I will keep my money in the bank because the crypto is unstable and I can lose my money.
I'm more confident to save my money in Bitcoin than altcoin.
Topic: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank? - page 86. (Read 9898 times)
I think bank is the safest place to store money, but saving in cryptos brings about increasing in the money, when one invest money in cryptos there is probability of increasing by 2x within months.
Many institutional investors have changed their minds about critico recently. the deep crisis of the world financial institutions, which began with the crisis of the mortgage market in the United States, has become priceless. For several years, many experts have called crypto a real opportunity to find a way out of this protracted decline in the market.
Most people simply do not know about the cryptocurrency and do not understand its advantages. To translate a billion, you need to call up with the bank, pay a transfer fee, solve problems, wait a lot of time. With bitcoin, this is done in a few hours with a very small commission (for now). Ordinary people do not need to think where to save their savings - if under the mattress, then they are slowly eaten by inflation, and if in the bank - then the bank can revoke the license and they will lose their money. In bitcoin, inflation does not eat up money - its value only grows and people never lose their money, because they are not stored somewhere and at someone.
In Russian money is safer in crypto, because a banks unreliable and can collapse at any time. Besides goverment can take your money through court bailiffs. Thus, crypto is so popular in Russia.
I think it's safer to keep the money in the bank but it's more profitable to invested in the crypto currency market !
I do not trust the banks with my money, I keep only the money in the bank that I need to pay communal payments, food and other small expenses. All other money I send for the purchase of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, and also invest in various ICO projects. Unlike banks in cryptocurrencies, I like the fact that my wallet, in which coins are stored, no one can block and all my transactions also can not be blocked by anyone.
No, I don't think that putting my money in the cryptocurrency market would be safer than putting it in a bank,But putting money into the market will make me happier Because it makes me richer . Haha
Bank guarantees return of your funds in case of their theft, in crypto you should be VERY CAREFUL in order to protect your funds from different scammers and hackers, and it will be very difficult to return your crypto back.
If you are talking of being safer in the sense of less risk involved then I will say bank but if you talk of being safer in the sense of absolute control of your fund then I think crypto is good to go. But don't forget you may lose all your money in crypto without warning than if is in the bank.
Banks is the safest for risk, but I prefer having part of my portfolio in risky assets and the remaining in safe places
Banks are a safe place for you to save. The crypto is where you can invest and make a lot of money. So the bank is safer than crypto
I think it's safer to keep money in the bank. But neither there nor there are 100% guarantees for the safety of your money. As for crypto, it is very risky, but profitable
My opinion, it's safer to keep your savings in a bank, but neither does it guarantee that they will not be lost, but the probability of losing is many times lower than that of crypto. But despite this, the cryptocurrency is a very profitable investment
I think both of them have their specific disadvantages and advantages. For putting money into banks, banks may go bankruptcy or losing all the savings from the bank. For crypto, crypto is still very much volatile and unstable, even the exchanges and the ICOs and there are more scams in crypto. Thus, depend on your extent of risky acceptance, you can choose the best ways to invest your money.
I think the bank seems to be safer today than crypto. Because I often see cases of loss or theft from a hacker in crypto. If such a case is still not resolved, it means that the crypto world is still unsafe compared to the bank.
Of course not, how can you think about it! Yes, I'm sure that the crypto currency has a great future, but so far the price is very unstable and can fall at any moment! Do not invest in crypto currency that money that you are not ready to lose!
Crypto wallet and Bank both are different type of wallet. Crypto wallet is a online wallet. Most of the people use online wallet but some people use hardware wallet so if you use hardware wallet for your crypto currency then it is very safer for your Crypto wallet but if you use Bank it also more secure because if you use offline Bank so it is very safe for everyone or if you use online bank so you feel some problem with it.
In my opinion, money is Safer at 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 !
I agree with you, saving money in the bank is certainly safer. We can feel safe because our money is kept by a trustworthy and licensed institution, and supervised by the government in it's management. But we can not expect to gain much profit by saving money in the bank because bank give a very small profit.It is true that if we want to get a better profit, we have to invest our money in crypto currency market, but it's high risk. The risk of investing is huge because the price of the digital currency is so volatile that it could be potentially harmful. If you have a digital currency, you will be an interesting target for cyber criminals, but only yourself can ensure your password security.
Similarly, when we save money in the banks and banks robbed or collapsed because of the economic crisis or miss management, in this case the risk that may occur in investing in bitcoin is if the company Bitcoin Exchange where you save Bitcoin suddenly collapsed or get attacks from hackers who 'steal' Bitcoin property of the customers. So make sure you really understand this risk.
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
That is a question for yourself. You need to protect your own money and not letting anyone do it for yourself. Just pick a good choice on where you should keep your money in.
Jump to: