/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>51583960CZ:
here's no way to collectively organise all the exchanges in the world to do it in this at the same time. So that's the that's the thing. Where on the blockchain you can implement it is at the protocol level. Anybody who wants to use that protocol will have to pay that. To be honest, the 1.2% burn will make use cases on the blockchain kind of meaningless. Sorry for my direct directness, because look, if if if Ethereum charges 1.2% fee, nobody's going to use it if Bitcoin charges 1.2%.
Not that many people gonna use it, so it's gonna it's actually gonna make that blockchain less useful.
Everybody wants no, but that blockchain was not.
Was kind of abandoned by the project team anyway, so.
Yeah, so for us, we need we we already supporting Luna C and we want to continue to support it, but we don't want to be in a situation where we won't be able to support it, and we don't want to be in a situation where, you know, everybody else just, you know.
That if we charge 1.2%, no one, and no other other exchanges don't do it at the same time, no one's going to trade on Binance. So we're not going, we're not going to help very much. So that's my view. I'll try to clarify that in some writing, but if you think about, if you think through that, that's basically the implication. So and also this voting mechanism, if you have a, if you have a bunch of people who are not involved vote, vote on something and they don't have the.
They don't have the ability to enforce that globally and the voting is somewhat meaningless, right? So you can vote on the blockchain, the blockchain does it okay, everybody uses the blockchain does it. But today I can vote for all centralised exchanges, charge zero fees, period. Everybody will vote yes. But can we implement it? Probably not. So the voting. I think that Community voting shows what the community wants, which is important, but there are interesting implications on the execution, o
But I think which are not that well thought through.