"Decentralized' exchange Uniswap starts blocking token access

[Oceat]

It's just a matter of time that SEC will come to visit with them once their name pop-up alot or is very popular among us users. So thinking that a certain exchange would remain a decentralized forever is a myth. This is the new era of centralized exchanges once there is a money involved.

The government wouldn't hesitate to take action because I believe it's also for the customers security. More and more exchanges out there will follow this new regulations once their name pop-up alot on the internet. I don't know which token they were blocking but I don't know if the token is worthy or not.

[1714852827]

1714852827

[s1lverbox]

It's just a matter of time that SEC will come to visit with them once their name pop-up alot or is very popular among us users. So thinking that a certain exchange would remain a decentralized forever is a myth. This is the new era of centralized exchanges once there is a money involved.

The government wouldn't hesitate to take action because I believe it's also for the customers security. More and more exchanges out there will follow this new regulations once their name pop-up alot on the internet. I don't know which token they were blocking but I don't know if the token is worthy or not.

Entity behind uniswap yes. But not protocol. Sec would have to stop ETH network to stop protocol.

And thats how defi is working. You can block front end or domain but protocol will be working without any problems.

[Bitstar_coin]

I told you guys so many times there is no such thing as decentralized exchange atm. I think this case is like etherdelta, where the developer/CEO was fined and then forced to change things. Decentralized exchanges, coins, whatever, is possible only if the developers have no power over the system. It can be via mining/signaling mechanism where if the devs change the code, the community can vote over it. And this is with the assumption that government cannot take over the network.

Clearly that's what it seems, a decentralized exchange with owners who have the power to block and unblock any coin or token can not be regarded as decentralize or fully decentralized, uniswap have teams who are in control just like any other dex exchange and also centralize exchange, they can make decisions that will affect the project positively or negatively even though it is a dex, and the way i see it, i don't think we can have a fully decentralized exchange where the devs have zero power over the operations, only the community can have the power, this way it will be considered as dex.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Nobody acting like a dick. If you research properly you would mention that fact in you OP.
Hayden only blocked this tokens on front end to not beeing chased up. But again, just because you hide that on UI does not mean completely not accessible.
So therefore your post have wholes.

Average users might have difficulty understand whats true and what not.

Front end, back end... They are all part of Uniswap. It's why the UI is there in the first place. it's of huge importance to uniswap.

Your claim is similar to that of centralized exchanges that come up and say "we are a KYC free exchange" but under their terms they have some sort of AML policy 

You know what I am talking about here. You just don't want to agree, which is OK, but the fact is there's nothing decentralized about the recent developments in Uniswap. What use is a protocol that will keep working in the backend if the front end is modified to censor certain tokens in the middle of the night by a couple of devs at their will.

[s1lverbox]

Nobody acting like a dick. If you research properly you would mention that fact in you OP.
Hayden only blocked this tokens on front end to not beeing chased up. But again, just because you hide that on UI does not mean completely not accessible.
So therefore your post have wholes.

Average users might have difficulty understand whats true and what not.

Front end, back end... They are all part of Uniswap. It's why the UI is there in the first place. it's of huge importance to uniswap.

Your claim is similar to that of centralized exchanges that come up and say "we are a KYC free exchange" but under their terms they have some sort of AML policy 

You know what I am talking about here. You just don't want to agree, which is OK, but the fact is there's nothing decentralized about the recent developments in Uniswap. What use is a protocol that will keep working in the backend if the front end is modified to censor certain tokens in the middle of the night by a couple of devs at their will.

Kyc and cex or cex and no kyc? get real.
But uniswap front end and rest of protocol? easy to net get distracted and just simply use smart contracts.But you need to DYOR properly. Average user need front end to know whats what. But uni was build to be decentralized and this is happening right now.

Whole idea is to make censorship resistant protocol not front end. And this so far has been acheived.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Kyc and cex or cex and no kyc? get real.
But uniswap front end and rest of protocol? easy to net get distracted and just simply use smart contracts.But you need to DYOR properly. Average user need front end to know whats what. But uni was build to be decentralized and this is happening right now.

Here we go again. We are just about to see the first decentralized exchange to officially ask for KYC once SEC starts to threaten even more. You seem to be living in denial, but deep down inside you, you know how the whole narrative ends.

Since when did the devs of Uniswap start getting concerned about the user data?
Uniswap Defends Sharing Wallet Addresses with Research Firm as ‘Common Practice’


Decentralized exchange LMFAOOOO

Whole idea is to make censorship resistant protocol not front end. And this so far has been acheived.

A useless "censorship resistant protocol" that won't serve any more purpose once the front end gets censored