Iran Central Bank hacked. Other banks also hacked causing major disruptions.

[adaseb]

This is why many should have at least 2 bank accounts to prevent this from happening.

Remember when SignatureBank and SiliconValley bank all collapsed, many of their customers which were start ups couldnt process payroll. Since they didnt process payroll, those which didnt even use those banks couldnt get paid. Which resulted in missed mortgage payments, bills, etc.

Hence this is why there needs to be a better of more fool proof system.

[Webetcoins]

So you are trying to prove that Bitcoin/crypto is better than fiat, just because a bank got hacked?
How many crypto exchanges got hacked in the last 10 years? How many cold wallet owners hot hacked or scammed in the last 10 years?
For me, online security is a never ending battle. Having a cold wallet doesn't guarantee better security.
A "multi-month long disruption in a country's banking system" cannot happen in reality. Such problems are usually solved in 24-48 hours.

I don't see he mentioned fiat there but only banks, and my response to him about his sentence is that Bitcoin is only a currency and a bank is a bank, so when bank fails I don't think Bitcoin is a perfect replacement for it. Like they say, it is like we are only comparing oranges to apples here when we compare these two. Maybe it is more valid if we are comparing Bitcoin with fiat despite the fact that BTC is a crypto which is decentralized, has a limited supply, and can also act as an asset.

I agree that many exchanges have been hacked all through the years because that is also what I've heard but that was crazy if a cold wallet owner can get hacked too. How come when it was offline? Can get scammed maybe, but if it's really possible then it was already their fault and maybe they already connected their wallet online when the hacking began.

It doesn't matter if you are into crypto or your don't have crypto at all. There's a possibility for you to get hacked/scammed and lose all your coins or fiat money.

Indeed it does not matter if you are not into crypto because you won't also find yourself investing here.

[Smack That Ace]

To everyone using the centralized financial institutions, this will be a warning that it will soon be their own turn to face the same consequences, except if they have an alternative means to financial system, the use of bitcoin has become a widespread without any resistance because of the issues related to this, people could no longer hold it any more with the use of centralized financial authorities and that is one of the reasons behind seeing bitcoin becoming a mainstream to the entire world.

You need to remember that this centralized banking system and financial institutions have been around for hundreds of years. So just because a few banks are attacked or go bankrupt doesn't mean the entire banking system will suffer the same consequences. Meanwhile, bitcoin is only 15 years old and it is fair to say that it is still too early to say that bitcoin will outperform the banking system.

Do you remember the news that the Bangladesh government shut down the internet nationwide not long ago? And no one can use bitcoin and that shows bitcoin also has disadvantages, not as perfect as we think.
The solution is diversification, no one forbids us to use only one of the two, why don't we take advantage of both to get the most convenience in life?

[Iamgoat]

You need to remember that this centralized banking system and financial institutions have been around for hundreds of years. So just because a few banks are attacked or go bankrupt doesn't mean the entire banking system will suffer the same consequences. Meanwhile, bitcoin is only 15 years old and it is fair to say that it is still too early to say that bitcoin will outperform the banking system.

I agree with this submission. Oftentimes, we portray bitcoin as a flawless solution to the centralized system making bitcoin look like an all-perfect technology in the world. I don't think even Satoshi sees bitcoin in such regards. I meant to say, Bitcoin also have its own lapses, some of which are volatility or fluctuations in prices, security risks like phishing sites when storing Bitcoin on exchanges or less secure wallets, high transactional fees among other major lapses like the inability to reverse transactions once it's confirmed. Many bitcoin users have lost unimaginable worth of Bitcoin assets to mistaken addresses and so on.

It is good to highlight some of these drawbacks to serve as an enlightenment to people and create ways towards improving on these things. The centralized system has stayed so long enough to serve humanity and I see the introduction of Bitcoin technology, a decentralized system, as an advancement to the centralized system. Because of the uncertainties of the conventional banking system, I have almost 5 different banks I operat, to avoid disappointment in periods of distress. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies seems to be more reliable in such situations.

[Marvell1]

Hacks on banking system happens all the time probably it exceeds billions on average a year or more cause I don't know the exact stats but it doesn't really cause the system to fail since it's not really a new thing but the consumer can get affected and bank may only refund a part of the lost funds cause it's what covered by their insurance.

Without accurate data, how can you claim that banks are losing billions of dollars every year? On the contrary, I rarely hear about banks being hacked and money being stolen, and that has never happened in my country. I have only heard of banks going bankrupt for some other reason but then they are bought by the central bank or taken over directly so most people won't be affected too much.

Bitcoin is ultimate opposite of banking, be your own bank so it's not only for when we face these situations it's supposed to be all the time then only the purpose of Bitcoin matters.

I also like to use bitcoin as my own bank but because it is so volatile I can only use it as an investment. I don't want to put my savings into bitcoin because it would be inconvenient if I needed to use it urgently when the bitcoin price is falling.

Overall, self custody has great benefits but is not perfect. If we are just a little careless, we may have to pay with our entire property.

[Smack That Ace]

You need to remember that this centralized banking system and financial institutions have been around for hundreds of years. So just because a few banks are attacked or go bankrupt doesn't mean the entire banking system will suffer the same consequences. Meanwhile, bitcoin is only 15 years old and it is fair to say that it is still too early to say that bitcoin will outperform the banking system.

I agree with this submission. Oftentimes, we portray bitcoin as a flawless solution to the centralized system making bitcoin look like an all-perfect technology in the world. I don't think even Satoshi sees bitcoin in such regards. I meant to say, Bitcoin also have its own lapses, some of which are volatility or fluctuations in prices, security risks like phishing sites when storing Bitcoin on exchanges or less secure wallets, high transactional fees among other major lapses like the inability to reverse transactions once it's confirmed. Many bitcoin users have lost unimaginable worth of Bitcoin assets to mistaken addresses and so on.

It is good to highlight some of these drawbacks to serve as an enlightenment to people and create ways towards improving on these things. The centralized system has stayed so long enough to serve humanity and I see the introduction of Bitcoin technology, a decentralized system, as an advancement to the centralized system. Because of the uncertainties of the conventional banking system, I have almost 5 different banks I operat, to avoid disappointment in periods of distress. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies seems to be more reliable in such situations.

What I mean is we should have fair judgment and combine both to get the best experiences in life. Our constant bashing of banks, fiat currencies...and hype around bitcoin will not make bitcoin any better. Everything has its pros and cons, as well as its own use cases, as wise people we should take advantage of both.

I bet those who criticize banking still use it every day and can't completely eliminate it from their lives, they have been using it for years and will continue to do so. I wonder how they will buy and sell bitcoin without using banks?

[Findingnemo]

Hacks on banking system happens all the time probably it exceeds billions on average a year or more cause I don't know the exact stats but it doesn't really cause the system to fail since it's not really a new thing but the consumer can get affected and bank may only refund a part of the lost funds cause it's what covered by their insurance.

Without accurate data, how can you claim that banks are losing billions of dollars every year? On the contrary, I rarely hear about banks being hacked and money being stolen, and that has never happened in my country. I have only heard of banks going bankrupt for some other reason but then they are bought by the central bank or taken over directly so most people won't be affected too much.

You can search for some of the hacks in Google, let me give you an example in 2016 Tesco bank lost 2.5 Million euros and also I read Bangladesh also faced a similar event for around 1 Billion but fortunately, hackers only managed to transfer 81 Million while the remaining somehow stopped in the process of transfer.

It is impossible to provide the data because the banking system is not transparent so not every hack are reported to the public, they manage themselves with the authority cause they can simply create money out of thin air just using a printer.

I also like to use bitcoin as my own bank but because it is so volatile I can only use it as an investment. I don't want to put my savings into bitcoin because it would be inconvenient if I needed to use it urgently when the bitcoin price is falling.

For short term, this might work but look at the long-term effect of using a trust-based monetary system. If everyone started using Bitcoin the value would reach it's threshold so as crypto enthusiasts we should not rely on fiat money and that is why rich people never hold liquid money, all their savings will be in something that can be gold, stocks, or any commodity that has intrinsic value and the price determined by demand and supply not by a centralized body.

[Marvell1]

You can search for some of the hacks in Google, let me give you an example in 2016 Tesco bank lost 2.5 Million euros and also I read Bangladesh also faced a similar event for around 1 Billion but fortunately, hackers only managed to transfer 81 Million while the remaining somehow stopped in the process of transfer.

It is impossible to provide the data because the banking system is not transparent so not every hack are reported to the public, they manage themselves with the authority cause they can simply create money out of thin air just using a printer.

But do these attacks happen frequently? More importantly, what data do you have to prove that depositors in these banks will lose all their money and will not be compensated or protected by the government?

For short term, this might work but look at the long-term effect of using a trust-based monetary system. If everyone started using Bitcoin the value would reach it's threshold so as crypto enthusiasts we should not rely on fiat money and that is why rich people never hold liquid money, all their savings will be in something that can be gold, stocks, or any commodity that has intrinsic value and the price determined by demand and supply not by a centralized body.

Why do you know for sure that rich people don't have savings in the bank? To my knowledge, rich people don't just always keep a portion of their savings in the bank for emergencies. Most of their assets will be tied up in banks because they need money to maintain their business or expand their business. Apart from banks, apart from mortgage loans, they have no better solution.

I will still rely on fiat to some extent because it is still the primary measure of value of the world economy. I do not believe that bitcoin or any cryptocurrency can become a world currency that can replace fiat.

Also, like I said, I would still use the bank because it's not just for deposits. If I need a loan for business, only banks can help me, can bitcoin do that? Banks provide us with more services than just a place to deposit or save money.

[Findingnemo]

But do these attacks happen frequently? More importantly, what data do you have to prove that depositors in these banks will lose all their money and will not be compensated or protected by the government?

Cyber break over financial institutions are attempted almost everyday but it doesn't mean banks get robbed every day but there have also many major incidents banks lost millions of dollars to cyber-attacks and some even claim that it's funded by other countries.

Cyberattacks and the Risk of Bank Failures

But it is not possible to know the accurate data cause it's not disclosed to public.

Why do you know for sure that rich people don't have savings in the bank? To my knowledge, rich people don't just always keep a portion of their savings in the bank for emergencies. Most of their assets will be tied up in banks because they need money to maintain their business or expand their business. Apart from banks, apart from mortgage loans, they have no better solution.

How do I know, because I learnt how rich thinks in all these years. Yes, you're right rich people do keep liquid cash but it's probably less than 1% of their wealth cause they know money depreciates so keeping as liquid money is nothing but a lose to them but they can afford to take cause they can tolerate that while an average joe keeping money in bank and assuming it will grow is lack of knowledge.

Banks and Rich people are not entirely different if you learn things too deep.

I will still rely on fiat to some extent because it is still the primary measure of value of the world economy. I do not believe that bitcoin or any cryptocurrency can become a world currency that can replace fiat.

Also, like I said, I would still use the bank because it's not just for deposits. If I need a loan for business, only banks can help me, can bitcoin do that? Banks provide us with more services than just a place to deposit or save money.

We need to use money which I agree but the fiat money is nothing but a rigged system will just keep on putting bank aid which is nothing but printing more when needed is gonna reflect on the people in the long run.