Quote from: Hispo on July 02, 2025, 08:34:33 PM

Quote from: coyhasmon on July 02, 2025, 07:33:41 PM

They already are censoring certain jurisdictions, so why wouldn't they if such laws come to place? Sure the DEX isn't censored on chain it is only the website, but very few people could use a DEX like Uniswap without the website.

One learns something new everyday, honestly.
I did not know that was possible. I assumed one needed to use the Uniswap interface as a the only way to interact with their smarth contracts, but now you mention it, it makes sense someone with enough knowledge on Ethereum code language could send a transaction directly to those smarth contracts and using the appropiate code in order for them to swap whatever coins they desire to.

Glad you learned something! You just need to think about it yourself and you will get there. If you needed also the website to interact with the smart contract, how is it any way decentralized? Just because something runs on the blockchian that does not make it decentralized. In the case of a DEX, you at the very least must be able to craft manual transactions for interacting with the smart contract. If not, then it is not decentralized.

Quote from: Hispo on July 02, 2025, 08:34:33 PM

Though, if Uniswap gets too rough with restrictions to some regions or wallets, what stops other developers to distribute tools to avoid those restrictions?

Legally it may cause problems if you share it from your identity, but anonymously you could do it. There is no money to be gained from sharing these tools for free and very few people would use or need it. I'm a bit disappointed in the lack of tools in ETH, but they don't care so much about decentralization.

Quote from: Abiky on July 08, 2025, 06:55:01 PM

I'm disappointed to see so-called DEXs imposing geographical restrictions on users. Crypto is supposed to be permission-less and censorship-resistant. But limiting people of certain countries from accessing a DEX or "De-Fi" platform, would greatly defeat crypto's original purpose. Developers are afraid regulators will go after them if they allow anyone to gain access to their platform. If that's the case, why make their identities public? Now you see why Satoshi was anonymous from the beginning. Otherwise, it would've been easy to regulate and enforce the rule of law on Bitcoin.

It is not so simple. Even if you do it anonymously, it has to be hosted somewhere. You could lose the domain and access to the hosting service provider. So they have means to shut it down or at least to make it very hard for you to operate if they want to.