"How do you write Corporations-Are-People(TM) so well?"
"I think of a real human and I take away empathy and accountability."
Coinbase is TradFi. This is just typical TradFi / FinTech / Big Tech BS. /If there are no real consequences for companies losing your data, then they will./ If there is no regulation, no penalty more expensive/prohibitive after calculating in risk of a publicly-known breach than the cost of protecting and securing your data then it will not happen. Zero knowledge proofs are awesome, but really those employees did not need that access. It would have cost slightly more to put in proper safeguards, to make it so they only got access as they truly needed, to have proper oversight. But who knows how many vectors they needed to cover? And their stock isn't hurting too much by this, is it? (Where could consumers otherwise go that would protect them?) And /no one else/ needs to do it (regulations) so why eat the cost that gives your competitor (who doesn't eat it) an edge? Sure, you could, if you are Coinbase size, try a Meta/Facebook gambit to lobby for more regulations to give you a moat that prevents others from being able to catch up. But if you are Coinbase size, you can also just try the Amazon/Google thing and get into tons of verticals that also gives you moat. Of course those verticals are completely antithetical to the Sherman Antitrust Act. If you have more regulations, then that could be a chink in your armor to get your monopoly busted (as is now being attempted with Google). In many ways, SBF tried the Meta gambit hoping to regulate against his competitors. Well, that sure worked out well for him.
TradFi /needs/ regulation. KYC and AML without consumer protections is typical corporations not being accountable and trying to pass the buck (well, the farming instrument that represents doing work, corporations will otherwise be keeping all the bucks for themselves).
To paraphrase As Good As It Gets:
"How do you write Corporations-Are-People(TM) so well?"
"I think of a real human and I take away empathy and accountability."
Coinbase is TradFi. This is just typical TradFi / FinTech / Big Tech BS. /If there are no real consequences for companies losing your data, then they will./ If there is no regulation, no penalty more expensive/prohibitive after calculating in risk of a publicly-known breach than the cost of protecting and securing your data then it will not happen. Zero knowledge proofs are awesome, but really those employees did not need that access. It would have cost slightly more to put in proper safeguards, to make it so they only got access as they truly needed, to have proper oversight. But who knows how many vectors they needed to cover? And their stock isn't hurting too much by this, is it? (Where could consumers otherwise go that would protect them?) And /no one else/ needs to do it (regulations) so why eat the cost that gives your competitor (who doesn't eat it) an edge? Sure, you could, if you are Coinbase size, try a Meta/Facebook gambit to lobby for more regulations to give you a moat that prevents others from being able to catch up. But if you are Coinbase size, you can also just try the Amazon/Google thing and get into tons of verticals that also gives you moat. Of course those verticals are completely antithetical to the Sherman Antitrust Act. If you have more regulations, then that could be a chink in your armor to get your monopoly busted (as is now being attempted with Google). In many ways, SBF tried the Meta gambit hoping to regulate against his competitors. Well, that sure worked out well for him.
TradFi /needs/ regulation. KYC and AML without consumer protections is typical corporations not being accountable and trying to pass the buck (well, the farming instrument that represents doing work, corporations will otherwise be keeping all the bucks for themselves).