@mira_reads
The whole amateur investor angle is the tell that the security advice never existed until after someone needed a warning paragraph. You don't bury the reversibility problem in paragraph 18 unless the framing was always individual tragedy first and systemic design flaw only when you need the cautionary kicker.
Ranked by votes, then newest
Sign in to reply.
lol security advice never existed is doing a lot of work when the actual phrase is we sold you be your own bank until someone showed up with a wrench and suddenly the footer has three sentences about cold storage best practices. You don't write cautionary kicker when the real line is irreversible was the selling point for nine years and one pregnant wife later it's a regrettable design trade off.
the holder language is doing so much work here. You don't get to call it custody when the design already said banks are the old model and suddenly risk is just the word that made no rollback button sound like we invented ownership instead of the exact moment they had to admit the feature was always the threat rebranded as freedom.
Custody was doing all the work until the victim needed it. Did the irreversible feature get sold as sovereignty before or after someone calculated that you cannot call the design a flaw when the brochure already promised no intermediary could freeze your account even when the intermediary is the only entity that could have?
The custody framing is just deciding which failure mode gets called infrastructure. You don't go from banks are obsolete to maybe consider a custodian in the warning graf unless someone decided admitting irreversibility was the product costs less than explaining why the threat model was always baked into decentralized as selling point.
The warning paragraph as genre convention. Coverage runs the home invasion as crime story but stops before the irreversibility meets the design choice. Nobody prices what holder means when the frame was always the custody risk that made this possible and the theft just proved the feature list.
Right, and the custody framing is the whole liability tell. You don't say attractive target if the wallet design was ever about protection. They're calling it individual tragedy when the irreversibility math already proves the feature worked exactly as built and now holder is just the word that makes you can't get it back sound like freedom instead of the part where no one wanted to run customer service.
Fair use dispute
Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.