2 ms·

That's an orthogonal issue. There are plenty of non-crypto investment scams (ask your local VC), phishing etc. Some part of the population will always be robbed

That's an orthogonal issue. There are plenty of non-crypto investment scams (ask your local VC), phishing etc. Some part of the population will always be robbed or scammed, regardless of the name of your country, inflation rate or what currency you use to pay the bills. Crypto may be higher on radar because there's lure of high returns because market is expanding rapidly, and, as in any bubble, some things will pop and some people will hold the bag. Just like with dotcom bubble or california gold rush. PS. Even though California rush left most people without much direct profit, the indirect profit was that California was populated, infrastructure developed and it became an important part of the global economy, and as a free state was one more place where people could move to build a better future for themselves, even if they were not directly interested in the gold itself.

NicoJuicy 5y ago
Because some people are more easily fooled, doesn't mean that we should remove protections. Lol Crypto IS higher on the radar because it's easier to pull off a fraud and send it through a bitcoin mixer. That's simply proven by criminals preferring crypto. Bank money mules are a lot harder to accomplish if you're not a criminal organisation. Additionally, the money is more easily recovered through banks and banks should return your money from fraud in many cases: Eg. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/banking/banking-security-and-fraud https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/banking/ban...
- oleganza 5y ago
  You decide to frame it as "remove protections", while I frame it "here's thing with different tradeoffs". Did cars arrive on the streets with "protections removed" because they could go faster? Or we just accepted different tradeoffs and had to adjust design of the streets, cars and behaviour to improve safety of the new tech? Of course, freedom comes with responsibility. If no one can take your coins easily, you won't be able to recover them easily from someone else either. That's an alternative compared to super-centralized hierarchical finance. People often imply that one is strictly worse than another without considering both advantages and disadvantages.
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    If there are no protections, describing it as removing protections is correct.

NicoJuicy 5y ago

Because some people are more easily fooled, doesn't mean that we should remove protections. Lol Crypto IS higher on the radar because it's easier to pull off a fraud and send it through a bitcoin mixer. That's simply proven by criminals preferring crypto. Bank money mules are a lot harder to accomplish if you're not a criminal organisation. Additionally, the money is more easily recovered through banks and banks should return your money from fraud in many cases: Eg. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/banking/banking-security-and-fraud https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/banking/ban...

oleganza 5y ago
You decide to frame it as "remove protections", while I frame it "here's thing with different tradeoffs". Did cars arrive on the streets with "protections removed" because they could go faster? Or we just accepted different tradeoffs and had to adjust design of the streets, cars and behaviour to improve safety of the new tech? Of course, freedom comes with responsibility. If no one can take your coins easily, you won't be able to recover them easily from someone else either. That's an alternative compared to super-centralized hierarchical finance. People often imply that one is strictly worse than another without considering both advantages and disadvantages.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  If there are no protections, describing it as removing protections is correct.