That is not essential to what futures do. The essence of a future, is that it is a trade that is agreed upon today, but which settles in the future. I sell my corn to you at a price we agree on today for delivery in 3 months. That allows producers and consumers of commodities to reduce risk, while speculators can increase their risk.
Also -- weird but interesting -- the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_Futures_Act bans trading futures contracts on onions (and motion picture box office receipts). Not sure if that would apply to onion seed.
Thanks for the usual collection of talking points from 2017 that nobody uses in the real world. There is no utility to these blockchain tokens except to scam others.
Other countries may not even be allowed to transfer from their bank overseas (I think China in most cases). Some countries have local currency that is devaluating, and banks that are less reliable than a mattress. Some countries have restrictions on the way that money can be stored or retrieved that basically mean that money deposited in the bank can not practically be withdrawn.
For some, the stablecoin is simply a more convenient bank that the one in the city, and in many cases they anyways don't have reportable income.
Other reasons exists for a stablecoin besides criminal activity, especially for people that live in poorer states - and these people are harder hit by losing their cash than would be someone who is in crypto for the ride. It is disingenuous to think its all crypto kiddies.
if you wanna question whether smart contracts are useful or not feel free, I sure do, but drop the smarminess when the answer to your question lies within the first paragraph.
They are a terrible idea whose time came and went around 2017.
It’s more accurate to say that you are “proclaiming”, which is perfectly fine, but doesn’t make for great conversation
Believe it or not, if you want to invest in gold, the only option isn't buying and storing physical gold in your home. That might even be a dangerous idea.
Stocks are certificates which claim partial ownership of a company. But how can owning a piece of paper be like owning a part of a company? What is a company anyway but an abstraction over the concept of group liabilities, assets, contracts, and actions? Or do you think companies only exist to allow people to break laws under another identity?