I have roughly reconstructed the FDUSD incident, and there are quite a few responsible parties here, but it is true that someone needs to take responsibility for this. First, I looked at @ justinsuntron's tweet, and Justin started posting three consecutive tweets at 23:21 Beijing time. The main content is about the occurrence of FTD's insolvency incident, and it cites news published on Coindesk, indicating that Justin first exposed this matter on Coindesk. But neither Justin's own post nor Coindesk's post explicitly mentioned the issue of FDUSD, only stating that FTD has become insolvent. So what's going on? The story begins in 2020, when TrueUSD (TUSD) was initially issued by TrueCoin and acquired by Techeryx Ltd. in December 2020. After the acquisition, Techteryx entrusted First Digital Trust to manage its reserve funds, which means FDT itself is an asset management company, not the issuing company of TUSD. And in the Coindesk documents, Justin also provided some evidence to prove that FDT may have some problems, of course, the specific content Justin said will be announced at the press conference on April 3rd. So what does this have to do with FDUSD? Indeed, FDT itself is the issuer of FDUSD and has issued FDUSD, but it is also the asset manager of TUSD. However, I did not see any content directly related to FDUSD in Justin's explanation or Coindesk documents. I'm not even sure if FDT manages FDUSD and TUSD separately, so I checked the February reserve report released by FDT in March, which showed that FDUSD has $1.7 billion worth of short-term US bonds and has been fairly treated. Of course, if we follow Justin's statement of fairness, there may be issues. I suggest that those who suffer losses can download this reserve report from FDT's official website. If FDT falsifies it, they can sue in Hong Kong and receive 100% compensation. If you can't download it, you can ask me for it. So since FDUSD was not mentioned, how could many people know that FDT itself is responsible for FDUSD? It may be another piece of news. This news clearly stated that FDT is the issuer of FDUSD, and of course, this statement is correct. Moreover, FDT's official website only has one product, FDUSD. Therefore, in line with Justin's statement, many users believe that FDUSD will explode, leading to a significant detachment of FDUSD. Looking back at the entire incident, @ FDLabsHQ should have given the highest priority for speaking, but in fact, the official statement of FDT was only issued at 12:25 am Beijing time, more than an hour after the incident, by which time FDUSD had almost returned to above 0.98. Secondly, it should be @ Binance that sends out official information. As FDUSD is almost the exclusive partner, Binance has an undeniable responsibility for FDUSD. Users choose to use FDUSD not because they believe in FDT, but because they believe in Binance. However, even now Binance has not sent any information through official channels, and has missed the best stop loss time for users. Partial paths and declarations have been provided for @ justinsuntron, but stronger evidence is needed, which can be seen tomorrow. My personal suggestion now is that for this wave of loss making investors, either prepare to sue Justin or prepare to sue FDT, the former is in Hong Kong and the latter is a Hong Kong company, neither of which can escape. Whoever lies, sue them.