Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank?

[hung690]

Dear sir,
Your topic is very interesting. I am not sure about that. In the future, that maybe right, but currently i am not sure. The banks are protected by the governments, managed by national finance systems, but the crypto is not. It is legal in some countries on the world.

[bat11]

In my opinion, I think it still safer the old fashion, the bank than in crypto. Banks have more security features and tangible papers that will give you an assurance that your money will be safe. In crypto, there are a lot of risks. No paperworks, signatures, and everything. Also, crypto is prone to hacking.

[tooiu3]

No, I don't think so. I think banks are safer. But investing money in cryptocurrencies I think there is room for appreciation. Because the volatility of the cryptocurrency is very large, the price difference is very large, you may get a lot, and you may lose a lot.

[qiaozhuang4354120]

No, I don't think so. I think there is a big risk in the encryption market.

[Pay phone82]

let say yes!! If you doing this multiple wallet it will make safer your coin from the hackers and investment!! I think Bank is the safer that crypto cause Bank has the most powerful device that secure all money that youve deposit on it!! and absulotly have just minimal system error!!
 

[ninokh]

it must be safer in the bank because if you save in a bank it won't be hacked. but saving money in a bank cannot provide many benefits. and saving money on cryptocurrency has a big risk but can also provide a large profit. and we can also minimize the risk of carefully selecting coins and always monitoring the development of coins and markets. so if I have to choose then I would rather save money in crypto than at the bank.

[allanaire]

No, as the market may collapse and the Bank may go bankrupt, and it is good that the contribution will be made less than 1,400,000 rubles, it is insured, and if more, no one will guarantee that you will get your money back, and when you consider that all about the same and more finances in cryptocurrency the security 50\50%.

[JackVenedy]

You have not be insure, that banks do have better security system more than cryptocurrency but the best thing about bitcoins is that, the growth of your profit is very fast and much better more than placing money on banks.

[profitgenerator212]

I think keeping money in the bank is safer in crypto. Because of various reasons, I'm not talking about security because both are the same.
I am referring to the risk that the crypto market may collapse at any moment but the bank can not collapse because it has existed for a long time

[AlexAtom]

Actually, your money is safer in crypto than in the bank. Unless you are careless in protecting your wallet against scammer and hackers.
Many hackers use the phishing sites to hack your wallet, so you must have a secure wallet and very careful action when moving your wallet balance.
Recently, one of browser Chrome extension get hacked, and can send your private key if you using MEW or decentralized exchange.

[StevenCS]

in my opinion it is not like that, the crypto world has a very high level of risk, but it is equivalent to the benefits obtained, so the point is if we talk about the level of security, banks are much safer than crypto

[doroshok2]

Of course, it is safer to keep money in the Bank. But is it profitable for you to keep money in the Bank? No. So it turns out that it is safer to store money in the Bank, but most of us store them in cryptocurrency, because it is profitable. But we understand the risks involved.

[KurtEldon]

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

I would actually say yes, it is. As a matter of fact, coins like Paragon have adopted Blockchain technology, and others like XRP and EOS are also very safe so you can easily trust them and keep investing.

[ogundowotoby01]

If it comes to taking risks and making profit then I would say your money is safer in cryptos because you can make a lot of interest on it and you can also lose your money too. But if you just want to reserve the value of your money then I think the bank is better.

[RistirP]

It depends on how bad the banks are in your country. If comparing the level of security between saving money in crypto or at the bank, I think the best level of security is the bank. Banks still dare to guarantee when our money is stolen or hacked, the bank will refund our money. 

[Grenin2]

For me money is absolutely safe in the bank, but you don't have full control over it. Money is safe, but it doesn't grow much, it just loses its value to inflation 🙂

[gulshan1]

Crypto market is a volatile market and there is stability in the price of every coin value, so your money is not safe in the crypto than the bank. But your money value can increase and decrease any time which may convert into the profit or loss at any time. And in the bank money will safe with the actual value of market price.

[tyronecoinbit]

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

Obviously Its in the bank but if you want a higher profits you may proceed to crypto Investment, but the difference Its much riskier rather than bank because the market of the cryptocurrency Is not stable, while In the bank you can estimated how much profit you will earn after the several years passed.

[Fqure3]

My opinon for Banks have more security features and tangible papers that will give you an assurance that your money will be safe.

[Hengemeran]

Well, I have a fear of crypto currency due to the fact that a lot of things are hacked, there is no such thing in banks, it's security, and the interest rate is of course crypto currency )