3 ms·
> as long as users can still withdraw into a non custodial address Uh, that’s a pretty big “if”, right? It’s completely up to the custodian whether you can wit
by cmckn 4y ago
> as long as users can still withdraw into a non custodial address
Uh, that’s a pretty big “if”, right? It’s completely up to the custodian whether you can withdraw or not, and we’ve seen several large platforms freeze withdrawals recently (and then fold). To an average individual, the hypothetical possibility of withdrawing to the “base layer” is at best a marginal improvement over the existing financial system; hardly a revolution.
- whatisweb3 4y agoThis is why many crypto proponents will say things like "not your keys not your coins" which means, do not hold tokens in a custodial service without understanding the risk. Many advocates of decentralization and blockchain do not want to support centralized services like Celsius. This is an area that laws and regulation could be added to protect users. If a service is holding user funds, there should be recourse to allow those users to withdraw the funds to a base layer, or if the funds are at risk of being frozen as we see with Celsius, this should be more clearly indicated. FDIC style insurance could be addressed in some hypothetical future crypto banks, giving users further protection.
- soco 4y agoSo basically replicating the way financials work today, but with blockchain.
- whatisweb3 4y agoYes, recreating some aspects of the financial system but with an open source, permissionless, and decentralized base layer that uses more modern code and cryptography. From that, additional applications can also be built on top - multi signatory accounts, a social graph, ownership of digital property, decentralized exchange and lending services, escrow, crowdfunding, and more.