Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Altcoins, DeFi thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post

    This is incorrect. Customers were lending Celsius money, not depositing it, so customers are considered creditors and must be listed. That's why it's important to read the fine print. Otherwise, it would go against the Bank Secrecy Act and would have been a huge blunder.
    Hmm, not sure that makes it any better tbh.

    These ppl need to go directly to jail: do not pass go - do not collect $200.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by xraygoggles View Post

      Hmm, not sure that makes it any better tbh.

      These ppl need to go directly to jail: do not pass go - do not collect $200.
      It makes it better because no laws were broken when they named all the customers since they were creditors as you said they doxxed everyone. What's that saying about a fool and his money? It's sad for the people that lost money in this, but this is just another example.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post
        Customers were lending Celsius money, not depositing it
        what's the difference?

        they literally called them "Earn" accounts

        Comment


        • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post
          would have been a huge blunder
          also lol I'd say calling it just a huge blunder would be kind

          Comment


          • Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

            what's the difference?

            they literally called them "Earn" accounts
            For one, being named or not being named in their court filing. I also suspect being a lender or a depositor will end up making a big difference for people.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post

              For one, being named or not being named in their court filing. I also suspect being a lender or a depositor will end up making a big difference for people.
              if you deposit your money in the bank down the street are you depositing your money or are you lending your money to the bank?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                if you deposit your money in the bank down the street are you depositing your money or are you lending your money to the bank?
                Deposit. Which would also have protection from the FDIC. The difference between the bank down the street and Celsius is the bank down the street isn’t a scam. I doubt it makes a lick of sense for customers of Celsius since I’m sure nobody will be getting any money.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post

                  Deposit. Which would also have protection from the FDIC. The difference between the bank down the street and Celsius is the bank down the street isn’t a scam. I doubt it makes a lick of sense for customers of Celsius since I’m sure nobody will be getting any money.
                  ok so then how would you lend money to a bank? the bank doesn't hold the money you deposit. they lend it out. that's fractional reserve banking

                  like I get what you're saying based on their terms and conditions but I just think it's a weird position to take and try to make some distinction.


                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                    ok so then how would you lend money to a bank? the bank doesn't hold the money you deposit. they lend it out. that's fractional reserve banking

                    like I get what you're saying based on their terms and conditions but I just think it's a weird position to take and try to make some distinction.
                    But you’re not considered a lender to the bank, you’re a depositor and as we’re seeing there’s a legal difference that apparently matters. I’m not the one that determines it and the only distinction I made was in reply to a previous post saying Celsius doxxed these people when they didn’t. What the bank does with the money is irrelevant from my standpoint. Either way, it doesn’t matter with Celsius because that money is gone since they’re a fraud.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post

                      But you’re not considered a lender to the bank, you’re a depositor and as we’re seeing there’s a legal difference that apparently matters. I’m not the one that determines it and the only distinction I made was in reply to a previous post saying Celsius doxxed these people when they didn’t. What the bank does with the money is irrelevant from my standpoint. Either way, it doesn’t matter with Celsius because that money is gone since they’re a fraud.
                      I just think “celsius didn’t doxx these people because technically they were lenders and not depositors” is a weird position.

                      there’s lots of names on that list with sub-penny balances and lots and lots of names with sub-dollar balances. Perhaps celsius could have advocated for some of those people that their PII shouldn’t have been included in the court filings

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post

                        I just think “celsius didn’t doxx these people because technically they were lenders and not depositors” is a weird position.

                        there’s lots of names on that list with sub-penny balances and lots and lots of names with sub-dollar balances. Perhaps celsius could have advocated for some of those people that their PII shouldn’t have been included in the court filings
                        It isn’t my position as I’m not the one that defines the difference. It seems to be a statement of fact, and a legal requirement, on why everyone was listed from a legal standpoint. From what I’ve read they had to disclose them in the bankruptcy case because they’re creditors. I don’t think Celsius had a choice on who was included and not since it sounds like they had to include everyone. Maybe a lawyer here could further expand on it.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post

                          This is incorrect. Customers were lending Celsius money, not depositing it, so customers are considered creditors and must be listed. That's why it's important to read the fine print. Otherwise, it would go against the Bank Secrecy Act and would have been a huge blunder.
                          Then that puts a whole new perspective on this: "Unsurprisingly, the CEO took out 10M, his wife 2M a few days before they shut down the site for withdrawals - nothing shady bout that..." If it is just a loan, fair game?

                          Comment


                          • more fun in defi land

                            Binance’s chains was hacked for a couple hundred million or something, but it could have been worse if they weren’t able to just hit the pause button on the chain

                            An official response to recent events from the BNB Chain team.


                            “Decentralized chains are not designed to be stopped, but by contacting community validators one by one, we were able to stop the incident from spreading. It was not that easy as BNB Smart Chain has 26 active validators at present and 44 in total in different time zones. This delayed closure, but we were able to minimize the loss.”


                            lol i guess even though it’s decentralized good thing they had all the validators cell numbers

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by jacoavlu View Post
                              more fun in defi land

                              Binance’s chains was hacked for a couple hundred million or something, but it could have been worse if they weren’t able to just hit the pause button on the chain

                              https://bnbchain.org/en/blog/bnb-cha...system-update/

                              “Decentralized chains are not designed to be stopped, but by contacting community validators one by one, we were able to stop the incident from spreading. It was not that easy as BNB Smart Chain has 26 active validators at present and 44 in total in different time zones. This delayed closure, but we were able to minimize the loss.”


                              lol i guess even though it’s decentralized good thing they had all the validators cell numbers
                              BSC is highly centralized, that's not new. But Binance is also like 60% or more of the total exchange volume of all cryptocurrency trades, so it's not going anywhere.

                              Also, almost all scamcoins/rug pulls/Ponzis originate on here, so there is a legit use-case - bullish (fr no cap).

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X