Thanks for the info on Standard Sats - I did not know about this :-)
Your point about "custodians will need to hedge their market risk" highlights an important distinction - Fedimint isn't pegging back to fiat currency values - the chaumian ecash from a Fedimint (let's call them f-sats) are interoperable with the Lightning Network and are just another form of sats - albeit with a different set of trade-offs to both L2 (Lightning) and L1 (onchain). What the USD/GBP/JPY/AUD do against BTC is irrelevant.
The Standard Sats capability of hedging could be pretty useful in some economies where the holders literally cannot financially tolerate the current volatility of BTC. Is that hedging automated or manually managed by the Uncle Jim?
The shared problem of multiple custodians in either approach is a harder one at this early stage of Bitcoin - but great to see new options arriving to be explored!
Fedimint isn't pegging back to fiat currency values - the chaumian ecash from a Fedimint (let's call them f-sats) are interoperable with the Lightning Network and are just another form of sats - albeit with a different set of trade-offs to both L2 (Lightning) and L1 (onchain).
Meanwhile in the post they talk about volatility. And likely issuance of stablecoins is the purpose. It might explain why VC invest in Fedimint.
Is that hedging automated or manually managed by the Uncle Jim?
Automated. But it can do both ways.
The shared problem of multiple custodians in either approach is a harder one at this early stage of Bitcoin - but great to see new options arriving to be explored!
That's the point. Standard Sats have single custodian and coordination problem in Fedimint is wildly ignored. It might be just several big exchanges issuing e-cash eventually.
reply
coordination problem in Fedimint is wildly ignored
what?
reply
Given: uncle Jim who wants to run local Fedimint node. But he wants to distribute liabilities among his peers. He needs to find someone else or may be even several other people who may go into rabbit hole with him together.
Likely uncle Jim will fail to do that. Do you know any examples of people running Elements sidechain somewhere, besides Liquid?
reply
Ah, that one.
The question should be posed like this: "who would the community trust?". Then the problem disappears.
The Montelibero community that you're testing in has coordinated to emit a stablecoin which is overbacked by bank accounts and regularly audited. Might be actually better than Tether. This is exactly the sort of community that would benefit from Fedimint more than from solo uncle Jim setups.
Do you know any examples of people running Elements sidechain somewhere, besides Liquid?
No but if it had 1s blocks, better privacy and Liquid would be congested than it would surprise me if that didn't happen.
reply