Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ted (not lasso)
@ted
it's inevitable that crypto product frontends will price access in stables and allow users to pay in whatever asset they want. pricing access to a product in a volatile asset is too bad of a user AND builder experience for it to remain the norm. speculators buy access they'll never use, drive up prices and lock out potential real users. bad for builders (who need real usage), bad for users (who can't get in). "what's wrong with adjusting access requirements as price changes?" if you're dropping access from 10k $token to 1k $token while nothing about the product changed, you're already pricing in stables — you're just using $token as an unstable middleman, introducing volatility risk for users and extra work for yourself. defi enables any product frontend to show price to access at a stable $25, yet users can still pay in whatever they want (ETH, USDC, ANON, HIGHER, VEIL). the tech for this already exists today. zero friction for users. zero complexity for builders. zero volatility risk for everyone.
15 replies
35 recasts
158 reactions
shazow
@shazow.eth
Protocols priced in stables, paid in whatever, frontends priced in whatever. ENS is a great example of this. Protocol price pegged at 5 USD paid out on ETH, but frontends can add whatever swap abstractions they want. Someday we can imagine whatever includes acts of labour, too. Taylor Swift should be able to pay for her coffee by singing a song (which maybe is realtime auctioned to fans as an NFT and proceeds get converted to USDC sent to the barista).
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
