3 ms·
The article mentions 7 people they directly interviewed, another 11 that claim to have done it publicly but didn't respond to their questions, and says: > The
by d23 4y ago
The article mentions 7 people they directly interviewed, another 11 that claim to have done it publicly but didn't respond to their questions, and says:
> The exchange's popularity in Iran was known inside the company. Senior employees knew of, and joked about, the exchange's growing ranks of Iranian users, according to 10 messages they sent to one another in 2019 and 2020 that are reported here for the first time. "IRAN BOYS," one of them wrote in response to data showing the popularity of Binance on Instagram in Iran.
The implication of the article is not that 7 people did it. It's that the platform is widely popular in Iran.
- vgatherps 4y agoThat's a fair but, but is a drastically different story than what the headline implies. "Internal messages indicate that Binance might have turned a blind eye to Iranians using VPNs (and later banned them)" is a much weaker claim than "Binance continued serving Iranians despite sanctions" As I mentioned in a different comment, the headline might be technically true, and there's definitely a story, but the headline paints a drastically different picture than the article. Almost every line of "we found someone in Iran who had gotten in" is followed by "they got banned later"
- d23 4y agoAgree to disagree I guess. Reuters clearly believes the story is that there was widespread use in Iran for at least two years after the sanctions went into effect and that Binance was aware. Given that, this headline doesn't seem beyond the pale: > Binance served crypto traders in Iran despite U.S. sanctions