▲ | ENGNR 5 days ago | |
There are all sorts of protections around who can be a custodian of someone’s money (for good reason) However there are use cases like running a marketplace, where the platform would like to be able to direct the flow, maybe hold things temporarily in case there are multiple transactions or to split a transaction up between different clients, before paying it out daily or weekly as a lump sum. Often it’s just to avoid fees, because the marketplace operator charges their fees in a different way (like a flat monthly invoice) and they want to assist with money logic as a service, but not be the custodian of the money. Even just knowing that money has moved at all can be useful, without any ability to touch it, and it’s difficult to get permissions from conservative financial institutions, whereas permissionless ledgers make it easy. Crypto can help add that nuance. It’s still your money, but you can give a third party the ability to do some things to assist you, without giving the ability to transfer it all to themself and run away with it. | ||
▲ | grey-area 5 days ago | parent [-] | |
So, we're just going to pretend those regulations don't exist for cryptocurrencies too? |