Cripto was supposed to be the way out – why are we still trapped?

The Collapse MT. Gok in 2014 years-Where 850,000 Bitcoin (Btc) Gone – it was supposed to be a crypto “never more” moment. The industry was built on the promise of financial sovereignty, and yet decade later, we still stuck in square.

Bibit Recent Hack It resulted in a loss of hundreds of millions – probably up to $ 1.5 billion in user funds, which makes it once today from the greatest breaches of crypto. Although the exchange continued work, the attack exhibits a deeper issue: CRIPTO’s weakest list is centralized exchange. Instead of eliminating individual failures of failure, the industry continues to renew, creating systems that are opaque, centralized and fragile increasing majority.

Cripto was intended for free users from traditional financial institutions. Instead, most users are still trapped, relying on centralized exchanges that control their means. These platforms function like black boxes, vulnerable to insider manipulation, misdemeanor data and banks such as collapse in collapse, but without legal protection or regulatory surveillance. And the system is not broken. It works exactly as designed – just not in favor of the user.

But if Cripto should be a way out of traditional finances, why do we still rely on intermediaries to keep our property? If decentralization was a goal, why did the trading activity concentrate in a few exchanges that work just as banks crypt should replace even less protective measures?

Cripto renewed financial prisons to be destroyed

The CECS model forces users to deposit funds into a centralized pool under the control of exchange. These funds are being helped, stored in parallel with sensitive customer data, and manage one entity.

This makes them perfect for hackers. It’s not a question if the exchange will endanger – it’s a question when and how many users will lose next time.

For all crypt’s conversations about decentralization, the most traded happens On centralized platforms that look and behave just like banks – except without deposit insurance, protection against fraud or supervision. If this model was unacceptable in traditional finances, why is it so common in cripto?

The explanation of centralized exchange has always been that they give liquidity – that without them, the crystasm will be inefficient and fragmented.

But at what price? Liquidity is not real if disappears at a time when the exchange fails; Markets are not open if a handful of insider prices control prices. Ownership is meaningless if users cannot access their property when they need them the most.

After all, if your funds can be frozen, is it financial freedom? If your exchanges can start your shops, is it an open market? If your property disappears overnight in hacks, was it ever really owned?

Bibit’s Hack is another reminder that the biggest players crypt benefit from centralization, not decentralization. The more much exchange of energy, the more can dictate fees, access control and profit from their own liquidity pools.

It’s time to correct the course

The following phase of the CRIPTA requires the right ownership without obstacles or intermediaries. If Cripto is to survive, it cannot be only decentralized. It is necessary to change how funds, markets and users of the interaction are basically changed.

This means that liquidity moves in chains, not locked inside the wallet’s check. This means self-assurance that does not sacrifice usability, so users do not have to choose between control and convenience. And that means markets on which users – not detecting insaida control prices.

Currently, the industry is stuck in the loop. Every few years, another centralized platform collapses, deleting billions in the user funds. Every time, the cycle is repeated because there is no sustainable way out of the system. If the CRYPTO will ever be a real alternative to traditional finance, it cannot be rely on the same fragile, centralized infrastructure.

The only way out is to leave the CEX’s behind

Bibit Hack should be a wake-up call. But will it?

Centralized exchanges profit from guiding captives. They manage liquidity, lay arbitrary fees and act as market platform manufacturers. As long as it stays correct, we will continue to see the same omissions and again.

The answer is not another exchange, another centralized guarantee or other rebranded deficient platform that works just like institutions that claim to replace. The answer is the construction infrastructure in which users do not have to trust intermediaries at all.

Cripto has a choice: Build a real output or stay trapped in the same wall gardens until the next inevitable collapse. It’s time to start the building.

Ramon Recuero

Ramon Recuero Whether the co-founder and CEO of Kinto, modular exchange and non-detention insured intrigue for maximum security and a seamless user experience. He was previously founded by Babylon.finance, the default protocol that surpassed $ 50 million in AUM. Earlier in his career, he worked in both combinators, construction products and support for the founders. Before that, it developed applications and games for Moz, Google and Zinga. In the last endeavor, he founded Netgamik, the user generated a Trivia platform, which has grown over 100K Mauu. Once it is turned on 30, he distilled his insights into a book called the flu. It also trains and mentoring the founders of launch.