Looking for guarantors against exchange hacks/"hacks"/thefts/seizures

[TheButterZone]

I was one of the victims of the https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitfloor exchange hack/"hack" in 2012. This was the only non-trivial loss of BTC I've ever had: BTC1.84915808, currently

Continuously since then, those with schadenfreude, shills, and probably "hackers" have recommended using exchanges rather than dealing P2P/OTC*.

Considering every exchange is compromised (past/present/future), that is tantamount to recommending economic suicide. Hint: Not every suicide attempt is "successful".

So, to anyone who would continue to recommend exchange use, put your money where your mouth is:

With this would-be victim you're recommending use an exchange, create a 2-of-2 multisig wallet.
Have this would-be victim prove the amount they will put at risk on the exchange & verify they have activated 2FA that is pentest-proof.
Deposit the same amount that was proven, as surety, to the 2-of-2 multisig with this would-be victim.
Guaranty you (or your legal representative) will release the multisig surety when this victim goes from would-be to actual, when the latest exchange hack/"hack"/theft/seizure occurs.
And until the latest exchange hack/"hack"/theft/seizure occurs, you will earn referral fees from the would-be victim's trading.

*In the face of all my number & length of ratings, cryptographically provable identity spread everywhere (enough for me to be murdered in short order if I were to "exit scam" a single person).

local rules:
don't quote OP or OP's replies
don't recommend exchanges without putting your money where your mouth is
legendster or any alts thereof is not to reply past the time of this reply

[MadZ]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what does the guarantor get out of this arrangement? Does the would-be victim pay a fee for this service, similar to an insurance premium?

[legendster]

..Does the would-be victim pay a fee for this service, similar to an insurance premium?

Would the 'would-be' victim be paying a fee for this service, similar to an insurance premium - in addition to being the direct referral of the "risk taker"?

lol

This is basically asking for every referrer to become a self-funded insurance company - and if that's the case then there should be an expiry to this "insured sum" where the risk taker gets at least 10% of the "risked" amount back as some form of "interest" in addition to getting the principal invested amount back. I mean if one was to take this seriously enough, this could be done.

A P2P insurance.

[TheButterZone]

The guarantor/referrer earns referral fees from the would-be victim's trading.

If they aren't a true believer (who puts their money where their mouth is) in the exchange, they shouldn't recommend people commit economic suicide by using that exchange, and still be able to call themselves moral/ethical/decent human beings.

[ThisManIsTesting]

Can a decentralized exchange solve this ?

[TheButterZone]

Can a decentralized exchange solve this ?

In theory. In practice, I don't know of any "decentralized" exchanges that don't charge brutal fees separate & distinct from the Bitcoin TX mining fee.

[legendster]

The guarantor/referrer earns referral fees from the would-be victim's trading.

If they aren't a true believer (who puts their money where their mouth is) in the exchange, they shouldn't recommend people commit economic suicide by using that exchange, and still be able to call themselves moral/ethical/decent human beings.

So let me get this straight.
You want all the fun of trading, WITHOUT ever taking a risk? How is that moral or ethical?
What you're suggesting is a type of insurance. It can be done. But what you're actually inferring - where someone else is covering for your ass. Then that, is not okay in my book.

[TheButterZone]

So let me get this straight.
You want all the fun of trading, WITHOUT ever taking a risk? How is that moral or ethical?
What you're suggesting is a type of insurance. It can be done. But what you're actually inferring - where someone else is covering for your ass. Then that, is not okay in my book.

The only risk should be in making bad trades, not giving/taking immoral/unethical advice to commit economic suicide by using exchanges that inevitably suffer a hack/"hack"/theft/seizure.

Come to think of it, people have committed mortal suicide after following advice to commit economic suicide.

So, is it OK in your book, then, to tell people to play Russian Roulette with a full cylinder?

[legendster]

So let me get this straight.
You want all the fun of trading, WITHOUT ever taking a risk? How is that moral or ethical?
What you're suggesting is a type of insurance. It can be done. But what you're actually inferring - where someone else is covering for your ass. Then that, is not okay in my book.

The only risk should be in making bad trades, not giving/taking immoral/unethical advice to commit economic suicide by using exchanges that inevitably suffer a hack/"hack"/theft/seizure.

Come to think of it, people have committed mortal suicide after following advice to commit economic suicide.

So, is it OK in your book, then, to tell people to play Russian Roulette with a full cylinder?

I can ask someone to jump off the cliff, whether or not they do it, is their choice. You don't want to join a trading exchange, that's your paranoia. Don't expect someone else to cover your ass for that.

[TheButterZone]

I can ask someone to jump off the cliff, whether or not they do it, is their choice. You don't want to join a trading exchange, that's your paranoia. Don't expect someone else to cover your ass for that.

It's not a question of can, it's a question of should. Should you be unethical/immoral? Thank you for your admission of guilt.

/yawn @ the inevitable "paranoia" canard, after what, hundreds of thousands of BTC have been lost to compromised exchanges?