91–100 of 158 posts
They didn’t measure how much value was stolen by rug-pull maneuvers. Did 10,000 ‘fake’ tokens start up, run a while, and rug-pull taking $1 with them? I’d guess that’s just ‘debugging’. Did a few big rug pulls run away with a million dollars? Can we detect _those_ better?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would I dispute it? At best the title is misleading though as most readers likely aren't aware of how Uniswap works and will think "97% of the tokens are scams so Uniswap is unsafe to use" which isn't true in the slightest.
97% of the things available in my vanguard or Charles Schwab aren't scams. It's preposterous to call a marketplace where less then 3% of the offerings are "legit" a safe market to use.
I’m sure the AOL walled garden had much higher quality content than the internet at large.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is logically incoherent. It would only be true if you chose a token completely at random instead of choosing a widely-used token you wanted to use. Reminds me of "it either works or it doesn't, so there's a 50/50 chance"
Trusting all individuals to make safe decisions in a marketplace flooded with scams is just not scalable. You cannot educate every user in how to identify a scam. And excluding users who haven't gone through that education hardly seems like the democratization of finance that these services advertise.
So uneducated users would really have to go out of their way to get scammed through there. Like having to go out of their way to follow up on a solicitation from something caught in a Gmail spam filter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, people should remember that they have 2.3% chance of not getting scammed on uniswap. That's the definition of safe to use.
Misconceptions like yours are why the title is misleading. If you go to Uniswap right now you will not see any of these tokens and have a near 0% chance of being scammed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it misleading it's an accurate statement of the findings of an analysis. Your argument is they won't see those tokens cause they're gonna search out the one they like (and that one won't be a scam?) What they'll conclude reading this is "wow, crypto is full of scams" and be right.
It's accurate in the sense that "97% of email is scams and phishing" which is a neat fact but doesn't indict email as a failure. Email and Uniswap are both useful tools that are safe to use for even non-technical users. In fact Uniswap is safer as spam filters aren't 100% reliable but Uniswap's lists nearly are.
Some comments: While the report findings might be correct on the number, the terminology and conclusion in related discussion are often not. No real person ever traded these 26k tokens. The creation of liquidity pool should not be considered a launch, as you still somehow need to convince other people to buy it from you. Nothing was "launched". These trading pairs are more akin to spam, to show up in the search resul…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you go to Uniswap right now you won't see any of these tokens. You run no risk of getting scammed by using Uniswap unless you go out of your way and manually add them.
Looking at the paper abstract, it says the identified scams by looking at transactions. So it seems at least some people are manually adding them and getting scammed. Or are you saying anyone who does that is by definition using Uniswap wrong and shouldn’t be counted as being scammed on Uniswap?
Uniswap filters the tokens available the same modern email providers filters email. If you go looking in the spam folder and fall pray to a scam there, it is your fault, not the fault of the email provider.
It's important to note that Uniswap is decentralized and anyone can "list" anything for trading without asking anyone or going through any process. This means there are thousands of tokens, probably millions in the future, available to trade. Users do not see these tokens unless they actively search them out. Uniswap uses the TokenList standard ( https://tokenlists.org/ ) and by default users only see tokens such as…
Reputable how? like ftx a couple weeks ago? Gemini holds an F rating by the BBB and a massive amount of complaints on trust pilot.[1][2]
This is their marketing message "Put your crypto to work. With Gemini Earn, you can receive up to 8.05% APY on your cryptocurrency." This is done by buying and holding stablecoins. Just curious how do you suppose they return such high APY on stablecoins without doing the exact same scam as FTX?
[1]https://www.bbb.org/us/ny/new-york/profile/cryptocurrency-ex...
[2]https://www.trustpilot.com/review/gemini.com
[edit] added quote for clarity
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Misconceptions like yours are why the title is misleading. If you go to Uniswap right now you will not see any of these tokens and have a near 0% chance of being scammed.
It's not misconceptions, it's accepting that the whole ecosystem is fraudulent, and that as an intermediation layer, uniswap fails to protect consumers. If any payment processor was letting 97.7% of its merchant users be fraudulent, they would be closed yesterday.
To fix your analogy, it's like a payment processor having thousands of fake storefronts able to accept payment. If 97% of their volume was to those fake entities then definitely shut them down but most of the volume would be Amazon and Walmart and the fake storefronts wouldn't even be a rounding error.
Volume info: https://info.uniswap.org/