djbebs

Define bad actor.

Ironic that they are giving up their actual realistic chance for a dignified retirement by blowing their money on gambling.

So apple doesnt have to change because their ports are already better?

Im sure the russians that just saw hundreds of billions of usd frozen would disagree.

I wouldn't.

People keeping their things is not a problem.

If you dont want to work for them, you're not required to.

I find it quite telling how you consider heavily regulated industries to be "examples of capitalism"...

Don't take this deal.

Quite frankly government have such a bad history of fucking over landlords that anything that doesn't involve a multi-billion dollar bond being posted outside of the country as security against future changes in law might as well be ignored and fought against.

The main culprits of those things are the governments making these laws.

Make no mistake this will just be used to implement those backdoors.

The solution is simple, relegate centralized exchanges to niches that so far can't be fulfilled in any other way (namely fiat-crypto transactions), and use them only briefly and immediately withdraw any assets from it once the transaction you need is complete.

You may also take on insurance against such malfeasance on the part of the exchange, increasing your likelihood of recovering your funds. On the plus side insurance agencies now have a financial incentive to ensure the exchanges they insure are honest.

In other words, see centralized entities as the unreliable partner that they are and work accordingly.

No regulation would have prevented this crime from happening.

I want to be clear here, what happened here is already illegal as is, and no regulation would have prevented it from happening in the first place.

Hell, the firm was already being audited, and those auditors didn't catch the accounting discrepancies, so it's doubtful that any additional regulation would have found this earlier either...

They shouldn't be, just like a pumpkin exchange shouldn't be trading using pumpkins that don't belong to them (or at all).

That's where the crime comes in.

If the fees aren't enough to cover it then the company isn't profitable and should shut down.

Or raise fees.

"I don't make a profit if I don't steal my customers assets" isn't a valid business plan.

I'm 100% serious.

Exchanges are not and should not be banks. They should not be comingling their assets with client assets.

There is nothing wrong with this, and indeed it's a good thing.

No reason to close this.

Nothing about blockchain prevents the amelioration of fraud, just like nothing about cash prevents it all the same.

You can very simply devise an insurance contract that compensates you for any such losses you incur.

Of course such an insurance is expensive, so most people wouldn't do it, but it's certainly possible.

Exchanges cannot get bankrun on. What you're watching is fraud being revealed.

Why?

Exchange business models are supposed to be 100% different from banks.

If exchanges are using fractional reserves of any kind or amount, they have already committed fraud.

They stole clients assets and used them to:

1- Gamble with them

2- pay themselves

3- lobby the government

4- bailout other failing crypto companies.

Everything here could have been done with any non-crypto exchange.

The peoblem with meta was never the quality of the business. It was with your ability to extract value and control from it.

The reason meta is uninvestible is because they are a clear cut case of structurely unsound corporate governance.

This.

The problem is the regulation that mandates people have insurance or be punished for it...

It is objectively true though.

Fraud is one

No it isn't.

Another example of why this sort of top down regulation is bad.

Yes, yes i do.