i am concern about poloniex. what is going on it???????

Nice post,  thanks for sharing

I think that the whole point of crypto is to avoid centralization.
(big banks)
so I will.

thanks for information denmarkguy

The company blog post
We’ve been privileged to get to know and collaborate with the Poloniex founders and their teams over the past several months as we contemplated this union and completed extensive due diligence together, and we learned that we share a similar perspective on the future as well as the same sharp sense of urgency about immediate needs and challenges.
[Link](https://planetcryptocurrencies.com/2018/02/26/goldman-sachs-backed-circle-acquires-poloniex-crypto-exchange/)

Just the beginning of more acquisitions to come. $400 M to these guys is pocket change, so why not gain some exposure to a burgeoning market that threatens your business? Serves them as both a hedge and an investment.

This will give circle relevant advantage to other competitors, like Revolut....
Bankera saw this coming and announced their own exchange at the beginning of their ICO, a couple of months ago.

I think a bit of regulation is inevitable and also a positive. On Feb 6th, the SEC chairman said in testimony before Congress that they favor less regulation and will handle this budding technology with kid gloves. I think the large scales of capitol required to bring this to the masses would only happen with the nod from the Feds. Not a popular opinion, perhaps, but a seeming reality.

Well Poloniex was always terrible so I will just continue to not use them I guess.

Poloniex was always centralized, they were incorporated in Delaware (US).

I would love to see an increase in both number of decentralized exchanges and also their popularity. 

But I don't mind some regulation either. I still tend to believe that at the core, most (initial) regulation comes from whether the angle of customer protection or prevention of criminal activity and not from lobbying groups. In fact, especially on platforms where "money" is traded I think it is positive to work with more centralization, and thus also (future) regulation as it gives the customer somebody to go after when done wrong. While I am no fan of Class A suits, a legally liable entity is IMHO a good thing to have.

Whether that will disrupt the whole dream of recreating economies, the world without the centralized 1% controlling everything? I don't think so, too many people worldwide are involved. Let's not forget that Paypal was going to fail to because the old money would never support such evolution (although considering that they've become one of the strictest regulated players with way too many unilateral flags and blocks, they may not be the perfect example in this specific discussion).

As far as I managed to observe and follow all politicians, none so far seem to have any intent to regulate blockchain and cryptoes in the knee. Basic regulation, protection and the possibility to go after criminals, yes but everybody knew that would come some day.

Besides, always more and more countries are joining the crypto world. Japan has made huge legal progress, Venezuala and Russia may not be the prime examples but nevertheless, they present signs that adoption is becoming wider. 

Here in the Philippines, regulation is already fully integrated and no local player can operate an exchange with accreditation from the Philippine Central Bank. Since more than 20 companies have applied, two of which were already active with an AML/KYC compliant 'cash out BTC to fiat' app and the first local, fully accredited exchange is currently in beta test stage, and letting in more users every day. Which IMHO is a nice position to be in as it also means that there's no *grey* about crypto anymore, instead it's fully white.

In the USA adoption by regulators is also growing as several states have already that they will accept tax payments in crypto.