RT s4mmy (@S4mmyEth)This is a thought provoking statement for a Sunday.Centralization risk is the ‘elephant in the room’:i) If ETH’s economic security (staked ETH) is dwarfed by the total value of stables it secured, there’s a theoretical imbalance.But some may initially think that stables are just tokenized RWAs (USD mostly). Controlled centrally by Tether, Circle, etc.So why would someone perform a 51% attack on the network to seize freezable assets?Not the issue here.ii) Is there a business risk for stab ...

RT s4mmy (@S4mmyEth)This is a thought provoking statement for a Sunday.Centralization risk is the ‘elephant in the room’:i) If ETH’s economic security (staked ETH) is dwarfed by the total value of stables it secured, there’s a theoretical imbalance.But some may initially think that stables are just tokenized RWAs (USD mostly). Controlled centrally by Tether, Circle, etc.So why would someone perform a 51% attack on the network to seize freezable assets?Not the issue here.ii) Is there a business risk for stab ...

RT s4mmy (@S4mmyEth)This is a thought provoking statement for a Sunday.Centralization risk is the ‘elephant in the room’:i) If ETH’s economic security (staked ETH) is dwarfed by the total value of stables it secured, there’s a theoretical imbalance.But some may initially think that stables are just tokenized RWAs (USD mostly). Controlled centrally by Tether, Circle, etc.So why would someone perform a 51% attack on the network to seize freezable assets?Not the issue here.ii) Is there a business risk for stab ...

RT s4mmy (@S4mmyEth)This is a thought provoking statement for a Sunday.Centralization risk is the ‘elephant in the room’:i) If ETH’s economic security (staked ETH) is dwarfed by the total value of stables it secured, there’s a theoretical imbalance.But some may initially think that stables are just tokenized RWAs (USD mostly). Controlled centrally by Tether, Circle, etc.So why would someone perform a 51% attack on the network to seize freezable assets?Not the issue here.ii) Is there a business risk for stab ...

RT s4mmy (@S4mmyEth)This is a thought provoking statement for a Sunday.Centralization risk is the ‘elephant in the room’:i) If ETH’s economic security (staked ETH) is dwarfed by the total value of stables it secured, there’s a theoretical imbalance.But some may initially think that stables are just tokenized RWAs (USD mostly). Controlled centrally by Tether, Circle, etc.So why would someone perform a 51% attack on the network to seize freezable assets?Not the issue here.ii) Is there a business risk for stab ...

This is a thought provoking statement for a Sunday.Centralization risk is the ‘elephant in the room’:i) If ETH’s economic security (staked ETH) is dwarfed by the total value of stables it secured, there’s a theoretical imbalance.But some may initially think that stables are just tokenized RWAs (USD mostly). Controlled centrally by Tether, Circle, etc.So why would someone perform a 51% attack on the network to seize freezable assets?Not the issue here.ii) Is there a business risk for stablecoin issuers if th ...