Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank?

[bighok353]

Of course, banks are safer and all investments are risky. The first thing you must understand is its safety factor. But for me I can afford the risks it poses. All I think cryptocurrencies are also safe. Worth investing.

[Gabri]

I have long been about 70% of the earnings on the cryptocurrency go to the bank. This, in my opinion, is much more reliable. It is unknown what will happen to the cryptocurrency market tomorrow, and my money will not go anywhere in the bank.

[Sergey698698]

In a sense, it is safer to store money in cryptocurrency.But there is a danger that the course may fall.Can steal private keys.But if you follow the safety, then you are not in danger.

[Bonanzabits]

Crypto currency is certainly much safer than the banking system. But because of the fragile market, which has yet to grow and regulate, money in crypto-currencies to keep the most risky, rather than in banks. This is a temporary question, which after a while will be decided by itself. It's just necessary to get a little rough while the regulators do their job.

[smagt7]

I tend to think of banks as a corrupt system whose main task is to take my money and then, in addition, to drive me into debt.

[Beazerdred]

I think this is a very difficult question and there is no single answer to it. The very bitcoin system is very reliable and you can store your money in bitcoin and are not afraid to lose it. But there is a problem with the price that is constantly falling and you can lose a lot of money on such falls

[lumpum]

I think that crypto is more reliable in this way. The secrecy is higher, but banks give percents for mi investment and I can do nothing while my money are there.

[Cianix]

Well, if you mean that it is more secure, I think banks are still more reliable , there were a lot of scams with wallets

[onaiwusun]

Interesting debate, Kudos Draper, Anyone who holds that we cannot trust computers when it comes finance as an argument against bitcoin certainly living in stone era. Much of banks transaction are not in physical cash.

[onaiwusun]

I tend to think of banks as a corrupt system whose main task is to take my money and then, in addition, to drive me into debt.

The corruption in banks is one of the principal reasons why we have cryptocurrencies in the first instance. cryptos are safer, more persons will see that in th e near future

[chaoscoinz]

Tim Draper: More Secure in Bitcoin Than the Money Sitting in Wells Fargo

Venture capitalist Tim Draper is bullish on Bitcoin and believes it will reach $250,000 in the next four years.

During a debate hosted by Intelligence Squared and the Adam Smith Society, Tim Draper was asked how Bitcoin compared with his previous tech investments in Hotmail, Skype, and Tesla. He replied bullishly, saying, “Bitcoin will be bigger than all three combined.” However, Draper didn’t leave it at that — he thinks it will be bigger than the iron age, the Renaissance, and the internet and says that the nascent technology will affect the entire world in a faster and more prevalent way than ever imagined.

The Debate: “Bitcoin is more than a bubble and here to stay.”
Backed up by Patrick Byrne (CEO of overstock), Draper took on Financial Times journalist, Gillian Tett, and Professor of Law, Eric Posner, both of whom argued that Bitcoin is indeed a bubble and strongly contested Draper’s claims. Posner and Tett called into question the “strengths” of Bitcoin, arguing that they could be regarded as weaknesses. Posner suggested that the pseudonymization of identity enabled by the technology makes Bitcoin transactions the perfect vehicle for sophisticated criminal transactions. Tett focused on the risk involved with trusting computers with finance as they can be hacked, are prone to faults, and that Bitcoin is a “terrible store of value.”

These arguments won’t be anything new to anyone who has studied the space, and the rebuttals of Draper and Byrne won’t come as a surprise either. The pair acknowledged that Bitcoin was imperfect and drew attention to the fact the technology was designed to be open source so that unforeseen problems can be managed by the community. Byrne also pointed out that although Bitcoin has been “hacked at” more than anything in history, but unlike banks, it has yet to be defeated.

Draper was more brazen in his responses and implored the crowd to use fiat if they were looking to facilitate their own criminal activity as many Bitcoin criminals get caught. The venture capitalist responded to Tett’s admission that she invests in several different fiat currencies by saying, “I’m so much more secure in my Bitcoin than I am in the money that’s sitting there in Wells Fargo.”

Who is right?
The short answer is it’s far too early to tell, but it is good to see the subject being discussed in this manner. Before the debate, Gillian Tett remarked that if both sides of an argument aren’t heard in the same room, on the same day, then the conversations can “go past one another.” It’s probably safe to say she’s right here because, although there is no shortage of media on either side of the argument, real debate on the subject can be difficult to find.

If crypto is going to head down the road Draper expects, its advocates need to be able to argue their case outside of the crypto community, and debate should be welcome as it not only gives both sides the ability to speak but also the ability to listen.

Draper’s comments are to be expected
As crypto enthusiasts, it’s easy to agree when figures like Draper sing the praises of Bitcoin, but we shouldn’t let confirmation bias get in the way of the issues. Draper is a successful investor, and he hasn’t arrived there without making mistakes. He could be wholly right, wrong, or somewhere in between — the latter is most likely. Draper allegedly owns 30,000 BTC, so he has a vested interest in Bitcoin’s success. That does not mean he is wrong, but it does mean his comments should be taken with a pinch of salt. Well-reasoned arguments are far more convincing than hype and chest beating because they allow people to make up their own minds.

The emergence of DLT might eclipse the impact of other innovations, but for now, the emphasis is not on critics to prove the crypto community wrong. It’s up to those who champion DLT to convince the world they’re right.

Originally published at cryptodisrupt.com

If your bank is apart of, or connected to the federal in any way, then I believe you might be FDIC insured, for at least up to $250,000, depending on where you bank. I don't think crypto has any where near this level of trust yet, but then again, cryptocurrency is mostly decentralized, with no protection. It always takes a 3rd party money transmission service, like Coinbase ect, to protect you from fraudulence, usually with insurance services that will reimburse you for your trouble, if the circumstances are found to be in your favor.

[edora]

I don't think that money in crypto currencies is safer than bank. bank is safer than crypto. The bank is more secure for money. Though cryptocurrency is very dependable and very reliable to invest on but is not that save in terms of security.

[Tanzion27]

I place my trust with Banks rather that with a crypto wallet, I've read a lot of stuff regarding stolen wallets in crypto and there's a lot of scam, but who know's let's assume that in the future we will not use any banks anymore or they will accept crypto as well, that's pretty great!

[Alisha FR]

I believe in cryptocurrency and its development in the future, the debate you mentioned above has no effect on me, I think the debate is a reciprocal claim between money lovers and investors in bitcoin, which justifies itself.

[cryptograce]

investors do not put money in the bank, to make more money, you have to invest.

[tonyjon]

I tend to think of banks as a corrupt system whose main task is to take my money and then, in addition, to drive me into debt.

The corruption in banks is one of the principal reasons why we have cryptocurrencies in the first instance. cryptos are safer, more persons will see that in th e near future

What corruption are you talking about? And how does that affect the Bank Deposit? Yes, blockchain technology can make this system more transparent, but it will not happen soon. And in any constitutional state Bank deposits are protected by law, so the concerns are minimal.

[Esterklu]

In my country there is not so much guaranties when you are keeping money in the bank. Of course, they are, but i cant tell - it is safe. So for me it is 50/50 - because crypto doesn't give 100% safety too.

[Umbrella Holdings]

I love cryptocurrency i mean it has its own advantages in many aspects. But there is still some risks like they can steal your private keys, or there are hackers everywhere. These are just simple examples that we all already know. So i’m not sure which one is more safe.

[Cocoincos]

I think my money not safe in bank, also not safe in crypto and also not safe in my hads or flat! no safety for 100% in any way!

[Retinol]

fifty fifty. I keep some of my money in the bank for the necessary expenses in everyday life and I keep some of it in the crypto currency and hope for a big increase in the future