0 sats \ 2 replies \ @DarthCoin 9 Sep 2023 \ parent \ on: Fun Fact Friday - Best Fun Fact Gets 10,000 Sats meta
What did Swan in this case?
They just custody THEIR funds with Fortress, that is a 3rd party company (not theirs) and was bought by another company. Swan have nothing in that deal.
I don't see anything wrong doing by swan in this deal.
And I do not see swan users affected in any way. Users just buy BTC from Swan and withdraw, Nothing burger. No custody, no scam no nothing.
On the other side yes, Ripple can fuck Swan now if they want. Maybe that was also their plan with this acquisition. Ripple are fucking evil and they are capable of many bad things.
Disclaimer: I do not use Swan and I do not endorse them in any way. I am just an objective observer.
What did Swan in this case? They just custody THEIR funds with Fortress, that is a 3rd party company (not theirs) and was bought by another company. Swan have nothing in that deal or necessary.
the ownership of that custodian is besides the point. what really matters imo is swan is using a 3rd party custodian at all, and is a custodial platform. Neither of these are ideal.
I don't see anything wrong doing by swan in this deal. again, you're not wrong. there's simply supreme irony in one of the loudest anti-shitcoin voices on twitter using a custodian that is now owned by one of the loudest shitcoins. this irony is self evident, hence the somewhat comedic reaction in this space.
Users just buy BTC from Swan and withdraw, Nothing burger
last I checked, there's limits of up to 2 weeks on withdrawals with swan?
And I do not see swan users affected in any way.
they could be in the long run via a rug pull. trusted 3rd parties are securities holes.
reply
oh 2 weeks to withdraw? WTF! This is bad.
It should not be such thing.
reply