What's your take on refunding 800 BNB that are effectively burned? - page 2.

(o)(o)ilikeboobs(o)(o)

full member

Activity: 826

Merit: 105

Quote from: mersal on September 13, 2020, 01:15:26 AM

Quote from: (o)(o)ilikeboobs(o)(o) on September 13, 2020, 01:03:07 AM

Reversing transactions is possible but it is best to return the money to the person who lost the money and burn the wrongly deposited tokens. That would be better than the way he reversed the trade because people didn't like it.
He needs to take responsibility for his mistake whether it was accidental or intentional.

Crypto transactions are not reversible but here the user made deposit to the wrong address which result into permanent stuck that is why CZ wants to burn 800 tokens lesser than the tokens they have to and return the 800 to the user but at the end no one lost or gained from this changes but this shows the centralization of cryptos.

Yes, I was wrong to assume that trading is reversible. Binance focuses on what they are. From the way they create Dapps on their platform (developers pay a sizable fee to generate tokens) shows they are going against the principles of cryptocurrency.
Cryptocurrency developers have also voiced their opposition to Binance's approach.
https://twitter.com/burn_the_state/status/1304995734354231296

Yogee

sr. member

Activity: 1526

Merit: 412

Quote from: pixie85 on September 13, 2020, 03:13:05 PM

.....
Those who invest in BNB should know that it's a centralized token. You know what you're getting yourself into and that the coin will depend on future actions of CZ and Binance.

Sure the success of the coin depends on the success of Binance exchange and of CZ as the head but I doubt they had any idea that CZ will tweak the burning mechanisms that was already in place when the native BNB was announced.

People seems okay because 800 is just a small amount compared to the circulating and total supply. If this happened to be at least a million, I bet the reaction would be different.

Dana888

member

Activity: 365

Merit: 10

Quote from: tvplus006 on September 13, 2020, 05:44:05 AM

Quote from: xOdiumNostrumx on September 13, 2020, 03:55:14 AM

I mean, I guess its a noble to give this guy a refund, but at the end of the day, it comes down to the question if this is really a principled thing to do. They will "refund" this guy, but what will happen to the next one that makes the same mistake? I am pretty sure this is not the first time this thing happened with BNB, so what about refunding mistakes from the past? They opened a Pandora box with this decision.

A few days ago, there was a similar situation when a user transferred 1 million USDT tokens to the wrong address. And these USDT were returned to the user by Tether. https://www.somagnews.com/defi-user-who-lost-1-million-usdt-got-his-money-back/ And this practice will be solved in the future in a similar way. We must accept the reality that cryptocurrency is centralized, with the exception of BTC.

Why did you decide that it is not decentralized? The fact that a person is sitting on the other end of the wire and has the ability to send you tokens back does not mean that everything is completely contralatable. Do not forget that you primarily interact with people, which means that the human factor will always affect the processes that are taking place.

Jackl87

sr. member

Activity: 1722

Merit: 269

I would help that guy. I mean 20.000 $ dollars is a huge sum and could be worth 5 years of working, depending on where the guy is located in the world.
It would be a great sign that crypto is not only about greed and quick money but also about community.
On the other hand, CZ uses this as a marketing tool to present himself as a caring guy, while he is still working on making crypto more and more centralized by buying cmc and so on.

pixie85

hero member

Activity: 2170

Merit: 528

Quote from: Baofeng on September 12, 2020, 07:19:28 PM

Then it will set a precedence, not just for Binance for any other burn token algorithm. And it will shows how powerful Binance and CZ. Don't forget about this one as well, Binance Considered Pushing for Bitcoin ‘Rollback’ Following $40 Million Hack. If he did do a rollback back then, it will be a wrong move for him. I sympathize with him, offering to help the guy, but the repercussions is big. If he wanted to show good will, give back $20k to the guy, that's it, instead of removing 800 BNB, that's just my opinion.

It sure would be a better choice to pay him back with his own money but I guess he didn't want to take responsibility for the situation. He chose to make the system responsible and show himself as the generous boss. This is all well calculated. Next time this happens people won't ask him for money directly like they would if he paid that guy.

Quote from: Yogee on September 12, 2020, 09:57:32 PM

These are the things I am getting at. Those who are "okay" with CZ burning BNBs less the 800 that are supposed to gone permanently are underestimating the future impact of such action.

We are very critical when it comes to coins or tokens supply, from circulating to locked or to team holdings, but we're just fine if developers and owners can easily play with it?

Those who invest in BNB should know that it's a centralized token. You know what you're getting yourself into and that the coin will depend on future actions of CZ and Binance.

If Binance gets into the same trouble as Bithumb you'll be able to buy a bottle of vodka to drown your sorrows in with your whole BNB investment.

Killrbit

member

Activity: 224

Merit: 31

Quote from: tvplus006 on September 13, 2020, 05:44:05 AM

Quote from: xOdiumNostrumx on September 13, 2020, 03:55:14 AM

I mean, I guess its a noble to give this guy a refund, but at the end of the day, it comes down to the question if this is really a principled thing to do. They will "refund" this guy, but what will happen to the next one that makes the same mistake? I am pretty sure this is not the first time this thing happened with BNB, so what about refunding mistakes from the past? They opened a Pandora box with this decision.

A few days ago, there was a similar situation when a user transferred 1 million USDT tokens to the wrong address. And these USDT were returned to the user by Tether. https://www.somagnews.com/defi-user-who-lost-1-million-usdt-got-his-money-back/ And this practice will be solved in the future in a similar way. We must accept the reality that cryptocurrency is centralized, with the exception of BTC.

I mean on the one hand its obviously good that both these individuals were able to recover their money, and is is undoubted that these sort of situations will happen again the future. However IMO a crypto currency needs to be immutable in order to be purely permission-less and trust-less. Also given that we will most likely see state backed currencies ( CBDC) in the next few years what than would be the advantage of using CZ's coin over one by backed by the state.

But yea almost all coins are by and large centralized apart from BTC, but it is only because BTC is immutable that it is the only coin worth truly holding onto in the long run.

All this just reminds me of the whole Ether/ether classic fiasco from 2016 though.

tvplus006

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 1655

To the Moon

Quote from: xOdiumNostrumx on September 13, 2020, 03:55:14 AM

I mean, I guess its a noble to give this guy a refund, but at the end of the day, it comes down to the question if this is really a principled thing to do. They will "refund" this guy, but what will happen to the next one that makes the same mistake? I am pretty sure this is not the first time this thing happened with BNB, so what about refunding mistakes from the past? They opened a Pandora box with this decision.

A few days ago, there was a similar situation when a user transferred 1 million USDT tokens to the wrong address. And these USDT were returned to the user by Tether. https://www.somagnews.com/defi-user-who-lost-1-million-usdt-got-his-money-back/ And this practice will be solved in the future in a similar way. We must accept the reality that cryptocurrency is centralized, with the exception of BTC.

xOdiumNostrumx

full member

Activity: 1064

Merit: 101

I mean, I guess its a noble to give this guy a refund, but at the end of the day, it comes down to the question if this is really a principled thing to do. They will "refund" this guy, but what will happen to the next one that makes the same mistake? I am pretty sure this is not the first time this thing happened with BNB, so what about refunding mistakes from the past? They opened a Pandora box with this decision.

mersal

member

Activity: 1204

Merit: 38

Quote from: (o)(o)ilikeboobs(o)(o) on September 13, 2020, 01:03:07 AM

Reversing transactions is possible but it is best to return the money to the person who lost the money and burn the wrongly deposited tokens. That would be better than the way he reversed the trade because people didn't like it.
He needs to take responsibility for his mistake whether it was accidental or intentional.

Crypto transactions are not reversible but here the user made deposit to the wrong address which result into permanent stuck that is why CZ wants to burn 800 tokens lesser than the tokens they have to and return the 800 to the user but at the end no one lost or gained from this changes but this shows the centralization of cryptos.

(o)(o)ilikeboobs(o)(o)

full member

Activity: 826

Merit: 105

Reversing transactions is possible but it is best to return the money to the person who lost the money and burn the wrongly deposited tokens. That would be better than the way he reversed the trade because people didn't like it.
He needs to take responsibility for his mistake whether it was accidental or intentional.

matchi2011

sr. member

Activity: 1456

Merit: 267

Buy $BGL before it's too late!

Quote from: cryptomaniac_xxx on September 12, 2020, 11:21:39 PM

To be honest, I'm not comfortable with this kind of refunding that CZ is planning to. And it added to the whole centralisation of crypto and damn, what powers CZ will have, wielding it in crypto space. It's a very dangerous, yes Binance is doing good for us, but for what? CZ he become one of the most powerful crypto figure, literally, if he will do this kind of move just to satisfy one customer of his. His tokens are meant to be burn, not to be salvage if anything goes wrong and this goes against the basic principle of token burning. Most crypto traders will be disappointed if he will do this.

Me as well, there's certain limitations in such kind of responsibilities,
If CZ can do that then who knows what possibilities that he can do in the future.

Question about refunding since that's really a huge amount of money to lose, balancing the situations and judging maybe very
hard, though it's him and his compassion to decide about this case.

ampu

full member

Activity: 504

Merit: 102

CLEARSIGHT- THE #1 BLOCKCHAIN JOB PLATFORM

The amount of $ 20,000 is small for a CEO of a large trading platform like Binance and they know how to keep their image in the eyes of the community.
As far as I can see, the money was lost so let it go, just pay back $ 20,000 is okay.

FinneysTrueVision

sr. member

Activity: 1680

Merit: 379

Top Crypto Casino

Decentralized currencies should not have a supreme leader who can have this much power to just unilaterally decide to change the burn supply. Ethereum isn't as bad but I've always felt uncomfortable with Vitalik having outsized influence.

cryptomaniac_xxx

hero member

Activity: 1344

Merit: 540

To be honest, I'm not comfortable with this kind of refunding that CZ is planning to. And it added to the whole centralisation of crypto and damn, what powers CZ will have, wielding it in crypto space. It's a very dangerous, yes Binance is doing good for us, but for what? CZ he become one of the most powerful crypto figure, literally, if he will do this kind of move just to satisfy one customer of his. His tokens are meant to be burn, not to be salvage if anything goes wrong and this goes against the basic principle of token burning. Most crypto traders will be disappointed if he will do this.

Yogee

sr. member

Activity: 1526

Merit: 412

Quote from: eaLiTy on September 12, 2020, 01:54:50 PM

........
Lets get it straight, i am not a fan of BNB coin and i am not a big fan of CZ either, but if he could sort of issues regarding the exchange and even though it is not a conventional process of returning the coin i think it is a good cause as the coins sent by the user was burned and is not in circulation as per the tweet and if they are burning the coins and if he is willing to hold off 800 BNB to refund the user, in theory they burned the same amount of coins.

The problem arises if more people start taking this approach, the power of centralization exists .

Quote from: AmoreJaz on September 12, 2020, 05:49:14 PM

.......
or maybe what CZ can do is just give some money to the guy out of his pockets, for the sake of good will. just dont get those coins from that address supposedly to be burned, the concept will be tainted and that will make people think that they can always do that the next time around someone made a mistake. hard lesson for the guy. lets see whats his action on this...

Quote from: Baofeng on September 12, 2020, 07:19:28 PM

Then it will set a precedence, not just for Binance for any other burn token algorithm. And it will shows how powerful Binance and CZ. Don't forget about this one as well, Binance Considered Pushing for Bitcoin ‘Rollback’ Following $40 Million Hack. If he did do a rollback back then, it will be a wrong move for him. I sympathize with him, offering to help the guy, but the repercussions is big. If he wanted to show good will, give back $20k to the guy, that's it, instead of removing 800 BNB, that's just my opinion.

Quote from: btc_angela on September 12, 2020, 07:30:21 PM

I also don't like the idea behind it, did he check the identification of the guy? it is for real and not trolling him? I agree with the OP, it's like CZ has God like power know to bring something from the dead (analogy). What if others make the same mistakes again? Will he do it, or just say "f**k" off, it's your mistake.

These are the things I am getting at. Those who are "okay" with CZ burning BNBs less the 800 that are supposed to gone permanently are underestimating the future impact of such action.

We are very critical when it comes to coins or tokens supply, from circulating to locked or to team holdings, but we're just fine if developers and owners can easily play with it?

btc_angela

hero member

Activity: 2632

Merit: 546

I also don't like the idea behind it, did he check the identification of the guy? it is for real and not trolling him? I agree with the OP, it's like CZ has God like power know to bring something from the dead (analogy). What if others make the same mistakes again? Will he do it, or just say "f**k" off, it's your mistake.

Baofeng

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1655

Quote from: pixie85 on September 12, 2020, 05:59:22 PM

It's a good idea by CZ, I think they should reimburse the guy who lost his coins.

If the coins got burned he will not affect the ecosystem in any way by getting them back and it's going to be a great opportunity to show good will.

Then it will set a precedence, not just for Binance for any other burn token algorithm. And it will shows how powerful Binance and CZ. Don't forget about this one as well, Binance Considered Pushing for Bitcoin ‘Rollback’ Following $40 Million Hack. If he did do a rollback back then, it will be a wrong move for him. I sympathize with him, offering to help the guy, but the repercussions is big. If he wanted to show good will, give back $20k to the guy, that's it, instead of removing 800 BNB, that's just my opinion.

BitcoinPanther

hero member

Activity: 1918

Merit: 564

Quote from: Yogee on September 12, 2020, 11:43:20 AM

CZ twitted earlier today about some guy mistakenly sending 800 BNB, that's worth $20K, to Binance smart chain and asked him for help.

What's your take on that?

I understand it's not a mineable coin but I still find it hard to believe that it's that easy to change BNB's supply. I mean, they should just stick to burning BNB's they originally planned. The 800 coins were supposed to be gone forever but with just one tweet, it's back! It's like bringing something back from the dead lol.

This action is humane. I do not see anything wrong on reimbursing a person of his 800 BNB that is sent to the burning address by mistake. The supply to be burned is unchanged because the guy's mistake of sending 800 BNB to the burning address makes up for it.

Let us not be happy on other's people mistake that will lead him to lose a huge amount. Rather let us be appreciative on a good action that enable that person to get his lost BNB back.

pixie85

hero member

Activity: 2170

Merit: 528

It's a good idea by CZ, I think they should reimburse the guy who lost his coins.

If the coins got burned he will not affect the ecosystem in any way by getting them back and it's going to be a great opportunity to show good will.

AmoreJaz

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1102

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: 2double0 on September 12, 2020, 04:31:50 PM

The coins that are stuck somewhere or gone should be counted as burnt already and returning those 800 coins to the guy from the upcoming burn does not make any difference but equates his mistake with a compensation as a 'donation' for his stupidity. This will be a lesson for him either way if CZ decides to return his BNB to him or not.

or maybe what CZ can do is just give some money to the guy out of his pockets, for the sake of good will. just dont get those coins from that address supposedly to be burned, the concept will be tainted and that will make people think that they can always do that the next time around someone made a mistake.
hard lesson for the guy. lets see whats his action on this...

Topic: What's your take on refunding 800 BNB that are effectively burned? - page 2. (Read 465 times)