Topic: Binance- CZ wanted to orchestrate a bitcoin re-org? (Read 221 times)

It would be great to have data on social media influence on cryptocurrency market in the last two cycles, even though the personel had changed from Roger Var to Elon Musk (the richest man) each time. Regarding CZ's influence in the market, the size of his exchange market, the communities he controls, and the latest enemies he is accumulating. Can he play a better role as a top social media influencer (with his vast knowledge as a developer) than Elon Musk did recently?

We know that CZ is an influential person in the crypto market, but I am sure that he would not be so stupid as to make the crypto market crash. Moreover, CZ has quite a large crypto exchange and ecosystem in several countries, so I think he is not stupid enough to destroy the crypto market and its reputation.

caught in botched robbery?

its more like
a robbery occured at a shop, and the mall of shops talked to the shop and said, "do you need some cash.. or we can send our guys to repair the damage and get back the stolen property, we can help"

and the robbed store owner says "its ok i have SAFU insurance, i didnt realise i could do that (get my goods back), we can try to get them back in a few days but im worried about the consequences" "my priority now is to fix my shop which could take a week"
then hours later" i spoke with the mall shops and decided not to get the goods back or undo the damage via their support"

try to watch the video in full and listen to the whole context.

it seems many in this topic didnt watch the video or do research of the other communications on twitter pre and post AMA video. nore realise tht all social drama events of this topic were just social discussions in a small 40hour period

one more time just for fun
day 1.
A. hack

day 2
B. many exchanges and miners -> binance "want us to help there are these options"
C. ama "lets discus topics from people that have asked me things"
D. "after speaking to the mall shops, we decided we are not gonna pursue that"

all in the space of about 40 hours from A to D
B to D happened in less than 12 hours

your assumption that B is CZ begging exchanges/miners is wrong.
B was exchanges/miners giving him idea's of support

your assumptions of C being a declaration of intent
C. was explaining topics discussed

your assumptions of C is that there were actual attempts to re-org on day of C

C. was saying his intentions were for a few days to dedicate time to find binances inside bugs and fix them to prevent more hacks and then in a few days it could do other things mentioned to him

there was no re-org attempt or intent to attempt on day of C

it was not a declaration. it was a discussion of topics of things asked before the AMA

D. was not a 'we give up, we tried and failed'
D. was a 'stop the fud we are not gonna'
..
re-org didnt happen. he didnt even try a re-org.,. it was just a discussion of options GIVEN TO HIM. where the whole social drama of the options lasted less than 12 hours..

yet here we are 3 years later and people are still even now promoting a non event that didnt happen(re-org) as if it was an actual threat..

---

i am not a kiss ass or fan club member of any crypto business
but here is what i see happening this month in 2022

there is a fanclub of the DCG portfolio (FTX/blockstream devs)
that seem more butt hurt by binances whistle blow that caused them losses of faith in their fanclub portfolio trust(FTX).. more so than any butt hurt of events that happen inside the portfolio

remember
FTX (buddy of DCG) robbed from the DCG fanclub
so why call the whistle blower a botched robber with silly rhetoric like
"ftx only crashed coz binance"
"binance tried a botched robbery 3 years ago"

It's like that criminal who is caught red-handed in a botched robbery and he insists that it wasn't his fault and others had told him to do it
He has been pushing for and discussing a 51% attack from the moment he found out about the hack. Later he reveals the intentions but pretends that others are suggesting it. Finally since it fails, he saves face by saying they didn't do it because it was harmful!

It is exactly like what they did with the scam shitcoin called BSV. They listed it while it had high volume and enjoyed the profit while allowed this shitcoins volume grow and made it easy for the scammers to scam more people. After the volume dropped and public opinion was getting worse about them, they tried to save face again and pretended that they are removing it because they just found out it is a scamcoin!

initially i just gave the answer..which was
it was not possible he didnt have 51%

others chimed in as usual with their false diatribe of drivel about how they perceived it as a threat then and a threat now due to drama now with the same person in video(facepalm)

after years of being on this forum it becomes obvious that certain people enjoy trying to drum up some non event that never happened (by this i mean no users were affected) where it was just some talking point social drama of a few hours of social crap that never went into a code activation of causing any real event
yet the try to drum it up and make it go viral again as its its a present threat .. acting like it was an event and a thing to fear or worry about this year/today..

so when non events are dragged up
and are then spammed by idiots that take it out of context as if it was an event..
..it deserves correcting those people that mis represent it.. and educating the ones trying to reanimate some zombie drama into the present  where by the education and correction make people realise it was a none event and something that is not a fear to have today..

asyou may see my initial response was straigh to the point that it was not possible, no malice or harchnes... but as the other chimed in with their silly narratives, i became more frank/blunt

yes my manner is not kiss-assery, hug a buddy. polite chummy happy chats. of just agreeing with the echo chambers of mis/uninformed narratives..  and instead i am frank/blunt in how i say things.

you may not like how i say things. but atleast read the context and understand what is said rather than how it is said.

With due respect why are being so offensive about it , This was posted on twitter and i just realized like others that how would it have been possible, i did not made any comments regarding this .. so why dragging me , moreover as much as we try to paint this situation right , the first thought would have not been made for people , I am not biased in -ve or +ve about CZ , but looking at this , one can simply figure out if it would have been possible by any chance , u never know what would be the repercussions. Its always said ... "Something said is half done"

its not about gullible or forgetfulness

there was no bribes to other miners to join activity either
it was other miners and exchanges that approached him to help and gave him the proposal

in the end it was speculation of social media that lasted... hmm ONE DAY

so heres the time line: enjoy

binance lost coins on may 7th. and someone proposed to CZ about a rollback.. and by may 8th.. CZ responded to say it wont do it for multiple reasons

if you want a better time line.. incase YOU forgot
7th: they stopped trading for "maintenance"
https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1125839310891053057
8th: he done a AMA to explain why the maintenance event happened
where someone proposed TO HIM to do a roll back
https://www.pscp.tv/w/1mrGmvjpbqBJy
"this morning alot of people have offered us support, and there is a few topics i will discuss in this regard"
"the idea came from the community and i did not know that we could do that"
"To be honest, we can actually do this probably within the next few days. But there are concerns that if we do a rollback on the bitcoin network at that scale, it may have some negative consequences, in terms of destroying the credibility for bitcoin."

note: alot of people forget purposefully the BUT part. and the later "decision to not pursue it" within hours of the AMA

note: he had been contact by miners and exchanges prior to the AMA about them supporting him either in funding or doing a re-org

try to put the conversations INTO CONTEXT

he said he had funds so didnt need funding support and said he would not do a re-org that same day.

listen to the entire conversations and also then do real research on who asked who what..

same day 8th
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2019/05/08/binance-considered-pushing-for-bitcoin-rollback-following-40-million-hack/

..
yep done and dusted in one day.. no activity... thus no event
just social media drama between 3pm on the 8th of a AMA and hours later a "we decided not to pursue the re-org approach"

the SAME DAY!!!

how i have reminded you of the facts.

have a nice day

this is not about taking sides. this is about seeking the facts and making sure people like idiots such as this topic creator dont try 3 years later twisting things.. about events that did not happen. and were just a few hours of social media FUD that should have died the day it started

I'm not sure if you are actually that gullible or you are that forgetful.
It doesn't matter what CZ claims happened, the history doesn't change. The fact that he was running around like a headless chicken seriously offering money to other mining pools to join hashrate and perform a 51% attack on Bitcoin network is not going to change. So is the fact that mining pools and the community both showed him the middle finger.

I remember this, this is like a mind-blowing react for everyone when CZ said about bitcoin re-org and he also said that he is in contact with the one of big bitcoin mining companies before.
This is one of the reason why some people before started to hate Binance of because of CZ saying like these statements without thinking first.

For such a huge company, CZ went too amateurishly impulsive with this plan of his. I couldn't see how CZ and company didn't foresee how excruciatingly terrible of a PR move this was. Like, of course the Bitcoin/crypto community would push against it.

Everyone has intentions but this video seems to be dug from the graveyard. Like a character assassination of CZ.

No one hates CZ more than the fallen kids of FTX and I could say there is nothing else to do but accept the fact FTX has collapsed and SBF's written plan for crypto regulation may be shoved down to where the sun never shines.

well although certain people want to sweep it under the carpet
in july 2017 the "NY agreement"(many exchanges(top economic nodes) done just that, agreed to accept segwit by threatening to ignore blocks that were not flagging for segwit.. this made niners agree to follow NYA, which at a certain NYA acceptance(blue) triggered the block ignoring of non-segwit flagging blocks.. ramped up only seeing more segwit flagging blocks. thus segwit flag(red) which had from nov 2016-june 2017 only 45% acceptance changed to a IMPOSSIBLE 100% acceptance of segwit within 1 month

blue=NY agreement. red =segwit flag

so yes its possible to get economic nodes(exchanges) to come to ANOTHER agreement and push miners to follow or be ignored(thus minder cant spend rewards if ignored, thus they follow)

but shh lets not talk about that event that did happen.. shhh or the censor committee will come out and shh you (humour for those that dont understand)

and instead cry about events that didnt happen.. oh wait.. thats the game play of certain fangirls that enjoyed the mandatory activation tactics of segwit in july 2017.. oops lets now see them chime in and defend their game plans
 (more humour for those that dont understand)

Which leads me to thinking, could large entities like exchanges or big custodians make some sort of arrangement with miners that if a hack would happen, the miners would execute a 51% attack on short notice to roll back the hacker's transaction and instead move the funds to a safe backup address. If only a few blocks are rolled back, it shouldn't be too disruptive for the ecosystem, because people are supposed to wait for 3-6 confirmations anyway.

I personally think such arrangement is not likely, because miners wouldn't want to undermine public confidence in blockchain permanence, even for a big reward.

He already admitted that it was a stupid move on his part, and yeah CZ is not thinking about it about the consequences when he open this suggestion to the public.


And yes this was around 2019, it was a hacked on Binance, 7,000 bitcoin (BTC) — worth around $40.7 million at the time.

I have nothing against CZ infact I think he is a role model to me from what he has achieved in Crypto-currency but as we may know Power can actually corrupt the mind if you let it.

CZ is a billionaire and a very notable figure in crypto-currency and I Think some of CZ moves are centered around him being dominant. He probably has achieved his financial goals and now seeking more power in Crypto-currency ecosystem.
He can try to pull up a Bitcoin re-org but I am sure it won't work out for him.

I already knew that. What the hell does this have to do with the conversation?

No shit Sherlock.

Never said it's about 2022, but anyway. It's usual that you're having troubles communicating with this Internet board.

It didn't happen, but that doesn't alter his intentions. His actions reveal he's malicious. This is just the icing in the cake. This is all I'm saying.

a. CZ sold his FTX FTT tokens this month
try to read and do some research

b. the video of 2019. is not about him doing a re-org this year
its going viral this year to create fud.. understand?(guess not as usual)

c. no re-org happened then or is planned to now..  thus non-news non event

d. it didnt happen so why in 2022 are you sweating under the collar getting angry now.. calm down. it was a non event. and its not news now.. so chill out!

e. as for your foiled attempts to imply serious consideration. he actually says (if you dont snippet small chunks to wrap in foil) that he didnt even think it possible to even do
again he does not nor never did have 51% of the network hashrate. so it was not a serious consideration

what i said above and in previous posts is about me trying to get you to use a rational mindset for once, to realise the social drama you love so much is not rational or correct. which if you done some research calmly you could probably figure it out yourself

edit to respond to the drivel below

we are in 2022 now. and dude below is getting angry and emotional now.. TODAY
.. about an event that didnt happen

heck he didnt even listen to the word of the video apart from a few snippets he took out of context to form an opinion today about a worry he then manifested in himself. that is meaningless today

weirdly he praises duplicitous actions that happened 5 years ago
.. but thats just his usual game. emotional over the social drama of his favourite fan club vs those that whistleblow his fanclub.. and yea.. FTX and blockstream devs(DCG portfolio) are blackhatcoiners fanclub

Had he bought $450M worth of FTX in May 2019?

Ugh...

2019 isn't old to me.

Don't twist the news. The community might have asked him if he could do it, but the rational response to such question isn't "we're afraid it might hurt the credibility". It's a "No". They, CZ and his team, were seriously considering  executing an attack to reverse the attacker's transaction.

Now that I have you as a ghosting audience? Never. 

If they wanted to do it they'd probably do it stealthily. The backlash would be huge and the consequences would be massive for their own business. Might as well create their own fork if needed. Less cost with probably more benefits compared to attacking the whole network because one of their business got hacked.

It was after kucoin hack or binance hack in 2020/2021.
The idea was proposed to CZ and I think he respond without thinking too much. It was not seriously considered. Binance give up on this idea saying that it will not be healthy for crypto industry, not that they are able to do it.