Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds).
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff "Covering" aka, passing the cost on to future customers? k...
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff I wonder how much there is to cover. It apparently makes around £500m a year in profit, so absorbing that much has got to hurt.
The company assets, which could easily cover it, are presumably owned by other people..
-
@ssiekmann In my experience, a lot of journalists are still pretty unwilling to believe that companies will just lie. And that’s a particularly bad perspective to hold when you’re covering the crypto sector.
@molly0xfff @ssiekmann That's an especially depressing blind spot because it seems like it should be the most familiar part. 'Crypto' likes to exaggerate how much the math really matters; but there are details there that you would expect a finance reporter to need to read up on if they want to get into the weeds. "Shady things happen on quasi-securities markets and people do perjury and fraud sometimes" seem like much more universal concepts.
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff What I don't understand is, why any losses are the customers' to begin with and need to be covered explicitly. Wouldn't customer funds and Binance's own funds be all in the same wallet(s), and anyone's balance is just a data base entry? It would seem natural to me that the losses get booked on their own balance entry, and at no time have customer funds, or balances be affected.
-
@molly0xfff @ssiekmann That's an especially depressing blind spot because it seems like it should be the most familiar part. 'Crypto' likes to exaggerate how much the math really matters; but there are details there that you would expect a finance reporter to need to read up on if they want to get into the weeds. "Shady things happen on quasi-securities markets and people do perjury and fraud sometimes" seem like much more universal concepts.
@fuzzyfuzzyfungus @molly0xfff @ssiekmann Agree. I'd like journalists to get into more detail. Does Binance possess investor's private keys?
-
@molly0xfff I wonder how much there is to cover. It apparently makes around £500m a year in profit, so absorbing that much has got to hurt.
The company assets, which could easily cover it, are presumably owned by other people..
@tony @molly0xfff Charles Ponzi perfected the business model many decades ago
-
@molly0xfff "Covering" aka, passing the cost on to future customers? k...
@neclimdul that's... completely up to the users. If they decide to be customers, they will incur costs.
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
Please... I've got at least that much just digging through my couch cushions...
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff Bad headlines like this is why I have avoided crypto like the plague... -
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff #Knords fleeced a bunch of #crypto wankers.
️ #FAFO #Binance -
@molly0xfff @ssiekmann That's an especially depressing blind spot because it seems like it should be the most familiar part. 'Crypto' likes to exaggerate how much the math really matters; but there are details there that you would expect a finance reporter to need to read up on if they want to get into the weeds. "Shady things happen on quasi-securities markets and people do perjury and fraud sometimes" seem like much more universal concepts.
@fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.social @molly0xfff@hachyderm.io especially since Binance isn’t publicly traded, has a history of shady ownership and financial crimes and there simply is no way a company generating less than $500M profit can easy peasy make $6B apparate. This isn’t Hogwarts. Now I’m learning they have a large private holding of SpaceX and boy does it all make sense. Leverage on leverage on crypto. I wish this would finally all crater like it should. End of rant -
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff the sentence after the one you highlighted says that $5B of the lost assets are the exact token assets that were lost. Why is that not considered recovered? What am I missing? Not supporting them or saying you're wrong, just confused.
-
@molly0xfff the sentence after the one you highlighted says that $5B of the lost assets are the exact token assets that were lost. Why is that not considered recovered? What am I missing? Not supporting them or saying you're wrong, just confused.
@forced_gump they’re saying that the company funds are held in the same asset that they’re replacing. For example, they already held ETH that they’ll use to replace the stolen ETH, without having to convert it from some other asset.
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
Super secure public ledger that is not controlled by anyone.
Sure enough, the sovereign individual asshats in the world pretended that they found an exit from society. Like everything else, they fantasize about it.
It doesn’t work that way. Crypto is neither safe or secure.
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff
So, I was mistaken in thinking that bitcoin, blockchain based assets, intrinsically included something that would prove ownership. -
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
hahahahahahaha!
-
@ssiekmann In my experience, a lot of journalists are still pretty unwilling to believe that companies will just lie. And that’s a particularly bad perspective to hold when you’re covering the crypto sector.
@molly0xfff @ssiekmann Even worse when it's governments/cops.
-
@fuzzyfuzzyfungus @molly0xfff @ssiekmann Agree. I'd like journalists to get into more detail. Does Binance possess investor's private keys?
@HenryT @fuzzyfuzzyfungus @molly0xfff @ssiekmann Most "investors" don't even understand how cryptocurrency works and don't have possession of their own coins. They just have a pinky-promise from whatever exchange they use that "X amount of coins in the exchange's possession belong to you and are available for you to withdraw" tracked in an ordinary database. It's utter clowncar shit.
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff Well those are very different things! Sounds like “spin” as you say that will at best be contributed to “nuance”.
But to use the “you wouldn’t steal a car” analogy from piracy, that’s the difference between getting the same car back (complete with your half finished bottle of water in the cup holder) and getting a 1:1 replacement without the car owner paying for it…presumably because the car maker thinks it’s more valuable to keep you driving than for you to decide to take mass transit.
Thank you for the clarification.
-
Binance hasn’t REcovered $6B+, it’s COVERING it (reimbursing customers from company funds). Some was frozen, but Binance is not likely to recover even half.
Bad headlines like this are a big part of why I started covering crypto. Generalist reporters on deadline far too often end up repeating company spin.
@molly0xfff Repeating company spin is policy for most media enterprises. Everything else is too expensive. Thank you for your reporting.
