You know it’s bad when a loss this large isn’t surprising or interesting in the slightest.
Yes but that is irrelevant.
It is unfortunate this happened of course, proper security audits of your smart contracts is very important in cases like these.
I think both are "huge" news, but the "rebuttal" does not add any weight to the argument because they're not comparable.
Yes, they are. Things don’t have to be the same to be comparable. People compare them all the time and very reasonably so. “Should I put my money into traditional finance or defi? What are the pros/cons?”
An axis that should be compared when choosing a finance system is “how likely is my money to disappear?”. A single event where an amount of money that’s this fraction of the overall system and this much value is a newsworthy, meaningful, relevant, comparable event.
I have no issues with this question, because you want to compare the two and find out what properties suit your goals.
> An axis that should be compared when choosing a finance system is “how likely is my money to disappear?”.
This is not what was being discussed, but it is certainly an important question to ask if that is the choice one is making.
> A single event where an amount of money that’s this fraction of the overall system and this much value is a newsworthy, meaningful, relevant, comparable event.
We already agree that the two events are newsworthy. The thing we disagree on is the following: If 0.1% of traditional money is stolen is newsworthy, then this adds further evidence that 0.1% of DeFi money being stolen is newsworthy. I don't agree with that.
It's not better that there's actually a planet-changing volume elsewhere in similar jeopardy. We should be howling about the anti-features baked into these things that enable criminal enterprise.
Based on current US inflation rates, that’s about 4 days worth of inflation. So, you could probably blame the Fed for “stealing” that much in one swoop.
And how do you come to that conclusion?