Topic: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank? - page 48. (Read 9916 times)
Banks are safer now. crypto is a very risky environment. I believe it will become more secure in the future. I hope we can provide this in the future.
It seems to me yes. But unlike to bank, you can't restore your stolen money in crypto. Just your wallet got compromised and you lose everything. In bank you can appeal and security will find those who stole money and repay you amount stolen. that's difference between centralisation and decentralisation
Keeping money in cryptocurrencies have some advantages, especially that you have full control. But if something goes wrong, no one will help you
That's what this is all about, the crypto currency does not yet have any state regulation, but on the other hand one can make good money here and not pay tax. I think that this is only a matter of time.
I do not believe the banks! I hold very small amounts, only to pay for purchases. It is better to keep money in its pure form, like real estate, gold, crypto...
Not so long ago, Banks burst one after another . Therefore, there is no confidence in the safety of their profits nowhere . I'm all for investing in real estate. And in bitcoin to make money and sometimes display
Nothing is safe, not even real estate related investments. Some years ago the real estate market in Spain hit the rock bottom, houses and apartments were so cheap. People lost millions. If some new global economic crisis hits, unfortunately we'll lose money one way or the other.
i realise how volatile crypto is but to be honest i love knowing that i actually ultimately control my own funds, and i dont trust the banks one bit! i only keep what i have to in fiat
So far, I feel if my money is safer stored in crypto currency than in the bank. I am more flexible in controlling my money unlimited by bank policy. Every time I want to sell or add to my savings then I can do with ease. I can transact with a very large amount without any tax whereas if I use the bank then I can only make large transactions with various conditions and the existence of a lot of taxes. Furthermore, banks are more prone to inflationary impacts while the crypto currency is less affected by inflation.
To me no where is safe. No matter where my money is , it's not safe. There is a possibility to loose it anywhere it is. But I can't put all my money on cryptocurrency due to its high volatility
That's somewhat true, mate. However, I believe that money will be safe if you take the necessary precautions to secure it. Sometimes, people they tend to lose their money easily (especially in crypto) because of their carelessness in securing their money the right way. Banks are regulated and protected by the government, so you can rest assured that your money will be safe there from theft (as in the US it's insured by the FDIC). On the other hand, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum are extremely secure to store your money, but it all depends on the wallet you're using, and how you're making use of it.
With cryptocurrencies, you can take necessary measures to protect your hard-earned money from thefts or hacks. The safest approach is simply generating your key pairs offline (which results in a paper wallet/cold storage) or making use of hardware wallets like Trezor or Ledger Nano S which are extremely secure. However, the biggest risk in crypto is the high volatility in price, and carelessness of developers in abandoning a specific cryptocurrency. Hence, your money might not be safe no matter where you put it. Just my thoughts
We trust in banks because they have regulated by the government. Cryptocurrencys are not safe in sense of value. Today we can see how we loose our money and nobody are Responsible.
I think that in a Bank the money would be definitely more secure. Just look at how many messages about hacked wallets or exchanges hacks. But the profit from storing money in cryptocurrency is much more.
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
Your cash unquestionably more secure in bank however you don't have full control over it, the cash is more secure yet it won't develop much and just losing it's an incentive to expansion. In the interim in crypto it can grow a ton as a speculation however it's less sheltered in the event that you don't have equipment wallet. There's a great deal of security issue in crypto like dns seize and other phising site, so on the off chance that you need your cash to be protected, better place it in bank.
it's not like my money is safer in a Bank than in crypto . crypto is very unpredictable and unstable
Well it is safer for keeping and buying stuff with it but for investment it's far better to keep it in crypto.
For me, banks are safer to keep your money instead of keeping in Crypto because banks take the responsibility for your money but in Crypto, you have to take your responsibility yourself if you are account gets hack you will lose your money.
it's not like my money is safer in a Bank than in crypto . crypto is very unpredictable and unstable
Yes, exactly. Bank is much safer since we could take note about the happening in it while cryptocurrency is very unpredictable and the volatility is quite high.
I'd still say money is safer in a bank, at least for now. Crypto is way too volatile for it to be considered safe. Imagine you put your life savings on BTC when the price was 15k. You'd have lost half your savings in less than a year.
May in future as they are improving it more and more buy regulating it but this will soon replace banks. I think Liven is a great.
when my money is in the Bank I am sure that it is safe, when my money is in crypto I am not sure of security
I think it's safer to keep the money in the bank but it's more profitable to invested in the crypto currency market !
Yes for me it is still much safer in the bank unless you have a secured place in your home and a hardware wallet or ledger to store your cryptocurrencies. What I do is to divide a portion of my investments to actual fiat and retain a portion as cryptocurrency that I can risk.
I think it's safer to keep the money in the bank but it's more profitable to invested in the crypto currency market !
what if the banks fold down, what will you do since you said saving money in the bank is more secured yes that is true but i don't saving money in banks anymore, i would rather leave it in crypto currency than bank. due to bank problems that is what stops me from saving money in the banks
Probably all the same to store money in the Bank is safer than in cryptocurrency , but most likely less profitable. Here you can earn a lot, but also a lot to lose . The more risk, the more profit
Jump to: