Can you make a short summary of the stance of that exchange owner on how centralized exchanges are important for obtaining your first BTC? I don't trust google translate.
I'll try
The context was that in Romania the law regarding crypto earnings was modified this year, during the pandemic. Our govern managed to solve all the nation's problem thus it had nothing better to do in March than changing that law (you may laugh here). The law was changed in a manner that the exchanges are licensed to operate only if they are
selling their users for 0.02BTC willing to offer the state all the customers' private information. Practically, making an easy job for the govern to catch the traders. Before, it was needed a decision from a Court of Law, but with this change the things became more simple for the govern.
In this context, the exchange owner gave inside the topic a few details about the change of the law and he also asked what expectations the users can have from a centralized exchange. He also tried to convince us that his exchange uses high security techniques. Besides, he also asked the reasons for this hate against centralized exchanges, because he said that he feels like the users' hate is actually headed towards the exchange owners. He mentioned here that not the exchange owners make the laws and that they have to obey to the laws. Furthermore, he alleged that he is a huge fan of Bitcoin, that centralized exchanges give a huge help to Bitcoin by making it more popular and that if the centralized exchanges wouldn't have made Bitcoin so popular, it would have been sold only on forums and between friends.
I tried to dismantle all his statements, because I felt they were erroneous. I am a notorious fan of privacy and of control over my own funds and I tried in several times to open people's eyes about the dangers associated with centralized exchanges. A topic of mine on this matter can be found here:
Governs are coming for the traders!.
1. Regarding "why people hate centralized exchanges", I said the following: you, among other thousands of exchange owners, try to change the quintessence of Bitcoin, being only determined by greed, as you try to centralize something that was meant to be decentralized. You contribute to ruining Satoshi's work! You could have chosen to sell cucumbers, to run a farm or a factory. But instead you chose to destroy Bitcoin and users' privacy, which is an abomination. If we take this example: a doctor cloning human beings. This would be an abomination, because the man was conceived to be unique on this world, not to be cloned. That would be something against the nature. The same is true for centralized exchanges: because of the owners' greed, they are trying to do this abomination to Bitcoin, breaking its spirit. This is the reason for the hate towards exchanges and also towards the owners. If you would have sold newspapers there was no hate towards you. But for doing this abomination, you have to take this hate. You don't make the laws indeed, the govern makes them. But you chose to act in this field and to follow these laws, which force you to give your users on govern's hands! It was your decision, not someone else's.
2. Regarding "he is a Bitcoin fan and the exchanges actually help Bitcoin by making it more popular": I said that is is
not a Bitcoin fan, otherwise he would not try to destroy it. He is a man drove by greed, trying to make a living from centralizing Bitcoin. And I gave him a few examples, using his words, in parallel with Satoshi's words. And I said that I accept that exchanges were useful
in the past, when they were not asking for KYC / AML, but not anymore. Now they are dangerous for the users.
The following is a sort of quote from the other topic, translated by me in English, for you:
Question 2: do you think that your allegations confirm or deny Satoshi's statements?
To be more precise:
If the centralized exchanges wouldn't have made Bitcoin so popular, it would have been sold only on forums and between friends || What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust,
allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party.
If the centralized exchanges wouldn't have made Bitcoin so popular, it would have been sold only on forums and between friends || The public can see that someone is sending an amount to someone else, but
without information linking the transaction to anyone.
If the centralized exchanges wouldn't have made Bitcoin so popular, it would have been sold only on forums and between friends || I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's
fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party.
If the centralized exchanges wouldn't have made Bitcoin so popular, it would have been sold only on forums and between friends || With e-currency based on cryptographic proof,
without the need to trust a third party middleman, money can be secure and transactions effortless.
Question 2.1: What sort of Bitcoin fan are you? How can you comment your words placed in the same line with Satoshi's? Do you think that you are helping Bitcoin or that you actually contribute to ruining it?
At question 3 I asked him about the security systems of the exchange. How can he ensure the user that the exchange is not vulnerable to hackers, if so many exchanges were hacked already, including Binance, the biggest one (not to mention Mt. Gox lol). I told him: "what do you think that CZ would have told the users if he was asked a while ago <
>" - obviously, he would have tried to ensure his users that Binance is secure. Oh well, it wasn't. Then I asked: honestly, can you say that your exchange is more secure than Binance? Or than Cryptopia, Bithumb, Poloniex and all the other hacked exchanges? Lol.
I also asked him how he can comment the sentence "no private keys no funds" and why would a sane person choose to place his private keys on the hands of the exchange, knowing that his funds may be gone or knowing that his personal information would arrive on the govern's desk in the next day after registering with the exchange. Still related to that and to the hate headed towards exchanges, I asked him: if you were a Mt. Gox client, would you look at Karpeles / Mt. Gox with sympathy? You ask the reasons of this hate. If you would have lost your own money, how would you feel? And here I also mentioned exchanges' hypocrisy, as none of them try to attract the clients with real facts, such as: "Come to us! We'll sell your name to the govern in no time!" / "Come to us! We may get hacked and you'll remain without any money, but be our client!" // "Come to us! We may do an exit scam, but be our client!" // "Come to us! We may freeze your account for no reason, but be our client!" and so on.
If you need his answers, let me know. They are mostly irrelevant, as it is obvious that he is trying to defend his business. Nobody running a business would ruin his work through his own words. What's certain is that he was curious how people obtained fist BTC / satoshis, being convinced it was through centralized exchanges. And if it was so, on his opinion, it would be another reason for considering these exchanges a huge help to Bitcoin. I doubted that people got first satoshis from centralized exchanges and from here we got to this topic