Bitfinex status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitfinex reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Bitfinex Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  RelativelyIrrelevant.vip (@RelIrrelvantVIP) reported 6 minutes ago

  @Charlesdav43874 @IndyBitcoin So when an XMR customer uses Kraken, KuCoin, Bitfinex, Poloniex (all examples) or similar XMR providers; those DAB's know the Customer and the amount of the Digital Asset Business Activity performed on the Customer's behalf. Those XMR DABAs would not be anonymous & are taxable.

• 
  ₿arnabyTheStoic (@BarnabyTheStoic) reported 13 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Wtf are you thinking asking this

• 
  Stash Management (@Stashquants) reported 14 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Urgent KYC issue: Compliance directed me to open a ticket, but Support has directed me back to Compliance. I can provide current documents and proof of my legal name change. My account is also under a withdrawal hold, making the 3-day deadline impossible. Need Help.

• 
  Uncle Jim (@losingshekels) reported 15 minutes ago

  @paoloardoino PAOLO PLEASE HELP ME TO RETRIEVE MY 11.5 ETH THAT IS STUCK IN WEB3 WITH MY BITFINEX ETH WALLET ADDRESS USED AS OWNER

• 
  Max Gas (@aqualanga) reported 21 minutes ago

  $UNI already down 5.5% over 4 hours, and $2.8M just landed on Binance, Bitget, Gate and Bitfinex in the last hour. this isn't the early signal, it's supply still showing up while the move is already happening. one wallet, 0x28c6…1d60, sent $2.0M straight onto Binance by itself. that's not a smear of small deposits, that's one player moving real size. worth noting, "Ceffu Deposit" also pulled $101K off Binance in this window, and we've clocked that wallet before, it moved on LINK back in August and that one barely budged the price over the next 8 hours. mixed signals in the same hour. coins on exchanges can be sold, they're not guaranteed to be. go trace the $2.0M yourself if you don't believe the number. NFA

• 
  Coca Cola Kid (@CocaColaKid_OG) reported 21 minutes ago

  Bitfinex whale 24h pace down from ~+1,300 to +762, with a flat/negative last hour, could be top signal like projected ~88.4K BTC, +11%, day 18 last time it quit buying Bitcoin gained +20%

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 22 minutes ago

  @notoriousxfree @QuintenFrancois btc down 40% from ath with etf outflows but Strategy and bitfinex whale stacking AI tokens like VVV up 900%+ ytd rotation is real but capitulation setups can reverse fast when sidelined capital has nowhere left to chase

• 
  SANDY.CRYPTOMAN (@SanMSH21) reported 24 minutes ago

  $Bitcoin ----Most Costly Mistakes The $44 Billion Bithumb Blunder (2026) A Bithumb employee accidentally sent 620,000 BTC instead of 2,000 Korean Won to users, forcing a massive, near-total network rollback and asset freeze. $44.000 Billion — Bithumb Error (2026) $9.000 Billion Mt. Gox Repayment Move (2024) $3.600 Billion DOJ Bitfinex Seizure (2022) $1.000 Billion DOJ Silk Road Move (2020) $0.003 B. Record Transaction Fee ($3.1M in 2023) $0.001 Billion Paxos Overpayment ($510,000 in 2023)

• 
  Boots (@bootzz) reported 24 minutes ago

  step back, look at the psychological state of ct & the headlines that are coming out detach yourself from $. best guess is someone/thing is hunting an entry and pushing price down to do so Blackrock as an example- could do this with ‘minimal’ size relative to their port Bitfinex whales are long here

• 
  Bullish with CryptoKSA (@cryptowithKSA) reported 25 minutes ago

  ARGENTINA FREEZES 25 CRYPTO WALLETS IN $LIBRA PROBE 🚨 An Argentine judge ordered the freezing of 25 wallets linked to the $LIBRA investigation. Binance, Bybit, OKX, CoinEx, FixedFloat, and Bitfinex have also been ordered to provide KYC data and transaction records to help identify wallet holders and trace funds.

• 
  No Quarter Brandolini 110 IQ Small Blocker (@FreeSpeechBTC21) reported 26 minutes ago

  @BlueDavid BitMex went down.. is Bitfinex next?

• 
  Mike Richardson (@Mike_the_Animal) reported 27 minutes ago

  @CW8900 Last cycle the volume of BTC Longs on Bitfinex was highest at the bottom of the cycle, roughly. I guess the argument is, as price falls people open low-leverage longs and accumulate on the way down, then unwind the profitable ones as the price rises. Whether that is true or not, who knows. Also, on the weekly chart, they are still accumulating.

• 
  Colbert (@sirshibaninja) reported 27 minutes ago

  @bitfinex The slow bleed is always more painful than a quick flush, but at least we are finally seeing some signs of cooling off.

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 29 minutes ago

  @DollarDecay 32 btc sale was symbolic noise, not distress bitfinex accumulating spot on the way down - there's your marginal buyer

• 
  Kryptos Opus (@kryptosopus) reported 30 minutes ago

  @lush_amorelli @BitcoinMagazine @glxyresearch Tell that to Bitfinex. Hackers sat on 120k BTC for 6 years and still got busted trying to cash out in 2022. The coins didn't vanish, the feds just waited them out. Stolen bitcoin is a ticking clock, not a brick. Terrible ROI, sure, but "impossible" is doing a lot of lifting there

• 
  Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡ (@shanaka86) reported 31 minutes ago

  The Coldcard attacker has gone back to the large wallets. Wave one averaged 0.91 bitcoin per address. Waves two and three collapsed to 0.05 and 0.11 bitcoin:native, which looked like an operator running out of targets. Galaxy's Alex Thorn flagged a suspected fourth wave on Monday averaging 0.82. Nobody finds fresh large wallets in a keyspace that has already been emptied. The earlier passes did not exhaust the supply. They had not looked everywhere. Going back up the balance ladder points to a new derivation path or address type the first sweeps never scanned, which means the exposed population is larger than three days of falling averages suggested. The pace says the same thing. Thorn counted 218 transactions across blocks 960,778 to 960,792, moving over 380 bitcoin from 462 addresses into 210 fresh destinations. Sweeps ran at 13.8 per block against a pre-incident baseline of 0.3, roughly 46 times the normal rate. The confirmed total is still 1,367.05 bitcoin, about 88.6 million dollars, from 4,585 addresses across three waves. Figures above 100 million, or address counts near 7,000, run ahead of Galaxy's published tracking, and Galaxy says it has not computationally confirmed that every one of those addresses came from weak Coldcard entropy. Coinkite halted shipments and destroyed its remaining inventory carrying the flawed firmware. It has asked victims to keep their devices rather than wipe them while its legal team works with law enforcement. Manufacturers do not destroy their own stock over a contained incident. Bitcoin itself cannot blacklist any of this. There is no issuer, no chargeback, no stolen flag inside a transaction output. A node checks whether a signature is valid, never whether the signer had any right to the key. The theft is cryptographically perfect and legally void at the same time. Everything outside the protocol works differently. Analytics firms can tag the exact outputs, exchanges can refuse the deposits, custodians can freeze accounts, and courts can order seizure. The coins stay spendable between two strangers and become close to unusable anywhere that checks identity. That gap is clearly why this may not be finished for the attacker. The Justice Department recovered 63.7 bitcoin from the Colonial Pipeline ransom, seized more than 94,000 from the Bitfinex theft, and took 50,676 from a Silk Road thief nearly a decade after the crime. None of it reversed a transaction. Each one required the holder to eventually touch something that asks who you are. For anyone still sitting on a seed made during that firmware window, the absence of a sweep is not evidence of safety. It may only mean your derivation path has not been scanned yet. Stay safe!!

• 
  Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported 32 minutes ago

  🚨𝗚𝗟𝗢𝗕𝗔𝗟 𝗦𝗣𝗢𝗧 𝗩𝗢𝗟𝗨𝗠𝗘 𝗣𝗟𝗨𝗠𝗠𝗘𝗧𝗦 𝟮𝟭.𝟳% 𝗜𝗡 𝗝𝗨𝗟𝗬! Spot trading across 14 leading exchanges fell to $429.0 billion in July, down from $547.9 billion in June. Every exchange saw a dip. Binance led with $196.5 billion (45.8% of total), followed by OKX ($41.6 billion) and Bybit ($36.3 billion), together making up 64% of activity. Uniswap ($UNI) had the mildest drop at 9.8%, while Bitfinex slumped 59.7%, Coinbase 26.4% and Bybit 24.5%.

• 
  Cryptoinsightuk (@Cryptoinsightuk) reported 39 minutes ago

  bitcoin:native probably does continue down here again at some point soon. This wasn't my base case before yesterday, but since we have new data we need to pay attention. I think there is a liquidation event to come. Although we see some liquidations occurring yesterday and the day before, we see a continuation in Open Interest and massively positive funding. This suggests we have people going leverage long here in size. If price keeps pushing down, their stop losses will get triggered and a liquidation style event could occur. This isn't inevitable, but looks likely here. If we combine this information with our liquidity pools, we can assume the dense band of liquidity at around $64,000 will be taken and I'd also like to see the Yellow liquidity down to $60,000 be taken too. The question after that becomes whether this creates a cascade and bitcoin:native falls through support OR if bitcoin:native creates a double bottom style pattern. This discussion is a difficult one. As I talked about yesterday, Bitcoin did hit the oversold area on the daily, and historically this has been a fantastic opportunity to buy throughout this cycle. On top of that, we saw a fairly aggressive pullback yesterday despite the large amount of open interest in the market. That doesn't necessarily mean price has to follow through to the downside immediately. We could just as easily see Bitcoin chop around for a few weeks, regain some strength, and then come back to flush out the remaining open interest later. In other words, it doesn't have to continue straight down from here. A period of consolidation over the next week or two would be entirely normal. Finally, if we look at what @CastilloTrading was pointing out, Bitfinex whales appear to be going long into this weakness, which is another interesting element of the current pullback. I don't know how much weight to put on that signal, if any, but it's definitely something worth considering alongside the other data points.

• 
  The Bitcoin Cash Podcast (@TheBCHPodcast) reported 39 minutes ago

  @SteveSimple Directly, no. Indirectly, a strong showing on prediction markets would influence miners' (and everyone's) thinking/support. This is even a point Mechanic has made on the Roundtable before re Bitfinex 2017 futures. Pleb-funded hash or pleb-funded HODL demand, potato poTAHto.

• 
  Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported 39 minutes ago

  Many things in this post are incorrect, and it matters that we correct them, because this version of the history is exactly what convinced people the last few months were a good idea. “BIP-148 is celebrated as Bitcoin Independence Day, because it proved that ordinary users, running nodes in their homes, could force the most powerful mining cartels and corporations in the industry to back down. The users had no hashrate, no exchanges, no lobbyists. They had conviction and they had nodes, and that was enough.” First, the framing. August 1st is what's celebrated as Bitcoin Independence Day (I coined and popularized that term). August 1st was the flag day, and it commemorates the outcome the UASF threat produced, not BIP-148 itself. Second, BIP-148 was not just "ordinary users" running nodes at home. It was a cross section of the entire Bitcoin network, something a lot of BIP-110 supporters seem to disregard: developers, exchanges, wallets, miners, and mega whales, alongside ordinary users. Most important to understand is that BIP-148 and the small block camp carried a massive amount of economic weight. Chain split markets ran on @bitfinex through 2017, and outside of those markets I know of many OTC deals struck privately in whale groups to trade one side of a split against the other. There was skin in the game on both sides of the war, and huge amounts of BTC put on the line to show real conviction. This was as much an economic war as an ideological one, and that point is rarely acknowledged. Even the companies backing BIP-148 were taking real risk. BIP-148 was never merged into Bitcoin Core. Running it meant deliberately installing different software and accepting that if the UASF chain lost, you could be reorganized off the chain entirely. Bitmain spelled that scenario out themselves, calling it a wipe out, in the same post where they laid out their hard fork contingency. Dozens of companies committed anyway (BIP-110 supporters would likely call them suitcoiners today). On the topic of hashrate, BIP-148 had no version bit of its own. It required bit 1, which was BIP-141. So the accurate way to state it is that BIP-148/BIP-141 had 30-45% of hashrate behind it for most of its deployment window. During that time I was COO of BTCC, overseeing a mining pool that was the biggest one signaling SegWit. So the UASF threat had three components that made it credible: economic weight, hashrate, and nodes. BIP-110 only had nodes. That is UASF cosplay, not a real UASF. Another point to cover: Mechanic was spreading misinformation in Spaces (and likely other places) that BIP-148, a UASF, activated SegWit. That is false. It was technically BIP-91 that brought miners in line with BIP-141. BIP-148 was effectively frontrun and never had to be tested. So Bitcoin Independence Day, while celebrating the flag day deadline, is as much a celebration of BIP-91 as it is of BIP-148. So no, it was not just nodes and conviction. Just think about things rationally for a minute. Why would buying a node-in-a-box give you the right to dictate what anyone else on the network does, regardless of whether it's a miner or another user? Does buying two nodes-in-a-box give you that power? Of course not. Btw the whole plug-and-play node culture came after the Blocksize War. In 2015-2017 you just downloaded the software and ran it on your computer. Stay humble and stack sats, but also stay humble when people who lived through the history try to explain it to you.

• 
  Gain (@GainMaxxing) reported 41 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Bitcoin is broken money, fiat is fake money.

• 
  DeepBlueAlpha (@DeepBlueAlpha) reported 46 minutes ago

  FLASHBACK 📜 10 years ago today — June 2, 2016 — the CFTC formally classified $BTC as a commodity in the Bitfinex enforcement order. That day, Bitcoin closed at $537.97. Today: $66,736. Even after a -6.32% red day, that's: ↳ +12,305% ↳ 124x over a decade ↳ $1.34T market cap The same agency that fined Bitfinex $75K then now sits alongside a spot BTC ETF complex worth ~$101B. On-chain, nothing gets deleted. We read the receipts every block. Follow the Whales → @DeepBlueAlpha

• 
  Cloakd ⌛ (@CloakdDev) reported 48 minutes ago

  @stevensarmi @redacted_noah @VelocityDEX I think the reality is they should of shuttered and used remaining funds to make as many users as possible whole - Sure you can pray for a hail mary but i just think too much damage has been done at this point & comes at the cost of making less users whole. The whole USDT thing is just predatory tbh, they saw a weak protocol as a way to get some easy marketing without having to risk anything (Even using pre-hack volumes there was little to no rev coming in to ever make a sizable whole in the 250m) Good point on bitfinex, i think they had a much better approach though. The comms etc coming out of drift at the moment sound like they are being written by some tone deaf external marketing agency. How long did it take for bitfinex to recover? Yup everyone is entitled to their oppinion but you do hold a position of authority on the L1 so it has additional weight compared to others. Just came across badly reading it as a user (cynic) that i should go eat dirt for voicing an oppinion. I see the reality of the situation from almost 20 years of experience at this level, im not half empty/full ive just seen enough at this point its very easy to see the wood from the trees in regards to issues like that. I prefer to be pragmatic when it comes to money. Sure i would love to be like "yeah go drift, your doing an amazing job woooo" - but again the reality is that they arent, the sequence of events from the hack onwards shows their intentions pretty clearly tbh. Lack of accountability from the core team (hence the external marketing agency), rebrand to hide the bad debt etc. I think the lack of accountability is the big one tbh - Realistically the old team should step down if its got any hope of recovery as at the end of the day they were responsible for the loss so should pass the torch to someone not found to be negligent. No amount of procedure is going to bring back that trust unfortunately. Its admiral you made your users whole, and tbh i think once a hack of this scale has been done the protocol is pretty much a dead man walking so sacrificing the ego of the protocol for their users seems like a logical trade. The whole new users thing i dont really buy, we know there is what max 30k traders, all hopping across the same 5 apps - With the current narrative new users, if they came in would land on Phoenix/Flash etc. Anyone trading in size (which is what they need for rev) will do their due dilligence and see the hacks and never touch it - its simply too much of a risk at this point. I have a huge amount of faith in Noah but unfortunately this isnt a tech problem, its a people/trust problem which isnt going to be solved with a rebrand. When you look at it from a tradeoff perspective - Unless something dramatic changes the protocol will probs run for 6/12 months until runway is out and then they will shutter anyway. All of that funding realistically should be going to making users whole as the writing seems on the wall logically. 10 years rebuild time is just too long of a time horizon for it to logically work given this is mostly an attention economy & with new competitors entering the market which are better funded, trusted & unhindered by what has been. They just arent going to win in that arena. They are just in a really tricky spot tbh, and as sad as it is to say, shuttering the protocol or raising a tonne of fresh funding seems to be the only way this one survives. Everything else is just a half measure

• 
  umo (@0xumo) reported 48 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Terrible timing. Blocking this crap account

• 
  difoxxn (@Difoxxn) reported 53 minutes ago

  $𝗕𝗚𝗕 𝗯𝘂𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗮 "𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝘅𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲" 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘁𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳 𝗶𝘀 𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗲𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗴𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝗸𝘁. 𝗟𝗲𝘁'𝘀 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗮𝗽 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗻-𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 Bitfinex just yeeted $BGB off their platform (delisted July 3). And the "official reason"? A vague "listing qualifications review." Translation: read between the lines yourself. Meanwhile Bitget's out here launching Stocks 2.0 like it's the second coming of TradFi. Cool story. But nobody's talking about the fact that $BGB's 24h volume is a measly $10M on a $1.18B cap. That's a 0.85% vol/cap ratio. This thing trades like a ghost town, not a "top 3 exchange token." "Deflationary tokenomics" 🤡 let's fact check that real quick: Dec 2024 burn: 800M tokens. Massive, legit, impressive. Q2 2026 Morph burn: 3,010,400 tokens. That's not a burn, that's a rounding error. Someone's riding on 2024's hype with 2026's leftovers. And here's the part that should actually scare you — there's NO public whale wallet breakdown for $BGB. None. Zero. Nada. An exchange that publishes monthly Proof of Reserves for 42 straight months... can't show you who's holding the bag on their own token? Make it make sense. That green candle everyone's screenshotting? Pure market beta. Zero BGB-specific catalyst behind it. You're not smart money for buying it — you're just along for the market's ride. My honest take: this is a CEX with real revenue wrapped around a token with thin liquidity, a fresh tier-1 delisting, and zero whale transparency. That's not a "hold and pray" setup — that's a "know your exit" setup. Growth headlines don't pay your bags. On-chain flow does. Stay sharp, don't get exit-liquidity'd. NFA, DYOR, act accordingly. #BGB #Bitget

• 
  CryptoSuzy888 (@CryptoSuzy888) reported 55 minutes ago

  @AshCrypto The Timeline of a Slow DeathThe First Strike (June 24, 2022): This was the day the network actually flatlined. North Korea's notorious Lazarus Group exploited Harmony's Horizon Bridge, looting $100 million in various crypto assets. The hack completely unpegged Harmony's wrapped assets, draining the network's liquidity and destroying user trust overnight. The Slow Coma (2022–2025): For the last four years, Harmony existed on life support. Total Value Locked (TVL) collapsed by over 99%—crashing from a multi-billion dollar peak down to a ghost-town baseline. Major institutional platforms slowly severed ties, including Bitfinex delisting the asset, and derivatives platform BitDelta purging its ONEUSD futures contracts. The Corpse Exploit (Today — August 12, 2026): Because the team and developer activity had largely abandoned the chain, severe logical bugs were left completely unpatched. Today's attacker simply walked through an open door, exploiting cross-shard vulnerabilities to forge receipts and mint 3 trillion rogue tokens out of thin air to dump onto exchanges.

• 
  Kathlyn Tuccillo (@KathlynTuc77441) reported 58 minutes ago

  Bitcoin ETFs absorbed 13300 BTC last week against 3150 issued, but price rose only 2 percent. Bitfinex Alpha flags a demand engine turning seller as range support. Read report now, weigh in: what moves Bitcoin next? #Crypto

• 
  Victor (@gvictor808) reported 1 hour ago

  @ProofOfMoney Bitcoin custodian (and exchange) failures form a long-running pattern of hacks, key mismanagement, fraud, and insolvency that has repeatedly locked or destroyed customer funds. These are not isolated events. Centralized platforms holding private keys create single points of failure—whether technical, operational, or human. Major Historical Failures Platform Year Estimated Loss Primary Cause Notes Mt. Gox 2014 ~850,000 BTC Prolonged security breach / poor controls Once handled >70% of global BTC volume. Bankruptcy; partial creditor repayments began years later and continued into 2025–2026. Net unrecovered portion still very large. Bitfinex 2016 119,756 BTC Multi-signature wallet vulnerability Significant hot-wallet/security failure. QuadrigaCX 2019 ~76,000 BTC + other assets Founder death + sole key control / alleged fraud Canadian exchange; Gerald Cotten held sole access to cold wallets. Funds largely inaccessible. Celsius 2022 Several billion USD Insolvency / risky lending Withdrawal freeze then bankruptcy after market downturn. FTX 2022 ~$8 billion shortfall Fraud (customer funds diverted to Alameda) One of the largest exchange collapses. Bankruptcy proceedings later recovered substantial value; some creditor classes received >100% of petition-date claims due to market recovery and asset management. Other notable cases include Prime Trust (2023) and related entities such as Fortress Trust, which faced insolvency, lost access to wallets/keys, and allegedly used customer funds improperly to cover shortfalls. Broader Context and Patterns •Hacks remain common (e.g., Bybit’s large 2025 incident involving ~$1.4–1.5 billion, primarily ETH, attributed to sophisticated attackers exploiting operational processes). •Key management failures (lost or inaccessible private keys) and commingling/misuse of customer assets appear repeatedly. •Insolvency cascades in 2022 (Celsius, Voyager, BlockFi, Genesis, FTX) showed how lending and leverage amplify risks when platforms treat customer deposits as their own capital. •Recovery is often slow and incomplete. Mt. Gox creditors waited a decade-plus; FTX moved faster with better asset recovery but still involved multi-year processes and frozen access during bankruptcy. Independent archives tracking custody access failures (including exchange lockouts, inheritance issues, and operational barriers) document hundreds of cases, with a high percentage of known outcomes ending in blocked or constrained access for legitimate owners or heirs. Key Lessons Custodial arrangements introduce counterparty risk: you rely on the platform’s security, honesty, solvency, and operational competence. History shows these can fail catastrophically even at large, seemingly reputable firms. Self-custody eliminates that counterparty risk but shifts responsibility to the individual (seed phrase security, device integrity, inheritance planning, etc.). Hybrid approaches (e.g., multisig with careful key distribution) aim to balance the two. The repeated failures reinforce the core Bitcoin principle: not your keys, not your coins. Platforms can and do lose or lock customer Bitcoin through negligence, theft, or deliberate misuse.

• 
  Remote Career Africa (@RemoteCareerAfr) reported 1 hour ago

  Bitfinex is Hiring 📢 Role: Product Manager Location: Remote (Worldwide) Pay: Competitive - 2+ years of product experience (or equivalent hands-on ownership). - Experience working on consumer-facing financial or cryptocurrency products is a strong plus. - Strong product sense and ability to simplify complex flows.

• 
  Lain on the Blockchain (@CryptoCyberia) reported 1 hour ago

  @colludingnode @satorinakamoto @0xCursr Kek cope It it public knowledge the feds pushed coinbase binance bitfinex etc to delist and Kracken told them ti **** off and they went to court against Kracken, as did EEA, UK and other feds. Really makes you wonder why theyre fine with zcash kek