[ryanschaefer]

These are all super reasonable things though…? (with the caveat you are explicitly dealing with a centralized vendor)

1. Why does the version matter? It all gets compiled down to bytecode upon deployment and maybe the developers chose this version out of familiarity.

2. See the recent cash app glitch for why you’d want to be able to stop everyone transferring if you had a bug. This gives me more confidence than if it didn’t exist like some other crypto projects which get fully drained due to lack of this functionality. (Only for centralized protocols.)

3. Future proofing for AML / terror regulations. Be mad at your lawmakers if you don’t like this. See tornado cash for what happens if you have lack of controls.

4. This is something you absolutely have to have? Like, I don’t get why this is a point at all. How do you expect to credit users if not by increasing the total supply by the dollars they deposit?

[vorpalhex]

Paypal already freezes and seizes money from account holders, not for AML compliance but uh.. just because they can.

This includes rules that they can fine you for "misinformation" (these rules have flip flopped a few times, not sure the current iteration).

Bluntly, I won't do business with Paypal. They do bad business. I encourage you to also not do business with them. Using Eth as a backing token doesn't make it any better when they still have the option to just nuke your money with no controls.

[ryanschaefer]

Yeah, seeing what PayPal already does I just wanted to point out that this shouldn’t surprise anyone. If anything this is slightly better because it’s all public. You can see calls to them banning accounts from transfers.

Number 4 being included just peeves me a lot because it seems like proper OOP to decouple increasing supply from any other logic they have to accept deposits.