3 ms·

So if you think the risk of permanently losing your assets via legal channels is, let's say, 99-to-1 compared to the risk of losing your assets to cryptocurrenc

by shawnz 5y ago

So if you think the risk of permanently losing your assets via legal channels is, let's say, 99-to-1 compared to the risk of losing your assets to cryptocurrency attacks, then wouldn't it make sense to hold 99% of your assets in the bank and 1% in cryptocurrencies? Cryptocurrencies don't have to replace all existing financial instruments to be a useful hedge. They can just be one tool of many to diversify your risk profile. Especially consider that for people living outside the developed world, the risk of having your assets stolen through legal channels is going to be much higher.

WJW 5y ago
If you think it is indeed 99-to-1, then perhaps. My perception of the trustworthiness of most crypto projects is certainly much lower (see the endless parade of crypto horror stories on https://www.reddit.com/r/SorryForYourLoss/ https://www.reddit.com/r/SorryForYourLoss/), so personally I would think the odds of a crypto project going under or just simply losing my wallet keys is way higher than the chance my bank or my government will steal my money or my stocks or whatever. Then again, I do live in western Europe so YMMV if you live in Venezuela or someplace like that.