Hacker News Reader

Comment by hackernud3s | Hacker News Reader

Isn't it already too late at that point? The tokens would have moved already.

I think the idea is that they freeze them indefinitely, and then they no longer count against the centralised reserves, since they can never cash out. Now they can mint the equivalent amount back to Binance and remain solvent.

And how do they ‘mint’ 2 billion without affecting the price of tether and without finding 2 billion to back it?

If they can mint with no impact doesn’t that mean they can just print money?

Because if they permanently freeze 2 billion in a wallet, that Tether can never move or cash out, so their liabilities go down 2 billion. They can mint an equivalent amount to a non-frozen wallet without affecting their reserve ratio.

And yes they can print money, you have to trust their reserves that are off chain.

To be clear: There is no permanently frozen guarantee. Tether can and has unfrozen (called removeBlackList)addresses before. All of this is just a public database fully controlled by Tether Limited.

Sorry, I don't trust their reserves that are off chain.

They have been caught cheating before, their numbers are astronomical, and no crypto numbers are actually verified and regulated.

It’s been years since anything Tether minted was plausibly 100% backed by real assets. Both times they’ve been forced to show the books, they only had fractional backing. And they’ve minted tens of billions of tokens since.

And yet people like the parent and those with billions invested in Tether seem to believe that it's all backed and fully solvent and minting new money from thin air is completely reasonable.

It's remarkable to me how long this scam has lasted and how much confidence people have in it, in spite of the very shady characters involved and the likelihood of fraud.

Personally I'm skeptical of Tether. But you don't need to trust them to believe that if they permanently freeze Z USDT and then mint Z USDT then their ratio of reserves to USDT is unchanged.

Well I think you do need to trust them: you are taking at face value their statements and assuming they do what they say they will. What if they mint coins without collateral (they have been caught doing this before), what if they unfreeze coins later (they have done this before)?

These stablecoins are just a database owned by untrustworthy people and backed by nothing but their promises, they're just one step up from NFTs.

Moved where? Moving to a different wallet wouldn't prevent freezing. It's 5B, impossible to cash out or exchange for different crypto quickly.

right but too late to call freeze on the original wallet address as per gp's post. I would imagine it got distributed to many wallets and attempts to tumble by the time Tether could move on it.

here's an interesting article by DataFinnovation arguing that blacklisting crypto is doomed to fail.

https://medium.com/chainargos/losing-the-blacklisting-race-e...

they took loan against it.

Excluding wash and artificial activity, supposedly stablecoins trade 400M/h so if it took 2h to notice and lock they might have been able trade about half a billion without overwhelming existing volumes?

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/stablecoin... (I didn't verify per-stablecoin volume, or actual volume at those hours, or typical volume for those exact hours, which a better analysis would have done.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com