It’s not always easy to distinguish between existentialism and a bad mood.
It’s used for actual payments because it’s shamelessly crime friendly even by crypto standards, not because it has better block size handling.
This is why it’s being increasingly blacklisted by exchanges facing regulatory pressure, which I would assume is why it’s supposedly not speculated on that much.
The best part is that because of blockchain immutability fixing a buggy contract is simply not a thing, you need to deploy a new one, as well as replace any other contracts that refer to the original since they are now compromised as well, all the while paying for gas fees out the ass.
And also as far as I can tell you can’t actually stop your users/exploiters from using the broken contract, you can only try to politely tell them not to.
Once [a company] can make more money by screwing its customers, that screw-job becomes a fait accompli.
If they open their APIs so I can coordinate different brands without downloading a bazillion different apps and as long as I can do it without my data leaving the house, I’ll think about it.
They say at one point that by being flaky, aloof and indifferent while rich SBF may have accidentally discovered the rules of pickup artistry for VCs, which is not a bad take.