> A currency needs stability.

The word “currency” is inherently a tautology. How does something become a currency?

> Speculation only works when there's a stable currency to dump your value into when the the security is going in the wrong direction.

Precious metals long predate government monies. Gold and silver couldn’t have become currency under the definition you’ve presented here.

> couldn’t have become currency under the definition you’ve presented here.

gold and silver were bad currencies back then, when people had no real alternative. People clipped coins, and debase the currency. People horded them when times were tough, and prevented lending and circulation, causing issues with the economy regarding liquidity.

Have a read of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Law_(economist)#Economic_... and educate yourself about the past.

"... only works when there's a stable currency to dump your value into ..."

    Hence the rise of algorithmic stable coins.

You mean like... Tether?

Tether is the counterexample of what she/he said. Tether is not algorithmic, it's backed by fiat.

> ... it's backed by fiat.

That's highly debatable. I'll grant you, it's advertised to be.

There are several alternatives nowadays, you're being dishonest by only mentioning the most controversial one.

> you're being dishonest by only mentioning the most controversial one.

No. Your argument is "Yeah, we know it's terrible... so you can't hold it against us." Nevermind the fact that coinbase started to support Tether.

I think what's most interesting to me (and should be to you as a pro-crypto advocate) is that underlying backing in tether appears to be highly volatile, yet it's not represented in the price. Also what should be shocking is hodlers don't care about this either.

Nobody cared about Bernie Madoff as long as their accounts and the market kept going up. As soon as people tried to take their money out, however....

How is that my argument, I haven't even supplied an argument? Don't read between the lines, there was nothing there. I pointed out that you purposefully took the most controversial one. There are several others, see a siblingreply for examples if you really didn't know there were any others.

I wouldn't call me a pro-crypto advocate, just as I wouldn't call you an anti-crypto advocate. I like to keep track of what's happening in the crypto space but I'm not advocating pro or against it.

My opinion on Tether is that there should be a lot more transparency regarding their backed funds and personally I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.

For the sake of argument, what's the absolute best alternative to Tether that you feel could safely be used as an example?

Because you quickly resorted to ad hominem attacks even though you failed to provide any alternative or even a single counter example.

I don't know what the absolute best alternative is or how you would define the absolute best, I just know that there are several alternatives. The grandparent knows this as well, hence my post. [0] https://coinmarketcap.com/view/stablecoin/

I've asked for your opinion on what you feel is the best counterexample you can put up.

It does not seem you're able to point out anything at all.

Is that because you are aware that there is actually no good argument to refute OP's point? And thus you resorted to name-calling?

Can you define this please? What does it mean to be the absolute best alternative stablecoin? Once I know that I can try and answer your question.

DAI is the most used stablecoin - https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/multi-collateral-dai/. It's completely decentralized.