What I don't understand is how this kind of stuff doesn't qualify them as a bank
back
2 comments
Crypto: reimplementing the financial system, poorly.
Certainly that's true of the overall sector. But crypto as a technology has some advantages and some disadvantages, same for traditional banking. People were arguing even before the crash that FTX was combining disadvantages of both.
FTX is not crypto. If you had a bank that accepted ears of corn and bushels of apples for deposit, and trading between them, you wouldn't blame farmers when that bank stole everyone's deposits.
Barely a year ago, you were telling someone they were ridiculous for claiming that FTX might go under if Tether had a major event: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28797080
I said it was ridiculous to claim that Tether collapsing would cause "most major exchanges to go under". Congratulations on totally twisting my words though. "Most major exchanges" don't have much exposure to tether.
Yeah I would. Why wouldn't you blame the thief?
> FTX is not crypto
And a bank is not the ears of corn in the analogy. The thief here is FTX which is like the bank. You don't blame the corn for being stolen. Yes, blame the thief.
Oops. I somehow read that completely opposite of what it said
If a whole bunch of banks trading in corn/apples did that, though, things start to be a bit different.
Well, first the regulators would need to grow a pair.