'the bank was sanctioned for failing to apply the proper anti-laundering strictures to the transfer of $378.4bn'

Wachovia, now part of Wells Fargo... Guardian story from 2011: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico...

That's what came to my mind as well.

Nobody has more contempt for "cryptocurrencies" than me, but "can be used for illegally activities" has to be the weakest argument ever created by mankind.

The article was written by someone with no idea how the blockchain works. Binance itself refuted everything https://www.binance.com/en/blog/ecosystem/the-crypto-money-l...

I have no expertise on the subject or those particular accusations, but generally speaking I feel that a company's response to bad PR is probably not the most trustworthy and objective account of what has happened given their direct involvement in the matter. It seems as a given that they would want to refute it.

Meanwhile, that's the size of the fines HSBC is paying for laundering.

Binance needs to be held accountable, but let's not pretend this is an outrageous number.

This is such an unbelievably bad take. HSBC was fined $1.9b for facilitating $880m of laundering.

Binance is accused of facilitating 3x this amount, which would be equivalent to a nearly $6b fine basis the HSBC settlement.