Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Bitcoin Canada

Binance Says Users In Ontario Restricted From Using Its Platform (reuters.com) 83

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Binance, the world's largest crypto exchange by trading volume, has confirmed in an undertaking to the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) that it would stop opening new accounts for users in the Canadian province, the regulator said on Thursday. The dispute between Binance and OSC started in June last year, when the exchange announced its decision to quit Ontario after a regulatory crackdown on crypto exchanges in the province for allegedly failing to meet securities laws. However, in December, Binance notified investors that it was allowed to continue its operations in Ontario while still being unregistered in the province, the OSC said.

In the undertaking, Binance also made a slew of other commitments, including halting trading in existing Ontario accounts, with certain exceptions that the company said were necessary "to protect investors." The crypto exchange also offered to provide fee waivers and reimbursements to certain Ontario users, and said it would hire an independent third party to oversee the implementation of its commitments.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Binance Says Users In Ontario Restricted From Using Its Platform

Comments Filter:
  • The vast majority of you are too dumb to use a non-custodial wallet safely. I wish I had better news. So just stay off crypto I guess. You're welcome.
    • by Luthair ( 847766 )
      More like Binance customers everywhere should be asking themselves why they're doing business with a company can't meet low regulatory requirements.
    • The vast majority of noncustodial (self-custodial is a better word) wallets have a super dumb design when it comes to pvt keys and recovery mechanisms.

      I have been trying out all the arcane web3 crypto stuff (basically everything except bitcoin) and its quite a brain dead thing logging into these services with your wallet n pvt key. Probably even 50yo SSH did it better.

      But worry not, Jack Dorsey's wallet is fixing all this

  • What these cryptos want is no regulations so they can sucker in everyone they please and do whatever they please . Well , tough. Governments are stepping in and cracking. Good riddance.

    • So you're for this or against it? Tell the nice folks at home why you think this is a good or bad thing. And as a follow-up, where do you get your ideas?
  • Trust (Score:3, Insightful)

    by carton ( 105671 ) on Friday March 18, 2022 @08:19AM (#62368475)

    I trust Binance to have my best interests at heart more than I trust the Ontario Securities Commission.

    Binance's Ontario users presumably agree. If we lived in democracies, that would be the end of this matter.

    Masks just keep falling.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by h33t l4x0r ( 4107715 )
      Hmm, crypto exchanges have a record of splitting with people's cash (MTGOX anyone?) Ontario Securities Commission not so much unless I'm misinformed about them.
      • by carton ( 105671 )

        crypto exchanges have a record of splitting with people's cash (MTGOX

        The Canadian government's [substack.com] reputation is worse, in my opinion.

        The analogy can be nit-picked in other ways: (1) Binance is not the same as Coinbase, (2) HODLers only leave funds exposed for the length of the trade, (3) etc., etc. I think this line of argument misses the point.

        It's my second sentence that should settle the matter: if I need to have this argument with you before I'm allowed to use Binance, something is wrong. Who are you? Get out of my way. What I mean by this: these "Commissions" are not

    • I don't trust companies because they're going to put profits first and me last. This means they will work with the government when it suits them, they will bribe the government when it suits them and they'll sell us all out when it suits them.

      Really large companies kind of freak me out. If I can be forgiven for Godwining the thread I always think back to IBM working with the Nazis. That's the most extreme example but for something more recent we know for a fact that Coca-Cola was running death squads in
    • Yeah, & Bernie Madoff's clients knew exactly what they were doing. Stupid regulators have no idea.
    • by Nugoo ( 1794744 )

      Binance's Ontario users presumably agree. If we lived in democracies, that would be the end of this matter.

      Ha ha ha! What a laughable claim.

      Ontario is a representative democracy, like Canada and virtually every other democratic country on the planet. The elected representatives of Ontario decided to create an agency to regulate financial service providers. Again, like Canada and virtually every other democratic country on the planet.

      The fact that some Ontario citizens aren't allowed to use Binance - even though they want to - has nothing to do with Ontario's system of government. It's no different from being

  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Friday March 18, 2022 @09:48AM (#62368653)
    of the kind meant to keep investors safe and money laundering for crime to a minimum. I'm not even talking the kind of regulation folks like Liz Warren want (e.g. the kind that prevents securities gambling like what caused 2008). I'm talking the bare minimum needed to keep the entire economy from collapsing in on itself.

    It's telling that at the 1st sign of regulation they have to pack up and leave like an old carpet bagger who got called out for scamming settlers. Also telling the only politicians they can get on their side are the really dodgy ones everyone hates like Ted "If you killed him on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you" Cruz.

    This would explain why I'm starting to see GPUs in stock. Still at inflated prices, but if we keep spreading regulation then before long Crypto will die. Not because regulation kills good things, but because with even the bare minimum needed to maintain a functioning system of capitalism crypto, like all ponzi schemes, goes away.

    If you're a capitalist this is a good thing. This is the maintenance a capitalist system needs to survive.
    • Here we go again with this bullshit. Let some new information enter your thick skull once in a while.
      • Cryptocurrencies can survive with basic safety regulations and anti-money laundering laws. They're not currencies because nobody uses them for that. Valve tried to and they had a 50% fraud rate. A handful of independent gas stations running ATMs used for questionable purposes does not make them a currency.

        Also you need to address the elephant in the room which is the massive consolidation of power because of the huge mining pools and the exchanges and the incestuous relationship the two now have. You ca
  • Unfree Canada (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sinij ( 911942 ) on Friday March 18, 2022 @10:22AM (#62368749)
    Drastic degradation of freedoms in Canada is nothing short of shocking. Just recently federal government of Canada and PM illegally invoked war measures act to disperse non-violent protesters on the Parliament Hill (think US Capitol) . They went as far as using rubber bullets and horse charges. They also used emergency powers to sidestep courts in confiscating property and freezing bank accounts. Not a week later, Canadian PM went on a photo-op tour in EU and keep pushing bromides about freedoms. Meanwhile, foolish Canadian public appears to support such abuse of power, with notable exception of First Nations, that understand that they are going to be next on the receiving end of these new measures.
    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

      *yawn* Another Freedumber?

      The War Measures Act hasn't been a thing since 1988; it was repealed on July 21, 1988, so we already see that you're ignorant.

      The Emergencies Act was approved by Parliament, so I'm not sure how you can say it was "illegally" invoked.

      And the protestors were certainly breaking the law. They broke at the very least the highway traffic act and many Ottawa bylaws, not to mention harassing residents and businesses downtown and illegally interfering with the lawful use of property.

      • by dskoll ( 99328 )

        Nice, I got downvoted. Exp[and parent.

      • by sinij ( 911942 )

        *yawn* Another Freedumber?

        If you think Charter/Constitutional rights are dumb, I can recommend the very good climate in Cuba or Venezuela.

        The Emergencies Act was approved by Parliament, so I'm not sure how you can say it was "illegally" invoked.

        Don't take my word for it. Here is Canadian Civil Liberties Association [ccla.org] explaining why it is illegal: "The government has brought in an extreme measure that should be reserved for national emergencies - a legal standard that has not been met."

        And the protestors were certainly breaking the law. They broke at the very least the highway traffic act and many Ottawa bylaws

        So you are calling protest unlawful based on parking and noise bylaws? What protest would be legal by such ridiculous standards? I recommend you take Civics

        • by dskoll ( 99328 )

          Guess what, Einstein... the emergencies act is subject to the Charter. There were no breaches of the charter.

          Yes, the protest was unlawful based on parking and noise bylaws and the fact that it lasted for three weeks and cost downtown Ottawa residents and businesses millions of dollars per day.

          We're used to protests in Ottawa. We're used to disruptions. But this was something qualitatively different. It was a hostile occupation of our city core and the holding of tens of thousands of downtown resident [www.cbc.ca]

          • by sinij ( 911942 )
            There were breaches - they had to suspend parts of the Charter BY invoking Emergencies Act, more so they did so while failing to meet the criteria outlined in the Emergencies Act. See this very telling exchange between Conservative MP and Justice Department where they are forced to admit this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
            • by dskoll ( 99328 )

              As the person from the Justice Department said: "None of the charter rights are absolute and all of them are subject to reasonable limitations" and that is the case whether or not the Emergencies Act is invoked.

              • by sinij ( 911942 )
                So you consider the right to protest, unless government approves, to be a reasonable limitation of Charter Rights? Can you also explain to me what the difference between Justin Trudeau actions and Putin's actions against war protesters?
                • by dskoll ( 99328 )

                  The right to protest legally is sacrosanct. There is no right to occupy a downtown core for three weeks, depriving tens of thousands of people of the right to enjoy their neighbourhoods and forcing thousands into unemployment because businesses had to close. It is those actions that constitute mischief under Sec. 430 of the Criminal Code of Canada, and those actions that required the Emergenies Act to be invoked, because the local police force was unwilling or unable to enforce the law.

                  • by sinij ( 911942 )

                    The right to protest legally is sacrosanct.

                    You got it wrong. It isn't "legally", because people in power would define what is legal. It is The right to non-violently protest is sacrosanct, and shot-sighted people like you are undermining it in 2022. What do you think going to happen when the next Harper comes to power?

                    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

                      You're arguing semantics. The point is: There's a line which, when crossed, makes it reasonable (or even obligatory) for law enforcement to shut down a protest, and the convoy traitors went waaay over that line.

                    • by sinij ( 911942 )
                      Convoy traitors? Traitors to what exactly? What is about convoy enrages you to the point that you willing to destroy democratic principles over it? The sunk-cost fallacy over COVID?
          • by sinij ( 911942 )

            If the protestors had made their point, stayed a day or two, and then dispersed, I wouldn't have had an issue with them.

            Why are you also not discussing the PM actions? Had Tuedau not go into "undisclosed location" hiding, and from hiding call protesters fringe minorities with unacceptable views, and without any evidence accused them of racism, white supremacist, misogyny and so on, they would have probably only stayed a day or two. Why are you not discussing THAT?

            Compare Justin's childish behavior to Pierre Trudeau https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

            • by dskoll ( 99328 )

              The fact that Trudeau may not have handled the situation well is not relevant to the legality of the protest or the reprehensible behaviour of the convoy traitors and occupiers.

              Interesting that you brought up that video, because Pierre Trudeau did indeed invoke the War Measures Act that actually suspended civil liberties in a dramatic way. So... are you saying Justin Trudeau should have done the same thing?

              • by sinij ( 911942 )
                There isn't a question of legality, it was legal protest and you not liking it does not make it any less legal. Justin Trudeau did do the same thing, only what Pierre Trudeau did over kidnappings and bombings Justin Trudeau did over honking and dancing on the streets.
                • by dskoll ( 99328 )

                  Actually, it was not a legal protest. Hundreds of charges have been laid and I fully expect many convictions. Just because you keep repeating a lie doesn't mean that the lie will morph into the truth.

                  You clearly don't live in Canada. In October 1970, civil liberties were suspended, habeas corpus was suspended, and the military was deployed in the streets of Canadian cities. None of that happened in 2022.

    • Do you mean the extremist QAnon-ers who were illegally obstructing public highways with trucks? The truckers whose union disavowed their behaviour?
      • by sinij ( 911942 )
        Even people you personally disapprove of have the right to peacefully protest. Because the next time it will be tree-hugging hippies illegally obstructing natural resources extraction projects that will get horse-charged and beaten with batons.
        • They have so get a clue. This isn't the right being punished bullshit, it's a limit on protest that balances the unlimited right to obstruct legal society / commerce against the unlimited right to do whatever I like.

          Left wing protestors like environmentalists get arrested for stepping outside of the law all the time. I had a friend that blocked the oil pipeline access. They knew they were breaking the law and they were prepared to go to jail for their convictions. The same should go for any movement. If you

          • by sinij ( 911942 )
            What laws that warrant arrests were broken downtown Ottawa?

            See this, official gov't inquiry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

            Conservative MP: Was the protest illegal before the Emergencies Act was declared?
            Justice Department:I wasn't aware of any charges being issued before that time.
            • by dskoll ( 99328 )

              Hundreds of people were arrested on mischief charges, so there's that. And mischief, despite its name, is a pretty serious offense with potential jail times up to life in prison (although nobody has actually been sentenced to that yet.)

              There were few arrests before the Emergencies Act was invoked because the Ottawa Police Service was incompetent to the point of complicity. Once there were enough police officers to make arrests effectively, hundreds were arrested and hundreds were charged.

              • by sinij ( 911942 )
                The act of mischief in question is protesting. You have to resort to circular logic to call it an illegal protest.
                • by dskoll ( 99328 )

                  You really are an idiot. Mischief is an offense defined in the Criminal Code of Canada, Section 430 [criminal-code.ca].

                  430(1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully (a) destroys or damages property; (b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective; (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or (d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.

                  I was wrong about the maximum sentence... the max

                  • by sinij ( 911942 )
                    Let me try to understand your argument. According to your legal theory, any protest that obstructs, interrupts, or interferes with anything is illegal by definition? Are you one of those "free speech zone" advocates?

                    Fortunately, Canadian Courts are not nearly as autocratic as you. I fully expect all charges to be dismissed for regular protesters, and Tamara Lich to get not guilty verdict. This is because, or maybe despite, Justin Trudeau trying to turn Canada into Cuba.
                    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

                      You're welcome to read the Criminal Code of Canada. It pretty plainly lays out what the crime of mischief is. And yes, anything that interferes with private citizens' rights to enjoy their property and make a living is illegal. Absolutely, yes.

                      Most protests in Ottawa take place on Parliament Hill. A few take place in front of embassies or other government buildings. Some of them might disrupt traffic for a few minutes or a couple of hours. That's fine; it doesn't seriously deprive private citizens of

                    • by sinij ( 911942 )

                      And ok, let's take a bet on the verdicts. I bet Pat King and Lich are both either convicted or they plead guilty to an offense.

                      I bet that Pat King and Tamara Lich would ether get acquitted or acquitted on appeal, but we won't find out for YEARS because the process in the punishment.

                    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

                      I'm willing to wait as long as it takes for the results.

        • by dskoll ( 99328 )

          The police gave the protesters plenty of warning to clear out and those warnings were ignored for literally days. They didn't "horse-charge" them. They went in on horses and a few idiots decided not to get out of the way. They arrived at the "FO" stage of "FAFO".

          And yes, leftist and non-white protestore are subjected to police violence all the time. These entitled white Karens got a tiny, tiny taste of the state enforcing the law and ran away whining. Fuck 'em.

          • by sinij ( 911942 )

            They didn't "horse-charge" them. They went in on horses and a few idiots decided not to get out of the way.

            Bullshit. There are videos all over internet of them trampling peaceful protesters: https://rumble.com/vvleto-inte... [rumble.com] and attacking journalists: https://rumble.com/vvbzw8-otta... [rumble.com]

            • by dskoll ( 99328 )

              Those videos show what I said: idiots electing not to get out of the way of horses. Recall that by this point, the protestors had been given days of warning to disperse; warnings they ignored. Again: FAFO. If you break the law, don't whine when the state uses very reasonable force to enforce the law.

              • by sinij ( 911942 )

                Those videos show what I said: idiots electing not to get out of the way of horses.

                Don't be childish. Charging peaceful protesters with horses is Uncanadian and is not reasonable use of force in a civilized country. You failing to acknowledge this out of partisan reasons is a shameful smear on your Canadian identity.

                • by dskoll ( 99328 )

                  Meh. Whatever. 2/3 of Canadians oppose the convoy traitors, so you're on the wrong side of history.

                  • by sinij ( 911942 )
                    Go back to drenching yourself in sanitizer and hiding under your safety blanked sanitary napkins. The rest of us have lives to live.
        • I look forward to your enthusiastic & persistent defence of First Nations & Native American protests the next time their legal treaties with the Canadian & US governments are broken then.
    • by Nugoo ( 1794744 )

      Meanwhile, foolish Canadian public appears to support such abuse of power, with notable exception of First Nations, that understand that they are going to be next on the receiving end of these new measures.

      Emphasis mine.

      Holy shit, what an ignorant or dishonest statement. The First Nations wish they could be treated as well as the freedom truckers were. The freedom truckers blockaded the capital and blasted their horns 24/7 for 3 weeks with essentially no police response. Meanwhile, the RCMP brings snipers and helicopters in when natives protest the construction an of oil pipeline going through their territory. In fact, most First Nations people I've heard were complaining at the obviously unfair treatment

    • were getting their eyes shot out by cops who admitted on recorded lines they were aiming for protestors faces and trying to take out their eyes?

      It's painfully obvious you don't care until it's your guys on the receiving end (even when your guys showed up explicitly to bring the city to it's knees and cause pain and suffering, and said so repeatedly on camera).

      And Binance is free to do business in Canada... after they comply with the same securities and anti-money laundering laws everybody else does
      • by sinij ( 911942 )
        The difference is violence. Had BLM attempted to be a peaceful movement instead of a looting frenzy with buildings on fire, I would have also supported their right to protest.
    • by Lordfly ( 590616 )

      I am so glad your Russian Vodka stipend is continuing unabated, comrade. For Mother Russia!

  • Sorry for my ignorance.. but it feels like a country wide policy would make sense for something like crypto.. maybe there is tax implications?
    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

      There is or was a push to have a federal securities regulator in Canada because you're right... it makes no sense to have a patchwork of regulations across the country. But I don't think anything has yet come of it.

    • Like the USA, Canada's legal system was set up to facilitate colonisation & exploitation of natural & human resources. Unlike, the USA & it's war of independence from Britain, they haven't changed the underlying system so there are still lots of disconnects, e.g. you have to go through an expensive 3rd party to have qualifications officially recognised if they're from another province. Health insurance is treated similarly. The provinces essentially treat each other as foreign countries.
  • I am wondering how come we dont hear from any actual firathand victims of crypto here ?
    And don't tell me its Decentralized victimhood :)

    We only hear people with all sorts of theories about crypto who ignore the fact that in actual practice most of the crypto stuff has somehow been working to garner a Trillion dollars of market cap and volumes regardless of how we think it's all a house of cards. You have govts and corporates and funds and the highest networth individuals owning billions of it and the bubble

The 11 is for people with the pride of a 10 and the pocketbook of an 8. -- R.B. Greenberg [referring to PDPs?]

Working...