10 ms·

I can see someone explaining to their grandmother about having to move her BTC to offline cold storage and storing her private keys securely or she could lose h

by enlyth 5y ago

I can see someone explaining to their grandmother about having to move her BTC to offline cold storage and storing her private keys securely or she could lose her life's savings in an instant with no recourse

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
aNoob7000 5y ago
LOL! Very true.. Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? I personally think the day the digital US dollar is developed and can be stored in your IPhone. If I can take my locally stored digital dollar and then send it via imessage or whatsapp, then the game is truly over for Bitcoin.
- pinkybanana 5y ago
  > Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? Nobody will have to learn this stuff, if the BTC economy develops there will be professional custodials for all levels. Eg. banks. But the importance is that there is always the option to self-custody if you want to. With fiat you don't have that option even in theory. I think the option for self-custody is what makes BTC powerful alternative, not necessarily how widespread self-custody is going to be.
  - acdha 5y ago
    > But the importance is that there is always the option to self-custody if you want to. With fiat you don't have that option even in theory. You mean that if you store cash it will magically disappear once you hit a certain quantity or age?
    - pinkybanana 5y ago
      Physical cash is ridiculously cumbersome and difficult to handle in larger quantities. I wouldn't probably be able to get $10k worth of cash from my local bank, and getting something like $100k would probably require days and lots of work. However if I have millions worth of BTC at some big exchange, I can move that amount to a secure self custody in 10 minutes without a hassle.
      - acdha 5y ago
        So you agree that you were wrong to say that you don’t have the option even in theory? Convenience is a discussion point but it’s predicated on being possible – and since this happens not-infrequently (people buy cars, farm equipment, even houses with cash) it’s far from theoretical. One other area to learn about: security – while it’s true that you can move millions on yourself own, the risks of theft or accidental loss are why most people do not avail themselves of these theoretical options since they consider the cost of banking fees to be an acceptable trade off for the security and convenience of letting a professional handle those problems.
  - wins32767 5y ago
    > But the importance is that there is always the option to self-custody if you want to. With fiat you don't have that option even in theory. The stack of hundred dollar bills under my mattress disagrees with you.
    - pinkybanana 5y ago
      Good luck storing and handling that pile of cash, I'll stay with my crypto hardware wallet.
      - wins32767 5y ago
        If folks are unbanked, their pile of cash is unlikely to be so large that it's hard to store and handle.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  I like physical analog cash even though its a pain in the ass to carry. Cashless society is terrifying to me.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - dougSF70 5y ago
    I think that using cash makes money expensive which adds some base load inflation - this will help reduces homelessness and other societal ills (such as wealth inequality). Electronic money is never lost, not like those pounds, pennies, dollars, quarters. Losing money, takes out of circulation. While not much is taken out, it might be enough to create a base load of inflation - money becomes more scarce and therefore more expensive. Low inflation leads to asset price bubbles - stock market and housing in particular. It also suppresses wage inflation. So housing becomes more expensive and wages do not keep up, making housing less affordable. A double punch. Low inflation leads to more financial speculation as people with access to capital look to diversify away from a limited pool of assets (Bonds and cash become less desirable in low inflation regimes). Buying housing and leasing it out is a good use of capital. However, this leads real-estate investors to drive increases in rent as they chase yield and airbnb-empires also drive rental prices - as this is one way of driving yield. High rents combined with low wage growth means that people's lives become priced for perfection and one small deviation can knock them out of equilibrium - losing their home / rental property when they lose their job. All because governments and technology are conspiring to keep inflation low. Using cash is the person-on-the-street's only weapon to fight it.
    - systemvoltage 5y ago
      Homelessness is a California’s complex housing shortage and governance/policy problem. The world is much bigger than issues in SF/Portland/Seattle. I am not following the strawman from utilitarian aspects of cash -> inflation -> homelessness & inquality.
      - 5y ago
- criley2 5y ago
  A cryptocurrency backed by the united states could certainly succeed as many people want to do business that way, but the point of bitcoin was decentralization and preventing government control of the currency. The same people (lots and lots and lots of criminals, but you know, regular people too) who use bitcoin would probably not want a us dollar coin very much. But the vast majority of people don't use bitcoin at all, for anything... I think a us dollar coin with FDIC protection or whatever protection it takes to make grandma feel safe that her $100k account is protected, would be wildly successful if they tried it.
- singularity2001 5y ago
  I personally think the day the digital US dollar is developed … The digital US dollar is pretty much in use already, or do you think your bank has anything physical resembling the number on your account?
  - bun_at_work 5y ago
    The bank does hold a fraction of your deposits, as our banking in the US is fractional reserve banking. This has been the case for quite some time, and isn't really the same thing as digital currency, even if we transact digitally.
    - jwolfe 5y ago
      From my understanding, they hold most of that in reserve accounts with the Federal Reserve. But yeah, someone at some point holds some cash. But of the total US money supply (in 2018), physical currency makes up about 11% of the total value[0]. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-us-currency-there-is-in-circulation-2018-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-us-currency-t...
      - reedjosh 5y ago
        And whenever this comes up, I just like to remind people that we went to a reserve requirement of 0% nearly a year ago with the start of COVID. https://medium.com/navigating-life/we-just-went-from-fractional-reserve-banking-to-zero-reserve-banking-and-its-a-pretty-big-deal-c501432e9be6 https://medium.com/navigating-life/we-just-went-from-fractio... Edit: Downvoted, and I'm guessing it's the source? This is legitimate fact though. Here's the fed's own announcement. > In light of the shift to an ample reserves regime, the Board has reduced reserve requirement ratios to zero percent effective on March 26, the beginning of the next reserve maintenance period. This action eliminates reserve requirements for thousands of depository institutions and will help to support lending to households and businesses. https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20200315b.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/mone...
- miked85 5y ago
  The digital dollar has been here for years. I couldn't even tell you the last time I carried paper currency.
  - JKCalhoun 5y ago
    If I hand a cashier a physical dollar, no fee to me. Not so with your so-called digital dollars. An actual digital dollar would have no transaction fee whatsoever.
    - hayyyyydos 5y ago
      > An actual digital dollar would have no transaction fee whatsoever. So, something BTC is unable to provide?
    - squeaky-clean 5y ago
      That fee is only because we want that money settled instantly by a third party. There's no fee for a bank to bank transfer. Or heck, even writing a check. Once you get VISA involved they want a cut.
    - miked85 5y ago
      I don't pay any fee when I use a credit card.
      - spullara 5y ago
        You do, but it is hidden as the vendor is responsible for paying it. CC companies are basically a tax on transactions.
      - reedjosh 5y ago
        You pay a slightly elevated price to use your CC. The CC network charge vendors a percentage of the transaction. So you aren't paying directly, but we're all paying.
      - c-linkage 5y ago
        It might appear that way, but that is only because the fee is hidden. The credit card terminal agreements signed by retailers prevent the retailer from offering differential pricing when buying via credit card or cash. Essentially, the credit card fee is embedded into the price. This might be "good" for people who have credit cards, but it is inflationary (by roughly 2%) to people whose credit is poor and only transact by cash. But let's be honest -- who cares about the poor?
- Vadoff 5y ago
  >Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? In the early days of the internet, many things were a complete pain in the ass to do. But then services and apps were built and things became easier, same is happening in this space. Before, even purchasing Bitcoin was extremely difficult to do, and involved a lot of research + steps - now it's trivial. Before, securing your wallet was extremely difficult, now it's easier but not ideal to those that are less tech saavy.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - aerosmile 5y ago
    This is such a brilliant answer. Imposing the grandma test on early-stage ecosystems is a total naysayer move. We all know that humans are capable of doing advanced math, even though a newborn baby doesn't come even close to being able to do it.
- amelius 5y ago
  > Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? This is a valid question for our current tax system, already.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  > I personally think the day the digital US dollar is developed and can be stored in your IPhone. If I can take my locally stored digital dollar and then send it via imessage or whatsapp, then the game is truly over for Bitcoin Hasn't this already happened. It's called Zelle or Venmo or CashApp or ApplePay or a million others. Heck, if you prefer Elon Musk pushed technology there's even this thing called PayPal. And it comes with a whole series of laws that protect you in the case of hacking, fraud, etc. I don't follow the advantage of using a government-issued (and custodially held) bitcoin wallet. Well, I understand that El Salvador wants to encourage people to use their BTC there. But other than that I don't see the value.
627467 5y ago
That someone probably will have learned how to help grandma on complex digital processes last time goverment services, communications and commerce moved online. I agree it won't be pain-free, but hardly the first time such conversion would happen
thinkmassive 5y ago
Multisig solutions are available for increased security and reliability. Services like Casa and Unchained Capital will even hold a single key from your set, allowing you to recover your funds if one of your keys is lost, however they can never move your funds on their own because they never possess a quorum.
- lftl 5y ago
  How does it work that they have the ability to help you recover your funds, but they can't do that "recovery" unilaterally?
  - tylerhou 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir%27s_Secret_Sharing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir%27s_Secret_Sharing
    - thinkmassive 5y ago
      Shamir’s Secret Sharing is a general solution for splitting secrets. Bitcoin multisig is superior for for its specific applications though. The biggest reasons are: 1. There is never one single key with full control. This is a huge vulnerability with SSS. 2. More flexibility, by allowing differing k-of-n subsets in combination with timelocks and other Bitcoin script features.
  - thinkmassive 5y ago
    Bitcoin has a scripting language that allows more complex requirements to unlock funds, rather than simply sending an amount from one key to another: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script Multisignature requires a quorum k-of-n signatures to unlock funds, for example 3 of 5 keys (or 2-of-3, 2-of-2, etc): https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multi-signature https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multi-signature So you can have a wallet that requires 2 signatures to move funds, where you control 2 signing devices (mobile app + hardware wallet) and the third-party holds the 3rd key. Normally you manage all transfers without involvement of the third party, but if one of your keys becomes inaccessible they can help you sweep your funds to a new set of keys. Additional resiliency and security is gained by increasing the quorum to 3-of-5. You control a mobile app plus 3 hardware signing devices, which are ideally distributed geographically. This increases reliability in case something happens at your primary site (like your house) and increases security by requiring an attacker to physically visit multiple locations. The 5th key is held by the recovery service. tl;dr: https://keys.casa/how-it-works https://keys.casa/how-it-works

by enlyth 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

aNoob7000 5y ago

LOL! Very true.. Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? I personally think the day the digital US dollar is developed and can be stored in your IPhone. If I can take my locally stored digital dollar and then send it via imessage or whatsapp, then the game is truly over for Bitcoin.

pinkybanana 5y ago
> Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? Nobody will have to learn this stuff, if the BTC economy develops there will be professional custodials for all levels. Eg. banks. But the importance is that there is always the option to self-custody if you want to. With fiat you don't have that option even in theory. I think the option for self-custody is what makes BTC powerful alternative, not necessarily how widespread self-custody is going to be.
- acdha 5y ago
  > But the importance is that there is always the option to self-custody if you want to. With fiat you don't have that option even in theory. You mean that if you store cash it will magically disappear once you hit a certain quantity or age?
  - pinkybanana 5y ago
    Physical cash is ridiculously cumbersome and difficult to handle in larger quantities. I wouldn't probably be able to get $10k worth of cash from my local bank, and getting something like $100k would probably require days and lots of work. However if I have millions worth of BTC at some big exchange, I can move that amount to a secure self custody in 10 minutes without a hassle.
    - acdha 5y ago
      So you agree that you were wrong to say that you don’t have the option even in theory? Convenience is a discussion point but it’s predicated on being possible – and since this happens not-infrequently (people buy cars, farm equipment, even houses with cash) it’s far from theoretical. One other area to learn about: security – while it’s true that you can move millions on yourself own, the risks of theft or accidental loss are why most people do not avail themselves of these theoretical options since they consider the cost of banking fees to be an acceptable trade off for the security and convenience of letting a professional handle those problems.
- wins32767 5y ago
  > But the importance is that there is always the option to self-custody if you want to. With fiat you don't have that option even in theory. The stack of hundred dollar bills under my mattress disagrees with you.
  - pinkybanana 5y ago
    Good luck storing and handling that pile of cash, I'll stay with my crypto hardware wallet.
    - wins32767 5y ago
      If folks are unbanked, their pile of cash is unlikely to be so large that it's hard to store and handle.
systemvoltage 5y ago
I like physical analog cash even though its a pain in the ass to carry. Cashless society is terrifying to me.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dougSF70 5y ago
  I think that using cash makes money expensive which adds some base load inflation - this will help reduces homelessness and other societal ills (such as wealth inequality). Electronic money is never lost, not like those pounds, pennies, dollars, quarters. Losing money, takes out of circulation. While not much is taken out, it might be enough to create a base load of inflation - money becomes more scarce and therefore more expensive. Low inflation leads to asset price bubbles - stock market and housing in particular. It also suppresses wage inflation. So housing becomes more expensive and wages do not keep up, making housing less affordable. A double punch. Low inflation leads to more financial speculation as people with access to capital look to diversify away from a limited pool of assets (Bonds and cash become less desirable in low inflation regimes). Buying housing and leasing it out is a good use of capital. However, this leads real-estate investors to drive increases in rent as they chase yield and airbnb-empires also drive rental prices - as this is one way of driving yield. High rents combined with low wage growth means that people's lives become priced for perfection and one small deviation can knock them out of equilibrium - losing their home / rental property when they lose their job. All because governments and technology are conspiring to keep inflation low. Using cash is the person-on-the-street's only weapon to fight it.
  - systemvoltage 5y ago
    Homelessness is a California’s complex housing shortage and governance/policy problem. The world is much bigger than issues in SF/Portland/Seattle. I am not following the strawman from utilitarian aspects of cash -> inflation -> homelessness & inquality.
    - 5y ago
criley2 5y ago
A cryptocurrency backed by the united states could certainly succeed as many people want to do business that way, but the point of bitcoin was decentralization and preventing government control of the currency. The same people (lots and lots and lots of criminals, but you know, regular people too) who use bitcoin would probably not want a us dollar coin very much. But the vast majority of people don't use bitcoin at all, for anything... I think a us dollar coin with FDIC protection or whatever protection it takes to make grandma feel safe that her $100k account is protected, would be wildly successful if they tried it.
singularity2001 5y ago
I personally think the day the digital US dollar is developed … The digital US dollar is pretty much in use already, or do you think your bank has anything physical resembling the number on your account?
- bun_at_work 5y ago
  The bank does hold a fraction of your deposits, as our banking in the US is fractional reserve banking. This has been the case for quite some time, and isn't really the same thing as digital currency, even if we transact digitally.
  - jwolfe 5y ago
    From my understanding, they hold most of that in reserve accounts with the Federal Reserve. But yeah, someone at some point holds some cash. But of the total US money supply (in 2018), physical currency makes up about 11% of the total value[0]. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-us-currency-there-is-in-circulation-2018-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-us-currency-t...
    - reedjosh 5y ago
      And whenever this comes up, I just like to remind people that we went to a reserve requirement of 0% nearly a year ago with the start of COVID. https://medium.com/navigating-life/we-just-went-from-fractional-reserve-banking-to-zero-reserve-banking-and-its-a-pretty-big-deal-c501432e9be6 https://medium.com/navigating-life/we-just-went-from-fractio... Edit: Downvoted, and I'm guessing it's the source? This is legitimate fact though. Here's the fed's own announcement. > In light of the shift to an ample reserves regime, the Board has reduced reserve requirement ratios to zero percent effective on March 26, the beginning of the next reserve maintenance period. This action eliminates reserve requirements for thousands of depository institutions and will help to support lending to households and businesses. https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20200315b.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/mone...
miked85 5y ago
The digital dollar has been here for years. I couldn't even tell you the last time I carried paper currency.
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  If I hand a cashier a physical dollar, no fee to me. Not so with your so-called digital dollars. An actual digital dollar would have no transaction fee whatsoever.
  - hayyyyydos 5y ago
    > An actual digital dollar would have no transaction fee whatsoever. So, something BTC is unable to provide?
  - squeaky-clean 5y ago
    That fee is only because we want that money settled instantly by a third party. There's no fee for a bank to bank transfer. Or heck, even writing a check. Once you get VISA involved they want a cut.
  - miked85 5y ago
    I don't pay any fee when I use a credit card.
    - spullara 5y ago
      You do, but it is hidden as the vendor is responsible for paying it. CC companies are basically a tax on transactions.
    - reedjosh 5y ago
      You pay a slightly elevated price to use your CC. The CC network charge vendors a percentage of the transaction. So you aren't paying directly, but we're all paying.
    - c-linkage 5y ago
      It might appear that way, but that is only because the fee is hidden. The credit card terminal agreements signed by retailers prevent the retailer from offering differential pricing when buying via credit card or cash. Essentially, the credit card fee is embedded into the price. This might be "good" for people who have credit cards, but it is inflationary (by roughly 2%) to people whose credit is poor and only transact by cash. But let's be honest -- who cares about the poor?
Vadoff 5y ago
>Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? In the early days of the internet, many things were a complete pain in the ass to do. But then services and apps were built and things became easier, same is happening in this space. Before, even purchasing Bitcoin was extremely difficult to do, and involved a lot of research + steps - now it's trivial. Before, securing your wallet was extremely difficult, now it's easier but not ideal to those that are less tech saavy.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- aerosmile 5y ago
  This is such a brilliant answer. Imposing the grandma test on early-stage ecosystems is a total naysayer move. We all know that humans are capable of doing advanced math, even though a newborn baby doesn't come even close to being able to do it.
amelius 5y ago
> Who the hell has time to figure out all this stuff? This is a valid question for our current tax system, already.
HWR_14 5y ago
> I personally think the day the digital US dollar is developed and can be stored in your IPhone. If I can take my locally stored digital dollar and then send it via imessage or whatsapp, then the game is truly over for Bitcoin Hasn't this already happened. It's called Zelle or Venmo or CashApp or ApplePay or a million others. Heck, if you prefer Elon Musk pushed technology there's even this thing called PayPal. And it comes with a whole series of laws that protect you in the case of hacking, fraud, etc. I don't follow the advantage of using a government-issued (and custodially held) bitcoin wallet. Well, I understand that El Salvador wants to encourage people to use their BTC there. But other than that I don't see the value.

627467 5y ago

That someone probably will have learned how to help grandma on complex digital processes last time goverment services, communications and commerce moved online. I agree it won't be pain-free, but hardly the first time such conversion would happen

thinkmassive 5y ago

Multisig solutions are available for increased security and reliability. Services like Casa and Unchained Capital will even hold a single key from your set, allowing you to recover your funds if one of your keys is lost, however they can never move your funds on their own because they never possess a quorum.

lftl 5y ago
How does it work that they have the ability to help you recover your funds, but they can't do that "recovery" unilaterally?
- tylerhou 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir%27s_Secret_Sharing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir%27s_Secret_Sharing
  - thinkmassive 5y ago
    Shamir’s Secret Sharing is a general solution for splitting secrets. Bitcoin multisig is superior for for its specific applications though. The biggest reasons are: 1. There is never one single key with full control. This is a huge vulnerability with SSS. 2. More flexibility, by allowing differing k-of-n subsets in combination with timelocks and other Bitcoin script features.
- thinkmassive 5y ago
  Bitcoin has a scripting language that allows more complex requirements to unlock funds, rather than simply sending an amount from one key to another: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script Multisignature requires a quorum k-of-n signatures to unlock funds, for example 3 of 5 keys (or 2-of-3, 2-of-2, etc): https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multi-signature https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multi-signature So you can have a wallet that requires 2 signatures to move funds, where you control 2 signing devices (mobile app + hardware wallet) and the third-party holds the 3rd key. Normally you manage all transfers without involvement of the third party, but if one of your keys becomes inaccessible they can help you sweep your funds to a new set of keys. Additional resiliency and security is gained by increasing the quorum to 3-of-5. You control a mobile app plus 3 hardware signing devices, which are ideally distributed geographically. This increases reliability in case something happens at your primary site (like your house) and increases security by requiring an attacker to physically visit multiple locations. The 5th key is held by the recovery service. tl;dr: https://keys.casa/how-it-works https://keys.casa/how-it-works