There are plenty of stocks you could have invested in recently and lost 60% if not more. Some of them make Crypto look stable, even large caps. Take Chrysler over the last few years - high of 19p, low of 6.2p. Get that wrong and it was -68%. Roughly the same as completely mistiming bitcoin over the same period. Both investments could also have made you a lot of money with slighly different timing. Losing money on an investment just means you made a poor investment decision, doesn't mean the investment itself is garbage. Having said that if he was trying to make a fast buck investing in some sort of meme coin, you can't complain if you go to the roulette table and lose money.

It's a massive short term problem for crypto - I agree. It's just that the root cause is with the traditional banking system. Lots of companies have money stuck there. That's what I meant by not a crypto issue.

So many people misunderstanding what is happening here. This isn't a crypto problem, it's a banking one. The fact that a crypto company had massive amounts of cash is this bank is irrelevant. The bank took customer deposits and invested them badly. When depositors got spooked and tried to withdraw their money it triggered and bank run, they ran out of cash and went under. The fact that banks are allowed to run in this under capitalised way is one of the reasons crypto exists in the first place!

Yep - a bank of England backed Stable coin would be massive. Mint one as a backed ERC-20 and let the free market work out how to make efficient payments with it.

If you cut through all the speculation and misleading formatting, and if you understand that Tether is backed 1:1 with USD, you get: Mr. Griffin looked at the flow of digital tokens going in and out of Bitfinex and identified several distinct patterns that suggest that someone or some people at the exchange used USD, to buy up those other cryptocurrencies. This worked to push up prices. The paper's two authors "sifted through an incredible 200 gigabytes of trading data, equal to the troves that the Smithsonian Institution collects in two years," according to a new article in Fortune, "and followed sales and purchases from 2.5 million separate wallets." No definitive proof of chicanery has so far emerged.