10 sats \ 0 replies \ @timechain 31 Dec 2022 \ parent \ on: Fiatjaf asks the right questions about stablecoins bitcoin
I'm not sure if that was the reason for the switch, as much as ETH's volitility;
https://www-coindesk-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.coindesk.com/tech/2020/03/17/makerdao-adds-usdc-as-defi-collateral-following-black-thursday-chaos/?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&outputType=amp&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16725056470090&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.coindesk.com%2Ftech%2F2020%2F03%2F17%2Fmakerdao-adds-usdc-as-defi-collateral-following-black-thursday-chaos%2F
(Article explains that DAI, which, at the time was only using ETH and BAT, chose to add a third asset, USDC following "black Thursday" (March 12, 2020), where the price of eth dropped 30% in one day.)
But yeah, Circle can kill DAI, so "defi" using DAI has the same problems of defi using usdc, which wasn't the case once. Add to that the controversial choice to custody the USDC with Coinbase (a few days before the founder was found dead) and you have a centrally held asset that can be seized by both its custodian and the issuer of one of its main collaterals, not to mention the fact that both Coinbase and Circle operate primarily in the US. There are a few trusted third parties that ALL must 'give the green light' for a DAI transaction to work.