If you need to keep money - do it in the bank. It's better than under the pillow
But if it's about investments, then surely that bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are much more interesting than banks.
Topic: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank? - page 74. (Read 9898 times)
Weird question.
If you need to keep money - do it in the bank. It's better than under the pillow
But if it's about investments, then surely that bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are much more interesting than banks.
If you need to keep money - do it in the bank. It's better than under the pillow
But if it's about investments, then surely that bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are much more interesting than banks.
This year I decided to transfer my money to the crypto currency. I think that it is more reliable than banks and we can still get additional revenue.
I think investing wherever it always has its own risks. It's just that investing in the bank more secure because there are third parties who will be responsible. But investing in crypto is actually more profitable than investing in a bank.
If we talk about security, everyone knows that there is no system in the world that is completely safe, so maybe the bank may be safer than crypto, but if we talk about profits, of course crypto is much more profitable than the bank
I think it's safer to keep the money in the bank but it's more profitable to invested in the crypto currency market !
Very well said, I agree. It is safer in the bank although it is also safe in here for as long as you know how to take care of your account but sad to say many hackers and scammers here unlike in the bank. But in your money in here can grown bigger more than double in just a couple of months unlike in the bank its like its interest is really small.
all the same, cash and money that are stored in the folder is much more reliable than cryptocurrency. the same Euro dollar and other currencies do not have such drastic price changes. therefore, it is still stable and safe to keep money in the Bank. but not far from the time when the cryptocurrency will replace cash.
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.
if not for sake of scammers i don't think keeping you money in the bank is safer than in crypto because you and you alone have the private key so keeping in crypto is safer to than bank.
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
Why would people even argue on this topic? Banks are almost no risk at all (unless you put all your money in one bank account, in which case, has a chance to lose all except the one covered by insurance). And the reason bank deposits are so riskless is because they have so little potential for growth unlike cryptocurrency.
Obviously Bank is safest place to keep money and it is safer than the cryptos.
When we compare both of them, in term of profit then Banks gives us a certain rate of interest on our savings but on the other hand crypto gives us unexpected return of our investment.
Second when you put our money in banks it is safe in government hand, but when you put money in cryptos, then there are chances that account will be hack and someone takeaway your all fund. And also if you lost your private key or passwords then also you lost your all fund.
So that's why i am saying that banks are more reliable and safe, than the Crypto.
When we compare both of them, in term of profit then Banks gives us a certain rate of interest on our savings but on the other hand crypto gives us unexpected return of our investment.
Second when you put our money in banks it is safe in government hand, but when you put money in cryptos, then there are chances that account will be hack and someone takeaway your all fund. And also if you lost your private key or passwords then also you lost your all fund.
So that's why i am saying that banks are more reliable and safe, than the Crypto.
The crypto is a good choice for ppl who live in the country has the unstable condition. Bank is a good choice, but not good for investing.
well for me, it is. even banks have some issue of scam or your money is being stolen by some individual without known reasons. if you have put your money into crypto, and used hardware wallet, it will be safe enough to save your funds.
I'd say bank.
Crypto has became more like an investment and speculation platform.
Bank has no problem of huge price fluctuation, they have no problems for hacks (if hacked, it's the bank that bears the loss) and there would be no problem for your if your money came from legit source.
While crypto investment are more like securities/stocks, you bear the profit and loss of the company. You can be rich as well go bankrupt.
Crypto has became more like an investment and speculation platform.
Bank has no problem of huge price fluctuation, they have no problems for hacks (if hacked, it's the bank that bears the loss) and there would be no problem for your if your money came from legit source.
While crypto investment are more like securities/stocks, you bear the profit and loss of the company. You can be rich as well go bankrupt.
Both has it's advantages and disadvantages. But if you are asking where is much safer, I would say the bank. Securities in the banks are upgrading.
Putting money in a bank is the safest way to hold your money that is no doubt but if you are wanting to earn money by just holding it on your own then crypto is the best way because it can able to double or even triple you money in a short span of time.
I think your money is safer in the bank as you pay them for securing your assets. Thats why they require those high transactions and other fees for your protection. The decentralized nature of crypto on the otherhand always you to freely make any transaction without the intervention of any financial institution. But of course with your own risk.
I am not sure that money in crypto currency is safer. Only 1 mistake and you can lose everything and nobody will help you. It's not too cool(
I think that depositing money into the bank is the safest, but if you want to make you rich, I think you still need to invest in cryptocurrencies, because cryptocurrencies can make your money more or even double.
If comparing the level of security between saving money in crypto or at the bank, I think the best level of security is the bank on the crypto appeal. Banks still dare to guarantee when our money is stolen or hacked, the bank will refund our money 100% and those who bear its loss as a consequence. But when our money in crypto (stored in the wallet) is stolen then we can not do anything or restore it (because it is difficult to return our money back).
I think you should look at your own prospects, no one can solve this problem for you, because there must always be an opinion. Thank you.
Jump to: