They essentially are to me, because I don't know how to differentiate them. Before the collapse, I would not have been able to look at the ones which collapsed and the ones which didn't and predict the outcome.
USDC operates as a fiat-backed stablecoin and is fundamentally different [0] to an algorithmic stablecoin such as UST which was the one that collapsed in 2022.
Forgive me but I don't find this very convincing. Crypto shills were saying the same things about UST before its collapse. The technical details differed, but the arrogant tone and firm insistence that nothing bad could possibly happen was the same.
> Forgive me but I don't find this very convincing.
I don't really need to convince you. I just look at how it's being tested and which companies are using it today.
But the main point I'm bringing is that stablecoins exist and the most trusted one USDC is used today by hundreds of companies after going under regulatory scrutiny for years and it can be used to send money.
You just said: "I don't know how to differentiate them." and I replied with a clear distinction with evidence comparing the two.
> Crypto shills were saying the same things about UST before its collapse...
Just like with all untested tech, there will always be alternatives out there with their fans, VCs and shills who have a vested interest and UST was one of them and when tested, some will fail which is expected.
So your answer is to paint all with a broad brush and to then dismissing them because one based on an untested technology failed doesn't make much sense.
