Ernst & Young: Cryptocurrencies are a great innovation!

[Possum577]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

Speaking in an interview with Channel NewsAsia Connect, Ernst & Young's Global Banking & Capital Markets Emerging Markets Leader, Jan Bellens, said his company truly believes in cryptocurrencies' potentials, which he believes hold "many upsides, especially for emerging markets." However, the executive noted that several issues needed to be resolved in the short-term in order for the technology to reach its maximum potential and succeed as global currencies.

When one of the big for accounting firms is touting the benefits of cryptocurrencies we've started to turn the corner on widespread acceptance. This is very, very good news!

More here.... -> http://cointelegraph.com/news/113061/ernst-young-cryptocurrencies-are-a-great-innovation

[1714027883]

1714027883

[1714027883]

1714027883

[1714027883]

1714027883

[1714027883]

1714027883

[Miracal]

I don't think the mentioned two key issues is issues. From the long term, individuals or business will benefit from this clear policies to bitcoin. It will set a good example for the other countries in bitcoin regulation.

[NorrisK]

I don't think the mentioned two key issues is issues. From the long term, individuals or business will benefit from this clear policies to bitcoin. It will set a good example for the other countries in bitcoin regulation.

I do think security is a key issue. The avarage user cannot even protect his or her email account, let alone a digital wallet potentially containing thousands of dollars. Fool proof security is required for the masses.

[maku]

I don't think the mentioned two key issues is issues. From the long term, individuals or business will benefit from this clear policies to bitcoin. It will set a good example for the other countries in bitcoin regulation.

I do think security is a key issue. The avarage user cannot even protect his or her email account, let alone a digital wallet potentially containing thousands of dollars. Fool proof security is required for the masses.

I agree, especially that society combines people at different age and knowledge, so we cannot except everyone to know how things work. Also there should be some kind of campaign informing people how things work and why btc is good for them.

[arallmuus]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

I dont see how "security" is the issue here since cryptocurrencies are way more secure in comparation to the old bank/fiat system if you are going in for long term. There could nothing more secure than "securing your own holding" like you can do with crytocurrencies.
One of the issue with using cryptocurrencies is that it is inevitable to volatility that withhold some potential of it since most people only based on how good a  cryptocurrencies is from the value of it

[NUFCrichard]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

I dont see how "security" is the issue here since cryptocurrencies are way more secure in comparation to the old bank/fiat system if you are going in for long term. There could nothing more secure than "securing your own holding" like you can do with crytocurrencies.
One of the issue with using cryptocurrencies is that it is inevitable to volatility that withhold some potential of it since most people only based on how good a  cryptocurrencies is from the value of it

I 100% agree that security is a big issue. Too many hundreds of thousands of Bitcoins have been stolen by hackers from what were thought to be safe wallets.
Mt Gox were obviously a poorly run company, but they must have had some security measures in place. That didn't stop them getting hacked.  Bitstamp are actually a good company and they got hacked, do you really think that if someone wanted to they couldn't hack your account?

The masses aren't very tech savvy. Internet explorer is still used by about 20% of the population. They will be sitting ducks for hackers.

KYC isn't a big issue for the masses, just regulators.

[arallmuus]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

I dont see how "security" is the issue here since cryptocurrencies are way more secure in comparation to the old bank/fiat system if you are going in for long term. There could nothing more secure than "securing your own holding" like you can do with crytocurrencies.
One of the issue with using cryptocurrencies is that it is inevitable to volatility that withhold some potential of it since most people only based on how good a  cryptocurrencies is from the value of it

I 100% agree that security is a big issue. Too many hundreds of thousands of Bitcoins have been stolen by hackers from what were thought to be safe wallets.
Mt Gox were obviously a poorly run company, but they must have had some security measures in place. That didn't stop them getting hacked.  Bitstamp are actually a good company and they got hacked, do you really think that if someone wanted to they couldn't hack your account?

The masses aren't very tech savvy. Internet explorer is still used by about 20% of the population. They will be sitting ducks for hackers.

KYC isn't a big issue for the masses, just regulators.

First  bolded part will be due to human error or human's flaw of unable to secure their own belongings. Most that got hacked was due to that they are unaware that they downloaded a malware (not tech savvy like you said)

Second bolded part is pretty much unclear that if it is inside job or that they really got "hacked" or that it was planned long ago to do this fraud

Third bolded part is a good example since bitstamp are one of the most reliable exchanger around but this whole thing could be applied to FIAT as well since I there are lof of "stealing incident " as well though. Still I do thing that everything cant be perfect but atleast cryptocurrencies are better in most aspect

[Possum577]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

I dont see how "security" is the issue here since cryptocurrencies are way more secure in comparation to the old bank/fiat system if you are going in for long term. There could nothing more secure than "securing your own holding" like you can do with crytocurrencies.
One of the issue with using cryptocurrencies is that it is inevitable to volatility that withhold some potential of it since most people only based on how good a  cryptocurrencies is from the value of it

Securing your bitcoin holdings is significantly more difficult than securing your cash - which is protected form fraud in the US through FDIC insurance (which ever bank in the US is covered by) or simply holding your cash in your home. Bitcoin, however, required complex addresses, access to systems that will authenticate the public and private keys to make a transaction, and (most alarming) any online bitcoin account is never in full control of the owner!

Banks are still more secure than bitcoin, unfortunately. I agree with EY's analysis that security is a big issue. However I don't think KYC regulation would be good for bitcoin, part of the benefit of the currency is the anonymity.

[arallmuus]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

I dont see how "security" is the issue here since cryptocurrencies are way more secure in comparation to the old bank/fiat system if you are going in for long term. There could nothing more secure than "securing your own holding" like you can do with crytocurrencies.
One of the issue with using cryptocurrencies is that it is inevitable to volatility that withhold some potential of it since most people only based on how good a  cryptocurrencies is from the value of it

Securing your bitcoin holdings is significantly more difficult than securing your cash - which is protected form fraud in the US through FDIC insurance (which ever bank in the US is covered by) or simply holding your cash in your home. Bitcoin, however, required complex addresses, access to systems that will authenticate the public and private keys to make a transaction, and (most alarming) any online bitcoin account is never in full control of the owner!

Banks are still more secure than bitcoin, unfortunately. I agree with EY's analysis that security is a big issue. However I don't think KYC regulation would be good for bitcoin, part of the benefit of the currency is the anonymity.

This is quoted from the article as I see that their statement has some flaw in it

There are massive security risks. The fact that there are large sums of virtual money involved, attracts quite a lot of criminal activities and quite a lot of security issues."

Seems to be a flaw there, Large sum of money involved ( in this case cryptocurrencies ) has nothing different than a large sum of FIAT involved. Criminals will always be attracted to large sum of money and it has nothing to do with either cryptocurrencies or FIAT.

As for the bolded part. Those bolded part are actually about human error in securing it especially if it is a techsavvy guy. In one point you are right that but in the other point if you are a not a techsavvy guy than money is still much more secure in form of crypto.

P.S: most thief are techsavvy as well and top hackers will aim for exchangers rather than someone's personal wallet with few BTC in it.
Just my 2 cents though 

[Possum577]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

I dont see how "security" is the issue here since cryptocurrencies are way more secure in comparation to the old bank/fiat system if you are going in for long term. There could nothing more secure than "securing your own holding" like you can do with crytocurrencies.
One of the issue with using cryptocurrencies is that it is inevitable to volatility that withhold some potential of it since most people only based on how good a  cryptocurrencies is from the value of it

Securing your bitcoin holdings is significantly more difficult than securing your cash - which is protected form fraud in the US through FDIC insurance (which ever bank in the US is covered by) or simply holding your cash in your home. Bitcoin, however, required complex addresses, access to systems that will authenticate the public and private keys to make a transaction, and (most alarming) any online bitcoin account is never in full control of the owner!

Banks are still more secure than bitcoin, unfortunately. I agree with EY's analysis that security is a big issue. However I don't think KYC regulation would be good for bitcoin, part of the benefit of the currency is the anonymity.

This is quoted from the article as I see that their statement has some flaw in it

There are massive security risks. The fact that there are large sums of virtual money involved, attracts quite a lot of criminal activities and quite a lot of security issues."

Seems to be a flaw there, Large sum of money involved ( in this case cryptocurrencies ) has nothing different than a large sum of FIAT involved. Criminals will always be attracted to large sum of money and it has nothing to do with either cryptocurrencies or FIAT.

As for the bolded part. Those bolded part are actually about human error in securing it especially if it is a techsavvy guy. In one point you are right that but in the other point if you are a not a techsavvy guy than money is still much more secure in form of crypto.

P.S: most thief are techsavvy as well and top hackers will aim for exchangers rather than someone's personal wallet with few BTC in it.
Just my 2 cents though 

What are you saying? It's really hard to follow your point. Can you summarize it?

[Kakmakr]

When wallet providers eventually get it right, security will be a non-issue. The banking sector have the same problems on the client side, so it's nothing new. To top that, they even have problems on the bank side too.
The Bitcoin protocol on the other hand, has to my knowledge, never been compromised in such a way, that people lost Billions of dollars. <MtGox was not a protocol problem> This is something that these huge centralized financial services cannot say.

[Towlie]

Re: Ernst & Young: Cryptocurrencies are a great innovation!

Yeah, we know. I doubt we'd be here otherwise  . I think cryptos are only getting started in the grand scheme of things and haven't really even begone to full break into the mainstream yet, but it will be exciting when they do and to see how far they go.

[johnyj]

In current banking system, if a large sum of money is lost, it will always end up somewhere in another account, since each account have its owner identified well, banks only need to freeze the destination account and eventually reverse it, the loss will be undo (Criminals can not take out cash in a fast enough manner)

However with bitcoin it is not the case, once fiat money entered bitcoin exchange, and bitcoin withdrew, there is almost no way to trace it further. Besides that, fiat money can be used to purchase mining rigs thus not even need to go through an exchange

So it is almost impossible to enforce KYC rules in bitcoin world, and that is exactly bitcoin's benefit, it brings more privacy than current banking system where everyone are almost naked in the eyes of banks

If KYC is not possible, then many current financial regulations will become useless. How could government manage risk and fight criminal/terrorism when KYC is very difficult? How could a country to enforce capital control when bitcoin can be used freely for international transactions?

Anyway, the AML/KYC regulation is reported to bring more cost than the benefit, so maybe it is the time for government to give up regulating every one's financial privacy and focus on other area

[aso118]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.

Security is an issue all users are concerned about. KYC is an issue all governments are concerned about.
KYC is a non-issue as far as users are concerned. If not, cryptocurrencies like Dark coin won't be around.

[tyz]

Singapore-based Ernst & Young LLP Partner Jan Bellens believes "cryptocurrencies are a great innovation with great upsides for the long-term," as long as the two keys issues, named as security and KYC, get resolved in the short-term.
...

I am wondering what they mean with longterm? 5, 10, 20, 50 years   I mean in technology era longterm should mean something between 3-5 years. In the old economy, longterm is defined as 10-50 years.