However, there’s one thing I found interesting about how CZ described this thought. When he described DEXs listing tokens as good, while CEXs doing the same as them is considered bad, I felt compelled to think about this for a brief second. It’s one of those simple sentences which quietly follows the call to question things. His belief that exchanges should provide access to everything sounds less like a bold claim and more like a reflection of what crypto was originally built for.
From a distance, I can understand both sides. Decentralized exchanges have always been about openness. Anyone can list, anyone can trade, and the system moves without asking for permission. That freedom is almost part of their identity. So when every token is available there, it feels normal. It feels expected. But when a centralized exchange lists too many tokens, the reaction is very different. People start asking questions. Is it safe? Is it vetted? Is it worth trusting?
That contrast is where the real conversation begins. A centralized platform carries a different kind of weight. Users don’t just see it as a marketplace. They see it as a gatekeeper. So when a CEX lists something, many assume it has been checked, approved, or somehow validated. That expectation changes everything. Suddenly, access isn’t just about choice anymore. It becomes about responsibility.
But CZ’s point feels rooted in a more open vision. The idea that exchanges should provide access to everything sounds like a return to the original spirit of crypto — where people decide for themselves, where markets form naturally, and where information matters more than restriction. It’s not about saying every token is good. It’s about saying access itself shouldn’t be limited.
At the same time, I can’t ignore the reality that this space is still risky. New tokens appear every day. Some bring innovation. Some bring noise. Some disappear as quickly as they arrive. In that environment, complete openness can feel exciting, but it can also feel overwhelming. Especially for newer users who look at big exchanges as safe places to start.
That’s why this debate doesn’t have a simple answer. On one side, there’s the idea of freedom and open access. On the other, there’s trust and protection. Both matter. Both shape how people experience crypto.
What CZ said doesn’t feel like a final conclusion. It feels more like a reminder that the industry is still figuring itself out. How much should platforms protect users? How much should they let the market decide? Somewhere between access and responsibility, the balance is still being written.
#CZ #Binance #CryptoExchange $BNB
