News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SEC Accuses Binance of Mishandling Funds and Lying to Reg... by crote on Monday June 05, 2023 @12:27PM (#36198724)
I wouldn't exactly call it "working" when the largest trading platforms turn out to be fraudulent, the value is highly volatile, the whole "immutability" thing is thrown out as soon as people are inconvenienced by it, and transaction volume always remains negligible. The only people for who Bitcoin is working is those using it for ransomware extortion.
Re:SEC Accuses Binance of Mishandling Funds and Lying to Reg... by super256 on Monday June 05, 2023 @01:00PM (#36199315)
I wonder if Coinbase could steal all the volume from Binance if they would offer 0% fees on spot. I bet most other markets would implode.
Re:SEC Accuses Binance of Mishandling Funds and Lying to Reg... by mhluongo on Monday June 05, 2023 @01:45PM (#36200058)
Is a public company not working of the exchange it's traded on is fraudulent? No — it can still offer governance rights and potentially dividends.

Does gold not work if the exchange it's traded on is fraudulent? No, it can still be held and traded peer to peer, and it can still be used in manufacturing.

You're conflating the market with the actual network. The Bitcoin network works just fine.

Re:SEC Accuses Binance of Mishandling Funds and Lying to Reg... by mt360 on Monday June 05, 2023 @07:06PM (#36205522)
People looking to buy Bitcoin unfortunately often end up at Binance.

They have long offered low trading fees, while heavily inflating on-chain withdrawal fees and duping users into accepting "wrapped bitcoin" instead (that is, a layer of misdirection and nonetheless custodial bitcoin, held by Binance or some other third party).

If what the SEC allege is proven, that they moved customer coins to a separate legal entity, I don't think it's a leap to assume the coins users think they're buying perhaps don't even exist - that the exchange have been selling paper coins banking on that users won't withdraw en masse.

This is what FTX were doing too - selling paper bitcoin; bitcoin that was not backed 1-to-1 (or anywhere close, they actually held a relatively small number), instead funneling customer money into the hundreds of other coins FTX had invested in.

This could reveal the apparent mass susceptibility for VC backed "cryptos" - that the masses are not so dumb after all, or at least not in the way you thought, that instead they've been fleeced.

Bitcoin may still suffer reputational damage in the short term, but surely the elimination of such schemes is, to use an overused phrase that seems very apt now, good for bitcoin?