| >one can send very large sums of value between two addresses This is not the same thing as sending money to Ukraine. If I send money between two addresses, I've just sent money between 2 addresses. > This value can be swapped across other tokens with low slippage in the millions (denominated in USD). But not to actually buy anything in Ukraine. To do that you have to find someone with Fiat. As you see with all the other examples I gave you, what you've done is used the modern banking system to buy crypto currency - some bank transfer to a crypto exchange, send it from one address to another, and then left yourself with the problem of getting the money back out of crypto in Ukraine. Which as you'll see with almost all of the charitable giving in crypto to Ukraine, happens via the modern banking system, often with the direct involvement of the Ukrainian government. So it seems to me, that this entire thing about using Crypto for Ukraine is rubbish. And it seems like that to you too - because when I start interrogating the idea, the Crypto to Ukraine story morphs into a Rwandan sending money to Nigeria. My take is that Crypto in your example, was a worthless layer of complexity that doesn't solve the difficult problems of international banking, it solves the trivial bit in the middle. |
No, weapons are getting purchased in crypto in Ukraine.