4 ms·

Why would they take down their previous report? I can only speculate that it was flawed in some way

• Hamuko 4y ago
  Maybe some authorities came asking questions. I would assume that authorities are paying more attention at the moment with the entire FTX fallout.
• yieldcrv 4y ago
  It doesn't show liabilities. Companies trying to do native web3 things are just a round hole trying to be filled with a square peg. In this case, Binance tries to use signatures that allow it to maintain the privacy of what address its holdings are in, while proving it owns the addresses with certain balances, but this doesn't account for the capability of the Binance company to have loans and debts. In comparison, a DAO which is an only native web3 creature and often not incorporated at all, would not have separate independent loans and debts that are not visible in a group of signatures. At least in today's implementations.
• phphphphp 4y ago
  A non-nefarious reason could be that the company doesn’t view digital publishing in the same way as we do: it’s possible that publishing is part of their service and so their attitude is, “a report is on our website if we have an active contract”. The relationship is over -> the content is removed. My guess would be that someone within the firm realised what a hot mess crypto is right now, determined that being involved was a risk not worth the reward, and decided to end all contracts with crypto companies. I don’t think it necessarily means anything is wrong with Binance’s report (in part because “report” is being generous — even if truthful it’s worthless.)