Yes, the money launderer [1], one whose founder is coming out of house arrest [2] (and is also a money launderer [3]), and one that can’t tell you where your money is [4]. What could go wrong.
I’ll put aside ethical and legal arguments. If the employees of the business face constant risk of arrest, and the business constant risk of massive fines and even sanctions, do you not see how that is de-stabilising?
If CZ is arrested or disappears and Binance’s dollars and euros frozen, do you think its users get their money back? Now what happens if even that rumour takes root?
Quite clearly not, since the party creating the risk has agreed to reimburse you. If regulators blow up a bank, depositors are its problem. If they blow up a crypto thing, users own that risk.
> the point is here, just accept it
No, the opposite. Acknowledge and manage it. If you want to do crypto, hold your own keys.
So, you enter a casino. Exchange your money for casino's chips. You gamble and win more chips. When you want to cash out, casino says: “Sorry, we won't give you money for those chips.”
Yes, the money launderer [1], one whose founder is coming out of house arrest [2] (and is also a money launderer [3]), and one that can’t tell you where your money is [4]. What could go wrong.
[1] https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1006
[2] https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/crypto-exchange-bit...
[3] https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2021/08/10/bitmex-announces...
[4] https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/10/29/leaked-docs-reve...