Topic: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank? (Read 9861 times)
I always see Crypto as safest mean to store assets. Since the technology behind it does not require any tgird trusted party, no one has control over your funds but you alone. Crypto is going to be the future of making funds have the full security, there is no way someone can interfere on what you have. The only thing you need to consider is to choose a good wallet that maximises the feature of Crypto which ia having an open source technology. You might consider HODLER wallet, it is a open source multi wallet giving the most simple design and having great security.
I think when your money is in crypto is really safe than being at the bank. This is because, at the banks it is controlled by a body which makes it centralized but in crypto you have a vas access to everything and it is decentralized.
Of course. This is one of the most important advantage of cryptocurrency. You do not need to trust your funds to third parties (the bank) anymore. You are responsible for your funds.
Depending on which Bank, if we talk about the banks of the CIS countries, then Yes, to keep all your money in a reliable cryptocurrency, it is more secure than in the Bank.
for the bank is more secure as it is the most money-money bank in our country because it is safe for crypto or exchanger because it is as good as exchanger funds to be stolen for exchangers who are not too strict in security because they can steal stolen so much better in the bank than the exchanger.
I can't say money is safer in cryoptowallet than bank.
Whichever money that get to the bank and get missing is at the banking organizations detriment. Because it has to be refunded. But any token lost in one's crypto wallet is at one's loss. Especially when it is lost to hackers.
The difference is, no one can easily access your account without your passwords - for crypto.
Whichever money that get to the bank and get missing is at the banking organizations detriment. Because it has to be refunded. But any token lost in one's crypto wallet is at one's loss. Especially when it is lost to hackers.
The difference is, no one can easily access your account without your passwords - for crypto.
At the moment no. It is much safer to put your money into a bank account. The crypto currencies market is very unstable and could lead to your deposit loss. But on the other hand you can become reach by hodling such a sum in crypto currencies.
Cryptocurrencies have always been a very risky investment, especially for those who prefer short-term investments. But for people who choose long-term investments, this works quite differently. Bitcoin is the safest asset in this regard. The income of long-term Bitcoin investors far exceeds the similar income on bank deposits.
Millions of crimes are committed annually using cash. Slightly fewer crimes are committed in the sphere of the economy, with the help of various funds and off-shores. And only a small percentage of all these crimes with the use of crypto currency.
Banks every day "rob" ordinary citizens through high interest rates on loans.They will never give up the hen that lay golden eggs,. The economic war between fiat money and cryptocurrencies will be very tough.
Banks every day "rob" ordinary citizens through high interest rates on loans.They will never give up the hen that lay golden eggs,. The economic war between fiat money and cryptocurrencies will be very tough.
Yea, very very tough but eventually, when the chips go down, the whole world will know that which truly holds its interest at heart, and that which serves only a few. For now, by way of economic confusion, and etc, it is just the tip of the iceberg we are seeing. Truth is; bitcoin is one of the few inventions that will experience the stiffest forms of opposition, and if forms of prosecution of past eras where allowed, Satoshi could be hunted and perhaps murdered like Galileo Galilei.
Perhaps the best response:
"Draper was more brazen in his responses and implored the crowd to use fiat if they were looking to facilitate their own criminal activity as many Bitcoin criminals get caught."
Keeping your money safer is always in the bank. Crypto is not a safe place to store, firstly the prices are constantly changing, secondly there are no reliable wallets for storing crypto.
I think that you risk more here than when you are dealing with a bank. Of course, by investing a good bank, you will ensure your safety. But the bank will not make a big profit.
Hi. In terms of safety, I think it is much safer in the bank you trust. Compared to cryptocurrency, the value is fluctuating and we will never know when it goes up or down. It is still safe in bank because of it is far from hackers. Once the money was stolen in your wallet, then you will not recover it anymore. But if your money was stolen in the bank, there is a chance that you can still recover your money from the bank. The disadvantage is that the interest in the bank is too small compared to cryptocurrency where sometimes it doubles your savings. It depends in you which one is better, the risky choice or the safer one.
I keep my savings in Bitcoin, I consider it more convenient and safe for me than storing in a bank account, which can freeze or close at any time, with Bitcoin this does not happen. I am 100% sure about this.
Safe as far as you hold your crypto in a hardware wallet otherwise there is no single penny of guarantee or warranty of your money. But in terms of value if we say there is definitely the erode of value is a must. So, always trust upon banks if your money is not black.
I think it is safer to store your money in digital assets, such as bitcoin. The most important thing is to use reliable protection systems against hackers. I do not trust banks for a long time, they often go bankrupt and do not return the money.
I think, with the current situation. My money in the bank will be safer in Crypto. Due to the nature of non-government, the nature of abnormal fluctuations that money in the crypto will be easy to evaporate. But if for investment exchange, I would choose to my money in crypto. In crypto, I will have the opportunity to earn a quick profit.
Our money is in the same degree of insecurity both in crypto and in the bank. Our security depends on our with you care and caution when using passwords of bank cards and secret keys in crypto. Be careful and your money will be safe.
the level of security in money deposited in crypto or bank types is actually equally safe, it's just that there is nothing in the crypto type that guarantees binding legal legality. and if it is to save the bank more insurance coverage that binds the law and is more clearly visible to use.
Tim Draper: More Secure in Bitcoin Than the Money Sitting in Wells Fargo
Venture capitalist Tim Draper is bullish on Bitcoin and believes it will reach $250,000 in the next four years.
During a debate hosted by Intelligence Squared and the Adam Smith Society, Tim Draper was asked how Bitcoin compared with his previous tech investments in Hotmail, Skype, and Tesla. He replied bullishly, saying, “Bitcoin will be bigger than all three combined.” However, Draper didn’t leave it at that — he thinks it will be bigger than the iron age, the Renaissance, and the internet and says that the nascent technology will affect the entire world in a faster and more prevalent way than ever imagined.
The Debate: “Bitcoin is more than a bubble and here to stay.”
Backed up by Patrick Byrne (CEO of overstock), Draper took on Financial Times journalist, Gillian Tett, and Professor of Law, Eric Posner, both of whom argued that Bitcoin is indeed a bubble and strongly contested Draper’s claims. Posner and Tett called into question the “strengths” of Bitcoin, arguing that they could be regarded as weaknesses. Posner suggested that the pseudonymization of identity enabled by the technology makes Bitcoin transactions the perfect vehicle for sophisticated criminal transactions. Tett focused on the risk involved with trusting computers with finance as they can be hacked, are prone to faults, and that Bitcoin is a “terrible store of value.”
These arguments won’t be anything new to anyone who has studied the space, and the rebuttals of Draper and Byrne won’t come as a surprise either. The pair acknowledged that Bitcoin was imperfect and drew attention to the fact the technology was designed to be open source so that unforeseen problems can be managed by the community. Byrne also pointed out that although Bitcoin has been “hacked at” more than anything in history, but unlike banks, it has yet to be defeated.
Draper was more brazen in his responses and implored the crowd to use fiat if they were looking to facilitate their own criminal activity as many Bitcoin criminals get caught. The venture capitalist responded to Tett’s admission that she invests in several different fiat currencies by saying, “I’m so much more secure in my Bitcoin than I am in the money that’s sitting there in Wells Fargo.”
Who is right?
The short answer is it’s far too early to tell, but it is good to see the subject being discussed in this manner. Before the debate, Gillian Tett remarked that if both sides of an argument aren’t heard in the same room, on the same day, then the conversations can “go past one another.” It’s probably safe to say she’s right here because, although there is no shortage of media on either side of the argument, real debate on the subject can be difficult to find.
If crypto is going to head down the road Draper expects, its advocates need to be able to argue their case outside of the crypto community, and debate should be welcome as it not only gives both sides the ability to speak but also the ability to listen.
Draper’s comments are to be expected
As crypto enthusiasts, it’s easy to agree when figures like Draper sing the praises of Bitcoin, but we shouldn’t let confirmation bias get in the way of the issues. Draper is a successful investor, and he hasn’t arrived there without making mistakes. He could be wholly right, wrong, or somewhere in between — the latter is most likely. Draper allegedly owns 30,000 BTC, so he has a vested interest in Bitcoin’s success. That does not mean he is wrong, but it does mean his comments should be taken with a pinch of salt. Well-reasoned arguments are far more convincing than hype and chest beating because they allow people to make up their own minds.
The emergence of DLT might eclipse the impact of other innovations, but for now, the emphasis is not on critics to prove the crypto community wrong. It’s up to those who champion DLT to convince the world they’re right.
Originally published at cryptodisrupt.com
Venture capitalist Tim Draper is bullish on Bitcoin and believes it will reach $250,000 in the next four years.
During a debate hosted by Intelligence Squared and the Adam Smith Society, Tim Draper was asked how Bitcoin compared with his previous tech investments in Hotmail, Skype, and Tesla. He replied bullishly, saying, “Bitcoin will be bigger than all three combined.” However, Draper didn’t leave it at that — he thinks it will be bigger than the iron age, the Renaissance, and the internet and says that the nascent technology will affect the entire world in a faster and more prevalent way than ever imagined.
The Debate: “Bitcoin is more than a bubble and here to stay.”
Backed up by Patrick Byrne (CEO of overstock), Draper took on Financial Times journalist, Gillian Tett, and Professor of Law, Eric Posner, both of whom argued that Bitcoin is indeed a bubble and strongly contested Draper’s claims. Posner and Tett called into question the “strengths” of Bitcoin, arguing that they could be regarded as weaknesses. Posner suggested that the pseudonymization of identity enabled by the technology makes Bitcoin transactions the perfect vehicle for sophisticated criminal transactions. Tett focused on the risk involved with trusting computers with finance as they can be hacked, are prone to faults, and that Bitcoin is a “terrible store of value.”
These arguments won’t be anything new to anyone who has studied the space, and the rebuttals of Draper and Byrne won’t come as a surprise either. The pair acknowledged that Bitcoin was imperfect and drew attention to the fact the technology was designed to be open source so that unforeseen problems can be managed by the community. Byrne also pointed out that although Bitcoin has been “hacked at” more than anything in history, but unlike banks, it has yet to be defeated.
Draper was more brazen in his responses and implored the crowd to use fiat if they were looking to facilitate their own criminal activity as many Bitcoin criminals get caught. The venture capitalist responded to Tett’s admission that she invests in several different fiat currencies by saying, “I’m so much more secure in my Bitcoin than I am in the money that’s sitting there in Wells Fargo.”
Who is right?
The short answer is it’s far too early to tell, but it is good to see the subject being discussed in this manner. Before the debate, Gillian Tett remarked that if both sides of an argument aren’t heard in the same room, on the same day, then the conversations can “go past one another.” It’s probably safe to say she’s right here because, although there is no shortage of media on either side of the argument, real debate on the subject can be difficult to find.
If crypto is going to head down the road Draper expects, its advocates need to be able to argue their case outside of the crypto community, and debate should be welcome as it not only gives both sides the ability to speak but also the ability to listen.
Draper’s comments are to be expected
As crypto enthusiasts, it’s easy to agree when figures like Draper sing the praises of Bitcoin, but we shouldn’t let confirmation bias get in the way of the issues. Draper is a successful investor, and he hasn’t arrived there without making mistakes. He could be wholly right, wrong, or somewhere in between — the latter is most likely. Draper allegedly owns 30,000 BTC, so he has a vested interest in Bitcoin’s success. That does not mean he is wrong, but it does mean his comments should be taken with a pinch of salt. Well-reasoned arguments are far more convincing than hype and chest beating because they allow people to make up their own minds.
The emergence of DLT might eclipse the impact of other innovations, but for now, the emphasis is not on critics to prove the crypto community wrong. It’s up to those who champion DLT to convince the world they’re right.
Originally published at cryptodisrupt.com
Its absolutely safer in the bank than putting in cryptocurrency, but when we talk about the gain that we could get, still it is presumable that putting in cryptocurrency might earn a lot, but there is no assurance of it, it maybe loss, or a gain, but rather, putting in a bank presumes that the money you invested might earn a small portion, but it is a sure one.
Still bank is better in holding funds.
Re: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank?
of course they are safer at the bank, but keeping them in crypto is more profitable, but risky
risk always comes when we save our money in crypto. if we are not careful and careful then our money might be stolen by someone. actually saving money in the bank or in crypto is the same depending on how we own it, how we secure it.of course they are safer at the bank, but keeping them in crypto is more profitable, but risky
If your money in the bank its value will not change much after a year because it depends on the inflation of each country. And if you invest that amount in crypto, it can increase several times to several dozen times
Jump to: