[SilverBirch]

This is great, because I was expecting a list of assets and instead I got an explainer on merkle trees. Honestly, it's pretty funny. Anyone who puts a penny in Kraken deserves to have it stolen if they believe stuff like this.

The problem is we all know that this really doesn't mean anything. One of the funnier stories that went round this week was that in an effort to shore up their reputation one company actually published an address for their deposits that highlighted they'd accidentally sent a huge amount out of that address and then brought it back, when questioned they claimed they'd sent the transaction in error and the recipient later returned it. The obvious shell game being played here - you send the money over, they do the audit, you send it back, suddenly two insolvent companies both pass audits.

It's just unfortunate because we all kind of know, you can't really trust these audits, because audits only really work when the people are being audited aren't highly motivated scam artists. Even if the funds do currently exist and are safe now, that doesn't help you if they disappear next week. The question isn't "are the funds there right now" the question is "can we trust you" and the answer is probably no.

[jld89]

> The question isn't "are the funds there right now" the question is "can we trust you" and the answer is probably no.

Why is the answer probably no? Because of what happened with FTX?

[SilverBirch]

Let's face it, operators in the crypto space have generally proven to be untrustworthy. In an ironic twist to the "trustless decentralized..." we've ended up with highly centralized untrustworthy operators. It turns out companies that operate in a deliberate regulatory grey zone tend to... you know... not operate with integrity. Let's face it, there are some stable coins out there we know aren't backed, but haven't blown up yet.