Neither is impregnable. But your money saved up in the bank is insured and in any eventuality you do not bear the loss. In crypto currency, be it on an exchange or a wallet. Your loss is your loss.
I say the bank is SAFER.
Topic: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank? - page 82. (Read 9898 times)
I think it's safer to keep the money in the bank but it's more profitable to invested in the crypto currency market !
It was very obvious that your money is really safe on the banks but the problem is that, we all know that the increase in prices if you are placing your money on banks is very low due to their own rule of scaling in the increase in their system.
of course it will always be safe in bank than in crypto, we know that crypto uses the block chain technology and that is really mind blowing to know how they keep and store all the data and information uniformly and safely but base on the value it is not stable and it has no sign to be stable, unlike on bank it will preserve its value, i think people here are after profiting, and when they earn their money will eventually go to their bank accounts.
Yes for me personally I think crypto and spicially dai is more safer than bank but volatile market and others coin depend on your own research goodluck
it's safer and more liquid in the bank where you can easily withdraw your money in time of emergency for now but hopefully in the future this will be changed. Cryptocurrency value is very volatile and ofcourse there's always a chance your wallet will be hack so it's kinda unsafe in a way. So only invest what you can afford to lose in cryptocurrency.
I expect bank on is safiest accommodation emblematizing my currency however i prize crypto very today you dont condition to chore machine or currency whether do you permit digital pouch so you can pay emblematizing anything you with out cash and machine cards.
I consider that now it is better to store money in cryptocurrency and during the cryptomarket growth periods, to withdraw a part of money in cash.
Thus you will always be in the chips.
Of course the saved-up means need to be filled up.
I for earnings participate in Bounty-campaigns and Airdrops.
Maybe still I will connect trading on altcoins.
Thus you will always be in the chips.
Of course the saved-up means need to be filled up.
I for earnings participate in Bounty-campaigns and Airdrops.
Maybe still I will connect trading on altcoins.
I still consider bank is safer keeping money in the bank but if we want our money to grew it is much better to put some of it or invest in cypto.
in my opinion, it is safer to save money in the bank because in crypto the price is not fixed, the money in crypto is hanging by a thread it may result in profit or loss
For today this is a very actual issue. From the one hand bank gives you some guarantee that you will get some income in future.
On the other hand youu should pay for you bank account. And course of the money you invest in bank may vary suddenly.
Nevertheless, blockchain is independent on country and payment systems. Also I can control my investment every time I want to do this.
On the other hand youu should pay for you bank account. And course of the money you invest in bank may vary suddenly.
Nevertheless, blockchain is independent on country and payment systems. Also I can control my investment every time I want to do this.
I think money is safer to keep in the bank, oн бoлee cтaбилeн. Keeping money in the cryptocurrency there is more chance to increase or lose money.
Cryptocurrency has a feature that makes your money secured and protected as it doesn't need to undergo to many transfers unlike in banks. The transactions made are peer to peer means there is no third person to interfere. I think it's a good mode of transaction but I also think that money will be a bit safer in banks as they can track the transactions made, because of decentralization of crypto, transactions made within its system can't be tracked. So in bank, if there's any malfunction on the transaction, you can still know what happened to your money.
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
Crypto is intended for investment because it is more safe and profitable if we invest it in crypto market than saving our money in the bank, Because cash is easy to steal by common iresponsible people in the bank or the outsider thieves.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
It is safer if you know how to secure your wallet and cryptocurrency becomes very profitable and countries are adopting it, there is a risk investing in cryptocurrency because of volatility but it is not also 100% safe to keep it in a bank although much safer than Bitcoin.
Yea very much. What essence is having my hard earned money in banks where another man will get it to make investment in even crypto only to reap bountifully from it whereas I the owner will even have to languish how different deductions that will come underway for some needles transactions via bank charges. Hence, it's actually wise if one can use such doughs on investments on different promising coins lying around every corners. Who knows, one can secure his future financially from this.
I prefer to keep a part of my money in bank, part - at home, and another part in crypto) I don't trust banks as in my country they are absolutely non proffesional and trustworthy, so crypto is more safe in my case
When we talk about safety, the bank will probably be the best choice. But of what use will it be when you leave your money in the bank instead of investing it into something that is more profitable? In cryptos too, your safety is equally guaranteed if you are cautious yourself. 
Basically it's more safe when you store your funds on bank but your future is not safe on bank. If you store your funds on cryptocurrency definitely your future is safe because theres a big potential on cryptocurrency than storing your funds on banks.
Banks are often closed, and the crypto currency holding a project is depreciating ... It is necessary to do 50/50!
Depending on the way we look and want to have progress, I usually save money, and if we want to benefit from the money it's better to invest, but certainly a lot of different opinions, but if you want to invest dicrypto will be more promising buy altcoin which has prospects for growth. and rest assured that investment will provide income.
Jump to: