He once announced that he will donate his wealth to a foundation that’s why I became a fan before. I was so disappointed that he became like this after all his hardwork on developing a very good exchange.
Topic: Sam Bankman-Fried the "savior" and his ideas - page 3. (Read 537 times)
copper member
Activity: 2800
Merit: 1179
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
I follow Sam work during his FTX is not that huge same with Solana since I’m one of the pioneer investor of Serum Project one of Sam greatest idea for a decentralized leverage trading on DEX. He is more focus on development side rather than spouting this ideology. I’m surprised that he was already blinded by power due to the success of his centralized exchange and blockchain(Solana). I never thought that he will become a sort of crypto politician since he is not interested on money before and focus on development side.
He once announced that he will donate his wealth to a foundation that’s why I became a fan before. I was so disappointed that he became like this after all his hardwork on developing a very good exchange.
He once announced that he will donate his wealth to a foundation that’s why I became a fan before. I was so disappointed that he became like this after all his hardwork on developing a very good exchange.
he wants probably to portray himself either as a crypto messiah
Maybe some newbies and altcoiners can see him that way, but he's just another businessman who has felt the potential of crypto industry and started a business in this ecosystem. Nothing else. Not a believer, not a messiah, nothing. It's all about money. Fiat money.
"Saving" those businesses means more businesses to earn from, means more customers he can get fees from. It happens in all kind of industries, not only in crypto.
So anybody seeing him more than he is... should at least wake up (and make sure he doesn't lose money because of doing things while dreaming).
Probably a lot of you are already accustomed to the name of the FTX founder grabbing headline after headline when he offers to buy assets from Celsius in an altruistic way or how he has "saved" Voyager thinking only of its users. Adding on top of that his desire on helping other troubled exchanges and so on he wants probably to portray himself either as a crypto messiah or at least a copy of JP Morgan.
But of course, in his ideal world where everything runs smoothly, we would need some adjustments and you can get an idea of those from the first paragraphs to the last:
https://www.ftxpolicy.com/posts/possible-digital-asset-industry-standards
Of course, this is just one of the many tips of the icebergs flotilla he has unleashed, for him seems like harmony can be achieved by, guess what, centralized coins, clear predefined protocols where percentage rule (I have a Terra flashback here) can solve everything without bothering anyone, and it's all about his care for the normal user that might be scammed or lose money, not about his own greed for power.
Now, I'm pretty sure that his sudden need for law regulation customer protection has started with the FCA poking around FTX and probably others in different countries especially the US looking more carefully at the way FTX is doing business but still, for him to go that fast in this direction highlight again, at least for me why we must never and never name any kind of leader or head figure or promote someone to this kind of virtual position, I think I don't even need to add that a politician would be the last person needed to be branded as such a savior.
But of course, in his ideal world where everything runs smoothly, we would need some adjustments and you can get an idea of those from the first paragraphs to the last:
https://www.ftxpolicy.com/posts/possible-digital-asset-industry-standards
Quote
Hacks are extremely destructive to the digital asset ecosystem.
They have been all too prevalent and large. At the same time, the industry has done a decent job of identifying and flagging addresses carrying funds from a security breach, and so even if the funds are gone, the hacker may not actually be able to utilize most of them.
We should formalize this, with major trusted parties adding addresses associated with security breaches to their public list of suspicious addresses. Thus, both centralized and decentralized protocols will be able to promptly freeze out the associated addresses.
They have been all too prevalent and large. At the same time, the industry has done a decent job of identifying and flagging addresses carrying funds from a security breach, and so even if the funds are gone, the hacker may not actually be able to utilize most of them.
We should formalize this, with major trusted parties adding addresses associated with security breaches to their public list of suspicious addresses. Thus, both centralized and decentralized protocols will be able to promptly freeze out the associated addresses.
Quote
Sanctions, allowlists, and blocklists
In order for commerce to work, it’s crucial that validators and smart contracts are free, permissionless, and decentralized. There are many cases, though, where many asset senders and centralized intermediaries will want or need to maintain and/or respect various address blocks: either because of hacks, scams, or sanctions.
I fundamentally believe that blocklists – not allowlists – are the correct approach to sanctions compliance on blockchain environments. The possible options for those sending assets or acting as centralized intermediaries are to either:
Allow all transfers
Ban transfers between sanctioned parties (i.e., declare these transfers illegal and hold violators liable) but otherwise presumptively allow other peer to peer transfers
Ban all transfers unless specifically allowlisted by an institution
In order for commerce to work, it’s crucial that validators and smart contracts are free, permissionless, and decentralized. There are many cases, though, where many asset senders and centralized intermediaries will want or need to maintain and/or respect various address blocks: either because of hacks, scams, or sanctions.
I fundamentally believe that blocklists – not allowlists – are the correct approach to sanctions compliance on blockchain environments. The possible options for those sending assets or acting as centralized intermediaries are to either:
Allow all transfers
Ban transfers between sanctioned parties (i.e., declare these transfers illegal and hold violators liable) but otherwise presumptively allow other peer to peer transfers
Ban all transfers unless specifically allowlisted by an institution
Of course, this is just one of the many tips of the icebergs flotilla he has unleashed, for him seems like harmony can be achieved by, guess what, centralized coins, clear predefined protocols where percentage rule (I have a Terra flashback here) can solve everything without bothering anyone, and it's all about his care for the normal user that might be scammed or lose money, not about his own greed for power.
Now, I'm pretty sure that his sudden need for law regulation customer protection has started with the FCA poking around FTX and probably others in different countries especially the US looking more carefully at the way FTX is doing business but still, for him to go that fast in this direction highlight again, at least for me why we must never and never name any kind of leader or head figure or promote someone to this kind of virtual position, I think I don't even need to add that a politician would be the last person needed to be branded as such a savior.
Jump to: