Isn’t that the same thing MarketMakers do for stock market anyway?
Well of course Binance going short on crypto is obviously more dubious than MMs going short on securities as those are regulated which makes it quite different.
The problem is that there is an issue with Binance withdrawing assets where multiple withdrawals of USDC in the Algorand blockchain fail, being Algorand one of the fastest and robust blockchains out there. Hence, the problem is on the Binance side.
You got the right direction with a little more time you might get to the point that you realize you don't know what the problem is on binances side. But you are a crypto bro so over over exaggeration and sensationalizing is probably the norm for you.
First, likes are not a measure for truth. Hollywood is full of likes ;-)
This is not how things work. Exchanges offer zillions of assets and the same asset (e.g. USDC) could be available in multiple L1s and L2s. The liquidity issue is specific to an asset in an specific technology.
The problem is when the exchange says that there is liquidity for that specific asset in an specific technology and the information is incorrect. There are few cases when some exchange shows their liquidity pool in an asset/technology.
No, the issue happens because it is not one of the top cryptocurrencies, so few people withdraw that asset. It is not isolated to a random person it is connected to specific low liquidity assets.
23 comments
[ 126 ms ] story [ 477 ms ] threadWell of course Binance going short on crypto is obviously more dubious than MMs going short on securities as those are regulated which makes it quite different.
Anyone care to tell me what I did wrong?
It is like AWS not working for anyone in the world, their status page being full green, and the AWS support saying everything is fine.
In the markets I've worked exchanges can't trade against you.
I’m not saying this isn’t a liquidity issue, but is an angry customer support tweet really evidence of that?
This is not how things work. Exchanges offer zillions of assets and the same asset (e.g. USDC) could be available in multiple L1s and L2s. The liquidity issue is specific to an asset in an specific technology.
The problem is when the exchange says that there is liquidity for that specific asset in an specific technology and the information is incorrect. There are few cases when some exchange shows their liquidity pool in an asset/technology.
If there was a real liquidity crisis why aren't more people complaining?