Fiat currency exchanges don't have to run code that in this case implements theft. Crypto exchanges do.
If you run code that implements theft you may become implicated in that theft.
It is an acceptance of the code to run it.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
The code that holds hostage the value that the crypto exchanges maintain as a means to conduct business. The code that the crypto exchanges run in order to continue business operations for all of their customers (not just the handful of illegally affected customers).
Again, I agree that the whole JS shenanigans are ridiculous and should be illegal (regardless of existing law by whatever jurisdiction), but you can't hold exchanges accountable for actions that they are "accepting" on behalf of the 10k+ users who are not negatively affected by this fraud. There are courts to settle the matters of "the few", while a hold-ups like this means that the majority are now being punished by the few.
It's no surprise that JS stole from some of the biggest accounts (full stop). The guy thought he was getting more value from Steem than he'll ever get, even after conducting this abhorrent confiscation of user funds.
Ned screwed everyone, and now JS continues the trend with the whales / witnesses who fought TRON and had any sort of stake to compete with him.
Everyone flipped when exchanges backed JS over the witnesses (that should have been a call to arms / illegal act / made witnesses de-list from the untrustworthy exchanges), now the same people want the exchanges to back the "old witnesses" over the acting witnesses who pushed the new code? ... so, trust the witnesses - but not the ones that are acting on behalf of the blockchain? It's a tough legal argument for me to chew..
Again, illegal, immoral, not something that should ever be done, and anti-blockchain ethos. But I am not seeing how this is the responsibility of the exchanges.