Which ones are those?
The biggest (Tether) have admitted that they are not fully collateralised and withrawn their claims to such. In a court filing last year they announced they had around 73% of the funds available in 'cash or cash-like instruments', but even that hasn't really been verified, nor is it apparent whether "cash-like instruments" includes other cryptocurrencies.
>I also highlight that in this context the most interesting thing about blockchains is that "Openness and interoperability have become more important than decentralization".
The most interesting thing to me about "blockchains" is how the hype train is still limping on, after almost zero actual delivery of anything useful or world-changing. I expect it to continue to lose steam, as all the pupported use-cases turn out (as they all have so far) either to be some sort of impractical techno-utopian dream, an unnecessary complication where a database works just fine (better in fact), or an outright scam.
That just doesn't make any damn sense, whatsoever.
Stablecoins may not be practically subject to these restrictions (they may have other very serious risks and limitations, but not the same ones as USD).
So choose whatever currency is best for you. Isn't it nice to have a choice?
Presumably they are subject to these restrictions in law, it's just that right now they fly under the radar.
So ... you're advising people that stablecoins are a good way to break the law?
So ... you're in favor of innocent people having their money confiscated on the spot without due process?
Your imagination beyond that is up to you.