Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

trends.aax.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 843 posts

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#251

Post by chitowneats »

yuvadam wrote: post #237
ethanbond wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you realize that banks (and individuals) could have all the advantages of decentralization if they just chose to be decentralized too, right? This prompts the question: why are they so centralized? It turns out the advantages of centralization are more significant than the advantages of decentralization, and this is true even in a market with religious orientation toward decentralization . All you've gotta do to…

Banks can't choose to be decentralized when the whole point of their existence is to custody centralized fiat money.

Banks existed long before fiat currency. If you're ignorant of the history, I suggest you look up "history of the bank note".

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#252

Post by bearjaws »

f0e4c2f7 wrote: post #9

In the current climate, I'm left wondering who still has their crypto on exchanges. Which maybe thats the problem - people withdrawing funds causing even more bank runs.

knowing how lazy & comfortable people are with banks probably 90% of the 'casual' investor space is entirely on exchanges.

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#253

Post by oblio »

tootie wrote: post #180
brnt wrote: post #33

So, having been around since the early bitcoin days, core to the salespitch back then was the fact you would have control. You'd have your coins in your wallet, and no need for banks etc. Apparently nobody does this anymore, and gives their wallets to these exchanges (i.e. banks) and balks when the obvious happens in pyramid schemes. People just don't get distributed currency if they promptly undistribute it. Or is i…

I read an interesting thread on why this isn't a pyramid scheme. Basically there's no one at the top. It's decentralized so there's a loose federation of edges arranged in a many-sided polygon. So we need a new name. Instead of Ponzi, this is a Nakamoto Scheme.

That's much better. It's not a monopoly, it's an oligopoly :-)

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#254

Post by bogomipz »

qudat wrote: post #104
rchaud wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apparently nobody does this anymore, and gives their wallets to these exchanges (i.e. banks) and balks when the obvious happens in pyramid schemes. The name of the game is pump and dump, you can't play the game (speculation) if you're not on the field (the exchange). Crypto's marketing is 'financial freedom' as in get-rich-quick, not free as in libre.

That's right. Not to mention the transaction fees are so high that moving from a wallet you own to an exchange can cost non-insignificant amount of money. Add on top of that the general volatility of crypto, people not wanting to deal with maintaining their own wallet, and you have a recipe for people keeping their funds on exchanges.

>"Not to mention the transaction fees are so high that moving from a wallet you own to an exchange can cost non-insignificant amount of money."

I realize that transaction fees are probably a moving target but is there a ballpark figure you or someone else could say? I'm guessing it's percentage-based?

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#256

Post by abruzzi »

tootie wrote: post #180
brnt wrote: post #33

So, having been around since the early bitcoin days, core to the salespitch back then was the fact you would have control. You'd have your coins in your wallet, and no need for banks etc. Apparently nobody does this anymore, and gives their wallets to these exchanges (i.e. banks) and balks when the obvious happens in pyramid schemes. People just don't get distributed currency if they promptly undistribute it. Or is i…

I read an interesting thread on why this isn't a pyramid scheme. Basically there's no one at the top. It's decentralized so there's a loose federation of edges arranged in a many-sided polygon. So we need a new name. Instead of Ponzi, this is a Nakamoto Scheme.

DePy - decentralized pyramid.

I say this in jest. There are more than one reason to be interested in crypto, but when bitcoin suddenly went from 1BTC=USD$1 to $1BTC=USD$100 (I don't actually know when the boom happened--I wasn't watching that closely) the individualist, libertarians were obscured by the quick-buck types looking to turn their thousand into a million. Thats when the scammers all came out.

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#257

Post by andruby »

rapsey wrote: post #54
endorphine wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you believe that is the case? How is this hypothesis explained?

Crypto very much follows the stock market. Interest rates are inversely correlated to stock market performance. After 2008 the stock market went into the longest bull run in history which has now reversed this year. Stock market is down and crypto is collapsing because it is the wild west. There are for sure going to be multiple exchange collapses not just FTX.

> Crypto very much follows the stock market.

Is that based on observing a correlation between both or is there an underlying hypothesis/theory/mechanism why crypto follows the stock market?

I'm genuinely curious, not trying to imply this isn't the case.

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#258

Post by xtracto »

gjulianm wrote: post #206
disruptalot wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a failure of traditional financial institutions and people who are ok with them, not of crypto. Satoshi wouldn't be encouraging people to put their coins on a trusted third party like that. All fundamental crypto values say this.

Precisely the failure of crypto is thinking that people will follow "fundamental crypto values" and underestimating the power of convenience and ignorance. "Traditional financial institutions" are inevitable in crypto.

I remember when WikiLeaks first decided to accept Bitcoin's for donations. Nakamoto cautioned that Bitcoin was not mature enough fr something like that.

I think that the problem with the Cryptocurrencies movement has been that the use peopel want to give to it has surpassed the technological advances that it provides. At some point, the ETH network will get there, providing "trustless" alternatives for a lot of the stuff that CeFi services are giving. But that is still several years away.

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#259

Post by mtkhaos »

ethanbond wrote: post #220
disruptalot wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a failure of traditional financial institutions and people who are ok with them, not of crypto. Satoshi wouldn't be encouraging people to put their coins on a trusted third party like that. All fundamental crypto values say this.

But you realize that banks (and individuals) could have all the advantages of decentralization if they just chose to be decentralized too, right? This prompts the question: why are they so centralized? It turns out the advantages of centralization are more significant than the advantages of decentralization, and this is true even in a market with religious orientation toward decentralization . All you've gotta do to…

Issue is they reinvented the wheel in the crypto space. Centralized or decentralized it's all on the same market is only a matter of scale. As even in centralized markets the concept of edge is just hitting parity.

What really surprised me about the space was the refusing of not registering as a speculative asset. As even if you look into the regulations, it's merely making the mechanisms transparent and creating reporting.

As if DeFi followed through with the true promise of decentralization and transparency. The FTX situation would never have happened in the first place. So with that, the crypto space actually went against its principles and we are seeing the result.

Re: Crypto exchange AAX suspends withdrawals

#260

Post by MichaelCollins »

kkielhofner wrote: post #106
brnt wrote: post #33

So, having been around since the early bitcoin days, core to the salespitch back then was the fact you would have control. You'd have your coins in your wallet, and no need for banks etc. Apparently nobody does this anymore, and gives their wallets to these exchanges (i.e. banks) and balks when the obvious happens in pyramid schemes. People just don't get distributed currency if they promptly undistribute it. Or is i…

As I've noted before on HN the entire concept of people being able to manage their own wallets flies against everything we know about people. People forget stuff, make mistakes, and lose things. The margin of error for a wallet is tiny. It's not rare for crypto forums, twitter, etc to prescribe completely ridiculous processes and systems for securing wallets, backing up seed phrases, etc. There's an entire cottage in…

Print your private key on paper and lose it all when your house burns down.

vs

Give your private key to an exchange, and enrich the shitheads running the exchange when they run away with your money.

First option seems preferable. If you're going to lose your money, better for the money to be truly lost than to enrich a thief.

Post reply on HN