Topic: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank? - page 78. (Read 9898 times)
I think its more profitable to keep our money in cryptocurrency. Keeping our money on the bank reducing the value by inflation and saving our money in cryptocurrency can be double because its like investment instrument. But for emergency, we should have account in the bank and safe in crypto with money that we can afford to lose because its high risk
What will determine whether your money is safer in crypto is dependent on how secured the wallet you are using is. Another thing again is that keeping money in crypto might either make you gain or loose, because crypto currency is volatile, except you decide to hold tether (USDT). On the other hand, keeping money in banks is safe, although there will be charges in form of tax levied on your cash in bank.
You know what for me both are good but i prefer saving money money in the bank.... Though in crypto it is profitable and good.... We didn't know what will happen because it is just starting unlike in the bank we know them lots and also we trust them.... But both of it is quite good and great.... Everyone has a freedom to choose what they want and its up to you and its up to your decision if what will you tust or not....
In real talk, it still safe to save money from our banks. Because banks takes the risk of what would happen to our money if anythings happened. It is only my opinion. 
I like that there is freedom of choice in crypto-currencies. For me, there is no need to deposit my money for a long time on a deposit with a bank, I can at any time sell the assets that belong to me on the exchange. I believe that it will be safe to keep assets in the crypto currency.
The Deposit placed in the Bank is no longer a source of income. Given the level of inflation in many countries, this method of investment is rarely able to save capital from inflation. In my country, banks have Deposit insurance, but in case of Bank failure, they return a very small percentage of the total amount, less than 90%. It only says one thing that money in the Bank is dangerous to keep. In addition, with the advent of cryptocurrencies, many banks are waiting for bankruptcy. It is more reasonable to invest in cryptocurrencies, as this is the future, and in many countries you can buy material things and services for cryptocurrencies. And I think it's very cool!
From a technical point of view, I believe that banks are safer, if for example wrong address in sending money through wallet those tokens are lost forever. But I believe that we will reach ever higher levels of security. Be patience.
For me money is more safer in banks than those damn scam ico,in bank our money is securely handled but with a tiny interest than you cant almost notify ,but in cryptoworld in joining ico yes theres a huge risk that may be entertaid but the posibility of gaining big is indeed
I think that their arguments are reasonable, but I personally prefer to pursue Bitcoin because I have invested in it because it can earn benefits for me. I don't care how long it lasts!
I think it's safer to put money in the bank, but it won't make a lot of money.
But investing in cryptocurrency can make us very profitable and risky.
But investing in cryptocurrency can make us very profitable and risky.
Every market has it own risk and Crypto is not spared. I would say I would rather make some profits investing in Crypto that keeping money in bank where-
1 - The returns are less
2 - As your balance grows, the prying eyes increase
3 - The government/third party has full control over your funds and can seize them if need be.
I used to love banking but not anymore. They just do not belong within the new decentralized system.
1 - The returns are less
2 - As your balance grows, the prying eyes increase
3 - The government/third party has full control over your funds and can seize them if need be.
I used to love banking but not anymore. They just do not belong within the new decentralized system.
In my opinion, this market is less protective than banks, since we see how many thefts have been committed over the last years, banks, of course, are robbing, but now less
Traditional banks have their advantages as well as disadvantages. But for me cryptos are safer because you have control over your assets at anytime and you can't say that for banks
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
Well, I guess this decision would probably go to the bank companies. First of all, they do have the biggest trust around the world which is a good image for an individual to lend some money. On the other hand, bank companies do have a permit to run their business with some permission of the people inside the government having that kind of tool could probably be a sign that this business [bank] is trusted and thus, the people could have an assurance that the bank could handle our money whole trustedly, unlike to crypto besides to its price that continuously fluctuates, we don't even have a single assurance that this will continuously running permanently.
When you put money in a bank , you nearly has 100% safety of that. When you put money in crypto, if you lost the private key, hacked, or put in a risk exchange , you have the much more chance to lost your money.
I more trust the cryptowallet with stable coins or altcoins and with private key that only I have. But I don’t trust banks because they can broke and I will not see my money any more.
I think banks and crypto have the same level of security. It's just that in the crypto money we have the possibility will increase if the price of coins rise but in the bank our money is stagnant instead it will be reduced because the cost is deducted admin fees every month.
It's pretty safe to have your assets in cryptocurrancy, but there are some risks you need to consider before transferring your fiat into crptocurrency, the value is not stable today you buy it at 1000 usd tomorrow could be 100 And you better be ready if it happend or you will break. I think Bank is the safest place for your money but you also like cryptocurrancy because you do not need to carry money if you have a digital wallet, then you can buy anything with cash and ATM card.
From a security perspective, I think that putting money into banks is more secure. From a profit perspective, I think that investing in cryptocurrencies is more profitable.
Based on what happened to some Banks who experienced Bankruptcy and decided to closed their Banks and some people lost their money. Still, we cannot say that crypto is safer than banks when it comes to money savings. But, we hope that our money in crypto will be safe and it won't happened the same with what happened to the Banks.
How about you? What do you think?
How about you? What do you think?
Jump to: