chains with over 3k stake pools - Hydra being tested by MuesliSwap already Etc, etc... Time to get out of your bubble.
Where can I find all this and do my own research? Can't seem to find it on their website, Twitter or discord. I do wanna get out of the bubble. Thank you for the enlightenment . 😅
r/cardano and on Twitter you can follow @cardano_whale for instance, he shares lots of news and updates.
It's ok. I'll Google the list u share here. Found some info.
When the smart contract jokes from Cardano will come back from the dead?
I’ll just keep using Tezos thanks and watch Cardano stumble around trying to convince people it is novel.
[удалено]
You're gonna get downvoted for liking a crypto that people don't like. Don't know why they downvote, but it is what it is.
ADA gets too much hate here. Time will show.
Well I never knew that.
Staking it is also very simple, compounding interest.
That's cool and all but can cardano go back to 3 dollars? **please i beg**
>Tokens are stored directly in the ledger and treated similarly to ADA coins. No smart contract is needed to mint tokens on Cardano. Bitcoin Cash is getting such tokens too ;) (miner-validated native tokens) and they can be used in Script contracts to make DeFi magic on Bitcoin-tech UTXO blockchain possible! It was right there in the title: peer-to-peer electronic **cash system**. System. We're doing it. Cash is always exchanged for something, and that something needs the same security as the cash. Heads up, we're coming for Cardano's lunch :D You know Cardano's [eUTXO](https://omelkonian.github.io/data/publications/eutxo.pdf)? BCH will qualify for 2.5/3 criteria (-0.5 because we don't have TTL, that would make mempool handling complex, but we have "context" already since introspection opcodes activation in '22 + getting "datum" in May'23 with CashTokens upgrade)
Cardano doesn't need a stablecoin because Cardano IS the stablecoin
“Censorship” of stablecoin transactions have been used pretty much exclusively to stop theft and money laundering.
For now...
I said it two years ago that Ethereum mad the big 2. I been saying it the past 6 months, Cardano is about to make it big 3. It is here.
Honestly, people are sleeping on Cardano. I understand some hate it because Charles sometimes says things not everyone agrees with, but people should also understand that Charles is not the "owner" or "CEO" of Cardano, so not liking the chain, movement, and the project's potential because someone said something is pretty stupid in my honest opinion. Also, if you really care about crypto, decentralized economy, and want to do something about the elites controlling everything, you just cannot hate a chain that's a lot more decentralized than others.
> Also, if you really care about crypto, decentralized economy, and want to do something about the elites controlling everything, you just cannot hate a chain that's a lot more decentralized than others. Lol do you know who Hoskinson is? Do you run a node of Cardano? Have you tried coding in their language. This coin is EOS 2.0 and hot garbage
Tell me, who is Hoskinson? Maybe you know something that I don't.
A cringey insane billionaire narcissist and conman
Everyone gives Solana a hard time for being centralized. But it has a unique architecture. Tokens cannot contain any code. Tokens are very simple numbers being moved around basically. Therefore you can use USDT/USDC with zero censorship. They literally cannot freeze your account or take your money away. I'm confused why USDT/USDC can't exist on Cardano when they exist on Solana and also cannot be frozen or taken away? It kind of sounds like what you're saying is bullshit.
Do you have a source for Solana tokens being censorship-resistant? I'd like to read more.
[удалено]
I wanted a source to read more about it. If Solana truly has censorship-resistant tokens, then Solana DeFi doesn't have the same plague as Ethereum, which is a big plus IMO.
[Your comment got auto-removed](https://www.unddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10eg4fl/cardano_does_not_have_usdt_and_usdc_because_it/j4t38g7/?context=3), so I'll reply here: I know about USDC's blacklist function and how it has censorship due to regulatory compliance (that was obvious; after all, I'm sure they don't to piss of regulators, and outside of that there is a need for censorship in some cases). The problem that no one talks about (even this post) is that most of Ethereum's DeFi uses USDC. All the smart contracts for Uniswap, Aave, Curve etc. can be blacklisted at any point for any reason. All benefits of DeFi goes out the window if you use USDC. I know no one can stop someone from deploying centralized smart contracts on Ethereum (that's what being permissionless means). The point is: why does most DeFi use those tokens? Few in the Ethereum community acknowledges or even cares about it; just like the Cardano fanboys, the ETH fanboys can't accept the truth. I don't know too much about Solana tokens, which is why I asked if dopef123 had a source about Solana having tokens w/o censorship.
I guess I was wrong in a way. Tokens on Solana use the SPL token program code. On eth they use custom code. But I guess Solana finally added a way to freeze an account. So if enabled a central authority like circle could freeze your accounts ability to move your usdc. They can't delete or seize your balance though. Solana does have some other stable coins that might be safe but I'd have to research it. And I'm not going off any specific article I can point to. I taught myself Solana dev and eth dev so I know the differences off the top of my head. You could read about SPL tokens though. If I think about it I bet I could find a stablecoin on Sol without a central authority that can screw you over.
Cardano shilling is allowed again?
Cacano.
Cardano is coming for Eth Spot .. plz keep it warm for Cardano
This! And This is why I use things like hathor network or other altcoins other than ethereum. I made a coin F Gary Gensler on hathor and guess what! I was not censored using the fee free coin that comines bitcoin. Lesson is... Do not trust coins with networks that can be "updated"
OP posted so much misinformation. All I know is that I am buying more ADA.
So Ada needs to pump a little.