from Hacker News

How the Feds bounced Binance

by haskellandchill on 12/16/23, 9:39 PM with 103 comments

  • by dale_glass on 12/16/23, 10:39 PM

    > But the blockchain’s entire purpose is political. If crypto is no longer about teh magic of decentralization, then why would anyone want to use it?

    Making big $$$, obviously.

    It's very clear that the whole decentralization tech angle failed a long time ago. I had a passing interest, but completely lost it around 2017-ish, when BTC blocks started filling up.

    It seemed completely clear to me that a "Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" couldn't tolerate such dysfunction. Usage as cash wasn't working. In the end capacity had to be promptly increased, or obviously there'd be huge problems for everyone.

    The first nail in the coffin was that blocks weren't expanded. The second one was that while there were plenty alternatives, BTC retained dominance, and that even forks that theoretically were superior because they did what they were supposed to do far better, BTC still won out.

    So clearly I was wrong, BTC wasn't functioning as a "cash system", and this obviously didn't matter to the BTC users, and didn't matter to the world at large either.

    Thus eventually it dawned on me that there were maybe a few people out there that had some interest in a "Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" and the "tech", but the vast majority out there were only interested in a world-wide game of hot potato, where the only point is to accumulate coins early, then sell them to some fool on the top, and cash out.

  • by jfengel on 12/16/23, 10:18 PM

    Binance will not only help the US government monitor the money flows (the argument of our book), but plausibly act act as a regulatory super-spreader, transmitting “know your customer rules” across the ecoystem like an epidemiological contagion (the argument of an important academic article on ‘viral governance’ by Gregoire Mallard and Jin Sun).

    Or, people will flood out to someone who hasn't been hit by that "contagion", because the entire point is to have unregulated money.

  • by csomar on 12/17/23, 3:23 AM

    The article keeps confusing the blockchain tech (ie: bitcoin) with the centralized exchange business (ie: binance). In 2017-2018, crypto grew so fast that the tech couldn’t catch up. The centralized exchanges indeed won.

    However, a significant volume is being traded today on DEXs (ie: uniswap). The OP fails to mention that. Uniswap did around $1bn in volume on a Saturday. These amount are very hard to fake as uniswap fees are simply brutal comparing to CEXs. This means a part of the market has moved off-grid and it’s significant. I don’t think the article argument can ignore that fact.

  • by from on 12/17/23, 1:43 AM

    Except Binance didn't make out too bad in the end anyways. CZ still has billions of dollars and is looking at a pretty good sentence given the allegations. Monitorship does not entail unlimited government access to records, it mostly means a bunch of adult hall-monitors reading off compliance checklists, making sure they are being followed, then writing to the government every quarter about the remaining items on the checklists.

    Yes, there's the SAR lookback, but no one reads those anyways and probably won't give the government much because criminals routinely use accounts registered with fake or stolen IDs. Binance still accepts customers from countries like Venezuela, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, etc that "respected" financial institutions wouldn't touch with a 39.5 foot pole. There are still people making $50,000 USDT -> cash transactions every day with Binance P2P.

  • by dist-epoch on 12/16/23, 10:42 PM

    When will Tether implode?

    I've been reading about how that is imminent here for 3 years now.

  • by mgaunard on 12/16/23, 10:54 PM

    In practice people use the blockchain to move assets between accounts tied to some of the many competing centralized trading markets (of which Binance is only the biggest one).

    They also use it for OTC transactions, which are typically also hedged on centralized markets due to their uncertainty.

    The centralized markets also function as banks, where you can borrow or cross-margin your positions.

    So it works, it's just that only using blockchain is not good enough to deal with speculation needs and market volatility.

  • by jongjong on 12/16/23, 10:35 PM

    My understanding of crypto (having worked in the industry for years) is that it's not about decentralisation so much as it is about reliability and transparency.

    The decentralization aspect was mostly necessary in the early days to avoid being shut down by government. Now that crypto is widespread, it is not as important. What is important though are things that are missing from our current fiat monetary system; transparency and reliability.

    While the fiat monetary system appears to be very reliable for the individual, it is in fact extremely unreliable due to its lack of transparency. Governments can easily manipulate the supply (and therefore the true value) of currency behind the scenes without your knowledge and that is one of the primary mechanisms via which it steals wealth from individuals and deprive them of opportunities.

    Arguments against cryptocurrency are essentially saying that these individuals who are being robbed and deprived of opportunities don't matter because the system only needs to work for rich people and fool the poor into thinking that it doesn't harm them.

    Unfortunately, many poor people understand exactly how the system robs them.

    - It devalues our salary contracts via inflation of buying power.

    - Centralized currency creation centralizes opportunities due to the Cantillon Effect and this creates an asymmetric playing field which unfairly benefits corporations and large organizations.

    - Given that income tax is levied against each transfer between individuals, newly issued currency cannot travel very far from the government money printers as each hop away from the printers incurs a significant additional tax in the remaining untaxed amount which keeps shrinking. This exacerbates the Cantillon Effect and punishes regional areas and individuals who are far from the centers of money printing. It keeps all economic activity on a very short leash which is held tightly by the government.

  • by paulpauper on 12/17/23, 1:30 AM

    Why is this so? Consider. If a business becomes big and powerful, it becomes more vulnerable to government regulation

    This certainly has not been the case with 'big tech' or 'big insurance'. Regulation amounts to slaps on the wrist, fines. Not being shut down or the key people arrested.

  • by tmpfs on 12/16/23, 11:53 PM

    A lot of comments here but I have still never seen people talk about the absolutely perfect use case for a block chain.

    Mandate that all government spending use a block chain so that all citizens can see government spending. All public finances visible to all citizens.

    I think we have got it backwards trying to use the technology as untraceable peer to peer currency, instead focus on visibility into government finances to combat corruption and nepotism.

  • by bragr on 12/16/23, 10:38 PM

    It is going to being very interesting to see all the prosecutions that result from this. The feds know how to make good use of the access they're about to have based what they've been able to do with other exchanges' records.
  • by lulznews on 12/16/23, 11:36 PM

    Feds are doing a stealth CBDC takeover …
  • by b33j0r on 12/17/23, 12:48 AM

    I’m so glad I don’t remember how much money was in that wallet. Let’s just call it 5, with no units. Helps.