Will a bank being hacked boost adoption of bitcoin?

[louisLavery]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

[1714895822]

1714895822

[LottoBooking]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Probably the liklelihood of getting your BTC Wallet hacked is far higher than getting your Bank account hacked.
When it comes to "traditional" and "revolutional" I'd go with the traditional.

However hypothetically if that would have happened it's probably only that specific bank that would lose its credibility and not the entire banking system nor the financial industry.

[Amph]

some banking are starting to not cover your money anymore, like those in austria, the crisis is really putting a dent on some of them, in those country it may be possible that some naive person will beginning to search for alternative way to store their money and bitcoin could be one of those

but unless this will happen in many country, you would get only the niche aspect of it

[Hazir]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Well, you are quite right. Financial Institutions are vulnerable to hackers. There are plenty of evidence that security measures of the biggest banks on our planet are really lacking hard.

http://www.pymnts.com/news/2015/how-100-banks-got-hacked-and-lost-900-million/ - you can read how easy is for hackers to steal money from banks...

But from the other side people are not gonna turn to bitcoin overnight just because their bank can be hacked. They won't lose theirs money, after all there is something like Bank Guarantee Fund.
Bank which are covering for their customers are rare and you can always choose better option for your money.

[LottoBooking]

but unless this will happen in many country, you would get only the niche aspect of it

That's correct, it's impossible to get a radical change unless if something radical happens.

[AtheistAKASaneBrain]

Everytime someone gets screwed by banks is a potential new Bitcoin user. Look at the Cyprus incident and look at Argentina where they are getting fucked on a daily basis by gov and banks, where the use of Bitcoin is higher than other countries in average.

[mmmaybe]

I highly doubt that,  There was a time when banks were screwing up with high and hidden fees, so prepaid cards came out with little to no fees, people started moving to them.


Bitcoin is going to take a lot longer to adapt due to it being technical. not every one is tech savvy (they should be its 2015) but some still live in the past.

but again bitcoin will take some time to be actually known.

at the moment bitcoin is known by criminals, tech savvy guys/gals and small guys trying to make a quick buck.

[arallmuus]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

For some people who understand technology well than it will shaken them ofcourse and could perhaps make them trust more in BTC but for someone that is blind on it then it will create a massive doubt for them, basically because their thoughts is that if such secured banking system could be hacked what would prevent a simple BTC wallet to not be hack
Also that people tend not to trust themselves into securing their own possesion which is why most people trust bank to secure their possesion and it takes them less trouble to secure things by themselves

[sdmathis]

Everytime someone gets screwed by banks is a potential new Bitcoin user. Look at the Cyprus incident and look at Argentina where they are getting fucked on a daily basis by gov and banks, where the use of Bitcoin is higher than other countries in average.

But if a person (especially one who doesn't know a lot about Bitcoin) gets screwed by the bank being hacked, he is more likely to turn to gold rather than Bitcoin. He just got screwed by the bank's computer system. He's not likely to turn to another computer for security.

[jayce]

some banking are starting to not cover your money anymore, like those in austria, the crisis is really putting a dent on some of them, in those country it may be possible that some naive person will beginning to search for alternative way to store their money and bitcoin could be one of those

but unless this will happen in many country, you would get only the niche aspect of it

I'm not sure if Bank want to lost the customers. What's the reason for them to do that? But this news really made bank reputation go down now, and people have no idea to save their money.

[bryant.coleman]

I don't think that if anyone hacks a major bank, we'll see a sharp spike in the number of Bitcoin users. Bank hacks happen extremely rarely. Out of the billions of bank accounts, only a few thousands get hacked every year. And now compare this figure to the hacking of Bitcoin wallets. Out of the 10 million or so Bitcoin wallets, at least 1% gets hacked every year.

[jayce]

I don't think that if anyone hacks a major bank, we'll see a sharp spike in the number of Bitcoin users. Bank hacks happen extremely rarely. Out of the billions of bank accounts, only a few thousands get hacked every year. And now compare this figure to the hacking of Bitcoin wallets. Out of the 10 million or so Bitcoin wallets, at least 1% gets hacked every year.

I think the most important thing is how much amount was be hacked, not how many times it did. If the hacking just happened once, but the account owner lost some millions euro, it would became a big news.

[JayCoDon]

Credit cards are already being hacked and we don't see people flocking to bitcoin. Maybe that's because they don't know or maybe it's because it isn't convenient. Adoption will come when businesses realize that it is in their best interest to pay bills using bitcoin. That'll decrease fees and allow for more cash to be deployed investing in other projects.

[LottoBooking]

Credit cards are already being hacked and we don't see people flocking to bitcoin. Maybe that's because they don't know or maybe it's because it isn't convenient.

That's a good point.
Bitcoin probably doesn't attract lots of investors due to the high volatility involved with it, and many fluctuations as well.
It could be worth $250 today and $200 tomorrow, and that probably explains why many investors or consumers are not using it on a daily basis.

[Valanor]

The Bank of Canada has issued new statements on bitcoin and digital currencies as part of its annual spring review.

Perhaps most notably, the central bank speculated that the stability of the financial industry could be threatened by bitcoin and its potential risks, should it develop into a widely used means of payment, saying:

    "There could be potential risks to overall financial stability if Bitcoin became a significant means of payment and the Bitcoin system remained unstable."

The comments came as part of wider report on digital currency platforms – such as Amazon Coins, Facebook Credits and World of Warcraft gold – that ultimately found that these financial instruments should monitored by central banks, though they are unlikely to become a more widely used method of payment.

The statements follow earlier comments from the central bank that suggested it believes it is still too early to predict whether decentralized digital currencies like bitcoin will enter the mainstream.

Consumer risk

The Bank of Canada used to the report to reiterate the risk consumers face when using bitcoin due to the ongoing volatility in its price, as well as issues with major bitcoin exchanges:

    "In particular, given that digital currencies such as bitcoin are not regulated and do not have a centralized issuer, users bear all of the risks themselves and have no legal recourse should they wish to reverse a bitcoin transaction."

Potential benefits

The central bank did acknowledge that the bitcoin network has the potential to improve financial services in some key areas, noting that bitcoin offers lower transaction costs than credit cards as it removes traditional financial intermediaries.

Still, it suggested that even in areas like the remittance market – where many experts believe bitcoin could benefit underbanked consumers, the volatility and security issues associated with bitcoin outweigh the potential benefits.

Despite the warnings, however, Canadian entrepreneurs remain undeterred. For more on how Canada is leading the world in the development of bitcoin ATMs, read our most recent report.

[Amph]

some banking are starting to not cover your money anymore, like those in austria, the crisis is really putting a dent on some of them, in those country it may be possible that some naive person will beginning to search for alternative way to store their money and bitcoin could be one of those

but unless this will happen in many country, you would get only the niche aspect of it

I'm not sure if Bank want to lost the customers. What's the reason for them to do that? But this news really made bank reputation go down now, and people have no idea to save their money.

as i said they have high debt, and they can't cover your ass anymore, it's a good opportunity for someone to try bitcoin at  the very least

one should just hope that the future bitcoin banks, will not go in the same way...

[jayce]

some banking are starting to not cover your money anymore, like those in austria, the crisis is really putting a dent on some of them, in those country it may be possible that some naive person will beginning to search for alternative way to store their money and bitcoin could be one of those

but unless this will happen in many country, you would get only the niche aspect of it

I'm not sure if Bank want to lost the customers. What's the reason for them to do that? But this news really made bank reputation go down now, and people have no idea to save their money.

as i said they have high debt, and they can't cover your ass anymore, it's a good opportunity for someone to try bitcoin at  the very least

one should just hope that the future bitcoin banks, will not go in the same way...

And I'm not sure the customer that be aggrieved by bank want to try bitcoin because he doesn't have any idea about that and doesn't want to risking his money anymore.

[ScryptAsic]

No. There is no tie between Bitcoin and fiat. Bank are centralized and Bitcoin is decentralized and sort of stands against what banks stand for.

[GreenStox]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Probably the liklelihood of getting your BTC Wallet hacked is far higher than getting your Bank account hacked.
When it comes to "traditional" and "revolutional" I'd go with the traditional.

However hypothetically if that would have happened it's probably only that specific bank that would lose its credibility and not the entire banking system nor the financial industry.

Actually it's not. The probability of a bank getting hacked is nearly impossible due to security precations but an insider can very well do it.

However in bitcoin there is nothing to hack if the sums are well spread out on different accounts.

Thus since a bank stores extreme sums of money, if it gets hacked then its game over and it will lose all money.

If 1 bitcoin address with 10-20 bitcoin gets hacked, no big deal.

[Febo]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Or a bank robbery?
They, at least they should, be insured against any theft.
The point of bank is that your money there is safe. Once is not no one will put their money to bank. That is their main business. Keep money safe. When they fail in this they can just close down.

Adoption of Bitcoin is inevitable. Reason is security and low costs.

[arallmuus]

No. There is no tie between Bitcoin and fiat. Bank are centralized and Bitcoin is decentralized and sort of stands against what banks stand for.

The value of BTC is tied to FIAT anyway and thats what most people measurement are to see if BTC is dying or not. Actually what OP meant is that since there has been alot of banking security has been breached will there be a chance that people might look for a safer and much more secure things to secure their FIAT which is BTC and provide a boost to the adoption because of this

[louisLavery]

I was really thinking of a hack that wrecks the accounts (records) in a bank so as they are unable to reliably restore those accounts (perhaps I could have framed the question better, but it's never easy, at least for me). I don't know how good the backup systems are in any bank, but there are limits to backups and the better they are the more they cost. Another point is that, to many, it seems intuitively obvious that a centralised private system is more secure than a public decentralised system, when in fact neither is inherently more secure than the other.
We see country to country cyber attacks happening more often. If you want to bring another country to its knees then attacking its banking system is quite a good idea, isn't it? Well, it depends if there are cheaper ways, I suppose. Also, what's the cost of making a system secure against such attacks?  Isn't the banking system archaic and due to be severely hacked, unless the banks spend the dosh to make the system more robust? But why would they do that when they know governments will bail them out! As I said, I think it's sure to happen sooner or later.

[randy8777]

there have been several bank hacks where millions were stolen, but it didn't boost bitcoin in any way. people most likely see bitcoin as less safe as the media most of the times only report hacks and thefts.

[LottoBooking]

No. There is no tie between Bitcoin and fiat. Bank are centralized and Bitcoin is decentralized and sort of stands against what banks stand for.

The value of BTC is tied to FIAT anyway and thats what most people measurement are to see if BTC is dying or not. Actually what OP meant is that since there has been alot of banking security has been breached will there be a chance that people might look for a safer and much more secure things to secure their FIAT which is BTC and provide a boost to the adoption because of this

Yes, that is because of globalization.
A bitcoin in Africa is not the same as Bitcoin in Europe.
The fundamental reasons for it are linked to FIAT currencies.
And there is no escape, we have to be tied to FIAT, even gold/silver etc. are all tied to FIAT.

[Amph]

No. There is no tie between Bitcoin and fiat. Bank are centralized and Bitcoin is decentralized and sort of stands against what banks stand for.

The value of BTC is tied to FIAT anyway and thats what most people measurement are to see if BTC is dying or not. Actually what OP meant is that since there has been alot of banking security has been breached will there be a chance that people might look for a safer and much more secure things to secure their FIAT which is BTC and provide a boost to the adoption because of this

Yes, that is because of globalization.
A bitcoin in Africa is not the same as Bitcoin in Europe.
The fundamental reasons for it are linked to FIAT currencies.
And there is no escape, we have to be tied to FIAT, even gold/silver etc. are all tied to FIAT.

fiat is tied to other fiat to, but only because you need another asset  to measure the value of your asset, for bitcoin isn't any different, it need fiat just for that and nothing else, so it's not really tied because it work well alone, but to have a representation of its value

bitcoin could do well even without any fiat, you just need to get used to it with the barter, if you know for example, that 1 btc is = to an apple then you know that 10 apple are 10 btc, then you can theorize that one car is 10k apple and so on, it's all about estimation at first

[Bananana]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

No, even if the banking get hacked so badly, the most important thing is that people's money is secured by government.

[mrhelpful]

if anything they`ll probably have a free pass, and get aid from govt.

and then upgrade their security, thats the most it`ll do. but they wont consider bitcoin lol.

[jbrnt]

When banks are hacked and depositors looses money, banks pay them back with the profits they make. It has no effect on bitcoin. If banks go bankrupt, then it will raise Bitcoin awareness, but it's doesn't happen too often. Bitcoin doesn't need these financial crisis to succeed. In a few more years, more people will use Bitcoin simply because it is the easiest and faster way to transfer money across the world.

[techgeek]

When banks are hacked and depositors looses money, banks pay them back with the profits they make. It has no effect on bitcoin. If banks go bankrupt, then it will raise Bitcoin awareness, but it's doesn't happen too often. Bitcoin doesn't need these financial crisis to succeed. In a few more years, more people will use Bitcoin simply because it is the easiest and faster way to transfer money across the world.

We need something like back in 2008 crisis to happen all over again.

To re-awake people with their financial options are pretty much.

[Stargazer]

Depends on the amount stolen. The Cyprus bail-out definitely influenced the adoption of Bitcoin, so if a big bank was hacked it would make people look for alternatives.
It wouldn't directly influence adoption, but it would surely make people aware of the fact that their funds aren't safe in a bank and hopefully encourage them to do some research.

[lissandra]

usually though they hire those special program people to avoid this problem.

but, im pretty sure they would have aid from other bank partnerships like if its a sister bank and continue operations.

[yahoo62278]

banks are robbed all over the world every year. it has been happening since the beginning of time. even with the introduction of btc it has not moved everyone to think btc is the new currency.

the difference between a bank being robbed or hacked and btc being hacked is most banks insure funds up to a certain amount. im sure if you could find someone to open a btc bank that was fdic insured some ppl would use it, but i dont think the whole world converts

[bitbaby]

I don't think it will have a significant affect on Bitcoin's adoption because people will get their money back. I don't know about other places but here if you put money in your account, it's the responsibility of the Bank to keep it safe and secure from robbery/hack and in case something like this were to happen the Bank will have to provide remuneration to it's customers in full.

The only affect I see from this, the bank that got hacked will lose it's credibility among some of it's users and they will opt to not use the same bank again, even after receiving the compensation. The only thing that can encourage people to adopt bitcoin imho is education and easier ways of keeping it secure.

[bryant.coleman]

I don't think that if anyone hacks a major bank, we'll see a sharp spike in the number of Bitcoin users. Bank hacks happen extremely rarely. Out of the billions of bank accounts, only a few thousands get hacked every year. And now compare this figure to the hacking of Bitcoin wallets. Out of the 10 million or so Bitcoin wallets, at least 1% gets hacked every year.

I think the most important thing is how much amount was be hacked, not how many times it did. If the hacking just happened once, but the account owner lost some millions euro, it would became a big news.

Even if the account holder loses a few million Euro as a result of the robbery, how we can claim that Bitcoin is much safer than bank savings accounts? Remember the Mt Gox robbery? Some 600 million USD worth of coins and fiat were stolen. That represented more than 5% of all the Bitcoins in circulation at that time. Could hacks of such magnitude occur with banks?

[bornil267645]

I dont think the competition of Bitcoin with Banking system is about security. I think it is more about the users freedom of using money. So hacking a bank won't make much of a difference. But establishing a stable bitcoin market will.

[arallmuus]

fiat is tied to other fiat to

Actually no, thats different because each currency stand as their own in the issued country

bitcoin could well even without any fiat, you just need to get used to it with the barter,

Unless you forgot, currency is created do disminished the old fashioned barter system which is not equal in the trade and thus easier to use currency such as FIAT exist

I dont think the competition of Bitcoin with Banking system is about security. I think it is more about the users freedom of using money.

Actually the bolded part indicate a correlation to the security issue though because even though both banking system and BTC could be hack . the difference would be that with BTC a person is able to secure his own belonging at his own will thus this.
The problem would be that not everyone wants or able to secure their own personal because not everyone is techsavvy ofcourse (seriously it would be hard to teach a 60 years old grandpa securing his retirement funds in BTC by himself)

But establishing a stable bitcoin market will.

Unfortunately it would be hard to do this because the current market is being manipulated. Way to do so would be if the entire supply of BTC is in the market circulation, then that would create a more stable market

[AtheistAKASaneBrain]

Bitcoin and fiat is like a ying yang relationship sort of thing. I think it's simply unavoidable that if something gets attacked, the other part gets benefited, and it's probably directly proportional. The bigger the disappointment is with fiat, the better Bitcoin will look in people's eyes and viceversa.

[Amph]

fiat is tied to other fiat to

Actually no, thats different because each currency stand as their own in the issued country

so you think that the problem as to do with the fact that bitcoin is decentralized and there isn't any issued country

what would happen if fiat now, would collapse, and bitcoiin price could not be measured with it, how one can know if bitcoin will be valued more or less?

i think the same that happened when fiat money was born at first, it gained value by permitting the owner to buy more items, and with the passage of time, the demand for it raised and thus its value

Unless you forgot, currency is created do disminished the old fashioned barter system which is not equal in the trade and thus easier to use currency such as FIAT exist

yeah i know this, i didn't say that we should return to barter, i did say that we should start all over again with bitcoin, and try to achieve an estimate in value without using fiat, but barter, at first, then you are free to use bitcoin only

[arallmuus]

fiat is tied to other fiat to

Actually no, thats different because each currency stand as their own in the issued country

so you think that the problem as to do with the fact that bitcoin is decentralized and there isn't any issued country

I dont mentioned anything about this, Im barely stating that each fiat is not actually tied to one another

what would happen if fiat now, would collapse, and bitcoiin price could not be measured with it, how one can know if bitcoin will be valued more or less?

Fiat wouldnt be "dead" and it will still be there, worst thing It will go will be getting into super inflation like Zimbabwe Dollar and the price of BTC will still be tied to it even if the currency getting into super inflation

Unless you forgot, currency is created do to disminished the old fashioned barter system which is not equal in the trade and thus easier to use currency such as FIAT exist

yeah i know this, i didn't say that we should return to barter, i did say that we should start all over again with bitcoin, and try to achieve an estimate in value without using fiat, but barter, at first, then you are free to use bitcoin only

That wont work, people are used to this FIAT system and no one gonna agree to "barter" things like It used to be because it has no estimation value either. Going back to where we was not going to help because BTC is treated as a good/stocks now and not a currency itself which means that it has a value that is tied to another currency.

[Amph]

I dont mentioned anything about this, Im barely stating that each fiat is not actually tied to one another

yeah ok, but from what you've said about the fact that they aren't tied because they are issued, one could deduce that bitcoin, is tied because it's not issued, thus not centralized like fiat, you can see the logic behind it easily

Fiat wouldnt be "dead" and it will still be there, worst thing It will go will be getting into super inflation like Zimbabwe Dollar and the price of BTC will still be tied to it even if the currency getting into super inflation

mine was just a possible scenario, if what i say happen then how someone can measure bitcoin value without fiat? there must be another way right? surely there is, and this is why i don't think that bitcoin is tied to fiat

That wont work, people are used to this FIAT system and no one gonna agree to "barter" things like It used to be because it has no estimation value either. Going back to where we was not going to help because BTC is treated as a good/stocks now and not a currency itself which means that it has a value that is tied to another currency.

estimate value, is estimated you know, it's not fixed, when you don't know the value of something first you estimte it, then you compare it with another estimate and so on, until you can find the good price of it, after all fiat started in the same way, there wasn't fiat at first, there was barter, then fiat come around VII century, if i'm not mistaken, and at the start there was an estimate of its value, then the demand of it increase, because people find it more easy to use than simply barter stuff all day

and i firmly believe that,  this is what would have happened if bitcoin was born without fiat

[louisLavery]

Some on here are suggesting that if a bank gets hacked people will get their money back, but that would mean the bank still has records of what each customer had which means the bank hasn't been hacked at all! At least not in the sense I mean, which is all records are destroyed - now how are banks going to restore what people had in their accounts? I'm thinking this could be done by an enemy state.
I guess the blockchain could be attacked too (Sybil attack?), but there seems less reason for any one state to attack it. In fact, if it was used as a world wide currency there'd be incentive to not attack it.

[Nicolas Dorier]

I am not scared about my bank being hacked by a hacker. This is the bank problem, not mine.

What I am concerned about is my bank account being hacked by my banker, legally.

[Amph]

I am not scared about my bank being hacked by a hacker. This is the bank problem, not mine.

What I am concerned about is my bank account being hacked by my banker, legally.

as long as there are insurance, you should not be scared by anything, if they can cover your ass, everything that will happen to your money is safe enough

but if something like austria or sveden(i don't remember now) happen, where bank will not offer insurance anymore, because they have bid debit problem, then the bank will be surely obsolete

[aahzmundus]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

There have been several cases where the bank was hacked but the price of bitcoin did not see any major changes as  there are more people in the world who need to know about the functions and value of bitcoin. If everyone tells atleast 2 or 3 people a month, the adaptability of bitcoin will spread like wildfire when news like these are out and the price will increase.

[Nicolas Dorier]

as long as there are insurance, you should not be scared by anything, if they can cover your ass, everything that will happen to your money is safe enough

Says that to cyprus and banco de madrid creditors.

[JarvisTechnology]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Well if Bitcoin has to grow, then it has to get accepted by banks. It doesn't matter if it gets hacked as the banks are always insured. In most of the countries, banks do not accept bitcoin. That has to be changed. Then only Bitcoin will reach common people.

[LottoBooking]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Well if Bitcoin has to grow, then it has to get accepted by banks. It doesn't matter if it gets hacked as the banks are always insured. In most of the countries, banks do not accept bitcoin. That has to be changed. Then only Bitcoin will reach common people.

The only way banks will accept Bitcoin is if it will become regulated like PayPal.
PayPal is regulated and that's why you can transfer money from/to your bank account with it.
Bitcoin is anonymous so it would be difficult to for banks to integrate it into their system just like that.

[Slark]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Well if Bitcoin has to grow, then it has to get accepted by banks. It doesn't matter if it gets hacked as the banks are always insured. In most of the countries, banks do not accept bitcoin. That has to be changed. Then only Bitcoin will reach common people.

The only way banks will accept Bitcoin is if it will become regulated like PayPal.
PayPal is regulated and that's why you can transfer money from/to your bank account with it.
Bitcoin is anonymous so it would be difficult to for banks to integrate it into their system just like that.

Bitcoin is not completly anonymous as you might think. But is is a pain to find specific bitcoin user nonetheless. But I believe bitcoin simply must change to bring it in line with other payment systems.
Unfortunately this means adding your identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds by financial institutions. It is only a matter of time when bitcoin regulations will hit us.
Sad but inevitable.

[LottoBooking]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Well if Bitcoin has to grow, then it has to get accepted by banks. It doesn't matter if it gets hacked as the banks are always insured. In most of the countries, banks do not accept bitcoin. That has to be changed. Then only Bitcoin will reach common people.

The only way banks will accept Bitcoin is if it will become regulated like PayPal.
PayPal is regulated and that's why you can transfer money from/to your bank account with it.
Bitcoin is anonymous so it would be difficult to for banks to integrate it into their system just like that.

Bitcoin is not completly anonymous as you might think. But is is a pain to find specific bitcoin user nonetheless. But I believe bitcoin simply must change to bring it in line with other payment systems.
Unfortunately this means adding your identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds by financial institutions. It is only a matter of time when bitcoin regulations will hit us.
Sad but inevitable.

Why do you not consider Bitcoin as anonymous as it stands right now? (not in the future)

[arallmuus]

Bitcoin is not completly anonymous as you might think.

Depends on what you compare it to, if you compared it to a bank account indeed BTC is completely anonymous

this means adding your identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds by financial institutions. It is only a matter of time when bitcoin regulations will hit us.

There will be no BTC regulations because it is not something that a country could control. Unfortunately most country will bann BTC for it because it cant be control and it will reduce the chance of mass adoption.
BTC was created so that people could leave the traditional economic system where identity is needed and that goverment could control your transaction, also block or reverse the transaction if needed. Adding identity to BTC transactions will only means that we are heading towards that old fashion system again

[Amph]

Bitcoin is not completly anonymous as you might think.

Depends on what you compare it to, if you compared it to a bank account indeed BTC is completely anonymous

it also depend on what tools you use, bitcoin it may not be anon on standard basis, but it hides potential on the anonimity that you can improve, if you use your tools correctly, like vpn mixer, monero ecc...

besides this, bank being hacked will boost other payments methods first, like paypal(which is already overused) and its clone

[LottoBooking]

Bitcoin is not completly anonymous as you might think.

Depends on what you compare it to, if you compared it to a bank account indeed BTC is completely anonymous

this means adding your identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds by financial institutions. It is only a matter of time when bitcoin regulations will hit us.

There will be no BTC regulations because it is not something that a country could control. Unfortunately most country will bann BTC for it because it cant be control and it will reduce the chance of mass adoption.
BTC was created so that people could leave the traditional economic system where identity is needed and that goverment could control your transaction, also block or reverse the transaction if needed. Adding identity to BTC transactions will only means that we are heading towards that old fashion system again

I don't think countries need to regulate bitcoin - they can just be one of those 'heavy traders' who can manipulate or change the market.
They don't need to regulate Bitcoin, just the fact they dropped its value from $600 to $230 should scare away lots of potential investors to stay away from this option.

[arallmuus]

Bitcoin is not completly anonymous as you might think.

Depends on what you compare it to, if you compared it to a bank account indeed BTC is completely anonymous

this means adding your identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds by financial institutions. It is only a matter of time when bitcoin regulations will hit us.

There will be no BTC regulations because it is not something that a country could control. Unfortunately most country will bann BTC for it because it cant be control and it will reduce the chance of mass adoption.
BTC was created so that people could leave the traditional economic system where identity is needed and that goverment could control your transaction, also block or reverse the transaction if needed. Adding identity to BTC transactions will only means that we are heading towards that old fashion system again

I don't think countries need to regulate bitcoin - they can just be one of those 'heavy traders' who can manipulate or change the market.
They don't need to regulate Bitcoin, just the fact they dropped its value from $600 to $230 should scare away lots of potential investors to stay away from this option.

Even if they want to , they cant because its in the nature of BTC that it cant be regulated. Unfortunately there are quiet few "potential investor" in BTC because BTC isnt viewed as investment for common people and mostly it is viewed as some kinda stocks for a quickswing in profit

To be honest, this low price is one of the reason that most people arent taking their attention into BTC yet, I would like a stable price but to boost adoption into BTC sadly a higher price is needed so that more people could see this as a potential

[LottoBooking]

Bitcoin is not completly anonymous as you might think.

Depends on what you compare it to, if you compared it to a bank account indeed BTC is completely anonymous

this means adding your identity information to bitcoin transactions and making it possible to blacklist funds by financial institutions. It is only a matter of time when bitcoin regulations will hit us.

There will be no BTC regulations because it is not something that a country could control. Unfortunately most country will bann BTC for it because it cant be control and it will reduce the chance of mass adoption.
BTC was created so that people could leave the traditional economic system where identity is needed and that goverment could control your transaction, also block or reverse the transaction if needed. Adding identity to BTC transactions will only means that we are heading towards that old fashion system again

I don't think countries need to regulate bitcoin - they can just be one of those 'heavy traders' who can manipulate or change the market.
They don't need to regulate Bitcoin, just the fact they dropped its value from $600 to $230 should scare away lots of potential investors to stay away from this option.

Even if they want to , they cant because its in the nature of BTC that it cant be regulated. Unfortunately there are quiet few "potential investor" in BTC because BTC isnt viewed as investment for common people and mostly it is viewed as some kinda stocks for a quickswing in profit

To be honest, this low price is one of the reason that most people arent taking their attention into BTC yet, I would like a stable price but to boost adoption into BTC sadly a higher price is needed so that more people could see this as a potential

How do the Bitcoin investors who though BTC was 'safe' at levels of $600 feel now that it lost more than half of its value?
If you were in their shoes would you still view it in that way?

[arallmuus]

Even if they want to , they cant because its in the nature of BTC that it cant be regulated. Unfortunately there are quiet few "potential investor" in BTC because BTC isnt viewed as investment for common people and mostly it is viewed as some kinda stocks for a quickswing in profit

To be honest, this low price is one of the reason that most people arent taking their attention into BTC yet, I would like a stable price but to boost adoption into BTC sadly a higher price is needed so that more people could see this as a potential

How do the Bitcoin investors who though BTC was 'safe' at levels of $600 feel now that it lost more than half of its value?
If you were in their shoes would you still view it in that way?

They lose almost 2/3 of it actually. Most have jumped off the sinking ship unfortunately but it is not a new things to hear. Basically alot has suffer at $1200 bubble, considering there are alot that buy at almost the peak point which means that they are losing alot on it.

It cant be helped anyway due to this volatility that this price decline will keep on happening in the future as well. With That being said , regarding the title of this thread even if a bank is hacked or any other things happen to the banking system , people will still choose another option to replace bank due to the volatility that may hurt them

[Gyfts]

I think the US dollar would crash before any banks became "hacked" to be honest. In fact, it's backwards. Bitcoin is way more often "hacked", for lack of a better phrase. You see exchanges go down left and right. Every now and then you hear about the big guys even taking a loss by hackers which definitely discourages the idea of Bitcoin in every sense of the matter. Going back to your original point, I do think the deterioration of fiat currencies will allow Bitcoin to take up more space in the economy. More people would choose to adopt it.

[arallmuus]

Bitcoin is way more often "hacked", for lack of a better phrase. You see exchanges go down left and right. Every now and then you hear about the big guys even taking a loss by hackers which definitely discourages the idea of Bitcoin in every sense of the matter.

Besides in term of security, BTC is more advanced than banks in any other things as well. Even if BTC lose in term of "security" but the other advantages will make up for this. Basically I think that BTC is less secure than banks only if someone dont know how to secure their BTC properly.
Another thing is that most people are techsavvy which means that they dont believe that any virtual coin on a computer might have a real life value

[Marbit]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Your assumption that hacking of banking systems and the finality of your statement is astonishing. I don't that's the kind of assumption that we can move forward with, but for your sake, let's say that does happen, it might boost crypto currency, but then again, people lose faith in digital systems anyway? So who knows where it pushed the bitcoin economy

[Q7]

Well, even if they don't get hacked, the money printing business is already a good enough reason to convince me that I will need to switch over to bitcoin. Fact is, this is happening all the time and people failed to see it or they just ignore it. Maybe like what you've said, a major scandal involving bank accounts getting compromised will make these people finally realized.

[bumm]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Well if Bitcoin has to grow, then it has to get accepted by banks. It doesn't matter if it gets hacked as the banks are always insured. In most of the countries, banks do not accept bitcoin. That has to be changed. Then only Bitcoin will reach common people.

The only way banks will accept Bitcoin is if it will become regulated like PayPal.
PayPal is regulated and that's why you can transfer money from/to your bank account with it.
Bitcoin is anonymous so it would be difficult to for banks to integrate it into their system just like that.

Agree, that is what I am saying, that if the banks started accepting bitcoins, then it will eventually becomes a regulated currency. And for integration, banks can use the existing bitcoin exchange platforms.

[arallmuus]

a major scandal involving bank accounts getting compromised will make these people finally realized.

Even if a major hacked or bank robbery occurs it will be hard to convince people to go for BTC . Most people think that bank are the most secure place to keep their money which means that telling them that you could secure your money in form of a virtual coin on your computer will be something that not comprehensible by them because people would think that if such secure place like bank could be hacked  then how can it is much safer to keep my money in form of virtual coins in my computer (logical thoughts)

[Amph]

a major scandal involving bank accounts getting compromised will make these people finally realized.

Even if a major hacked or bank robbery occurs it will be hard to convince people to go for BTC . Most people think that bank are the most secure place to keep their money which means that telling them that you could secure your money in form of a virtual coin on your computer will be something that not comprehensible by them because people would think that if such secure place like bank could be hacked  then how can it is much safer to keep my money in form of virtual coins in my computer (logical thoughts)

if they will be forced to secure them in another way, because banks will not be reliable enough in the future(imagines a great disaster, where the majority of the banks in the world, cannot cover your fund anymore) and the difference between depositing your money on their safe box and in your wallet would be zero, at that piint, i'm sure people will just use bitcoin more

[arallmuus]

Even if a major hacked or bank robbery occurs it will be hard to convince people to go for BTC . Most people think that bank are the most secure place to keep their money which means that telling them that you could secure your money in form of a virtual coin on your computer will be something that not comprehensible by them because people would think that if such secure place like bank could be hacked  then how can it is much safer to keep my money in form of virtual coins in my computer (logical thoughts)

if they will be forced to secure them in another way, because banks will not be reliable enough in the future(imagines a great disaster, where the majority of the banks in the world, cannot cover your fund anymore) and the difference between depositing your money on their safe box and in your wallet would be zero, at that piint, i'm sure people will just use bitcoin more

The bolded part, if there is such things happening then there isnt any need to save anything at all because the whole world will be ripping apart and I doubt money will be any use of that point (logic)

Back on topic, Even if such things happen , I have stated that it would not be easy to convince people that you could save your money in your computer in form of a virtual coins . For most people this things will not ring a bell in their ear unfortunately.
If by any point that people will be force to search for another option to keep their money safe , then saving it in their own computer will be the last option people would look at since most people arent techsavvy to understand this stuff

[Nicolas Dorier]

The bolded part, if there is such things happening then there isnt any need to save anything at all because the whole world will be ripping apart and I doubt money will be any use of that point (logic)

As long as the need to exchange goods among individual exists, money exists.
What happen is that people choose other kind of money. (Argentina is a nice experience to study)

If by any point that people will be force to search for another option to keep their money safe , then saving it in their own computer will be the last option people would look at since most people arent techsavvy to understand this stuff

I think you under value the ability of humans to learn when it is clear that it is for the good of their wallet.

Once again, we will see how argentina behaves. From people I know living there, as you said, non tech savvy people are still using western union in big waiting line and outrageous official exchange rate.
And the tech savvys uses Bitcoin.
Tech savvy or not, it is easy to understand that you get ripped by the forced exchange rate of the government.

There, the local currency costs 73 percent less to obtain on black market than at the official exchange rate. (Source)
I think people will adapt as they know they can suddenly earn 73% just by using bitcoin instead of WU.

[iram66680]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

Probably the liklelihood of getting your BTC Wallet hacked is far higher than getting your Bank account hacked.
When it comes to "traditional" and "revolutional" I'd go with the traditional.

However hypothetically if that would have happened it's probably only that specific bank that would lose its credibility and not the entire banking system nor the financial industry.

It is more likely for only a few accounts to be hacked. It won't go big on the news anyway. They can be reversed easily. Main reason being banks hire cybersecurity engineers to secure their servers. Bitcoin is secured by the operator or user themselves once hacked, they will never get the funds back.

[mmmaybe]

Banks have been comprised and illegal transaction did occur. It was done by anakata by ThePirateBay fame.

Almost all legal documents from the court are freely available, and most are translated to English. The documents are very, very interesting, telling much how vulnerable the modern society and its institutions and authorities is if some brilliant minds have the knowledge and dedication to get access even to personal bank accounts or major institutions internal computer system, such as
the Swedish Enforcement Agency (Kronofogden) or Police records.

Happy reading: https://wikileaks.org/gottfrid-docs/
 

[GreenStox]

Banks have been comprised and illegal transaction did occur. It was done by anakata by ThePirateBay fame.

Almost all legal documents from the court are freely available, and most are translated to English. The documents are very, very interesting, telling much how vulnerable the modern society and its institutions and authorities is if some brilliant minds have the knowledge and dedication to get access even to personal bank accounts or major institutions internal computer system, such as
the Swedish Enforcement Agency (Kronofogden) or Police records.

Happy reading: https://wikileaks.org/gottfrid-docs/
 

All banks can be hacked by an insider no matter how secure their software is. And if they restrict the keys to only the CEO and CTO then they will be very inneficient.

So the entire model is not secure because you have to rely on people. Bitcoin is different, here trust is default

[mmmaybe]

Banks have been comprised and illegal transaction did occur. It was done by anakata by ThePirateBay fame.

Almost all legal documents from the court are freely available, and most are translated to English. The documents are very, very interesting, telling much how vulnerable the modern society and its institutions and authorities is if some brilliant minds have the knowledge and dedication to get access even to personal bank accounts or major institutions internal computer system, such as
the Swedish Enforcement Agency (Kronofogden) or Police records.

Happy reading: https://wikileaks.org/gottfrid-docs/
 

All banks can be hacked by an insider no matter how secure their software is. And if they restrict the keys to only the CEO and CTO then they will be very inneficient.

So the entire model is not secure because you have to rely on people. Bitcoin is different, here trust is default

Correct That's why I own more and more cryptocurrency instead of fiat. But regarding the hacking, he had no insider - it was pure exploitation of technology.

[arallmuus]

That's why I own more and more cryptocurrency But regarding the hacking, he had no insider - it was pure exploitation of technology.

You are making your argument sounds like crypto is not hackable though. It is no doubt that crypto especially BTC is much more secure than a traditional bank however it doesnt meant it is a top notch security and is not hackable. The history of BTC is pretty much full of hacking incident especially that occured on a few exchanger several months ago and not to mention the MT. GOX "incident"

All banks can be hacked
-snip-
So the entire model is not secure because you have to rely on people. Bitcoin is different

BTC is absolutely different but again it is still hackable. With all the hacking that occured throughout the world and also alot of bank robbery that happened , it will take more than that to shift people's choice into BTC as an alternative to secure their belonging.
Mainly the reason for that will be that because not everyone know such tech-things or that people will still have some confidence with banks because it has been some sort of "tradition" or "common sense" to secure your money in a bank ( even you learned it when you are in your elementary stages that you need to save your money in a bank )

[mmmaybe]

That's why I own more and more cryptocurrency But regarding the hacking, he had no insider - it was pure exploitation of technology.

You are making your argument sounds like crypto is not hackable though. It is no doubt that crypto especially BTC is much more secure than a traditional bank however it doesnt meant it is a top notch security and is not hackable. The history of BTC is pretty much full of hacking incident especially that occured on a few exchanger several months ago and not to mention the MT. GOX "incident"

You misunderstood me. Sure, cryptocurrencies can be compromised too, but but be your own choosing your are able to "not put all egg in one basket". I have addresses in different forms of cold-storage off-line, and I own altcoins to diversify money. I even own various "precious metals". Still using backs bu when possible I move them off-line. Like my gold.

[GreenStox]

BTC is absolutely different but again it is still hackable. With all the hacking that occured throughout the world and also alot of bank robbery that happened , it will take more than that to shift people's choice into BTC as an alternative to secure their belonging.
Mainly the reason for that will be that because not everyone know such tech-things or that people will still have some confidence with banks because it has been some sort of "tradition" or "common sense" to secure your money in a bank ( even you learned it when you are in your elementary stages that you need to save your money in a bank )

Hahaha ask that from Argentinians or Venezuelans or now from Greeks...they will simply laugh at your statement.

These guys have experienced what happens to the economy when banks play ponzi schemes. I think if this collapse happens nobody will take banks seriously anymore.

They already have bad reputation so it's common sense to keep your money near you, and not in the bank.

[arallmuus]

BTC is absolutely different but again it is still hackable. With all the hacking that occured throughout the world and also alot of bank robbery that happened , it will take more than that to shift people's choice into BTC as an alternative to secure their belonging.
Mainly the reason for that will be that because not everyone know such tech-things or that people will still have some confidence with banks because it has been some sort of "tradition" or "common sense" to secure your money in a bank ( even you learned it when you are in your elementary stages that you need to save your money in a bank )

Hahaha ask that from Argentinians or Venezuelans or now from Greeks...they will simply laugh at your statement.

These guys have experienced what happens to the economy when banks play ponzi schemes. I think if this collapse happens nobody will take banks seriously anymore.

They already have bad reputation so it's common sense to keep your money near you, and not in the bank.

* Do learn how to quote properly, corrected the wrong quote anyway

Good example you got there however none of it is correlated with the topic. Perhaps you should read the main point of my statement again (bolded my main point, some people tend to not read giant wall of text I assume ).

With all what had happened recently especially with the Greeks, Id assume people wont trust banks anymore but that doesnt mean that people will shift their choice to BTC. If actually people shifted their choice into BTC, I'd assume we could see some huge increase on some graphs like number of Transaction per month or so .

Which means that people do not shift their choice to BTC just because the banking system in their country is failing. So the chance of BTC being adopted to the failure of the banking system is actually low. On another note, the failure of the banking system on a country will mostly lead people to shift their choice to another banking system in another country ( high chance for this to happen but not shifting into BTC )

[stallion]

It depends on the person pursuing the situation or how media demonstrates the situations to the masses who believe and follow such news blindly.
If people realize the beauty of bitcoin and shift, it might be great but chances of that happening too cannot be calculated just by assumptions. It may or may not boost it.

[GreenStox]

* Do learn how to quote properly, corrected the wrong quote anyway

Good example you got there however none of it is correlated with the topic. Perhaps you should read the main point of my statement again (bolded my main point, some people tend to not read giant wall of text I assume ).

With all what had happened recently especially with the Greeks, Id assume people wont trust banks anymore but that doesnt mean that people will shift their choice to BTC. If actually people shifted their choice into BTC, I'd assume we could see some huge increase on some graphs like number of Transaction per month or so .

Which means that people do not shift their choice to BTC just because the banking system in their country is failing. So the chance of BTC being adopted to the failure of the banking system is actually low. On another note, the failure of the banking system on a country will mostly lead people to shift their choice to another banking system in another country ( high chance for this to happen but not shifting into BTC )

Because they dont know about it. We need big advertisement campaigns telling greeks to buy bitcoin with their money under mattress.

I`m not saying all greeks to adopt bitcoin, but if we start with a healthy 15% that might do it for now.

We need awareness raising for them, and also quick greek language websites for bitcoin, i`m sure not all greeks speak english.

[dblink]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

The idea is good, however people only cannot able to adopt bitcoin in their entire banking system in their daily life on their own way without being support of Government who act as a central authority, What if government ban the people to adopt the bitcoin in their transactions ?

[arallmuus]

* Do learn how to quote properly, corrected the wrong quote anyway

Good example you got there however none of it is correlated with the topic. Perhaps you should read the main point of my statement again (bolded my main point, some people tend to not read giant wall of text I assume ).

With all what had happened recently especially with the Greeks, Id assume people wont trust banks anymore but that doesnt mean that people will shift their choice to BTC. If actually people shifted their choice into BTC, I'd assume we could see some huge increase on some graphs like number of Transaction per month or so .

Which means that people do not shift their choice to BTC just because the banking system in their country is failing. So the chance of BTC being adopted to the failure of the banking system is actually low. On another note, the failure of the banking system on a country will mostly lead people to shift their choice to another banking system in another country ( high chance for this to happen but not shifting into BTC )

Because they dont know about it. We need big advertisement campaigns telling greeks to buy bitcoin with their money under mattress.

I`m not saying all greeks to adopt bitcoin, but if we start with a healthy 15% that might do it for now.

We need awareness raising for them, and also quick greek language websites for bitcoin, i`m sure not all greeks speak english.

As a matter of facts securing money in form of BTC is the best security nowadays however this doesnt mean that it will be easy for people to shift their choice to BTC right away as there are other stuff that needs to be consider about such as the volatility issue . Common people would not love to have have their saving in BTC to be declining day by day ( or increasing ) .

Also that as most people are techsavvy, especially the older people,  I doubt that people will want to go into trouble to secure their own belongings while they can easily put it into another bank abroad (Swiss for example) and it is hard to convince people that you can store your own money in your own computer in form of a virtual coin. Try to tell that to your grandpa and see what his reaction is.

Code:

We need big advertisement campaign

For the bolded part of yours, who are we again? As we are decentralized this means that everyone is on their own in this matter. The community wont go into such length as to provide such advert campaign to lure people into BTC. Everyone got here to use BTC by their own decision and/or from hearing words about it not from seeing any advert campaign in the street's billboard or so

[cakir]

No.
Last year HSBC Turkey got hacked and 2.7 million user's credit card data etc were stolen. But it changed nothing in Turkey.
https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=hsbc+turkey+hacked

[Erdogan]

I think it will. Till now, when people asked how this could happen, the only answer was shrugging, it's the way it is, que sera sera.

Now, when people ask, they might get this, depending on who they ask: Well, in fact there is another way, bitcoin, check it out.

[expert4knowledge]

I think only bitcoin lovers are capable of hacking banking system in order to increase their price of bitcoins because the system is working for the years

[grendel25]

Banks get hacked frequently but not always in the most high tech way you would think.  A local bank in my town here was in the news recently because a "hacker" in China was able to get the local bank to send millions of dollars through business accounts.  The process followed usual business protocol and the guy in China had all the correct security info (which was probably attained through a mix of social engineering and actual computer hacking to gain access to personal information).

[Amph]

I think it will. Till now, when people asked how this could happen, the only answer was shrugging, it's the way it is, que sera sera.

Now, when people ask, they might get this, depending on who they ask: Well, in fact there is another way, bitcoin, check it out.

it will eventually, but only if it will be on a large scale, and not 1 or two bank hacked from time to time, if the majority of banks(not gonna happen at 99% at least) will begin to face some heavy hacking all over the wolrd, then something will happen about the possible shifting to bitcoin from many around the world

[GreenStox]

I think it will. Till now, when people asked how this could happen, the only answer was shrugging, it's the way it is, que sera sera.

Now, when people ask, they might get this, depending on who they ask: Well, in fact there is another way, bitcoin, check it out.

it will eventually, but only if it will be on a large scale, and not 1 or two bank hacked from time to time, if the majority of banks(not gonna happen at 99% at least) will begin to face some heavy hacking all over the wolrd, then something will happen about the possible shifting to bitcoin from many around the world

Well if banks start to get hacked then bitcoin could be too. And i`m not talking about offline wallets, but the online wallets.

I`m sure 95% of bitcoin users use online wallets, so if they want to harm bitcoin, the online wallets will be the target probably

[Amph]

I think it will. Till now, when people asked how this could happen, the only answer was shrugging, it's the way it is, que sera sera.

Now, when people ask, they might get this, depending on who they ask: Well, in fact there is another way, bitcoin, check it out.

it will eventually, but only if it will be on a large scale, and not 1 or two bank hacked from time to time, if the majority of banks(not gonna happen at 99% at least) will begin to face some heavy hacking all over the wolrd, then something will happen about the possible shifting to bitcoin from many around the world

Well if banks start to get hacked then bitcoin could be too. And i`m not talking about offline wallets, but the online wallets.

I`m sure 95% of bitcoin users use online wallets, so if they want to harm bitcoin, the online wallets will be the target probably

it could be a good lesson for them to use cold storage, and learn more about bitcoin, those are just lazy people guided by those, lazy's guides that say that learning about how bitcoin works is irrelevant, there is a thread talking about this in the bitcoin discussion board, this can not be more wrong...

[Miracal]

For people having an opinion stating that bitcoin is much safer than banks, yes, you're right. For people having an opinion stating that bitcoin can never be hacker, um, no. Everything in this world can be hacked, nothing is secure enough for the best. A lot of bitcoin hacks have already happened, refer to the mt.Gox bitcoins went 'missing' scandal.

[arallmuus]

it could be a good lesson for them to use cold storage

As a matter of fact using cold wallet is pretty inconvenience for some people. That is why people tend to store their BTC in an online wallet and also exchanger which allow them to withdraw it instantly if needed. Also that not everyone is a tech guy that know how to secure their BTC in cold wallet properly.
This will be another reason BTC will have a hard chance to replace traditional bank as because any wallets that connects to the network is pretty much risky while on the other hand using cold wallet is inconvenience

Therefore the idea to make a BTC bank or rather call it BTC storage is pretty much a good idea which that will serve as a storage only "bank" and takes fee from this service. This would be a good service to provide some security for those who dont know how to secure their coins properly . This will encourage people to shift from traditional bank into BTC as well

[Amph]

it could be a good lesson for them to use cold storage

As a matter of fact using cold wallet is pretty inconvenience for some people. That is why people tend to store their BTC in an online wallet and also exchanger which allow them to withdraw it instantly if needed. Also that not everyone is a tech guy that know how to secure their BTC in cold wallet properly.
This will be another reason BTC will have a hard chance to replace traditional bank as because any wallets that connects to the network is pretty much risky while on the other hand using cold wallet is inconvenience

Therefore the idea to make a BTC bank or rather call it BTC storage is pretty much a good idea which that will serve as a storage only "bank" and takes fee from this service. This would be a good service to provide some security for those who dont know how to secure their coins properly . This will encourage people to shift from traditional bank into BTC as well

well you don't need to be a tech guy to copy paste a file in a usb(it's like a backup of any other file, does they don't know how to do this? come on even my father which do not know what is copypaste know this..., that is a cold storage(when you need touse those bitcoin you do it in a safe enviroment, cold storage with offline transaction is another story

there should be an easy way to send offline transaction, for newbie, for those that are approaching crypto, it should be integrated in the core wallet, the mere thing that there are many different client, is already confusing for newcomers....

what i would suggest for a newbie is to buy a cheap laptop, do a format and install everything there, and don't touch that laptop for anything else that isn't bitcoin(no browsing no anything...)

bitcoin banks could help rising the bitcoin adoption, for those individuals which apparently are the majority, but in the end they should try to handle the bitcoin security aspect on their own

[Erdogan]

I think the imprisonment of funds in accounts really pisses people off.

[Xialla]

majority of people are already sick by current bank status, loans model, all the fees, possible block by gov (wave on greece) etc etc. bank "hack" would be another (small) nail to coif but generally, I don't think, that it will boost somehow adoption..

[arallmuus]

As a matter of fact using cold wallet is pretty inconvenience for some people. That is why people tend to store their BTC in an online wallet and also exchanger which allow them to withdraw it instantly if needed. Also that not everyone is a tech guy that know how to secure their BTC in cold wallet properly.
This will be another reason BTC will have a hard chance to replace traditional bank as because any wallets that connects to the network is pretty much risky while on the other hand using cold wallet is inconvenience

Therefore the idea to make a BTC bank or rather call it BTC storage is pretty much a good idea which that will serve as a storage only "bank" and takes fee from this service. This would be a good service to provide some security for those who dont know how to secure their coins properly . This will encourage people to shift from traditional bank into BTC as well

-snip-
does they don't know how to do this?
-snip-

Sadly not everyone even understand how BTC works. You can even check this number of people that dont even know how to sign an address, asking about halving , blaming a site when they have waited for hours but their balance is not updated which in fact because there are no blocks found yet. Of course this is just niche and also that I do know that in some part of the world there are person that dont even know how to use Ms. Word
So yeah this could help people more as people love convenience dont they? The more convenience a life , the more people will love it more.

I think the imprisonment of funds in accounts really pisses people off.

Indeed, people love the ability to spend their funds in a matter of seconds and BTC offer it however every wallet that is connected to the network isnt safe, so thats kinda countering each another there

[BitcoinNewbie15]

If something like this were to theoretically happen, I think Bitcoin would benefit from it in some way. Who knows if it would be positive or not. But it would show the strengths in Bitcoin though.

[GreenStox]

majority of people are already sick by current bank status, loans model, all the fees, possible block by gov (wave on greece) etc etc. bank "hack" would be another (small) nail to coif but generally, I don't think, that it will boost somehow adoption..

Well people have to have an option to move money around. And if the banks suck, then the only alternative is bitcoin.

Try using wheeled carts to move money arount, it aint gonna happen, bitcoin only please

[arallmuus]

Well people have to have an option to move money around. And if the banks suck, then the only alternative is bitcoin.

The chances for bank to completely off the grid will be close to zero at this point. Barely I'd say this because the government would not let go of their source of power (they control the bank and FIAT, they control the people) . If banks were to fail, there will be another "system" that replace the traditional bank and shifting onto BTC will be the last resort to do .
You can check on the hype towards greece with their latest issue but simply they are looking for another option rather than BTC , not saying BTC is the complete answer for them but atleast it could be a better option for them

[GreenStox]

Well people have to have an option to move money around. And if the banks suck, then the only alternative is bitcoin.

The chances for bank to completely off the grid will be close to zero at this point. Barely I'd say this because the government would not let go of their source of power (they control the bank and FIAT, they control the people) . If banks were to fail, there will be another "system" that replace the traditional bank and shifting onto BTC will be the last resort to do .
You can check on the hype towards greece with their latest issue but simply they are looking for another option rather than BTC , not saying BTC is the complete answer for them but atleast it could be a better option for them

Ok they can put another puppet  institution there ,but none of them can compete with bitcoin.

I just saw a few big banks trying to create a crypto currency, but which they control, is pretty hilarious and pathetic, and desperate.

Are they that desperate to survive?

[JarvisTechnology]

If the some bank gets hacked, it will obviously shake the faith of people in it. The might even resort to Bitcoin or the types but then ,what makes you think that the people will have full confidence over bitcoin. Bitcoin is anyhow equally vulnerable like  a bank. SO it doesn't really make any difference.

[arallmuus]

The chances for bank to completely off the grid will be close to zero at this point. Barely I'd say this because the government would not let go of their source of power (they control the bank and FIAT, they control the people) . If banks were to fail, there will be another "system" that replace the traditional bank and shifting onto BTC will be the last resort to do .
You can check on the hype towards greece with their latest issue but simply they are looking for another option rather than BTC , not saying BTC is the complete answer for them but atleast it could be a better option for them

I just saw a few big banks trying to create a crypto currency, but which they control, is pretty hilarious and pathetic, and desperate.

Are they that desperate to survive?

Banks are not thinking about their survival because they are pretty much thinking that they are on top of the food chain and there is nothing to take them down . Most banks actually have no interest with BTC and also the fact is that BTC is not much of a threat to them and is just a niche for the economics world.
I do believe that Banks are not actually trying to make a cryptocurrency I believe but rather taking steps into making the old fashioned FIAT into a digital form (something like controllable paypal ). However this is the fact that banks are actually "stronger" than BTC (for now) as they are pretty confident into creating a new form of digital FIAT

[rayhan]

Uhm Uhm  , if we talk about banks. the scams they happen a lot in banking institutions . People are well aware of them , but do they shift the system itself? They can shift from one back to the other bank , because of utter dissatisfaction but i have never seen someone adopting a whole new system. People tend to stick with traditional.

[Enzyme]

Nope, because most banks have insurance.
If this was to happen, you'd most likely get your money back.

And, people don't have enough trust in bitcoin; an extremely volatile currency.

[arallmuus]

Nope, because most banks have insurance.
If this was to happen, you'd most likely get your money back.

It is not about the insurance policy of a bank but rather the security of it. Banks are seen as the most secure place to save your money by people who have no idea about what BTC is but with constant news about bank being robbed or hacked will make people lose their confident in securing their personal belongings in the bank. However this will not be enough to shake's people's confidence about saving in banks and thus wont get people to move into BTC as well

[GreenStox]

Banks are not thinking about their survival because they are pretty much thinking that they are on top of the food chain and there is nothing to take them down . Most banks actually have no interest with BTC and also the fact is that BTC is not much of a threat to them and is just a niche for the economics world.
I do believe that Banks are not actually trying to make a cryptocurrency I believe but rather taking steps into making the old fashioned FIAT into a digital form (something like controllable paypal ). However this is the fact that banks are actually "stronger" than BTC (for now) as they are pretty confident into creating a new form of digital FIAT

"Whoever is winning at the moment will always seem to be invincible."
George Orwell


Yea their vanity will be their end, but then again I agree with you, they are trying to hijack the word: cryptocurrency.

The elite is always in the business of hijacking and distorting words like:  liberal, freedom, courage, bravery, or other sensitive words.

So they are building a centralized toilet paper printed fiat currency, and trying to brand it as a decentralized cryptocurrency with limited supply, what a shame 

And more shame to those idiot ignorants who will believe them

[orsotheysaid]

Banks being hacked piss of people, pissed off people may or not may go to Bitcoin after that. I think its a minority until its more mainstream.

[Gyfts]

Any type of attack to fiat currencies (like banks being hacked) will always be a victory for Bitcoin. As more and more people get fucked by the cons of banks and centralized economies, they'll soon realize Bitcoin is the way to go. Simple example would be Greece and the limitations implemented by the government on banks, ATM's, ect. Even paypal stopped taking outgoing funds by Greeks.

[greBit]

Banks being hacked piss of people, pissed off people may or not may go to Bitcoin after that. I think its a minority until its more mainstream.

In a logical order of disbelief, people who have recently been stranded and stripped off by the trust they had on their banks, they will tend to either believe there is no place in this world to keep your money safe. or create/find an alternative for the following. Their discoveries must bring them to bitcoin. Now at that moment, it will be their move to invest their trust on bitcoin or move ahead.

[Erdogan]

Banks being hacked piss of people, pissed off people may or not may go to Bitcoin after that. I think its a minority until its more mainstream.

In a logical order of disbelief, people who have recently been stranded and stripped off by the trust they had on their banks, they will tend to either believe there is no place in this world to keep your money safe. or create/find an alternative for the following. Their discoveries must bring them to bitcoin. Now at that moment, it will be their move to invest their trust on bitcoin or move ahead.

For every leg of expansion for bitcoin, there will be some new users and ten times more loud skeptics, repeating all the old assumed deficiencies of bitcoin. We have to live with that, until bitcoin stops expanding.

[greBit]

Banks being hacked piss of people, pissed off people may or not may go to Bitcoin after that. I think its a minority until its more mainstream.

In a logical order of disbelief, people who have recently been stranded and stripped off by the trust they had on their banks, they will tend to either believe there is no place in this world to keep your money safe. or create/find an alternative for the following. Their discoveries must bring them to bitcoin. Now at that moment, it will be their move to invest their trust on bitcoin or move ahead.

For every leg of expansion for bitcoin, there will be some new users and ten times more loud skeptics, repeating all the old assumed deficiencies of bitcoin. We have to live with that, until bitcoin stops expanding.

Skeptics do tend to piss me off way more than humans usually do, but I guess we should either be patient and explain to them rather than twisting their necks. FATALITY.

[Miracal]

Banks being hacked piss of people, pissed off people may or not may go to Bitcoin after that. I think its a minority until its more mainstream.

In a logical order of disbelief, people who have recently been stranded and stripped off by the trust they had on their banks, they will tend to either believe there is no place in this world to keep your money safe. or create/find an alternative for the following. Their discoveries must bring them to bitcoin. Now at that moment, it will be their move to invest their trust on bitcoin or move ahead.

For every leg of expansion for bitcoin, there will be some new users and ten times more loud skeptics, repeating all the old assumed deficiencies of bitcoin. We have to live with that, until bitcoin stops expanding.

Skeptics do tend to piss me off way more than humans usually do, but I guess we should either be patient and explain to them rather than twisting their necks. FATALITY.

TEKKEN REFERENCE! yeah man I agree people with pessimistic approach are annoying but we need a little balance in the circle. Some people are way too over ambitious. A little spike in price 2 days back and people already started believing that its time for the price to hit the moon, etc. There's time.

[Amph]

Banks being hacked piss of people, pissed off people may or not may go to Bitcoin after that. I think its a minority until its more mainstream.

some of them will not decide to go with bitcoin or anything else, but simply they will put their money in their house in a safebox

so don't be so sure about the fact that the falling of the banks might help bitcoin's adoption, if they cannot trust banks they will not trust anyone with their money, i know their mentality, because it was mine too before knowing about bitcoin...

[GreenStox]

Banks being hacked piss of people, pissed off people may or not may go to Bitcoin after that. I think its a minority until its more mainstream.

some of them will not decide to go with bitcoin or anything else, but simply they will put their money in their house in a safebox

so don't be so sure about the fact that the falling of the banks might help bitcoin's adoption, if they cannot trust banks they will not trust anyone with their money, i know their mentality, because it was mine too before knowing about bitcoin...

Thats not an option in europe from where I am from. We are disarmed in europe, you cant even defend your home if burglars come in and even if you do the fucking law will put you in prison for daring to defend your home.

Best option in europe is to just not have valuables at home to not become a target. Bitcoin is an ethereal object, you can sure steal my external hard drive where i store my priv keys but good luck breaking triple encryption fucking burglars.

[scarsbergholden]

if this happens world wide it would be more of the panic and drama that might just get too violent just because people would want to cash out their accounts and we all know the banks never have the real amount of money they use to lend or move around.

[Erdogan]

Most people will, in the event of hyperinflation or confiscation of saved money, just yell and scream, topple the government, elect a new one just like the old, and put their new savings into the new banks. It is called revolution, as in turning the wheel the full circle until you are back where you started. Normally, the full circle represents an amount of time larger than a generation. In Argentina, strangely, a revolution takes only a decennium, and people still don't learn. Well, as good money now exists, may be this time will be different.

[Zorrocoin]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

I do not think it would make any difference for bitcoin because it is more likely of  BTC getting hacked than the whole banks getting robbed or hacked or whatever.  How would this raise the trust of people for bitcoin. The security issue of bitcoin is a major issue which is yet to be fixed. If that does happen, the people wouldn't stop trusting banks . They would probably stop depositing their money in that bank's name which has been hacked.

[GreenStox]

Isn't it sure to happen, sooner or later, that some country's central bank, or banking system, gets hacked? If that happened it'd shake peoples' confidence in the banking system, which most think is more robust than the likes of the blockchain, simply because banks are centralised systems. I guess some people would then look at the likes of bitcoin, but even it's not invulnerable - or is it?

I do not think it would make any difference for bitcoin because it is more likely of  BTC getting hacked than the whole banks getting robbed or hacked or whatever.  How would this raise the trust of people for bitcoin. The security issue of bitcoin is a major issue which is yet to be fixed. If that does happen, the people wouldn't stop trusting banks . They would probably stop depositing their money in that bank's name which has been hacked.

Actually its not, banks are much bigger targets at the moment, just look at political hacking, when china hacks us banks and vice versa.

I`m sure bitcoin is not a target yet, however these strange forum ddos-es could very well come from political zones.

But as of chance, its probably easier to hack a bank because you can infiltrate insiders there, while in bitcoin there is no central plant which to attack.

[Nizam ibrahim.P.N]

No, It does not happen because banks are fully secured eg: central bank etc. So there is no need of adopting BTC..

[michinzx]

if this happens world wide it would be more of the panic and drama that might just get too violent just because people would want to cash out their accounts and we all know the banks never have the real amount of money they use to lend or move around.

the panic and drama would likely cause the economy to come to a halt as the banks would no longer have capital to move around as well, nothing good can come of a situation like that.

[HarHarHar9965]

No, It does not happen because banks are fully secured eg: central bank etc. So there is no need of adopting BTC..

nobody is adopting btc because of they expect bank backs will boost btc, yes it might tarnish the amount of trust people invest in it, especially affecting the market negatively causing panic. Its volatile nature already scares people and knowing how sensitive the crypto market is, I don't know how things work out but I hope they will

[Nicolas Dorier]

No, It does not happen because banks are fully secured eg: central bank etc. So there is no need of adopting BTC..

From an economic sandpoint, I don't think there should have a difference between money being stolen because of a hacker, and being stolen because of a hair cut/capital control/inflation. (insurance does not protect against this)
You can ask to an argentina guy whether he prefers peso to BTC.

The only difference is that stealing btc by hacking can't happen on a global scale.

[Kingno.1]

Yes, definitely it will shake people's confidence in banks and they will withdraw their money from banks if any left after the hacks.
But on the other hand, Bitcoin is also feared of the 51% attack. So they will probably not buy Bitcoins.

[HarHarHar9965]

Yes, definitely it will shake people's confidence in banks and they will withdraw their money from banks if any left after the hacks.
But on the other hand, Bitcoin is also feared of the 51% attack. So they will probably not buy Bitcoins.

bitcoin does not aim to rescue people when fiat fails, it only seems to offer a better alternative, its goal is not to replace the fiat currency, though a lot of bitcoin fanatics day dream about such an event. But speaking strictly in terms of hacks, there has never been a hack with the bitcoin core technology, only with scammers and hackers attacking peoples' wallets personally, so technically bitcoin has never been hacked

[botany]

Yes, definitely it will shake people's confidence in banks and they will withdraw their money from banks if any left after the hacks.
But on the other hand, Bitcoin is also feared of the 51% attack. So they will probably not buy Bitcoins.

bitcoin does not aim to rescue people when fiat fails, it only seems to offer a better alternative, its goal is not to replace the fiat currency, though a lot of bitcoin fanatics day dream about such an event. But speaking strictly in terms of hacks, there has never been a hack with the bitcoin core technology, only with scammers and hackers attacking peoples' wallets personally, so technically bitcoin has never been hacked

Bitcoin has never been hacked, but neither has fiat.
It is just companies and wallets which get hacked. You can't say that Bitcoin has an advantage in this regard.

[HarHarHar9965]

Yes, definitely it will shake people's confidence in banks and they will withdraw their money from banks if any left after the hacks.
But on the other hand, Bitcoin is also feared of the 51% attack. So they will probably not buy Bitcoins.

bitcoin does not aim to rescue people when fiat fails, it only seems to offer a better alternative, its goal is not to replace the fiat currency, though a lot of bitcoin fanatics day dream about such an event. But speaking strictly in terms of hacks, there has never been a hack with the bitcoin core technology, only with scammers and hackers attacking peoples' wallets personally, so technically bitcoin has never been hacked

Bitcoin has never been hacked, but neither has fiat.
It is just companies and wallets which get hacked. You can't say that Bitcoin has an advantage in this regard.

Bitcoin has an advantage over fiat being limited in supply and not controlled by a central authority Oh, and also, they are not debt based, remember? And if your argument would be based only limited to 'fiats have not been hacked', I hope you do know that electronic fiat exists too? Your debit and credit has been attacked a potential million times, and often successful. Bitcoin has an advantage over fiat by being freeze-proof, cheaper and faster to transfer and well, potentially anonymous

[botany]

Yes, definitely it will shake people's confidence in banks and they will withdraw their money from banks if any left after the hacks.
But on the other hand, Bitcoin is also feared of the 51% attack. So they will probably not buy Bitcoins.

bitcoin does not aim to rescue people when fiat fails, it only seems to offer a better alternative, its goal is not to replace the fiat currency, though a lot of bitcoin fanatics day dream about such an event. But speaking strictly in terms of hacks, there has never been a hack with the bitcoin core technology, only with scammers and hackers attacking peoples' wallets personally, so technically bitcoin has never been hacked

Bitcoin has never been hacked, but neither has fiat.
It is just companies and wallets which get hacked. You can't say that Bitcoin has an advantage in this regard.

And if your argument would be based only limited to 'fiats have not been hacked', I hope you do know that electronic fiat exists too? Your debit and credit has been attacked a potential million times, and often successful.

That is what the OP is about - an attack on a bank (electronic fiat). My point is that even if it does happen, you can't say that Bitcoin has an advantage because bitcoin wallets / companies are susceptible to attacks too. MtGox going down didn't mean the end of Bitcoin. A bank being hacked doesn't mean that people will start switching overnight to Bitcoin.

[jeffthebaker]

Short answer: no. Longer answer: Nooooo.

Banks are hacked, robbed, etc. all the time. The money is insured, and people don't lose their life savings due to such an attack. If a bank is hacked into and the news is publicized on national television, the Bitcoin price will most likely spike in response, but this is 100% due to pure speculation, no actual adoption takes place.

[techgeek]

Short answer: no. Longer answer: Nooooo.

Banks are hacked, robbed, etc. all the time. The money is insured, and people don't lose their life savings due to such an attack. If a bank is hacked into and the news is publicized on national television, the Bitcoin price will most likely spike in response, but this is 100% due to pure speculation, no actual adoption takes place.

As for the comment on bitcoin spiking, I think it would only spike if there was a huge level of cyber break.

Like on the corporate level and having funds being split off multiple ways which they cant trace or the hacker has a level of skill they couldnt handle.

But even then, the bank will always insure your money is safe since they have so much of it.

[HarHarHar9965]

Short answer: no. Longer answer: Nooooo.

Banks are hacked, robbed, etc. all the time. The money is insured, and people don't lose their life savings due to such an attack. If a bank is hacked into and the news is publicized on national television, the Bitcoin price will most likely spike in response, but this is 100% due to pure speculation, no actual adoption takes place.

As for the comment on bitcoin spiking, I think it would only spike if there was a huge level of cyber break.

Like on the corporate level and having funds being split off multiple ways which they cant trace or the hacker has a level of skill they couldnt handle.

But even then, the bank will always insure your money is safe since they have so much of it.

yeah man, bitcoin market is very sensitive when the volatility of bitcoin does not advantage them, then bitcoin is really bad for them but when it boosts, they invest even more. If any bad news comes up, btc market shakes up and eventually crashes down causing panic but when things work in favor of bitcoin, 1/4th of the % of people who leave btc, join it.

[lissandra]

No, It does not happen because banks are fully secured eg: central bank etc. So there is no need of adopting BTC..

Well technically the central bank supports almost all the largest banks, so in short we pay taxes to the private banks.

That money flows anytime through central banks and the central banks loan money to the actual private banks.

[jeffthebaker]

Short answer: no. Longer answer: Nooooo.

Banks are hacked, robbed, etc. all the time. The money is insured, and people don't lose their life savings due to such an attack. If a bank is hacked into and the news is publicized on national television, the Bitcoin price will most likely spike in response, but this is 100% due to pure speculation, no actual adoption takes place.

As for the comment on bitcoin spiking, I think it would only spike if there was a huge level of cyber break.

Like on the corporate level and having funds being split off multiple ways which they cant trace or the hacker has a level of skill they couldnt handle.

But even then, the bank will always insure your money is safe since they have so much of it.

yeah man, bitcoin market is very sensitive when the volatility of bitcoin does not advantage them, then bitcoin is really bad for them but when it boosts, they invest even more. If any bad news comes up, btc market shakes up and eventually crashes down causing panic but when things work in favor of bitcoin, 1/4th of the % of people who leave btc, join it.

I mean there is a reason behind this. A lot of Bitcoin traders use technical analysis- a strategy where you base your orders and transactions based off of actual factors (anticipating a price increase after Greece, and a decrease during XT debates, for example). In addition, you have everyone else who holds Bitcoin. Most people are hodling for years to come, but for weak-stomached investors, something bad could mean cashing out, at least partially.

[CryptoTrout]

banks fuck up all the time and no one ever does anything about it

[HarHarHar9965]

Short answer: no. Longer answer: Nooooo.

Banks are hacked, robbed, etc. all the time. The money is insured, and people don't lose their life savings due to such an attack. If a bank is hacked into and the news is publicized on national television, the Bitcoin price will most likely spike in response, but this is 100% due to pure speculation, no actual adoption takes place.

As for the comment on bitcoin spiking, I think it would only spike if there was a huge level of cyber break.

Like on the corporate level and having funds being split off multiple ways which they cant trace or the hacker has a level of skill they couldnt handle.

But even then, the bank will always insure your money is safe since they have so much of it.

yeah man, bitcoin market is very sensitive when the volatility of bitcoin does not advantage them, then bitcoin is really bad for them but when it boosts, they invest even more. If any bad news comes up, btc market shakes up and eventually crashes down causing panic but when things work in favor of bitcoin, 1/4th of the % of people who leave btc, join it.

I mean there is a reason behind this. A lot of Bitcoin traders use technical analysis- a strategy where you base your orders and transactions based off of actual factors (anticipating a price increase after Greece, and a decrease during XT debates, for example). In addition, you have everyone else who holds Bitcoin. Most people are hodling for years to come, but for weak-stomached investors, something bad could mean cashing out, at least partially.

and that is also quite understandable, bitcoin traders could really invest their time in determining price and making calculated decisions, afterall it is their investments, and being a little cautious is never too bad than being a little too risky Despite the speculation regarding price increase after Eurozone vs Greece and questioning the future of bitcoin with Bitcoin core Vs BTC XT, I think we all pray that our investments perform better

[Kaneki]

i guess if it happens it might be only a particular bank would lose credibility and not the entire banking system in the world's