[arcticbull]

And yet going from 1:1 backed (ostensibly but not ever audited) to 1:0.7 backed it still traded 1:1. That’s my issue with it. The fact that they got caught with their pants 30% down is the least surprising thing ever imo.

In fact as I recall they continued to tell people they were backed 1:1 for many months after the seizure.

Remember BFX and Tether pretended to be two separate companies until the paradise papers because of course those clowns used Appleby. [1]

[1] https://news.bitcoin.com/paradise-papers-reveal-bitfinexs-de...

[1996]

I agree with you, I just find your consistent and persistent myopia interesting: for you, nothing can ever be good in crypto!

[arcticbull]

Well, I wouldn’t call it myopia (naturally, I suspect anyone with such a myopia wouldn’t haha by virtue of not being able to see past your blinders - but I digress). I’ve done and continue to do a lot of research to challenge my opinions on this subject and any other I feel passionate about. For instance, I’m a lefty and I watch a ton of Fox.

I simply do not believe that the core tenets of crypto (decentralization, trustlessness, irreversible, “hard money,” etc) are good things to have in a currency. I don’t think trustlessness extends past cryptocurrency in a meaningful way beyond things captured entirely on the blockchain as that breaks down at the boundary between on and off chain (ie garbage in garbage out). I believe humans are fallible and trust is a massive optimization - and a system that doesn’t take those into account isn’t worth the NAND it’s stored on.

I’ve yet to see anything solved with a blockchain better than a classical solution - 12 years and billions of dollars scammed later. Such a thing would change my mind, and I would certainly eat my, err, hat (Hi Mr McAffee) and admit publicly, on Twitter, and here, and anywhere, that I was totally and incredibly wrong.

At least I’m on message! :)