Mark says about Roger is true, why would they/he make it public? People may bankrupt themselves and deal with financial consequences but that doesn't mean they should be publicly shamed.
I think it was only made public when Ver posted a tweet absolutely denying he was the guy. Kinda forced Mark's hand. Not being aware of what their contractual relationship is I really have no idea what the true story is. I do know that I'm not impressed by any of the parties' handling of the situation and it seems utterly self defeating. The centralization exposure of SmartBCH is precisely why we have not committed to this platform even though it is by far the one we most wish we could primarily operate on. Can't even begin to describe how frustrating this is for me and my company.
IMO, this still doesn't justify CF making it public.
I'm just describing the impetus - I'm not judging the justification or action. None of this should have been possible.
They legally have to I think. They are selling debt. RvUSD. The debt has to be paid back by the debtor. The debtor publicly announces they are not in debt. That means CoinFLEX are selling bad debt, they need to make sure everyone is aware of that.
I'm sorry to say but the current design for the decentralized bridge is not very strong. It won't be practical for most transactions.
Have you seen the alternative?
Is this talking about @p2pcashadvocate's implementation?
https://twitter.com/GeukensMathieu/status/1541555323848331268
It's been a few months since I looked so I forget honestly. But understand that to make this truly decentralized it means it's going to be many hours for a confirmed tx and a funky UX. Most people will ultimately want to be on faster options. This is just a result of the limitations of the respective block chains we're on. The new BCH upgrade does help a little I expect. But it'll be next year before it becomes something more "viable".
That many people will use a custodial swap does not matter
Roger Ver liked this tweet 🙃
Обсуждают сегодня