Do you remember the UST disaster? Many people have since become completely hopeless about algorithmic stablecoins and have blacklisted all stablecoins. But recently, I dissected an interesting project and realized that stablecoins can indeed be designed more cautiously.

The stablecoin behind this project is fully backed by over-collateralized mainstream assets like BNB and ETH, and can be redeemed at any time. The mechanism is somewhat like a traditional pawnshop: if you want to borrow 100 dollars, you need to deposit assets worth 150 dollars, with a strict liquidation threshold. This architecture effectively blocks the risk of infinite expansion.

What's even more interesting is the innovative design — your collateral assets are not just sitting idle; they continuously generate income. The system governance is also decentralized, allowing token holders to vote on parameter adjustments, effectively enabling users to jointly safeguard the mechanism.

Honestly, UST has left many with psychological scars, and now people are wary of stablecoins. But the emergence of such projects also shows that some are actively exploring the question of "how to design more secure stablecoins." It’s worth studying them as case examples to rethink the possibilities of stablecoins. After all, the industry must move forward; venting alone is not enough—deep understanding is key.