If it reduces friction and lets processors handle more transactions, eliminates pressure points subject to third party interference, scams, and political/ideological fuckery, and if it performs as well or better than before from the consumer perspective, then it's a win. Ostensibly decentralized systems like this allow the processor to defer responsibility for any given transaction in particular, so vendors and consumers are harder to particularly target; Stripe can't be maneuvered into "debanking" efforts, or at least, can't as easily as has been the case with controversial adult performers and products and political and other people who've suffered under the old paradigm.

That says nothing of political idiocy which will surely follow as new levers are tested, but payment processors are in the business of making money, and ostensibly want as many transactions to happen as possible, regardless of origin or the particulars of any sale.

They shouldn't be gatekeeping goods and services for legal transactions, and I'd be willing to bet most of them absolutely don't want to be in that position.

I imagine there's also a chargeback scam reduction and accountability benefit to this, which reduces losses, and ostensibly prices.

There's a surveillance and privacy hit, but it's not like the systems currently being used aren't completely compromised and surveilled already, so maybe this adds some accountability at that level as well.

> Why create a new blockchain?

Stablecoins enable instant, borderless, programmable transactions, but current blockchain infrastructure isn’t designed for them: existing systems are either fully general or trading-focused. Tempo is a blockchain designed and built for real-world payments.

- First line in TFA

Paradigm is closely aligned to the current US administration, so it's valuable to Stripe to suck up to them.