SeekerErebus on Nostr: Ok, I must be missing something. Read the press release. What they are describing ...
Ok, I must be missing something. Read the press release. What they are describing sounds exactly like the "killer app" that people have been talking about driving mass scale adoption for years.
An open standard, that allows a receiver to receive the type of currency (stable-coins or bitcoin) that they wish to receive, without requiring all of the additional hassle of currency conversion, and all running on top of the bitcoin network. This is a major win for bitcoin far as I can tell.
It is an in-between step, certainly. There is some risk that it will overstay its welcome. But so long as this UMA standard is a protocol without an overseer, this strikes me as a very good thing. Bitcoin gets the stablecoin support that has kept Eth and other junk alive; they will die even faster. Slightly longer term, all of our fiat jobs will pay us and we will immediately receive it in bitcoin.
So is it not an open standard that could be individually implemented? If it is, why the opposition?
An open standard, that allows a receiver to receive the type of currency (stable-coins or bitcoin) that they wish to receive, without requiring all of the additional hassle of currency conversion, and all running on top of the bitcoin network. This is a major win for bitcoin far as I can tell.
It is an in-between step, certainly. There is some risk that it will overstay its welcome. But so long as this UMA standard is a protocol without an overseer, this strikes me as a very good thing. Bitcoin gets the stablecoin support that has kept Eth and other junk alive; they will die even faster. Slightly longer term, all of our fiat jobs will pay us and we will immediately receive it in bitcoin.
So is it not an open standard that could be individually implemented? If it is, why the opposition?