Topic: Bitcoin, the only thing that stands on its lane. (Read 576 times)

I mean without CZ, there would be exchanges. Binance is not the most secure exchange. Binance has been hackers before but there are exchanges that has not been hacked. Or maybe I should point more on what I quote:


I mean without CZ, there would be exchanges and cryptocurrencies.

I can do without BNB, BUSD, BEP2 tokens and BEP20 tokens. I can do without Coinmarketcap. People can do without all that I mentioned. CZ thinks nothing more than business. Either CZ bought it or copied the work of other developers.

So, in your understanding you decoded I said in that post that his exchange was the first, right? Guy, I'm done on this. Please yourself.

I can not agree more. CZ is one of the people that is deviating people away from the real use if bitcoin, which is decentralization. I have only seen him as someone that only cares most about his  business and nothing more than that.

o_e_l_e_o has mentioned a good decentralized exchanges with Tor function which is bisq. A true decentralized exchange has a multisig way of connecting buyers and sellers. The only time statement of account can be needed is during dispute with the buyer or seller. Unlike Binance that will require for KYC before you can make use of their exchange. Your identity is known to them (Binance) and the government and which can be known to hackers during data breach. Yet there are fake KYC on exchangs, this is an example:

Be careful with your identity documents and KYC


Have you forgotten that you posted this:


What kind of trust?

I am a day trader, I trade with the money that I can afford to lose. If Binance is hacked today, then no problem. I still have other exchanges that I divided the trading money. If all is hacked at once, I can afford to lose the trading money, but I think not more than one or two can be hacked at once, but the $50 I have on all the exchanges that makes it $250 in total, I can afford to lose that.

On exchange, if traders are not wise, the traders may later regret it if not moving money to noncustodial wallet. Centralized exchanges has done it in a way that people thought they are for holding coins, but which is not.

What innovation has CZ brought is the question? Nothing.

Frankly, I don't know what your point is or what you intend to achieve by distorting my comment to satisfy your narrative because I never said anywhere that Binance was the first exchange.

This is laughable. If you were a day trader, there must be an exchange you trade from. It doesn't have to be Binance. If you term yourself a trader and you say you don't have any coin on an exchange, then you aren't truthful to yourself.
 
But of course, you don't even know the Satoshi Nakamoto you're fraternizing with. He's anonymous. Not even late Hal Finney knew him (them). Again, if you're going to be up talking others down for what you think they haven't done; it simply means there are achievements you can point to that you've under your belt in this crypto space. I want to believe you've innovations you've brought into this space yourself???

Binance, and every part of it (including their P2P trading), is as centralized as they come.

Bisq.

No. If you need to submit KYC and gain approval to access a platform, then by definition there is a centralized party collecting that KYC data and making decisions on who may or may not access the platform.

Theirs something I want to know concerning all this exchanges and an exchange like Binance do we say that Binance is operating in decentralized way or Binance is operating in centralized process. If we are having p2p i think is ought to say is centralized exchange, sometimes i do contradict all the exchange as decentralized operating system. Do we have an exchanges that doesn't operate in a centralized form, again I didn't know the reason of KYC in exchange, is it for decentralized or centralized purpose and can decentralized process requires a KYC? I need more education from you

I've already provided a link in an earlier post in this thread to proof of Binance scamming people. CZ also accelerated the collapse of FTX when it suited his agenda. And again, let's not forget he wanted to centralize bitcoin itself by rolling back the chain to fix his own poor security practices.

He is not a positive influence on this space, at all.

If you start checking Coingecko often, you will not always see Binance at the top. I can point to this later when I see it. In market volume, it is the first, but that doesn't mean it should be the most trusted exchange there when there are many other exchanges with excellent high trading volume.

You just have to accept that Binance is not the first exchange and it is only copying what others have created before.

I do not trust Binance, that is why I have my coins on noncustodial wallet. There are also better exchanges. If there is no Binance, there will be other exchanges.

He is earning money from millions of people. What has he exactly done that is new? The only person I know is Satoshi Nakamoto that created bitcoin and blockchain. Other people are copying and advancing what he did. I also respect bitcoin developers that makes bitcoin to continue to be decentralized. Other people are only developing centralized blockchain, coins and tokens to get rich and CZ is one of them.

I saw through your sarcasm. However, for what it's worth; what's the state of those exchanges that existed before Binance now? How many of them are still in business till date and have the same mileage and trust rating as Binance? While I'm not standing in for CZ, I think it won't be nice to talk down on all that he has done for the industry. Nothing is completely bad in itself to the point it won't have something positive about it.

You see it as a monopoly and tag it evil. I see it as capitalism. It can only become an issue if he's threatening others not to come in and establish their own stuff or he's scamming others. We are all capitalist. We want the best for every business engagement we go into. CZ is a shrewd businessman and will want the best too for every of his business commitments. That's the way I want to see it.

Why bother creating something from scratch when you can just buy the most popular site of that type with all its users? 


To be fair, Binance is at the top of the CMC's biggest competitor Coingecko as well so no surprise that its at top of one of their own sites as well. Imho, CMC used to be even worse before CZ bought it was as it was normal back in the day to see scammy exchanges like HitBTC or P2PB2B at the top (or near) of the list, while at least now they are much further down the list.

In reality, the situation was clearly like that. Everything related to cryptocurrencies, whether it's an exchange or a wallet, is clearly a business. So I agree with your opinion, that only Bitcoin is truly decentralized and there really is no control behind it. Because satoshi is also the creator of bitcoin, until now no one knows about its existence. who knows where Satoshi went and who knows where Satoshi is.

But clearly, Satoshi has provided an example and a clear picture of decentralization, with the creation of bitcoin. Because to be honest, I know the term decentralized, along with the real evidence, that's because I know about bitcoin. So if currently, within the scope of cryptocurrencies, there are those who imitate a decentralized system, it will not be as perfect as bitcoin. Because as we know, bitcoin was created by satoshi, indeed in its totality, especially regarding its decentralization.

And then presented everyone who tries to withdraw bitcoin from Binance the option of withdrawing fake bitcoin on one of these centralized scam chains at a tiny fraction of the outrageous withdrawal fees they charge for actual bitcoin, tricking newbies in to withdrawing fake tokens and not withdrawing bitcoin at all.

Also owns Trust Wallet, which is closed source, but lies about it being open source.

And then miraculously Binance became the number one rated exchange on coinmarketcap! What a coincidence!

Binance has been hacked multiple times already. It will certainly be hacked again in the future. But you are absolutely right - people will keep using it regardless.

You shoudn't because those centralized exchange owners has been playing us a fool for a very long time, they're aren't making the industry any better instead they're centralizing it more. They call the shot on which coins gets to get listed on their popular exchanges and marketed to the public. Their investment in projects takes them to the top and others have to settle for less. They're the reason behind projects like Shiba and Pepe success (as they listed them on their exchange almost instantly they were launched and gave them publicity) If CZ had his way, he'll monopolized the industry, aren't you seeing what he did to coinmarketcap, trust wallet and other projects in the industry. Cz isn't different from what the government wants which is control.


They're all just buzz world and been recycled just like the many projects that we have in the industry that aren't adding anything new but just recycling ideas and people are still falling for their tricks. The most recent is now AI but before that we had Metaverse which Cz was also one of the reasons the projects that launched through his crowdfunding service (launchpad) becomes very famous and top charts because of the billions they poured into the marketing irrespective of those project having little or no valuable real life products. People wasted their money buying land and nfts that're now becoming worthless.

I can mention few 

He created an exchange which was not the first exchange that was created. His exchanges was created in 2017, but exchanges has been existing since 2013, or maybe since 2010.

He created BNB which did not follow bitcoin that was decentralized, but followed Ethereum that was completely centralized and CZ makes it more centralized because he made BNB in a way like USDT, USDC and others that can freeze the coin on noncustodial wallet.

He created BUSD the same way. Now Paxos is no more minting BUSD and its marketcap has fallen and it will continue to fall. Binance will soon have not support for BUSD and the coin will not be listed anywhere again.

He created BEP2 and BEP20 chain which are all centralized and a carbon copy of what other developers like Ethereum has done before

He supported Safepal, a close source wallet

He can not make his own coins price and exchanges listing site but bought coinmarketcap cap

I have forgotten what he did about Forbes some years ago because he wants more recognition.

The last thing I know he did was when his user's are moving their coins out of Binance, I think some people advised him to talk about it and he said moving money to noncustodial wallet is risky. 

With everything I have listed above, you can see that CZ has been the copy cat of other developers.

Being a copying cat is also not an invention.

Even if the exchange is hacked today, some people will remain fools 

What are some of the innovations that CZ brought that improved crypto industry?

Regarding "trust and excitement", you are saying like this is a good thing. People trust exchange way too much already so anyone who makes people trust them even more is not doing a good thing.

This is the point I was making earlier - is there a single point of failure? Even if all the Bitcoin Core devs and maintainers conspired to push some malicious changes to the next version of Core, then every node on the network can respond by doing absolutely nothing and continuing to run their current version of Core, and the network will continue to run completely unaffected as if nothing has happened.

If the person or people who wrote any of these so called "DeFi" smart contracts or run the various "DeFi" platforms decide to rug pull and steal everyone's coins (which has happened literally countless times), there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it.

We already have decentralized finance. It's called Bitcoin. "DeFi" is almost universally a scam.

The first one on that list is absolutely but unnecessarily over bloated. Just like every new lingo in the crypto space, DeFi instantly became a buzz word. Again, because it has decentralized to it, it became an instant hit like when this industry had ICOs, IEOs, IDOs but it's obvious now that DeFi was just a thing. I bought a few tokens with the DeFi tag in them in the past but they didn't turn out well. None did well. As for the P2P, that's one of the major excitement points in this space and for Bitcoin too. That one is able to transact smoothly with others in exchange without middlemen shows the gains Bitcoin (cryptos) has over traditional financial institutions. In addition, the issue of privacy for me is a personal thing. I'm of the opinion that there's no way anyone in this industry can claim with certainty that they haven't in any way compromised their privacy ever in the past, except they're just starting out now.

I still duff my hat for CZ Binance for what he has been able to achieve with Binance. No matter the criticisms against him, we should remember that the excitement and trust we still have on exchanges is partly because of him and his innovations.

That is not an accurate way to determine if a project is decentralized or not, you don't even know if Satoshi is just a single person, or a group of 5 people, you don't know how many persons were involved in creating Bitcoin. A project can be created by one person and be centralized, the same way a project can be created by 20 people and be decentralized.

A project is centralized when its users can be censored by the creators, like Binance, another way to identify a centralized project is if it can be shut down by those who created it or by a different entity, like Coinbase. There are many other examples, and decentralized projects like Bitcoin are immune to all of these, because even Satoshi cannot shut down the network or censor any user.

It's called jumping on a trend and everyone is doing it but just because everyone is doing it doesn't make it right. Whenever there's a new trend in the cryptocurency industry, every company wants to do what's trending because that's where the money is and that's why all this popular centralized exchanges now have their own (so called) decentralized exchange and P2P exchanges. They do this because they know people are looking to participate in what's trending and considering they already have the reputation and numbers, if they say they're offering those services they'll get people to use their exchange and make them more money. Guess what, many people don't care if what they're using is truly what it should be but provided they get what they wanted or feel a sense of belonging, they'll keep using it and that's why people are using these exchanges P2P and their (so called) decentralized exchanges while others don't truly know the difference.


It won't have been cool because they would have deceived more people and that's that why I'm glad they made their name been centralized and this make it easier to tell anybody trusting them to open their eyes to reality. Binance has been centralized from the very begining and no matter what they call the name of the service they're offering it doesn't change that. Changpeng Zhao wants to control the crypto industry and it's a good thing that he isn't succeeding. Bitcoin will always be the only true decentralized cryptocurency because it was created for the people and made popular by the people and not because of big money backing by influencers used by most other crytpo projects.

It depends on each person's point of view. And don't feel offended if someone calls us stupid.

It was to attract the attention of new people who joined their platform, and they succeeded.

The two exchanges you mentioned are centralized. And when they claim that they have a decentralized exchange, it is not completely decentralized but still centralized. And why is there involvement of a centralized entity? Because they want to get more money from the costs made by those people.

If an exchange already asks for KYC, they are a centralized exchange. In the past, Binance didn't ask for KYC like now and only email. But after pressure from regulators, Binance asked its users to carry out KYC. The same thing happened to Poloniex and Bittrex in the old days.

The level of Bitcoin decentralization that has been achieved is largely based on the fact that there are already many miners that require huge computing power to find the hash. This is what Satoshi Nakamoto predicted in the White Paper. Initially, bitcoin was much more vulnerable.

Therefore, I will not undertake to predict whether some other decentralized project will appear in the near future. After all, even if it has already appeared and is starting to work, in order to reach the level of Bitcoin decentralization, it will need to become quite popular. And at the initial stage, even a promising project can be compromised.

If we notice Bitcoin trading performance has been marked with a lot of volatility lately. Chinese traders are in the system. Now many of these companies have been alerted to inadequate financial market infrastructure and basic oversight of existing exchanges for digital currencies. Yes. at least we should probably stick to a safer investment portfolio because All confirmed Bitcoin transactions are included in the blockchain so that the Bitcoin wallet can calculate the total of our most important balance (Privacy).

This is something I also hope for too but I can’t see it coming soon. As long as new projects keeps imitating decentralisation when they’re not, do you think we can see a new project as decentralised as bitcoin coming soon?

If bitcoin could do this, what should prevent some other coins from doing the same sooner or later? The fact that, as experience has shown, many coins were created for completely different purposes, and only for advertising purposes they talked about decentralization, while they themselves made every effort to maintain centralized control, does not mean that the success of bitcoin in the field of decentralization can not be repeated at all.

Decentralized solutions can be useful to us for a variety of purposes, and one bitcoin cannot solve all problems at all, so I would like to hope that other truly decentralized projects will still appear.

There is no coin that can be as decentralised as bitcoin when discussing centralization and decentralisation. The only decentralised cryptocurrency currently in use is bitcoin, and it will continue to be the only one for many years to come.

Using the word decentralised does not imply that a company, projects, or exchange is entirely decentralised; rather, it is a marketing term used to draw customers to them. If you grasp it, you won't always fall for their enticing statements because it is only a marketing strategy.

Advertising a project is acceptable, but not at the expense of lying, but who is to say they won't lie in marketing to attract more customers?  Without a doubt, no one, and the pattern will remain unchanged. Simply remember that Bitcoin is the only decentralised cryptocurrency and that’s it.

Some people lack adequate perspectives regarding the distinction between decentralization and centralization, which leads them to believe other projects that claim to be decentralized. How can a new project produced by a multi-person team be decentralized? It is not possible since we have a conflict of interest that could lead to problems within the team.

What exactly is the distinction between exchanges that require KYC and those that enable trading without it?
Do they become decentralized just by not requiring KYC?
Is it wise to invest our money in them?

Absolutely. And the second most popular crypto in the world - Ethereum - has done exactly that. When the wrong person acquired some ETH, a small group of individual reorganized the entire chain to reverse that from happening. That's the whole reason there is a fork called Ethereum Classic. It was started by a group of people protesting against the complete centralization of Ethereum.

And let's never forget that Binance wanted to do the same thing on Bitcoin to reverse one of the many times they were hacked. Of course the community told them to GTFO.

There are a handful of projects out there that are truly decentralized, such as Bisq and JoinMarket, and one or two other coins, such as Monero.

The only true decentralization is Bitcoin, all others aren't truly decentralized Anyway. You may call them semi-decentralized, not truly decentralized. Because almost everything is controlled by a team. I am not sure about the Coinbase platform since I haven't used it. But Binance p2p won't be decentralized, I don't know where they claim it. To be honest it's become hard to think of crypto without centralization. If you hold Bitcoin on a non-custodial wallet then you may claim it's fully decentralized. Though Bitcoin is truly decentralized, we can't control it unless we store our own non-custodial wallet.

It is possible since developers are in haste in implementing their applications.  They rush to get profit while they do not fully test the functionality of the code for the glitches or exploits.  It is also possible that the vulnerabilities are intentionally left there so that they can milk the system by hacking it themselves in disguise as other people doing it.

I used to say wow about DeFi a long time ago but now for me, it is a haven for hackers, and avoided it as much as I can.  I would rather have a centralized service that is way more secure and has insurance than dive into a DeFi thing that can be hacked anytime and any losses are unrecoverable since there is no one to take the blame.

I never leave any funds on any centralized exchanges since I am using them according to the reason they are made, to exchange so I do not have any issue using them.

Coinbase, binance are centralized exchanges and they have been like this for a long time, regardless of the fact that binance offers peer to peer transaction you can see all the details of the buyer like their bank account details.

To register an account on binance you would be needed to present some identification details of users and this already has compromised your identity something decentralization Is against.

It would have been the best decision if Binance went completely decentralized than we have them centralized today, but that shouldn't be an issue for now, we have the opportunity to go after any decentralized exchange and if any exchange that is centralized us claiming decentralized under new service introduced, we should not fall for such, they cannot be two at once, it's either they are custodial or non custodial, or maybe as some have assumed that bitcoin shouldn't be allowed on centralized exchages than a non custodial wallets.

It is absurd to see that centralized exchanges like Binance deceives people to make them believe that they are decentralized just to claim that they are the best. People that lacks the understanding of what a decentralized exchange is,will fall for them. As long as KYC verification is needed and you don't have control over your keys,it shows that you are dealing with a centralized exchange. It is impossible for an exchange to be decentralized and have centralized features. It is because these exchanges knows that bitcoin is decentralized and people knows,that is why they are claiming that Binance is decentralized to make people believe that they can store their bitcoin in their exchange. Whatever is not an open source is centralized.

Bitcoin surely is incomparable from all of those examples that you've mentioned. As for Binance, I can't vividly remember if they have advertised before as a new project that they're like a decentralized project that shall disrupt the current technologies and market for exchanges. But that's like the pattern that most of the projects does. They're going to use the descriptions that typically used by most projects telling people how decentralized they are but in nature, they're not. If people are all for the decentralization, Bitcoin is the number 1 candidate of it. However, with today's movement in the market, it's no longer about the tech, about the privacy but more with profitability for which they're taking a leap of faith with the alts and projects of their choice.

I haven't dealt with any yet. I prefer to first understand what might have to be dealt with, which is why I ask these questions. Because indeed many claim to be called decentralized, and then it turns out that they are much more centralized than it might seem from the outside. Blockchain rollbacks and suspensions, say, don't look like something that should happen on a truly decentralized blockchain.

But ignoring should also be meaningful. Even if it turns out that there are no other sufficiently decentralized projects at all, I want to understand how to see it so that the decision is supported by knowledge, and not just a repetition of someone else's experience.

Well, that's it.
They should know that Non-KYC is a non-guaranteed proposition if they examine the business concept, and decentralization is not only about privacy.

Unfortunately users of centralized services on average behave compulsively and assume all services with these offers are truly decentralized.

Could be the reason for the fail of other defi projects are less testing's, and security setups for the developers? finding bugs and other exploit are the developers responsibility, releasing projects early without proper testing and looking for bugs, is one way of telling these hackers that take the money its okay, a rush project is like a trash, i mean im sure there are security features that can be implement for security.

Truly decentralized services are easy to identify. Instead of using the service via a centralized website like any centralized exchange, you run the service locally and connect directly to other users. Bitcoin, Bisq, and JoinMarket are some great examples.

For seeing if something is centralized, the bottom line is this - is there a single point of failure? If the website or server went offline, could I still use the service? Is the code maintained by a single person or company, and if they changed the code to something malicious, could I do anything about it? Can some person, company, or entity, prevent me from using the service?

I would ask what fake decentralized projects you have been dealing with already? Some DeFi scam or yield scam? Why? What's wrong with just buying bitcoin and ignoring these scamming shitcoins and their scamming platforms?

No way you think Coinbase is decenteralized just because it's now providing DeFi services. Coinbase allows you to connect your exchange account with your wallet and which makes it share the data of your DeFi wallet with Coinbase which completely removes any privacy or anonymity you had earlier. I prefer to use Metamask If I really want to go deep in DeFi or DApps. I would never use any wallet built by an exchange, similarly Binance has their own Trust Wallet. They named it Trust. That's a complete joke.

How to check? How to understand that some service is truly decentralized? With Bitcoin, it is clear that everyone can connect to the network and mine just like everyone else. And with other projects it is more difficult to understand. It is clear that if there is a website that offers a certain service through its own forms and databases, including the organization of p2p transactions, in fact it is still a centralized service. A decentralized project should probably work through some kind of smart contract. But how can a person who is not yet very well versed in all this understand whether he is dealing with a decentralized project or is it all disguised centralized projects?

Bitcoin had an advantage when it was just starting out. Not many people took cryptocurrencies seriously, and hardly anyone knew it even existed. This meant that Bitcoin could grow on its own, without a central authority, using a system called "proof of work, and not having other coin in mind at that moment. No company created and launched Bitcoin unlike many altcoins, this why it will remain fully decentralized forever.

The reason why the first thing that come in mind, mentioning cryptocurrency, is bitcoin. It provides what investors see as true decentralization. It only gets worse for any decentralized project, once centralized bodies begin to fit in the process and use it to make money. Centralized exchanges have brought multiple bad publicity on bitcoin, similar to what you're explaining about centralized bodies launching defi projects. These guys do the most marketing, and attract multiple people, who don't know much of bitcoin, to invest and they'll end up losing money to hackers. The blame goes to bitcoin, not the centralized bodies. If only the masses understand how bitcoin works, a lot of scam project will be minimized.

I am not protecting defi projects, the majority of them are scam, I do believe that Bitcoin is more reliable than other decentralized practitioners, they are all liars and that's why hacks are happening with DeFi, they can't be caught and they can do all they want, that's why my topic said that Bitcoin is the only true decentralized project that stands on its lane.

Bitcoin protects it's investors, there is never a hack on bitcoin blockchain, but because many projects are ready to deceive the masses in the name of DeFI and Decentralization that's why some people believe them.

We all want decentralization on crypto space to be more than just Bitcoin only, but the truth is I believe there won't be another.

In 2020, one of my friends who knew that I was interested in cryptocurrency asked me about my attitude to DeFi. I knew that DeFi stands for decentralised finances, and I was acquainted with only two such systems: Bitcoin itself and Lightning Network. I was surprised that many people don't even consider them as DeFi projects.

I still think Bitcoin and Lightning are true DeFi. Bitcoin stores money, Lightning transfers it.

This did bug me previously but then I thought that it is actually good that the P2P trades are happening under the supervision of Binance.
This is because in case of disputes, Binance is there to help and the P2P experience is better when it is present on a trusted platform.
I know it is not decentralized because Binance does have intervention somewhere but at least things are running smoothly that way.

Bitcoin is highly decentralized but it isn't private and with mandatory KYC on every crypto platform like exchanges, casinos etc means it is more possible to trace back the origin/owner of the address unless they took the complete way of keeping their anonymity as their priority too.

About the centralized exchanges using DeFi are simply due to the market behind the hype so all they want is to make more money in anyway as possible for them its more like a clickbait title we see on the YouTube videos.

Here's the thing. Decentralized doesn't automatically mean it's censorship resistant and could survive a heavy nation-state attack like Bitcoin, rather, decentralized can simply just mean that there isn't one single entity controlling it — it could be multiple entities. Decentralization is not binary; it's a spectrum.

When people mention "decentralized", people always automatically compare it to Bitcoin — which doesn't make sense because of course nothing is more decentralized than Bitcoin.

The reason for the success of DEFI is not that it is decentralized, but rather at the time of its appearance. It appeared in a time when it was easy to get a loan and you could invest in those emerging projects that were paying good APY, and the reason that they were able to pay is that we are in up trend market, so you will find that during 2021 To 2023, lending and “de-centralized” services flourished, which for many means anonymity.

They always try to promote Decentralization= "no KYC" which is not true.


you forgot AI coins

Binance presented itself as ALL IN ONE crypto exchange. It is looking for competitors and trying to imitate or buy them, the mistake of depositors who leave their coins there to give Binance more power.

If we talk about DeFi, we must mention Cryptocurrency Bridges that are very vulnerable to exploitation. Many hacks on cryptocurrency bridges and value of stolen cryptocurrencies is very big.

Crypto bridge hacks: types and causes

Latest, the Multichain, one of most famous crypto bridge was exploited.
Multichain Protocol Experiences Mysterious Withdrawals, Suggesting Multi-Million Dollar Hack or Rug Pull
Multichain hacks and its consequences

Centralized decentralized finance (CEDEFI : wonder if should I patent this definition lol) is the correct definition for these shitty feature centralized entities provide nowadays : as already someone else said it's just marketing marketing and marketing to attract more people to their business and more money into their bottomless pockets.

I've been saying this for years OP:

This space is full of buzzwords. ICO, NFTs, DeFi, decentralized, the list goes on. There are countless exchanges out there which call themselves DEXs, call themselves decentralized, call themselves peer to peer, when they are nothing of the sort. The same holds true for shitcoins. Lots of people don't bother to check if the claims are true, and even more people don't even understand the difference, falsely believing that things like Binance P2P are either peer to peer or decentralized, when they are neither of those things. Centralized exchanges use these buzzwords for cheap marketing because there is nothing stopping them and they know people will be attracted by those buzzwords, even though they are outright lies.

Crypto is for many a way to make money, and preferably easy money.
Like many other things (I remember ICO), DEFI was used as buzz word by many, the term DEFI was misused willingly or not...(But without DEFI buzz word who would buy this or that shitcoin?)

Don't go by buzz words. Take a close look and use services that really deserve your attention. And when you see the first signs of lies or fake advertising, turn away from that.
Yes, it's difficult. Yes, you'll make mistakes too since there's no manual on what to do. This is how experience is gained.

In just August, DeFi was exploited and resulted to over $16 million losses.

What I used to read before was annually, but DeFI exploits are like almost daily and it is now monthly report 

Another DEFI was known in August 27. Nearly $900000 was stolen.: https://cointelegraph.com/news/balancer-protocol-exploited-for-900k-as-defi-hacks-mount-finance-redefined

Do not worry, another DeFi exploits are coming this month.

DeFi which was not even decentralized was created for hackers to enjoy.

You're comparing an apple with an orange, it's not make sense.

Since you talk about P2P and centralized exchange, you need to compare with decentralized exchange which is Bisq, this exchange is completely decentralized.

Non custodial wallet that run full node is can be included as decentralized too.

Bitcoin is obviously a decentralized cryptocurrency, it should be compared to other crypto e.g. USDT, XRP, and any other centralized cryptocurrency.

Unfortunately, the word DEFI is more like a complete joke in crypto space today, there are things I am seeing that I am not linking about crypto and the funny thing is these people think we are stupid.

The most important part of crypto and blockchain to me are

-Defi
- P2P
- Privacy

Yes I don't really like anything CeFi and Centralized, but it seems these people are calling us stupid, why?

How can a centralized platform that have build up its name and reputation in crypto space claim they have a decentralized feature to offer people?

If they are already well known how can they successfully run decentralization? You want examples? Here we go

Coinbase for example now have a swap exchange that they claimed its true decentralized, running on base, a project layer 2 from the coinbase team.

Binance, another centralized exchange, offering a peer to peer service, something that should happened between two people only, even if because of successful transaction to be carried out, why centralized entity involvement?

I mean if Binance was decentralized right from day one, wouldn't this be cool? This is why I think decentralization is a complete joke in crypto today, any parties can just come out and they say they offer both.

It's annoying and this is why Bitcoin is different, I think nothing can really be decentralized as Bitcoin again.