Why trusting code is better than trusting banks

[Oasisman]

Would you trust code more than banks?

We are on a bitcoin forum and most of us are bitcoin investors. Not to mention, although profit is our top concern, most people choose and favor holding bitcoins in non-custodial wallets. This shows that most people prefer freedom and self-control over dependence on a third party. Or even if someone trusts banks more than bitcoin, they don't dare to say it because they don't want to be the center of criticism and be attacked by everyone. So I would be surprised if someone here said they trust banks more than bitcoin and code.

Well, the fact that we are here in this very community means either we are sick of how the bank works, looking for financial freedom, or just fully trust Bitcoin could change everything that the government and the banks are hiding from us, and what they do with our money. Most of us believe only one thing about banks, they use our money to lend it to other person/people and gain interest from it. That alone is like WTF, right? But there could be a lot worse than that. Some conspiracy theories you can find on the internet even make sense.
So, why don't we find alternatives where we can store our money that don't involve any third party, are not controlled, and are transparent?

Though as much as we want to totally get rid of banks, something is holding us back from doing so, because some of us still need a financial identity for several reasons and legal processes. 

[Patikno]

We’ve trusted banks with money but they sometimes fail us.Bitcoin doesn’t rely on people It relies on code and math. Its supply is fixed and transactions are public. The rules are clear and can’t be easily changed unlike banks. This make them transparent over banking institutions

Would you trust code more than banks?

Don't forget that most banks have implemented cryptographic encryption technology for their security layer. However, banks prone to quantum computing attacks is still questionable, and I believe that if quantum computing is perfected, banks are more vulnerable to attacks than Bitcoin. Because the process of attacking Bitcoin takes more time than banks, and Bitcoin wallet owners can still take precautions by using a completely new wallet, for that reason, I trust Bitcoin more than banks for the problem I'm referring to. Regarding transparency, Bitcoin is certainly much more transparent or open than banks, which keep everything secret in their centralized systems. While Bitcoin transactions can be tracked, no one knows the identity of the wallet owner until they reveal themselves, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Cmiiw.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I think I am at a point in my life where I have the least trust in banks that I have ever had. Many UK banks have put monthly deposit limits to crypto exchanges. They ask for proof of why you want to take your own cash out when it’s over £3,000.

I think the whole fiat banking system is struggling. I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them are. Ompleteoy insolvent and we are one bad Black Swan Event away from capital controls and banking system collapse.

This is why we self custody Bitcoin. No middlemen, no permission required to transact.

[Koadharber]

Would you trust code more than banks?

We are on a bitcoin forum and most of us are bitcoin investors. Not to mention, although profit is our top concern, most people choose and favor holding bitcoins in non-custodial wallets. This shows that most people prefer freedom and self-control over dependence on a third party. Or even if someone trusts banks more than bitcoin, they don't dare to say it because they don't want to be the center of criticism and be attacked by everyone. So I would be surprised if someone here said they trust banks more than bitcoin and code.

Well, the fact that we are here in this very community means either we are sick of how the bank works, looking for financial freedom, or just fully trust Bitcoin could change everything that the government and the banks are hiding from us, and what they do with our money. Most of us believe only one thing about banks, they use our money to lend it to other person/people and gain interest from it. That alone is like WTF, right? But there could be a lot worse than that. Some conspiracy theories you can find on the internet even make sense.
So, why don't we find alternatives where we can store our money that don't involve any third party, are not controlled, and are transparent?

Though as much as we want to totally get rid of banks, something is holding us back from doing so, because some of us still need a financial identity for several reasons and legal processes. 

Trusting code over banks makes sense for many people in a Bitcoin community because the whole idea of this space is built on removing middlemen and giving control back to the user. most Bitcoin holders prefer non custodial wallets because they want freedom and ownership not a third party deciding what happens to their money. even people who still trust banks a bit rarely admit it here because they do not want to be criticized for supporting a system many believe is broken. The reason many of us are in a place like this forum is because something about the banking system pushed us away maybe the lack of transparency maybe the slow processes maybe the way banks use our deposits for their own lending and profit. once you realize your own money is being used to make the bank richer the trust cracks. then you read certain things online and some of those so called conspiracy theories start sounding logical because the system is not as clean as it pretends to be.

Looking for a system that does not rely on a third party becomes natural after that. code does not discriminate code does not freeze accounts code does not tell you when or how to use your own money. transparency becomes normal not something you have to request. Bitcoin offers that feeling of control that banks never give.

[hd49728]

I think I am at a point in my life where I have the least trust in banks that I have ever had. Many UK banks have put monthly deposit limits to crypto exchanges. They ask for proof of why you want to take your own cash out when it’s over £3,000.

I think the whole fiat banking system is struggling. I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them are. Ompleteoy insolvent and we are one bad Black Swan Event away from capital controls and banking system collapse.

It comes and returns with time and Bitcoin was created in 2009 with this message in the Coinbase.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Genesis_block

The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks

This is why we self custody Bitcoin. No middlemen, no permission required to transact.

Being self custodian is very important for our fund and there is one more thing to make it better, using open source wallet. A good wallet for a Bitcoin self-custodian is an open-source and non-custodial wallet with good community reviews and history.

The https://walletscrutiny.com/ website is a good one for checking wallets.

[WhoYouCantKill]

There is strengths and weaknesses in both. Code is predictable and do not change its own rules overnight, hence making Bitcoin feel even more transparent and able to resist manipulation. On the other hand, banks, provides protection, support for customers, and stability that only coding can not offer. For real, trust relys on what you have more worth for, independence and transparency, or security well structured and human oversight.

[Numeral]

It turns out that I now trust banks more than code, even though storing money in banks also involves various risks. I thought long and hard before making my decision, but ultimately chose banks. One of my arguments was that if I needed fiat money, it would be difficult to legally withdraw it from Bitcoin in my country at the moment. Perhaps the situation will change in the future and some legal procedures will appear, but for now, unfortunately, everything is complicated. However, no one is stopping people from investing small amounts of money in Bitcoin, which citizens of my country are willing to risk. If you look into it, you may be able to find some loopholes in the legislation for the legal storage of Bitcoin, but it is not easy. For example, as far as I understand, miners can legally store funds in Bitcoin. Large investors can also legally invest in BTC ETFs.

[MinoRaiola]

We’ve trusted banks with money but they sometimes fail us.Bitcoin doesn’t rely on people It relies on code and math. Its supply is fixed and transactions are public. The rules are clear and can’t be easily changed unlike banks. This make them transparent over banking institutions

Would you trust code more than banks?

I think you written it wrong. We have trusted our money to the banks is not correct, we must trust our money to the banks. Our money system requires legitimate proof of assets. This is accepted in a standard bank account. There are other options, but unfortunately, the basis remains the bank account. I dont completely trust the bank system, there are people behind it who make decisions, and I dont trust them. A code that has to be confirmed by many people without a really benefiting from the assets is wonderful. They are only paid for their work with the fees.

[Satofan44]

Would you trust code more than banks?

You are not supposed to trust it, you are supposed to verify it. If you are unable to verify it yourself, then you must verify it through third parties by for example trusting someone else to do it for you.

You can only trust our CREATOR, who can never fail anyone who trust HIM, unlike trusting other things.But if code or a system is built on good foundation, it's definitely in "Good HANDS" and can be trusted, but as long as it does not deviate from the good foundation

Are you a drug addict? What is this cult nonsense doing in Bitcoin Discussion? 

It is all fun and games until someone loses his private keys. You can do charge backs with credit cards when you get scammed or even reverse transactions with banks in some rare cases but none of those are available for btc. Btc is superior to banks as long as you are in control of what you are doing but it also takes a second of distraction to lose your coins forever. A tiny copy/paste trojan can ruin everything for you irreversibly. Or a infected browser plugin… a misclicked spam email link… a hacked electrum update…  As long as you are aware of those risks, btc is invincible. If you even miss one of those threats, then banks win. Banks don’t win directly but your loss of btc becomes their victory. I think it is still way too early to ditch banks. They will be around for a long time.

Sounds good until you realize that there are many cases in which the banks can't recover your money either. So what exactly is so scary about self custody? Anyway this is not a good argument, essentially you are saying that most adults need a parent to oversee their "adulthood". A bank to act as their nanny? Surely doing things this way encourages growth and responsibility. 

Holding Bitcoin in a Secure way is not as difficult as it seems.  It only takes one try and then things become so much easier next time as you get used to the system.

This is absolutely not true. It sounds good in theory but the reality is that 99% of users today are using Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in ways that are not secure, and that only a tiny minority actually has fairly decent security practices. Owning a hardware wallet does not mean that you automatically using Bitcoin in a secure way. There are ways that you can be hacked or tricked into providing important information which leads to a complete breakdown of the allegedly "secure" way of using it.

[Cryptomultiplier]

We’ve trusted banks with money but they sometimes fail us.Bitcoin doesn’t rely on people It relies on code and math. Its supply is fixed and transactions are public. The rules are clear and can’t be easily changed unlike banks. This make them transparent over banking institutions

Would you trust code more than banks?

I think you written it wrong. We have trusted our money to the banks is not correct, we must trust our money to the banks. Our money system requires legitimate proof of assets. This is accepted in a standard bank account. There are other options, but unfortunately, the basis remains the bank account. I dont completely trust the bank system, there are people behind it who make decisions, and I dont trust them. A code that has to be confirmed by many people without a really benefiting from the assets is wonderful. They are only paid for their work with the fees.

Sincerely, I don't trust both the banks or the codes that Bitcoin rely on to function today, but the truth is that to belong to a society and earn means that one must be willing to commit to bank regulations and the taxing system and even with the P2p system which I believe is the code OP is referring to, may sometimes be infiltrated by criminals who pose as merchant and find ways to swindle your coins without you paying full attention in most cases when this happens.

However I have no choice than to trust the decentralized system more due to its pecks of decentralization and personal control to some extent and the fact that it bridges the gap that traditional finance system cannot occupy.

[PrivacyG]

Holding Bitcoin in a Secure way is not as difficult as it seems.  It only takes one try and then things become so much easier next time as you get used to the system.

This is absolutely not true. It sounds good in theory but the reality is that 99% of users today are using Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in ways that are not secure, and that only a tiny minority actually has fairly decent security practices. Owning a hardware wallet does not mean that you automatically using Bitcoin in a secure way. There are ways that you can be hacked or tricked into providing important information which leads to a complete breakdown of the allegedly "secure" way of using it.

And what is particularly not true about my statement?  It is really not as difficult as it seems and it does become much easier once you do a Transaction or two in a Secure way.  I did not even mention Hardware Wallets in the Reply you quoted.

[Satofan44]

Sincerely, I don't trust both the banks or the codes that Bitcoin rely on to function today, but the truth is that to belong to a society and earn means that one must be willing to commit to bank regulations and the taxing system and even with the P2p system which I believe is the code OP is referring to, may sometimes be infiltrated by criminals who pose as merchant and find ways to swindle your coins without you paying full attention in most cases when this happens.

However I have no choice than to trust the decentralized system more due to its pecks of decentralization and personal control to some extent and the fact that it bridges the gap that traditional finance system cannot occupy.

Then you are a complete idiot and you should not even be here. The code that Bitcoin uses and the way that it is governed ensures that your "infiltration" bullshit is next to impossible. It is something that is extremely difficult to do with the actual Bitcoin code, and we only consider it in theoretical examinations of potential attack vectors since they are possible even if the probability is extremely low. Writing on a Bitcoin forum while simultaneously not trusting the Bitcoin code, only a 3rd world parasite is capable of such idiocy.

Holding Bitcoin in a Secure way is not as difficult as it seems.  It only takes one try and then things become so much easier next time as you get used to the system.

This is absolutely not true. It sounds good in theory but the reality is that 99% of users today are using Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in ways that are not secure, and that only a tiny minority actually has fairly decent security practices. Owning a hardware wallet does not mean that you automatically using Bitcoin in a secure way. There are ways that you can be hacked or tricked into providing important information which leads to a complete breakdown of the allegedly "secure" way of using it.

And what is particularly not true about my statement?  It is really not as difficult as it seems and it does become much easier once you do a Transaction or two in a Secure way.  I did not even mention Hardware Wallets in the Reply you quoted.

None of it is true. Being able to do a proper transaction sometimes does not mean that you know how to use Bitcoin in a secure way. Most users are not able to do it, and most users are not doing it. You live in some fantasy bubble where the average person is not a complete retard from Idiocracy. It is time to tune down the naivety in regards to the real world before life does it for you in a very bad way.  

Most users are mobile wallet users and exchange users, a tiny minority ever verify anything that they download before they install it. Therefore by default they are using it in insecure ways. It is really quite simple.

[Taskford]

I think I am at a point in my life where I have the least trust in banks that I have ever had. Many UK banks have put monthly deposit limits to crypto exchanges. They ask for proof of why you want to take your own cash out when it’s over £3,000.

I think the whole fiat banking system is struggling. I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them are. Ompleteoy insolvent and we are one bad Black Swan Event away from capital controls and banking system collapse.

This is why we self custody Bitcoin. No middlemen, no permission required to transact.

Can't blame you to think that way since actually many people actually losing their trust on banks. Since it seems that they prioritize profit over their costumer protection that's why I'm afraid to put all my savings in that in institution.

Also I don't trust their digital platforms since security is growing concern and they are so slow paying attention on the issues of their client. The downtime we experience is so long and that's frustrating that's why its good that Bitcoin is available since we can use it anytime we want without getting bothered by any legal entities.

[imthegreat]

We’ve trusted banks with money but they sometimes fail us.Bitcoin doesn’t rely on people It relies on code and math. Its supply is fixed and transactions are public. The rules are clear and can’t be easily changed unlike banks. This make them transparent over banking institutions

Would you trust code more than banks?

I completely agree with you because banks are often mechanisms that, while secure, are easily hacked due to human error. We know of numerous stories where, due to a bank employee's error, vast amounts of data were leaked, leading to the darknet gaining access to a wealth of information that could then be used against the bank's users. This is terrifying, but Bitcoin doesn't have this problem at all.
After all, if a Bitcoin holder does not reveal their address in conjunction with their login, and is careless about this issue, then they can be considered anonymous.

[cr1776]

We’ve trusted banks with money but they sometimes fail us.Bitcoin doesn’t rely on people It relies on code and math. Its supply is fixed and transactions are public. The rules are clear and can’t be easily changed unlike banks. This make them transparent over banking institutions

Would you trust code more than banks?

Of course.  But it should be *central banks* with an extra emphasis because they are what devalues fiat year after year, usually slow enough so people don't notice it for long periods (although in many cases they notice it sooner) so that you lose half of your purchasing power every 30 years or so.  And 99% over a lifetime.  It is a hidden tax that impacts the poor the most and is an evil and immoral system that the authoritarians like because it keeps them in power:  they can complain about something they created, claim only they know how to fix it, and slowly steal the products of your life from you.

[YOSHIE]

Would you trust code more than banks?

In my opinion, if you talk about banks and Bitcoin, for me it doesn't all lie in the code or bank factor, on the contrary, it all lies in the ease of transactions.
In general, we know banks as a means of storing money and transferring money to accounts A and B so on.
In general, we know Bitcoin as a means of digital currency which is generally carried out for transactions to addresses A and B and also as a symbol of investment, trading, mining.

So, these two systems are very different, so code and bank are two different problems.

[notocactus]

In my opinion, if you talk about banks and Bitcoin, for me it doesn't all lie in the code or bank factor, on the contrary, it all lies in the ease of transactions.
In general, we know banks as a means of storing money and transferring money to accounts A and B so on.
In general, we know Bitcoin as a means of digital currency which is generally carried out for transactions to addresses A and B and also as a symbol of investment, trading, mining.

So, these two systems are very different, so code and bank are two different problems.

Bitcoin blockchain and bank system are different systems with biggest difference are: decentralization vs centralization; and irreversible transactions vs reversible transactions.

With Bitcoin blockchain, your transaction is safe and secure if it was confirmed (at least 1 confirmation) while with bank, your bank transfer can be reversed by banks any time.

Another difference is risk of fund freeze that is only possible with money in bank accounts while with bitcoin in Bitcoin non-custodial wallets, noone can freeze your bitcoins.

[Findingnemo]

~
Bitcoin blockchain and bank system are different systems with biggest difference are: decentralization vs centralization; and irreversible transactions vs reversible transactions.

With Bitcoin blockchain, your transaction is safe and secure if it was confirmed (at least 1 confirmation) while with bank, your bank transfer can be reversed by banks any time.

Other factors like transparency, is also important thing, no one can verify whether the transaction is confirmed on their own with wire transfer but we came to know when the funds arrives but with bitcoin can track everything on the real time using blockchain explorers and all it need to do is txid.

[X-ray]

Other factors like transparency, is also important thing, no one can verify whether the transaction is confirmed on their own with wire transfer but we came to know when the funds arrives but with bitcoin can track everything on the real time using blockchain explorers and all it need to do is txid.

Transparent ledger is a blessing. I've experienced sending money using e wallet and apparently the receiver didn't get any confirmation and there is no change in his account which means money is not arriving.

Just trying to confirm whether the transaction is actually going through or not through customer support is hell, so many complexity behind the bureaucracy that i'm even feeling to give up the money because it's just too complicated.

With bitcoin you just check blockchain and see it yourself how many confirmation has it gotten. Blockchain is the only single source of truth and that is already solved so many complexities.

[Renampun]

It is all fun and games until someone loses his private keys. You can do charge backs with credit cards when you get scammed or even reverse transactions with banks in some rare cases but none of those are available for btc. Btc is superior to banks as long as you are in control of what you are doing but it also takes a second of distraction to lose your coins forever. A tiny copy/paste trojan can ruin everything for you irreversibly. Or a infected browser plugin… a misclicked spam email link… a hacked electrum update…  As long as you are aware of those risks, btc is invincible. If you even miss one of those threats, then banks win. Banks don’t win directly but your loss of btc becomes their victory. I think it is still way too early to ditch banks. They will be around for a long time.

I don't think it's that easy to get your money back with the bank, if you get scammed or get a virus and you lose some money from your account because of that, you can't get your money back by reporting it to the bank and asking them to refund it, because the bank will only process the refund if the error is from the system or negligence of the bank, not because of the user's error, even in some cases when it is the bank's error but they shift the error to the user. so don't think too much that you can rely on the bank in matters like this, instead they can frustrate you because of the long claim process, complicated bureaucracy, and the results that are actually useless for reporting.