Wrapped, Safu, tokenized all useless words that try to hide reality.
As Loycev said, all those wrapped tokens, coins whatever are just IOU promises, there is no difference between WBTC and Terra, they were both backed by consent that was not in your control, so when the ones really controlling those decide it's time to pull the plug you're left with a coin backed by literally nothing and worth just as much as some moron who has not read the news is willing to pay.
Same for UST, the same for BUSD, same for every coin that promises stability or pegging to a value. If this can't work in the real world with currencies, do you think the likes of CZ or Kwon (ups) can solve it?
As for unethical, should we ask SBF what is considered ethical in the industry?
Back to the matter at hand, if Binance would really care about the fees and about Bitcoin, the order on that list would be a little different right? Not with a fake bitcoin being first and the real Bitcoin second? Or if they wound;t want to trick their customers, they could have simply made a different selection for BNB Bitcoin, whoever wants bitcoin click on Bitcoin and deals with that, the ones that want BNB scam coins click on BNB and do the deposit from there.
Reminds me of a Simpsons scene, it's like you press to vote with Democrats, and the first option is Bush.