Quote from: roemer on Today at 03:03:48 AM

Quote from: zasad@ on July 17, 2025, 03:41:39 PM

Quote from: bbc.reporter on July 17, 2025, 03:37:33 AM

@zasad@. Agreed. Also, the distribution of bitcoin is becoming centralized and this will continue because of the monetary policy chosen by the creator Satoshi Nakamoto. I speculate that if he can change this, bitcoin will have a monetary policy similar to Grin.

Everything decentralized eventually becomes centralized.
Almost 75% of all bitcoins were mined in the first 8 years, but no one took it seriously back then. I bought the first bitcoin in 2015 at about $200 on average, and many other people bought it, but no one kept the coins even until they reached $20,000.

Where were you able to spend it? The market places didn't even open up less then a few years ago.

If you are interested, in 2015 there were many exchanges and all were without KYC.
For example polonex, yobit, if necessary I need to look at my old accounts where I traded. And I definitely used 5-6 exchanges and dozens of money exchangers, which sent me money by transfer to a bank card without any problems. Then it was a great time, no control from banks, states and tax inspectorates.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on Today at 02:32:19 AM

@zasad@. It is the beginning. Did they mention which blockchain they will use to issue their stablecoins? I predict that this will be on Ripple because it appears that they have created a few banking partnerships already. However, this might also make this an isolated issuance because there no ways to bridge from Ethereum or Solana to Ripple.

Citi might be correct, it will only be a good opportunity for them if this is in Ripple because if this is issued in Ethereum or Solana, their stablecoin will certainly create liquidity inflows through Curve or Aave and the others hehehe.

Stablecoins USDT and USDC use different blockchains. According to my logic, Citi probably won't lag behind its competitors either.
"To consider the possibility" in Russian means blah blah blah. That is, it's most likely more no than yes.
Maybe in English it should be understood differently, but for now I'm watching