The reason we do all this stuff for Binance is pretty much the same as why producers jump through hoops to get into supermarkets: Exposure.
I dislike the business practices of large corporations, but when I have to pay a +10% at the local store, it makes me think twice.
I understand your point, but we have no guarantee that the next exchange won’t want to do the same thing tomorrow. We have to be ready.
But most importantly, I feel the great benefit of TEX addresses as an interim step towards a full-fledged transition to unified addresses.
It’s a dream come true! To finally do away with T and Z addresses, because your wallet will automatically detect when it needs to make a transaction through a T address and when to send a Z. At the same time you will only have a unified one. My opinion is that exchanges will rather switch to this format after the introduction of TEX addresses.
Binance should have ‘do not deposit shielded zec from a hidden address’ just like they have written ‘do not deposit mining rewards’ it’s such a simple step for them to take but it’s almost like they want to find a reason not to give it back. I’m one of the lucky ones but still have to wait 30+ days.
They show:
You didn’t get that?
To put this whole issue in a positive light, we reached a critical mass of shielded address usage when a major exchange started to see it as a problem.
So everything is going in the right direction. Who’s out there saying Zcash is dying?
I don’t understand what you mean. Their issue is with the inability to return the funds. How is it related to the number of shielded deposits?
I mean, it’s a signal in general that people are starting to use shielded addresses en masse. Not about non-returnability. I haven’t heard anything about such cases of the exchange not returning funds. And I think this is just a message for people to be more careful.
Yeah, but I don’t see why you conclude that shielded addresses are used en masse. Their policy could be: “Shielded transfers are forbidden because we want to be able to return the funds”.
Maybe I’m wrong in this case, but bureaucracies are more likely to pay attention to a problem when it crosses a critical point. Many of us have been using Z-addresses forever, but Binance only turned their attention to this in 2024.
I see. I’m not sure I would draw the same conclusion.
I understand what you mean but let me explain myself
To keep with the “rationality theme”, I don’t think that an exchange that has had such a tremendous user growth in emerging economies as Binance had these last years can be rationally accused of “increasing friction”.
Let’s face the music. CEXs do offer a series of products that are interesting to “normies” and mostly to unbanked people like “pre-paid” credit cards and other financial tools that are backed by crypto holdings of the users.
To put only one case on the table, the amount of “friction” reduction achieved by the ability to receive remittances from abroad into a bank account in minutes without leaving your house or walking around with cash is huge. This is true for all exchanges that can integrate to the national traditional banking system of the many countries of the world. But to do that, you need to have a functioning “compliance department”.
I do recognize that exchanges are under heavy regulator pressure and this is complicating stuff for users either because the user experience is worse or because the operating costs of running compliant business is higher now than before and therefore they charge higher fees.
Using CEXs is not as easy as it used to be, most of them enforce KYC quite heavily lately. I don’t think this trend is exclusive to Binance. And what the legal experts stated on ZconV confirms this. That’s why we need to double our efforts on Bridges and DEX integration to offer more alternative to our users in this increasingly regulated environment that CEXs are becoming and there are many initiatives around this like ZavaX Bridge and Maya integration.
I don’t buy the cost argument for a single second either, they have money, potentially more than the other exchanges I listed above.
From what I learned in college and my past corporate jobs, is that companies don’t count money that way. They see the cost, the opportunity, the risk and the return of investment and of course the mission alignment of the thing they will spend on with their current business plan. They do all this because they will be held accountable by the company shareholders.
So imagine that you are a product designer at a major exchange and you think of this idea of “reducing friction would benefit customers”. You pitch it to your boss and it goes well then, he goes upstairs and your idea goes through the paragraph above. Your revolutionary feature went through he company’s gears and got turned into a “toast message to educate users”. Your boss tells you to have a demo by next sprint end. Then the toast message will be put under A/B Testing and measure how it moved the metric you were intending to improve.
That’s how big companies work. Pretty boring huh?
EDITS: typos.
I appreciate your perspective @pacu . 
I’m optimistic, I believe this problem with binance is an opportunity for Zcash, we will have the opportunity to show that Zcash was designed to comply with regulations. It is possible to be transparent when necessary, but we can be anonymous and decentralized at the same time. This Binance case will be a kick to make fine adjustments that were not thought of before, but over time everything will be adjusted and we will be in compliance with legislation without much effort.
Just like what happened with Bitcoin, many will look back and envy us for trusting Zcash even in these challenges, this is the opportunity to accumulate little by little, take advantage of this low moment.
You are forgetting Binance Old CEO in jail sadly
4 months sentence
zcash need DEX fast
I received my refund yesterday. After 2 weeks…. But they refunded me. Anyway I do not recommend sending shielded anymore to Binance at all
I imagine what you felt during that period, waiting for the return, thinking you had lost everything.
I know I harp on Ywallet all the time but currently, tmk, it is really the only light wallet suitable for interacting with binance, as you have the ability to generate a transparent (and diversified is better) address, explicitly send whatever notes to it and then send those transparent funds to binance. The same process would work with sending to any other transparent-only exchange or transparent-only wallet.
Update: Last week, I reached out to Binance and requested that they remove Zcash from the monitoring list at the end of the second quarter. I explained that, given Binance’s recent policy of blocking shielded deposits and the progress we have made with implementing TEX Addresses, the monitoring tag should be removed. Binance acknowledged the request and said they’d review it.
I’ll follow up if they respond with additional information; however, it’s uncertain whether we’ll receive direct communication from them about this. We’ll likely learn of their decision when they release the updated monitoring list in early July.
I am confident, I believe that binance will remove Zcash from the list.