Artem @THORChainExp

Everyone who could censor, did. Circle and Tether froze ~$340K. NEAR Intents froze $503K. ⚡ Total recovered by every freeze power in crypto: about $840K. 0.2% of $387.5M. The attacker still controls roughly $342M. 88.3%. 🚨 Here's why it failed. Every stolen stablecoin was swapped into native tokens within 41 minutes. A freeze needs an asset with a blacklist function and a target holding still. The attacker gave them neither. NEAR's SHIELD flagged $50M in attempts. It stopped $503K. Another $166K went through anyway. The rest simply rerouted to other providers. So that's the actual trade on offer: Permanent discretionary freeze power. For 0.2%. And their own disclosure never names who can authorize release, or how someone wrongly flagged gets their money back. 🔑 THORChain said no. Again. It said no in May, when its OWN pools were drained for $10.7M. Trading halted network-wide. Attacker addresses never blacklisted. It said no through Bybit, when $1.2B moved across. The admin key had been retired 11 days earlier. That key wasn't quietly shelved. Admin Mimir was stripped out of the code in v3.2.0 on Feb 10, 2025. Only a node quorum can move parameters now. And it cost something real. The lead developer walked that same month, after a vote to block Lazarus transactions was canceled. 🩸 That's what a principle looks like when you actually hold it. It has a price, and someone pays it. Meanwhile Bitget's own backend signed those transfers. Forged withdrawal commands, written straight into their wallet system. No private key was ever stolen. Their $464M protection fund covers users. Good. It should. But that failure happened inside a company with a payroll, an admin key and a pause button — and the proposed fix is for a permissionless network to grow all three. ⚡ THORChain's technical co-founder @CBarraford offered to join the debate publicly. Still waiting. Cover the side you're describing. 🎙️ $RUNE

What kind of debate is this when @laurashin ignores the voluntary participation request from @THORChain Co-Founder @CBarraford ? Is this even a debate when the party which gets blamed being ignored and denied to be on the show? If this is suppose to be a paid show to just tell one-sided story, just openly admit it, and dont call this as debate. 🙄🙄

Laura Shin @laurashin

a day ago

Bitget's $387.5M hack has reopened the debate over whether permissionless networks should block stolen funds. THORChain declined to block the addresses; NEAR Intents blocked $50M+ in transfers. Uneasy Money with @PabloSabbatella, today, Wednesday at 4pm ET.

47 1 21 16K 2

Laura Shin continues to deny anyone from the THORChain community to join her show. Ironic, considering this is a debate about censorship.

Laura Shin @laurashin

a day ago

Bitget's $387.5M hack has reopened the debate over whether permissionless networks should block stolen funds. THORChain declined to block the addresses; NEAR Intents blocked $50M+ in transfers. Uneasy Money with @PabloSabbatella, today, Wednesday at 4pm ET.

47 1 21 16K 2

Bitget 被盗，全网都知道这几个动作：公开信、点名、悬赏、链上追踪、找发行方冻稳定币、找跨链层拦截，再配上保护基金和撤出计划。有人冻了，有人拒了，骂战打了一周。 看起来像原则之争。 更像资源分配。 一家有体量的交易所被盗，背后是品牌、是媒体、是同行、是能开出赏金的账户、是能把一份地址名单送进每一个协议社群的关系网。名单一出，有人配合，有人拒绝，至少所有人都得表态。表态本身就是被调动起来了。 散户被盗，通常不是这样。 一个普通人丢了几十个、几百个、甚至几千个币，去同一个地方喊冻、喊拦截、喊“行业应该站出来”。常见结果是：已读不回，模版回复，让你去报警，让你去论坛自行发帖，让你等一个没有排期的流程。没有发布会，没有创始人互@，没有谁会为你放弃一笔赏金来证明自己高尚。 不是技术突然失灵。 是你不够大。 他们现在把话抬得很高：财产权、反洗钱、不能给赃款修路、去中心化不是挡箭牌。这些话只在镜头对准大户时才变得响亮。镜头对准一个没有公关部的地址时，同一套系统恢复成冷的。冷，才是默认值。热，是因为这次的受害者能把热度买来、叫来、换来。 所以别被带进假问题。 假问题是：应不应该无需许可。 真问题是：谁的单子值得他们加班。 如果原则真的是“已知赃款就必须拦”，那小额失窃和三亿失窃应当走同一条通道、同一套响应、同一个时限。现在没有。大的有专班，小的进工单。大的能改变一个协议当天的舆论位置，小的连工单编号都没有。这不是道德升华，这是客户分级。 NEAR Intents 冻 Bitget 相关资金，可以写成英雄。也可以写成：客户足够重要，情报足够完整，新闻足够好写，冻结足够安全。换一个没有头条的散户，同一套 SHIELD 会不会为你通宵，会不会公开进度，会不会有人出来扛责任——答案大家心里有数。能冻的人，选择冻谁，已经是权力。权力围着体量转，不围着口号转。 #THORChain 挨骂，正因为它不肯做这套分级。它没有“这家交易所的名单优先处理、那个散户的帖子下次再说”。规则对所有地址一样冷：不看你是不是好人，也不看你是不是有公关。冷得让大交易所受不了，因为大交易所习惯被优先。冷得也让部分受害者受不了，因为受害者希望有人破例。破例一开始为你破，后来就会为更有关系的人破。 加拿大冻抗议者账户时，政府也说自己在负责。负责的对象从来不是“所有人”，是当时必须被按住的人。交易所动员全网时，负责的对象也不是“所有被盗的人”，是这次站在镜头里的机构。 散户要听清这句话： 他们上心，不是因为他们比你更懂去中心化。 是因为你没有他们的关系，也开不出他们的条件。 有关系、有钱，就能把公路临时改成专案通道。 没关系、没钱，就去排队，或者被当成噪音。 要保护所有人，就不能只保护叫得动人的人。 要么所有地址都走规则，要么承认你们做的是VIP追赃，别再冒充原则。 风可以进，雨可以进，国王不能进。 国王最擅长的，不是讲道德，是看谁配被服务。

Gracy Chen @Bitget @GracyBitget

3 days ago

Appreciate @near_intents / SHIELD for stepping up on the Bitget incident: flagged $50M+ in attempted laundering flows, froze $503k mid-execution, and waived their own bounty share so we can recover more. This is what permissionless but not "facilitating known stolen funds"

127 73 739 124K 57

NEAR 和 THORChain 争的不是谁更会写通稿 争的是钱到底是谁的 一边是华尔街基金养大的企业链。a16z 领投过，Pantera、Electric、Coinbase Ventures、Tiger Global 这类名字都在桌上。钱从沙盒谷和纽约来，产品就会像沙盒谷和纽约想要的样子：可编程，能接风控，能按名单放行，能在中途把一笔意图按住。这次冻黑客，对公司是正确决定。正确，是企业语言。企业语言成不了货币。 另一边是散户自己押进去的结算层。THORChain 没有人替你审批地址。想停网，去买 RUNE、去做节点、去投票。单个人按不了太久，少数人提案也能被打回去。脏、慢、挨骂，但这是散户大本营该有的样子：门开着，不先问你是谁。 有人说，让坏人也能用，就是给黑客修路。 这句话听着正义，结构是缴械。 枪支的逻辑也一样。你若把持枪变成一套审批，最后常常变成：坏人照样有办法拿到，好人办事处处要许可。工具一旦变成特权，特权就不会平均分配，它会按关系、按立场、按谁能进办公室来分配。无需许可不是喜欢坏人，是拒绝让国王决定谁配拥有工具。 钱更是如此。现金不管你买咖啡还是买毒品。它没意见。没意见，才叫流通。 一开始就给钱装接口，接口就要解释，解释就要开会，开会就是公司治理。治理下的余额，叫许可，不叫货币。 别觉得这是危言耸听。2022 年加拿大动用《紧急状态法》，银行按政府指令冻结与抗议相关的账户，大约两百多个账户、近八百万加元，不少事先没有法院逐笔审判。后来有法院认定这次动用紧急权不合法。当时被按住的，不只是你讨厌的人，也包括捐过钱、被关联、家里共用账户的普通人。媒体、抗议者、金主，在国王眼里都只是“指定人员”。 借口永远现成：国家安全，公共秩序，打击犯罪。 开关一旦在，借口只是换台词。 所以今天 NEAR Intents 冻黑客，不是终点，是演示。演示给所有人看：这条路上坐着人，人可以做好事，也可以做国王。加拿大已经演示过后半句。你鼓掌前半句的时候，后半句的电闸已经装上了。 THORChain 保护的不是好人证件，是所有人的路权。坏人会走这条路，好人也会走，政敌也会走。因为一个坏人封掉整条高速，让所有开车的人一起受罚，那不叫抓贼，那叫连坐。国王最爱连坐，因为连坐最省事。 我们不要这种省事。 华尔街可以继续做它的合规产品，做它的风控层，做它的英雄新闻。散户若还要自己的钱，就守住那条不用问路的公路：@THORChain，以及同一套精神往隐私资产走的 @THORXMR。 所有人都可以走。 不是坏人容易走、好人要审批。 不是政府不喜欢你，卡就停了。 风可以进，雨可以进，国王不能进。 无需许可，不是口号。是唯一能把国王挡在门外的那把锁。

Jane D'Butterfly 🦋 @JaneDButterfly

5 days ago

To begin with, as a decentralized exchange, @THORChain has never promised anyone that THORChain is here to protect or safeguard people money. All we have been advocating all these years is to encourage people safeguard their own money with full self-custody wallets. So, from

35 35 239 26K 8

If you CAN censor, you WILL censor. Today it's hacked funds, you think you're cool with that because theft is immoral. True! But tomorrow it's transactions to and from the truckers in Canada protesting totalitarian government overreach. At least you'll know how you got here. But you know what else stops hackers? Hardening your platforms so you don't get hacked in the first place. Bitget, it's your fault for getting hacked. Gracy the buck stops with you. Take some accountability.

Alex Shevchenko 🇺🇦 @AlexAuroraDev

3 days ago

x.com/i/article/2104…

94 123 532 596K 156

Is a system that can make decisions centralized? Not necessarily! All systems, even permissionless ones, need to make changes, or decide explicitly to not make changes. Decentralized systems are analogous to democracies: decisions are made via the vote of the people. In theory at least, you can consider that every person has an equal say in what happens. Centralized systems are like monarchies: one person or entity decides unilaterally for everyone. If a decentralized network decides to implement a certain feature or pause temporarily, that doesn't mean it's centralized. If a wide variety of different entities are involved in the decision, that means that it's decentralized. But if decisions are made by the few without consulting the rest of the users or network, that's centralized! If we can't differentiate between centralized and decentralized governance, we'll purely end up with centralized, permissioned systems. Hope this helps!

今天能冻黑客，明天就能冻你。 NEAR Intents 冻了 Bitget 案里五十多万，还说拦住了五千万想过路的钱。媒体说负责，交易所说榜样，评论区说英雄。 英雄故事最好编：先指定一个坏人，再给人一把剑，让所有人为这把剑鼓掌。 问题不在剑有没有砍中黑客。 问题在于剑在谁手里，名单谁来写。 能在你钱还没走完时按住它，说明路上坐着人。SHIELD 自己都说了，情报来自 KYT、分析公司，还有那些最大的中心化交易所。柜台供料，输出就会像柜台。 今天名单上写的是黑客。 名单不会自己退休。 明天写平民，后天写立场不对的人，中间只差一句“情况特殊”。 为他们说话的，看着像侠客，结构是宫廷。 “我们选择不帮赃款变现”——重点是“我们选择”无需许可的系统，不会开新闻发布会宣布自己选了谁。 Circle、Tether 冻自己发的稳定币，那是公司产品。Bitget 用保险基金赔用户，那是交易所的责任。这些都可以。 别把公路改成法庭。公路一变成法庭，公路就姓法庭的。 THORChain 挨骂，是因为它不当庭长。 5月停网，停的是自己金库被掏，多节点一起按，单节点按不了太久。 Bitget 要的是按地址拒绝服务。协议没有这开关。Bybit 那年三票想停，四票打回去。开发者生气也没用。 坏人会用无需许可的路。比特币也一样。这是代价，不是广告。 一边是干净的许可：先问过，再放行。 一边是脏的自由：不喜欢你，钱也能走。 货币要是只能在好人之间转，那就不是货币，是党证。 我们自己拿钥匙，自己扛风险，自己负责。 风可以进，雨可以进，国王不能进。 NEAR Intents 选择进门，说是来抓贼。贼该抓。可门一开，这房子就开始接受临检。 THORChain 不让国王进。所以它脏，所以它挨骂，所以它还像钱。 想抓贼，去找警察，去找发行方，去找交易所。 想当货币，先把国王请出去。 剑一旦拔出来，不会只砍你同意的人。

李平平无奇 @liping007

3 days ago

昨晚Near Intents冻结了16万美元的被朝鲜黑客攻击的Bitget 资金，引起了一些中立性争议，我支持Near Intents所做的工作，这是对的事情，技术应该让世界变得更美好。 $Near价格可能收到一些压力，但这是短期的，对的事情会在长期取得更大成功。

34 3 66 41K 7

1/4 None of us welcome exploiters and criminals. We despise them too. And it’s understandable that some parties try to enforce controls to freeze/block. I’m just urging folks to pause and think about what Bitcoin (aka decentralized and permissionless) meant vs TradFi cartels.

First, Unstoppable money Second, Unstoppable compute Third, Unstoppable exchange It really is that simple. Just a pity that some who built 1 and 2 don’t understand 3

是的，想停 @THORChain ，就去当节点，别发通稿 @star_okx 说 @THORChain 是假去中心化。 理由很短：5月能停，这次 Bitget 求停却不停 你们把两件不是一类的事焊在一起，再对外宣布：焊点就是真相。 5月停的是协议自己的金库。金库正在被抽，偿付假设已经破了，网络若继续出站，就是继续把钱送出去。于是自动检测先响，多个独立节点叠上 `make pause`，再经 Mimir 把交易、签名、轮换按住。规则写在明处：一个节点大约只能停 720 个块，每个 churn 周期只能按一次。这不是哪位 CEO 的红按钮，这是一群互不隶属的节点在抢时间。 然后Bitget 要的也不是这个 Bitget 要的是：拒绝这些地址 THORChain协议层没有黑名单。halt 停的是功能，不是身份证。你用全网熔断去挡几笔兑换，等于把所有 LP、所有普通用户绑上同一根绳，只为完成一份交易所通稿。那不叫负责，那叫征用。 而且Bybit 那年已经演过一次。三票想停 ETH，几分钟被四票打回去。技术上，停得了；治理上，少数人停不了。开发者不行，交易所不行，舆论也不行。不能一锤定音的系统，你们偏要叫它假的。能一锤定音的系统，你们自己天天在用。 去中心化从来不是“永远不停机” 去中心化是：没有人能按自己的心情打开网络、关掉用户、审查地址。 5月能停，9月没停，主语都不是 Bitget，也不是某位创始人。主语是持有RUNE的去中心化的节点集体。自己的金库被盗，他们选择自保；别人把名单拍到桌上，他们选择中立。同一套规则，两种状态，两种输出。这叫一致。把一致说成双标，是因为你们需要一个听话的基础设施，却不想承认自己只是用户。 公开信不是治理。 转发量不是共识。 公司 Logo 不是超级多数。 中国用户对 @star_okx 并不陌生。圈子里叫他「徐护士」，不是今天才起的外号。合约插针、流动性被抽、散户在自己的盘口里被打穿——这些指控在中文区挂了太久，久到已经不是一条情绪，而是一张集体记忆。你们可以不认，可以告，可以删评。但你们没有资格一边靠中心化订单簿抽水，一边转过身来给去中心化协议上政治课。 你们开的是赌场。赌场可以很大、很亮、很合规，也可以很会写行业责任。可赌场从不为无需许可贡献一条节点、一枚债券、一次链上投票。流水进自己口袋的时候，叫创新；协议不给你们当风控外包的时候，就叫破坏。威胁到的不是行业，是中介的抽成。密码朋克精神要回归的时候，最先坐不住的，从来不是节点，是怕用户绕过赌场柜台的人。 如果你们真懂去中心化，少在 X 上要求协议立正。去买 #RUNE，去质押，去当节点，去联合发起那份暂停提案。门开着。债券是门票，投票是手，链上才是会场。你们站在会场外面喊“为什么不按我们说的停”，这不叫参与，这叫旁观者审判。 你们是公司。 公司可以有风控，有名单，有客服，有新闻稿。这些都合法，也都可以很赚钱。但公司没有资格把「不听我们的」写成「破坏行业」，更没有资格把密码朋克精神改写成「先过我们这关」。更没有资格，在自己被中文区长期指控「插针割韭菜」的时候，反过来审判一个不肯按名单审查用户的协议。 密码朋克精神不是装饰。它很硬，也很难看：谁都能用，所以你讨厌的人也能用；没有人能随便关，所以你的公开信也会掉在地上。接受这一点，才有资格谈去中心化。接受不了，就继续做你们的中心化生意，继续抽流水，不必来给一套你们从未参加过的治理颁伪证。 要不要暂停，由债券节点决定。 不是由上市公司公关部决定。 不是由「徐护士」决定。 不必再绕。若还想辩，把播客打开，把底层摊开：谁能进来，谁能叠加暂停，谁能把暂停投回去，暂停惩罚的是攻击者还是所有人。也可以一起摊开中文区这些年对你们盘口的指控。把这些讲完，再宣布谁在破坏这个行业。 在那之前，想停 THORChain，就去当节点。 发通稿的人，停不了网。 开赌场的人，定义不了密码朋克。

THORChain @THORChain

4 days ago

A THORChain network halt is an emergency security mechanism designed to protect the protocol. A halt is not a selective freeze of specific funds or an individual swap. During the May 2026 exploit that resulted in $10.7M stolen from the liquidity pools, the attackers addresses

97 82 614 149K 48

You’ve got the facts wrong. In May 2026 the THORChain protocol shutdown immediately—not within hours. The protocol is designed to automatically halt itself when unauthorized transactions are detected from its vaults. There was no decision making. Nobody took action. The system shut itself down in self-preservation after detecting an unauthorized transaction

1/2 . @THORChain LP breakeven RUNE price: BTC: $6 RUNE at $100k BTC ETH: $2.3 RUNE at $3k ETH LTC: $1.5 RUNE at $60 LTC DOGE: $3.8 at $0.09 DOGE - It is the RUNE:Asset price ratio which is important, not just RUNE price per se

A THORChain network halt is an emergency security mechanism designed to protect the protocol. A halt is not a selective freeze of specific funds or an individual swap. During the May 2026 exploit that resulted in $10.7M stolen from the liquidity pools, the attackers addresses were never blacklisted and therefore never prevented from swapping on THORChain. THORChain is permissionless and doesn't censor by design. It's a neutral public good/tool as described by @mperklin in the post below.

Michael Perklin @mperklin

4 days ago

@GoPlusSecurity @THORChain This is cherry picking at best, a false equivalency at worst. Either way it wreaks of AI slop. All tools in existence are inherently neutral by nature. It is the man who wields the tool that decides whether they will use it for good or for bad, and you cannot blame tools for the

11 21 183 67K 19

攻击者还使用了 Uniswap、1inch、Stargate、Across、Relay 和 Chainflip。 其中只有一个被指责。为什么？因为 Thorchain 是最去中心化的 DEX。 “THORChain 并不真正去中心化，节点可以暂停它。” 没错。他们可以。~100 个独立节点运营商选择不成为每个被黑的 CEX 的合规部门。对每个人都是一样的规则，即使是对 THORChain 自己今年的漏洞也是如此。

@

57 years ago

0 0 0 0 0

La explicación es clara. No puede haber un sistema de CBDCs contrrolados por Clarity, Mica, y lo que coño sea en cada región de corruptos si existen Thorchains por ahí. El punto lo expone aquí muy bien el compañero. Dónde estaría el límite? Solo robos? Gobiernos pidiendo alguna cosa para hacerte más esclavo? En qué punto Thorchain tendría que llegar a decir "YA BASTA!". Es tan sencillo: Desde el principio. Quien posee la pasta la mueve. CEXs, protejan como se debe la pasta de la peña o lárguense. Enhorabuena THORCHAIN, por ser no gobernable por terceros. FUERZA.

CyberSatoshi 𓆙 @XBToshi

5 days ago

cexs and their pet kols are going after thorchain harder than ever. zero rune in my bag. i just despise watching a permissionless dex get blamed for a centralized exchange's custody failure. they want a sandbox where every contract has an admin key and a kill switch. until they

3 8 94 5K 0

CEXs are the opposite of why cryptocurrency was invented. You freeze user accounts, perform invasive KYC (which gets leaked), liquidate your users, crime coins (high FDV, low float), and then cry foul when a bigger shark hunts you. Have users not been curious how CEXs can even cover a $350,000,000+ USD black hole? That "rescue fund" comes from CEXs victimizing their own users. What other business model in the world can dismiss 9 digits @bitget or 10 digits @Bybit_Official on their balance sheet like it's nothing? I fail to see the point of CEXs when AMMs, Solvers, and DEXs are live. The remaining leg is fiat on-ramps but there exists trust-minimized solutions today that are consistently improving. North Korea is far greater than "the crypto industry" can handle. Your coalitions get reduced to ash no matter how many big names join. In secret, North Korea TERRIFIES YOU because they are outside any laws as a Nation State. Muh trace funds all you want, freeze what little you can via centralized admin keys, but you have no means to stop it. The postmortems are just PR to assuage the noobs so that they'll resume deposits to get Rekt™ all over again. The stolen funds WILL be laundered successfully and many CEXs are complicit in that laundering themselves. Oops. The CEX structure on its face is complex: it will always be vulnerable to hacks. Android and iOS can barely keep up, let alone anything cryptocurrency with INSTANT financial reward. We need MORE permissionless* models, not less. You can't have it both ways because that would reintroduce middlemen, defeating the point. It's NOT a crime to demand privacy and permissionless* protocols. That's some weak boomer psyop. You're shifting blame onto @THORChain as an excuse, hoping users don't point fingers back at Bitget demanding to know why their security was so trash in the first place. Cryptocurrency was invented for freedom and censorship resistance (Bitcoin & Ether). The dinosaurs are desperately gripping onto vestiges of control trying to relive "the glory days".

Gracy Chen @Bitget @GracyBitget

6 days ago

Our attacker addresses are publicly listed and actively tracked. We are formally asking @THORChain to refuse service to these addresses. Decentralization is a design principle, not a shield for facilitating known stolen funds. The industry is watching.

424 109 1K 685K 102

恕我直言，中文区没人比我更了解@THORChain 这个协议 我在上面做套利超过两年的时间 协议代码设计我闭着眼睛都能回忆起来 在dc上协助改进过各种功能，消息都能搜到 上次bybit被盗还协助追踪资金，相关工作现在还开源在github

One is self-preservation; the other is censorship. One happens automatically, executed by code and logic; the other happens through human intervention. THORChain has to defend itself in order to survive and provide freedom tech. It’s a survival instinct. The other is censorship of users. Today it’s a hacker; tomorrow a government critic or whistleblower; the next day it’s just for being different. That is not what crypto is about. It is about absolute sovereignty over your assets, whoever you are. THORChain provides a non-custodial, permissionless, and decentralized liquidity service with which you can swap from one asset to another in a completely open and traceable way. There is no obfuscation taking place whatsoever, so you cannot launder money through THORChain. Through its non-custodial design, it cannot freeze funds during a swap. It’s absolute freedom tech. That said, implementing wallet blacklists is completely ineffective, and this has already been shown not to work. Hackers can switch wallets faster than addresses get added to blacklists. NEAR, Chainflip, or THORChain would have to stop all swapping indefinitely. Hackers could then wait until the services are active again and beat the blacklist. If these services had to stop forever, THORChain and the other players would effectively commit suicide. On another note, these funds are lost. Even if all this censorship worked (it doesn’t), the funds cannot be recovered unless the base chains (Ethereum, Bitcoin, etc.) are willing to roll back the chain, or unless these hackers get caught during off-ramping. That means THORChain and the other players would commit suicide for absolutely no reason. You need to understand the tech and get realistic. Instead, THORChain provides freedom tech. Everyone else loses a critical service because of the bad behavior of a few. Fuck that and fuck censorship. That’s why I support THORChain.

金灰 @GXingPing

5 days ago

如果真的像徐明星所说 @THORChain 自己被盗的时候马上停链规避风险，但其他用户被盗金额更高也不愿意有进一步行动，这种行为确实不能被称为去中心化。 但是为什么如此明显的“双标”行为这么多人还是在维护THOR？ 可见的是 Bitget 实在口碑太好辣😂

23 1 55 18K 1

El tema de Thorchain, falso dilema creado para hundirlos, es claro para mí. Crypto nació para no pedir permiso a nadie para usar tu propio dinero, el que posees, TUYO, lo robes al estado, pagues impuestos o blanquees capitales, que de esos hay muchos y mira que hablan 🤣. Los CEX nos demuestran todos los días que las CBDCs ya existen, pueden paralizar transacciones con un botón, pueden bloquear tu billetera, pueden quedarse con tus fondos si les sale de los huevos. Thorchain no es el árbitro de ningún partido de fútbol. Dónde se pondría la frontera del dinero que se puede permitir mover y del que no? Quién lo permite? Un tercero? En base a qué? Si lo guardan ellos es tuyo o suyo? Tú KYC a saco y ahí nsdie te da garantía de nada, no conoces a nadie, genial, no? Me hace gracia la divergencia mental de estos tiempos donde apartándose de los bancos en sus inicios, el sistema ha medrado crypto y trae a los bancos para regular y paralizar tu dinero a su voluntad, no a la tuya. Al ladrón de joyas nadie le paraliza sus fondos, a no ser que sea un juez y las fuerzas de seguridad en conjunto. Lo más fuerte es que hayamos normalizado que un banco pueda paralizar tus transferencias durante días, semanas. Tu dinero no es tuyo, te permiten usarlo, o no. Thorchain no vino para hacer de árbitro de nada ni nadie. Vino para asegurarse de que quien tenga un dinero lo pueda mover sin problemas, y punto. Sabes los riesgos de crypto, todos lo sabemos. Nadie llora en el casino.

Rujira @RujiraNetwork

6 days ago

Freedom begins with having a choice. For millions of people, banks and centralized exchanges are unavailable, unreliable or out of reach. We give people another path to hold assets and access financial tools without asking a central institution for permission.

4 8 79 6K 0