Hacker News Reader

Comment by mywaifuismeta | Hacker News Reader

Maybe I'm missing something but is it a problem if SHIB is 20% of their reserves if 20% of what users are keeping on the exchange is SHIB? Of course we don't want what people actually deposited since it's a centralized exchange with no transparency. But by itself this isn't really a red flag...

View on HN

They have 300x more SHIB than DOGE[1]. Is that realistic reflection of their users preferences?

[1]https://portfolio.nansen.ai/dashboard/crypto.com

They were pushing SHIB hard in their marketing

maybe a significant number of people created accounts for the SHIB trading when SHIB was not supported in slower to adopt exchanges?

Yes, it's yet another potentially destabilising factor you can add to the pile though.

How is it destabilizing?

If 20% of depositor funds are SHIB then 20% of reserves should be SHIB.

As far as I am concerned, if they have 90% of their reserves in literal dog shit that is fine IF their liabilities are also in dog shit.

I wouldnt pay $10,000 a turd, but that is my value judgement, if someone else does then their problem.

> How is it destabilizing?

Potentially destabilising is what I said. In a similar fashion to how 20% of my diet consisting of Taco Bell would carry a greater destabilising potential than a the same share of FDA recommended diet conforming home-cooked meals would.

> If 20% of depositor funds are SHIB then 20% of reserves should be SHIB.

You're the one bringing this up, not me. Not refuting it though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com