[Syonyk]

> But the crypto sector doesn't want exchange regulation, so they don't have the "circuit breakers" that, say, the CBOE does.

The description of crypto markets as "speedrunning the history of why we have the financial regulations we do" seems more and more accurate as time goes on.

But I agree, this isn't a "hack" in the normal sense. It may be a "hack" in the broader, "clever use of a system against the desires of the designer" sense, but it doesn't seem like any security boundaries were bypassed, just that the attacker made the system perform, per its rules, in a way that had not been predicted. Not a bad haul... good luck cashing it out, though.

[ckastner]

> The description of crypto markets as "speedrunning the history of why we have the financial regulations we do" seems more and more accurate as time goes on.

As someone who's been at the butt end of banking regulation for almost two decades, I love that quote.

It used to annoy me to no end that crypto folk touted the lack of regulation, actually even the ability to regulate, as some revolutionary new feature, not realizing that in fact, they were just traveling back to the stone age of finance.

The vast majority of the tons of financial regulations that exist today serve to protect market participants, most notably your Average Joe. Average Joe claiming he doesn't need regulation just demonstrates their absolute cluelessness and is just another argument in favor of it.

[qeternity]

The average Joe thinks the banking sector just runs checking accounts and credit cards…they have no clue how the rails of modern finance actually work.

This is how you end up with people comparing the energy usage of Bitcoin with that of the top 10 banks, as if they are remotely comparable.