I glanced at the news about the user accidentally transferring money yesterday, and I never imagined it would escalate to the point where the owners of two exchanges were involved. The Binance UID transfer process itself is fine; I use it frequently, and I just tested it again. It requires verifying the recipient's profile picture, the UID matching the nickname, facial recognition, and several other steps. So how can the user who transferred the wrong money bear no responsibility? I can understand the ingrained thinking; they just clicked through without paying attention. But I roughly guessed that Binance would compensate the user to resolve the issue, but the user would also have to admit their negligence; it can't end with Binance being solely blamed. Then Binance would start fixing this legacy problem. This guess is based on my understanding of Binance's consistent approach to similar user issues over the years. Besides, it's not a large sum of money. I woke up to find they'd escalated the situation and started arguing! I once helped Huobi build a local exchange in Australia. Every company's rapid expansion phase has a different development experience, including different strategies due to mergers and acquisitions or historical reasons. I understand that with rapid industry development and frequent changes in laws and regulations in different regions, some uncommon legacy issues might arise. Just solve them one by one, or create a bounty program to reward those who discover vulnerabilities. Isn't that a mature mechanism already? Binance previously had a reward program for reporting insider trading, which was quite effective. Anyone who discovers a potential risk to their assets can submit it to Binance and receive a reward based on the circumstances. There's really no need to make such a big deal out of it. Who can guarantee their service is flawless? When they encounter problems themselves, they'll only realize how embarrassing it is when the boomerang comes back to haunt them.