Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank?

[mabyyy]

Many experts agree that there is a serious financial crisis ahead which will turn the presentation of clothes upside down. Perhaps Fiat money is on the verge of extinction and in the future digital economy it will not have a place. What will be the main driver of the movement in the new digital era. The clear answer of cryptocurrency!

[rassvetcolnca]

Of course I believe that the Bank will be one of the safest places to save money .

[cleverhope]

I think that now our money is safer in Banks. Banks have licenses, good relationships with regulators. And banks give stability interest rate. Also, nobody steals money from banks.
BUT Crypto is more promising. From the other hand, crypto is very risky tool. So if you do not fear risks and believe in crypto - put all your money in crypto. In some years you will be very rich i think. But before -
you will be very worried because of market situation and risks)

[ZumbiLe]

As far as security I favored with the bank regardless of what happen incase banks are ransack you will even now get your cash stored and the bank are at risk to restore your cash. In crypto the hazard and instability is high there is no affirmation that your cash will be back if the cost of coins is dropping. Then again, in crypto concerning benefit and simple access is favored in light of the fact that I don't pay any charges and in the meantime I can check my adjust effectively.

[oaks05]

as of right now, no not safer, if a bank fails your money is insured to a certain amount, you dont get that in crypto space.

[Piskeante]

are you f***king kidding??

[Abiky]

It is definitely more secure than the bank.You can do whatever you want without banking.Your wallet is under your own hand.The money in the bank is only composed of figures

That's certainly true, mate. You can do a lot more with a cryptocurrency than a bank itself. With cryptocurrencies, you always have control over your funds if you have access to your private key. Whenever you like, you can spend it, trade it, buy it, and even loan it to others in a decentralized fashion. That level of freedom is not possible with banks, as they can easily freeze your funds, and even close your account at will. They're easily manipulated by governments, and they can do whatever they desire with your hard-earned money.

Cryptocurrencies are safe as long as you want them to be. If you're quite knowledgeable, you'll notice that the best way to secure your cryptocurrency funds, would be to use a hardware wallet or a paper wallet whose keys had been generated offline. For unparalleled security, and reliability, you can depend on Bitcoin for preserving your money within the long term. For such reasons, I believe that cryptocurrencies are much safer than banks, if you know well how to secure them. However, if you're simply a newbie, and leave your crypto in an online wallet or a centralized exchange, then your funds could be easily lost or stolen by a hacker. Just my thoughts

[cherepashkis]

my money is safer in the Bank. but there they lie idle and do not make a profit.

[QuickS22]

Crypto-currencies are protected from inflation more than national currencies, but hackers can either steal the crypto currency or it may fall sharply in price

[johnnywoo2015]

as of right now, no not safer, if a bank fails your money is insured to a certain amount, you dont get that in crypto space.

Your money in the bank are not insured, but protected by laws. In European Union is up to 100000 Euro. No matter what happen your money are safe there. In crypto is totally different and everybody is responsible for himself.

[prechi]

I won't say funds are safer in crypto because if you don't know how to invest in crypto, your funds will lose that way, It means its safer in the bank but if you are a good investor or a good trader, crypto is better than saving your money in the bank.

[tncbitcoin]

I believe fiat currency is still safer compare to crypto currency since crypto currency is very risky and volatile. The only reason that fiat currency is safer because of security but in terms of profit perspective it would be obvious that crypto currency will be chosen.

[jpnl0006]

Make it a 50/50 certain percentage to the bank and certain percentage in crypto i think doing that you also shared the risk and it all depends on your country and how the bank system works thanks

[MisterPipka]

Yes safety everywhere is very small.Unless it's Switzerland.If you do not really believe the banks and the crypt will not suit you!

[Cahndeso]

I think, money is safer in the bank. But if you will get more money, let's invest for crypto.
At the bank, our money is still safer because the value will not reduce much more. In crypto, if we invest all the money, we can make a big profit from here. But crypto is too risky because the price of crypto is fluctuable, it could easily fall if everyone panics sell it.

[MortonAlden]

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

Umm, see it depends on our perceptions. According to me, money is definitely safer in Crypto. With my choice of coins, Paragon, Cardano and Stellar, no one would say that this is not safe.

[shabinmathew23]

bank is more safe than crypto who knows whn the price can go down

[hussnainali]

I think its more safer to keep funds in bank then to keep them in crypto because this is decentralized network so if anything happens no one is responsible except you for your funds but in banks, they are responsible for everything but if u see the other side its more profitable to keep funds in crypto...

[MYbagsBIG]

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

3 of my friends had there identity stolen and some or all of their funds stolen by identity thieves. Since, i got into crypto in 2014 my coins have been safe. yes, there are some shady players and hackers; however, as time goes on, i think those wallets and companies will fail and we will be left with a secure system. I think crypto has the potential to be much better than banks can ever be.

[FosterEgan]

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

Well, let me get this straight. I have never seen a medium as safe as TAU, NEO and ADA’s. These are the best coins in this market and our investments are completely safe and secure here.