Stable coins such as Tether, TrueUSD, or DAI already exist that are pegged to fiat (USD, US dollar):
https://www.cryptomorrow.com/2018/05/24/stable-coin-cryptocurrencies/If you want to preserve your BBP value, trade it for BTC then take it out in fiat or a stable coin.
I don't see the point in BBPD when solutions already exist.
Wasting dev time, reinventing the wheel... for what?
Tether is suspected to be not fully backed by dollars and Bitfinex dissolved the relationship with their auditor.
https://medium.com/@bitfinexed/bitfinex-and-tether-is-unauditable-why-they-will-never-do-a-real-audit-3324e002b185Tether is widely regarded to be something between a scam and shady, but not proven so yet.
Do you want to force merchants to accept BBP and then have to immediately change it to BTC and then fiat? What if BTC crashes by $100, $200, $1,000 or more while the merchant is waiting for the transaction? Instead either the merchant can directly convert the BBP to BBPD or the purchaser can convert the BBP to BBPD to make the purchase. TrueUSD is just tokenized dollars; a token backed by USD like what Tether is supposed to be. DAI doesn't do what I am proposing either.
The point you are missing and the reason why developer resources should be used is because this is 1) a way to extinguish more of our overwhelming supply 2) A way for shoppers and merchants to adopt BBP and BBPD for real world adoption and usage 3) A way to increase demand by spreading the knowledge that we will have decreasing supply with increasing adoption and usage of BBPD. That is the real key: people doing the burn transactions leads to less BBP, the risk asset. As more people accept and transact with BBPD, the higher the value of the risk asset BBP because it will become in shorter supply UNLIKE Tether, TrueUSD and DAI. That is what will make BBPD different: it's relationship to a risk asset BBP.
I will be busy for a time tomorrow but will probably be around to chat late.