Is CZ a Fool?

in binance •  6 years ago 

damned-fool-sin-city.gif

Changpeng Zhao's short-lived scramble to try to reverse the Binance hack really has me scratching my head. He actually thought he could roll back the Bitcoin blockchain. Was he serious?

As a whole, this situation makes Bitcoin look really good. Perhaps he would suggest such a thing to show how censorship resistant the blockchain really is. No one can control it.

However, it makes him look really bad. It makes him look like the leader of the biggest crypto exchange doesn't understand the fundamental concepts that make blockchain great.


Everyone in favor of a rollbackNot in favor
BinanceLiterally everyone else

How could CZ ever in a million years expect to get the support to do this?

The fact that this hack and subsequent rollback suggestion was compared to Ethereum's DAO hack hardfork is even worse. No transactions were ever rolled back on the Ethereum blockchain.

Vitalik even had to pop up and make a Twitter comment about the situation. The only thing done in the DAO hack fork was a state change. All the money from the DAO was returned to the rightful owners, and even this was extremely contentious. Rolling back Bitcoin would be far worse for multiple reasons.

First of all, you can't just run around deleting other people's transactions because your personal security wasn't good enough. Second, Bitcoin is more mature than Ethereum, so a rollback on Bitcoin would cause much more outrage than one on Ethereum, and a rollback on Ethereum would certainly end with yet another unabandoned fork that refused the rollback. Guaranteed.

Also, it's just insulting. 10% of all Ethereum was stolen in the DAO hack. The majority of the community was affected. Meanwhile, this paltry Binance hack accounts for 0.04% of all Bitcoin. Go home CZ, you're drunk.

Timing

The timing of this hack is also pretty crazy. I'm guessing this operation was planned for quite a while. Everyone thinks it's an inside job, and it probably is.

On the other hand, Binance has never been hacked, so there was a lot of incentive by competitors to cut them down a notch. Could Binance employees have been paid off to engage in this corporate espionage? It's fun to speculate.

Ironically bullish?

The market didn't even react to this hack. If anything, price action has increased. I find it kind of funny at this point. The hacker funds obviously aren't going to be put on any centralized exchanges. They are locked up for a bit. Meanwhile, Binance needs to replace 7000 more Bitcoin to their coffers. It's like 14,000 Bitcoin just disappeared off the market... lol.

Conclusion

If you just had 40 million USD stolen from you you'd probably get a little crazy as well. That's probably what happened. CZ was looking for any way to get those funds back.

Honestly if I was him I would backpedal and make the claim that the suggestion was made, not in seriousness, but to show the world that even the world's most powerful exchange can't bend Bitcoin to its will.

So bullish right now.

CZ is not a fool.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I really don't know.

If i put on my total conspiratorial cap (tin foil, of course) then Binance:

  • are a Cocain Import Agency puppet for collecting data.
  • doesn't have the coins they say they do.
  • are out to control or destroy bitcoin.
  • did this to say it was theft, and not that it never was.
  • is trying to collect insurance money.

The same thing happened with Mt. Gox, but it really only became clear with 20/20 hindsite. The timings and sketchiness was there.

I really can't say what CZ's intentions were.

i like the binance exchange but this CZ character is out to lunch and i believe half of hacks are done by exchanges and they take turns getting hacked
before this it was cryptopia
whos next lmao
good article bud have a great day dude

I like Binance as far as exchanges go, but something fishy is going on here. The Safu fund was created after the last hack in 2018, which was also supposedly involved 7000 Bitcoin.

https://xbt.net/blog/binance-potentially-hacked-for-45-million-announces-unplanned-maintenance-updated/

It seems odd that both times it involved 7000 Bitcoin. Also, how did the hackers move so much from Binance, bypassing the KYC rules?

I do wonder if the market would have reacted if people had actually lost their money and Binance's #SAFU hadn't come to the rescue. If anything, it was just another great example of 'no keys, no crypto'.

Ahahaha. These guys have a lot of nerve. Why not roll back the BTC network until December 2017 so that none of us loose money? 😂😂😂

Regarding the DOA bug/hack/rolling back btc, which takes precedence, consensus or immutability?

Posted using Partiko Android

Immutability is a subset of consensus.

So then if consensus forms such in the case of ETH/ETC wouldn't the later be putting the carriege before the horse?

Posted using Partiko Android

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

Both ETH and ETC have consensus.
BTC has consensus as well.

We already know the answer.

Number of miners in favor of a rollback because Binance got hacked for 0.04% of all Bitcoins:

0%

What consensus are you talking about?

The latter of what?
Immutability IS the consensus.

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

The consensus that formed to fix the DOA and refund the ether, that one. In that respect, ETC went against consensus and touted immutability as above consensus.

Communities form consensus.
One cell can become two cells.
One community can become two communities.

You're avoiding the obvious, ETC didn't form or have consensus. A community breaking into two isn't consensus, it's actually disagreement, not agreement, which is the simplest sense of consensus, general agreement.

Posted using Partiko Android

You don't have an argument or a question.
#trolled

Agree to Disagree