"Not your keys, Not your coins" is not enough

[Wind_FURY]

Well, thinking that way, Bitcoin is everything other than decentralized p2p payment method that doesn't depend on 3rd parties. Actually, you depend on 3rd parties, including miners and node runners.

It all starts with one full node, just like how Satoshi started to bootstrap the network. Each node is a peer, and in itself both a server and a client. The network needs multiple peers to be an actual network, but saying a single full node depends on other full nodes in your context, is wrong. Each node independently validates.

If nodes don't broadcast and if miners don't include your transaction in the next block, you won't be able to finalize transaction. You also depend on Core developers, internet service providers, on electricity and so on.

That's true, but the genius of Satoshi's creation is in its incentive structure. If a miner won't include your transaction in the next block, another miner will and take the fees. It would have been better for that miner to maximize its own profit than giving opportunities to the other miners.

My whole point in my post was to briefly explain to NotATether that using DEX for exchanging crypto is not actually a centralized way and if we think that technically it's a centralized way, then we can consider absolutely everything about bitcoin to be centralized. That was just my point, that's all.

👍

Btw guys, have you thought about what would be Bitcoin's price if centralized exchanges didn't exist? Or how massively adopt it would be? I am not a CEX fan but it has its pros and cons that we can't deny.

Bitcoin's price discovery would be more inefficient caused by lower liquidity, which would therefore make the market more volatile.

Adoption would also be slower because it would be harder for everyone to buy their first Bitcoins. It's another reason why ransomware hackers and the dark markets still use Bitcoin instead of the more privacy-enhanced cryptocurrencies because Bitcoin is easier to find and purchase.

[1714315920]

1714315920

[mendace]

I think they know all about custodial and non-custodial wallets or the saying "not your keys, not your money.", but the problem is they ignore it because their priority goal is how to make the most profit. It can be said that, for a day trader, profit is the top concern. Furthermore, since decentralized exchanges have not yet been able to provide them with a favorable trading environment, they will look to centralized exchanges as that is the only option.
Even if Binance collapses and the DEX still cannot provide a good trading environment like CEX, traders will still use other CEXs despite the risks.

Probably someone ignores the message even if they are aware of what a wallet with private keys is but I am convinced that some traders don't even waste time in finding out, they think that the exchange is legitimate and that it cannot close without warning, they are interested in good tools to operate well.  I hope that after FTX someone has started to understand.

[TheGreatPython]

CEX or DEX doesn't matter - you can still lose your funds.

My point is :

-Your CEX is hacked : risk for your funds + risk for your personal data
-Your non-KYC service is hacked : risk for your funds

A CEX is more risky from my point of view

And about Bisq, apart if the user downloads a fake software of Bisq, I don't really see what could go wrong ? its way of functioning is very protective of user funds

You are right that when a centralized exchange faces exploits or hacks, it also has the risk of losing users' personal data to hackers or exploiters as well along with the funds, which is not the case with decentralized exchanges since they don't have any personal data of their users, but to be honest, people still prefer using centralized exchanges because they provide more tools and products and better opportunities such as competitions and stuff.

One more thing that mainly why people prefer using centralized exchanges is because they have the most liquidity for almost every single coin or token. Take Binance as an example, any token or coin listed in Binance will have the most liquidity available on Binance.

[tranthidung]

My point is :

-Your CEX is hacked : risk for your funds + risk for your personal data
-Your non-KYC service is hacked : risk for your funds

A CEX is more risky from my point of view

And about Bisq, apart if the user downloads a fake software of Bisq, I don't really see what could go wrong ? its way of functioning is very protective of user funds

When a centralized exchange is hacked, they compensate their users instantly or gradually.

When a decentralized exchange is hacked, who will compensate you as a user? Nobody because it is decentralized and I am talking about really decentralized exchanges, not what are called as DEX with public founder teams.

Like if Bisq is hacked because that software is exploited, who will compensate you?

[darkv0rt3x]

I think they know all about custodial and non-custodial wallets or the saying "not your keys, not your money.", but the problem is they ignore it because their priority goal is how to make the most profit. It can be said that, for a day trader, profit is the top concern. Furthermore, since decentralized exchanges have not yet been able to provide them with a favorable trading environment, they will look to centralized exchanges as that is the only option.
Even if Binance collapses and the DEX still cannot provide a good trading environment like CEX, traders will still use other CEXs despite the risks.

Probably someone ignores the message even if they are aware of what a wallet with private keys is but I am convinced that some traders don't even waste time in finding out, they think that the exchange is legitimate and that it cannot close without warning, they are interested in good tools to operate well.  I hope that after FTX someone has started to understand.

There was a chunk of people that probably understood after MTGox, but those people are pobably the same (or at least I hope not to be the same) as the ones in FTX. I think one way or the other, the market and the ecosystem itself will take care of the "bad players" in the network. And by bad players I don't even mean the ones with bad intentions. I mean the ones that know about things and still don't care and keep their investments in exchanges. Or if they don't know is because they didn't DTOR (do their...). Those are probably not needed in the network! The network somehow needs these "filters", I guess!

[BlackHatCoiner]

And about Bisq, apart if the user downloads a fake software of Bisq, I don't really see what could go wrong ?

Failure in Arbitration. Use reputable order makers to avoid that as much as possible.

When a centralized exchange is hacked, they compensate their users instantly or gradually.

Except this is not always the case. Regulations haven't evolved yet to force all exchanges across the nations have user protection mechanisms. In Mt. Gox some have still not been compensated, same as with Bitfinex's and Coincheck's hack. And those who were compensated, were partially.

Like if Bisq is hacked because that software is exploited, who will compensate you?

I honestly feel more safe in a reputable, open-source environment, as with other Bitcoin software like Bitcoin Core and Electrum, than leaving my funds in some stranger with questionable security and money insurance.

[tranthidung]

Except this is not always the case. Regulations haven't evolved yet to force all exchanges across the nations have user protection mechanisms. In Mt. Gox some have still not been compensated, same as with Bitfinex's and Coincheck's hack. And those who were compensated, were partially.

I know they don't always compensate users and it depends. Like if a hack is not big enough to kill that exchange and if they see they will have long term gain if they make compensation to their users. It is possible if they don't have their exchange tokens and bet it as collateral like FTX.

They can die or file bankruptcy and I only say there are some factors to consider when using CEX or DEX.

I honestly feel more safe in a reputable, open-source environment, as with other Bitcoin software like Bitcoin Core and Electrum, than leaving my funds in some stranger with questionable security and money insurance.

Again it depends too. If a person is amateur and can not learn to use non custodial wallet in a few hours because of old age, lack of English reading skills ... using centralized exchange is not too bad. Then try to learn and improve knowledge and practice to use non custodial wallet.

It is acceptable if you are a newbie and use centralized exchange account to store bitcoin. Though, it is not bad to start like that, if you are in this market like 6 months, 1 or 4 years and still don't use non custodial wallets, it is unacceptable.

I only want to say, it is not correct to say CEX is the best or DEX is a best, it depends on specific user and at specific time.

[BlackHatCoiner]

They can die or file bankruptcy and I only say there are some factors to consider when using CEX or DEX.

They can have poor security. Or bet with users' funds irresponsibly. Or lock you out from your money arbitrarily. Or simply become unnecessarily big target for hackers. I think that when it comes to your funds' safety, there is little to say about that. To me, it's DEX by far.

If a person is amateur and can not learn to use non custodial wallet in a few hours because of old age, lack of English reading skills ... using centralized exchange is not too bad.

This implies that the person would agree to an endless list of terms that are consistently proven to be unfavorable to them. Also, if you admit to lacking technical expertise, I do not consider that a wise decision either. If the person is incapable of reading accurately and comprehending fundamental aspects of the concept of cryptocurrency, it's not worth pursuing. You should never invest money in something you don't understand.

[Wind_FURY]

My point is :

-Your CEX is hacked : risk for your funds + risk for your personal data
-Your non-KYC service is hacked : risk for your funds

A CEX is more risky from my point of view

And about Bisq, apart if the user downloads a fake software of Bisq, I don't really see what could go wrong ? its way of functioning is very protective of user funds

When a centralized exchange is hacked, they compensate their users instantly or gradually.

When a decentralized exchange is hacked, who will compensate you as a user? Nobody because it is decentralized and I am talking about really decentralized exchanges, not what are called as DEX with public founder teams.

Like if Bisq is hacked because that software is exploited, who will compensate you?

There are pros and cons for both centralized and decentralized exchanges, and it's for the user to decide if he or she is willing to accept the trade-offs of each. But if some users don't want to accept the cons of using a decentralized exchange, it shouldn't suggest that development for them should be discouraged. There should be at least one that exists, like there should be at least one censorship-resistant cryptocurrency existing.

It doesn't need to be a better alternative than its centralized counterparts, just a dependably working one and robust.

[Synchronice]

Bitcoin's price discovery would be more inefficient caused by lower liquidity, which would therefore make the market more volatile.

Adoption would also be slower because it would be harder for everyone to buy their first Bitcoins. It's another reason why ransomware hackers and the dark markets still use Bitcoin instead of the more privacy-enhanced cryptocurrencies because Bitcoin is easier to find and purchase.

So, we find out that centralized exchanges are necessary too. This world is like, every type of thing is necessary. You need people who do manual labor to have white-collar jobs too. So, you need people who use CEX to take an advantage of high bitcoin price and massive adoption while you still continue to use all the other advantages of bitcoin, including being your own bank and protecting your privacy.

The only one thing that makes me sad is that Bitcoin was really good back then when it was a new thing. It was a new, an innovation with very fresh community, wish I haven't missed those days.

[DooMAD]

So, we find out that centralized exchanges are necessary too.

Eeehhh.... kinda.  For now, and only if you're a frequent trader (my guess is that at least half of CEX users don't actually need to use CEXs). 

Technology improves over time.  DEX will get better and will have fewer trade-offs as things develop.  I hope to see a time where centralised exchanges are consigned to the history books, where they belong.  They're antiquated, vulnerable and on borrowed time.

[Wind_FURY]

So, we find out that centralized exchanges are necessary too.

Eeehhh.... kinda.  For now, and only if you're a frequent trader (my guess is that at least half of CEX users don't actually need to use CEXs). 

Technology improves over time.  DEX will get better and will have fewer trade-offs as things develop.  I hope to see a time where centralised exchanges are consigned to the history books, where they belong.  They're antiquated, vulnerable and on borrowed time.

It's not going to be simple in my opinion, and I believe many users will be put off by the trade-offs they need to accept in a "decentralized-only" world because they have to take absolute responsibility if they indeed choose to participate. We're seeing it in the Ethereum community's "DeFi movement". Their DEXs are being hacked, being scammed, with the bad actors running off with the "bounty", and with the users given no hope for compensation.

Technology improves, but does the security assurances improve side by side with it? That's a question open for debate.

[Blitzboy]

It is sad to see that people are still not 100% sure what they are doing and that means we are not going to see security in the crypto world all that often and not anytime soon. There are still a lot of people who keep on forgetting that crypto is a dangerous place and since the law is not on our side just yet, people who hack or steal or scam you "usually" do not get caught. Of course anyone who does it for a grand scale would be caught or at least looked for, there are people who stole millions, and those people will be searched.

However, someone who steals a few grand from someone in the crypto world will not be cared about at all, so you can't really trust anyone in this world and you need to be more careful than you probably should be.

The world of bitcoin is dangerous, but it also offers unprecedented security and transparency. Blockchain's immutability helps build confidence in trustless environments. Bitcoin proves it. Its not a scam-ridden sewer but a dynamic ecology thats altering money and trust.

Hackers and scammers are human nature, not crypto. They're anomalies. I see the crypto community as full of innovators and visionaries fighting to make the digital future safer and more secure. Small-scale thefts go unpunished in traditional banking systems too. Credit card fraud, identity theft, and phishing schemes are commonly ignored. Instead of condemning crypto, promote reform and legalization.