4 ms·

I think this very short-sighted. People don't want to run their own banks now because the UX behind Crypto sucks. But the space is moving like a rocket and who

I think this very short-sighted. People don't want to run their own banks now because the UX behind Crypto sucks. But the space is moving like a rocket and who knows what the future holds. Anecdote: I am a fairly technical person but stayed away from the whole self-custody stuff because no way anyone in my family can figure it out and if something happens to me, its all gone. Two days ago, my wife (non-tech as you can get) got a muun wallet and was very happy about the experience. She got the point of being able to send money to her relatives in the middle east without the normal shadiness that goes on over there. (getting USD or any hard currency in and out of some middle eastern countries is a nightmare)

300bps 5y ago
Wait until your non-tech wife accidentally sends ETH to a BTC address. Or her hard drive dies. Or a million other things that can happen. And the one “legitimate” use case you list is to use cryptocurrency to bypass US controls on money transfers to monitored countries. How long do you think that hole will remain open?
- jonathan-adly 5y ago
  I think you are being disingenuous and emotional about it. Previously, the UX was terrible and didn't protect non-technical users at all, so these scenarios could happen. Newer tech with better UX does a wonderful job protecting users and is improving at rocket speed. The example I used protects the user from all these scenarios you mentioned. Also, the US doesn't care about moving USD in and out of most countries (Iran, NK excluded). It's these countries themselves that want that level of control.
  - 300bps 5y ago
    The example I used protects the user from all these scenarios you mentioned. How does it protect against hardware failure? How does it protect against sending Coin X to a wallet meant for Coin Y? Also, the US doesn't care about moving USD in and out of most countries That's funny. And even if what you said were true, other countries will eventually control what appears to not be controllable today.
    - jonathan-adly 5y ago
      Your Bitcoin lives on the ledger. You can recover your wallet with your private keys under most circumstances (unless the Bitcoin network itself dies). Hardware failure is not relevant. As far as the addresses goes, it’s the same thing as sending a wire transfer to the wrong account in a different country. You won’t get it back.
      - giaour 5y ago
        How many people make international wire transfers? It's an extremely rare and risky kind of transaction, which is why banks have built up their own opsec around it. If cryptocurrency enthusiasts had their way, though, the high-risk transaction the GP called out would be required to buy a gallon of milk.
        jonathan-adly 5y ago
        My man, not even the wildest Bitcoin maxi is calling for a world where you are required to buy milk with bitcoin lol. People just want their savings accounts to match inflation. (and the option to spend from that savings account for some transactions). Give them that and Bitcoin will go back to being a niche investment vehicle where 99% of the people don't care about it.
      - elevader 5y ago
        Hardware failure is extremely relevant if that hardware is the drive you store your private key on,at which point the wallet is gone forever. One could say "don't do that, have elaborate backup strategies" but that brings us back to UX. Even professionals who should know better tend to be awful at this.
        jonathan-adly 5y ago
        I have no problems with this. Like I said in the original comment, people not wanting to run their bank is a solvable UX problem. Fundamentally, I don't see why it has to stay this way.
hvidgaard 5y ago
We're at a point where you can have your coins on a hardware wallet, and have a simple route into an proper exchange with the possibility to pay fiat to your bank account. Documenting this and updating it yearly is not that much extra work if you really believe in it. Every year, practice the process with your wife/sibling/whoever and 10$ so they are accustomed to it. It's work, but you are running your own bank.
dmitriid 5y ago
> got a muun wallet and was very happy about the experience. Developed by a centralised developer that you trust not to screw up your money transfers. > But the space is moving like a rocket and who knows what the future holds. We know. All the crypto bros will slowly and inefficiently learn why regulations and centralisation exist
- jonathan-adly 5y ago
  It's a self-custody wallet. Money moves over the Bitcoin network or the lighting network. Developer has no control. (literally, can't be evil vs. won't be evil is the whole point). Are you sure you know how Bitcoin and self-custody wallets work?
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > Developer has no control. Developer literally created the software you use.
    - jonathan-adly 5y ago
      Ok. Let me explain to you how Bitcoin works. Satoshi created the software and nodes maintain it. Anyone can maintain a node and enforce the rules of the network. A ledger lives on the network says who has what. To interact with the ledger on an easy non-technical way, you can: 1. Use a centralized exchange (coinbase) 2. Use a self-custody cold-storage wallet (ledger) 3. Use a self-custody hot wallet (muun) 4. Use a custodial wallet For #2, and #3. You have your own private keys. The developer of the wallet can’t do anything to your money. Even if they shut off the servers(#2 doesn’t have servers), the ledger on the network still says you have x amounts of Bitcoins. You can access the ledger and interact with the network in another way. Literally can’t be evil!
      - 300bps 5y ago
        Respectfully, you need to do more research on this. Look up how ETC (Ethereum Classic) came into being. Look up a 51% attack. Look up forks from BTC to BCH and then BSV. Look up Craig Wright and his claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto. Again, respectfully, your many comments here make you appear to be someone that just learned about cryptocurrency in the last six months and you have only the simplest of surface understandings of it. You’re INcorrecting several people that have been at the forefront of cryptocurrency for over a decade.

300bps 5y ago

Wait until your non-tech wife accidentally sends ETH to a BTC address. Or her hard drive dies. Or a million other things that can happen. And the one “legitimate” use case you list is to use cryptocurrency to bypass US controls on money transfers to monitored countries. How long do you think that hole will remain open?

jonathan-adly 5y ago
I think you are being disingenuous and emotional about it. Previously, the UX was terrible and didn't protect non-technical users at all, so these scenarios could happen. Newer tech with better UX does a wonderful job protecting users and is improving at rocket speed. The example I used protects the user from all these scenarios you mentioned. Also, the US doesn't care about moving USD in and out of most countries (Iran, NK excluded). It's these countries themselves that want that level of control.
- 300bps 5y ago
  The example I used protects the user from all these scenarios you mentioned. How does it protect against hardware failure? How does it protect against sending Coin X to a wallet meant for Coin Y? Also, the US doesn't care about moving USD in and out of most countries That's funny. And even if what you said were true, other countries will eventually control what appears to not be controllable today.
  - jonathan-adly 5y ago
    Your Bitcoin lives on the ledger. You can recover your wallet with your private keys under most circumstances (unless the Bitcoin network itself dies). Hardware failure is not relevant. As far as the addresses goes, it’s the same thing as sending a wire transfer to the wrong account in a different country. You won’t get it back.
    - giaour 5y ago
      How many people make international wire transfers? It's an extremely rare and risky kind of transaction, which is why banks have built up their own opsec around it. If cryptocurrency enthusiasts had their way, though, the high-risk transaction the GP called out would be required to buy a gallon of milk.
      - jonathan-adly 5y ago
        My man, not even the wildest Bitcoin maxi is calling for a world where you are required to buy milk with bitcoin lol. People just want their savings accounts to match inflation. (and the option to spend from that savings account for some transactions). Give them that and Bitcoin will go back to being a niche investment vehicle where 99% of the people don't care about it.
    - elevader 5y ago
      Hardware failure is extremely relevant if that hardware is the drive you store your private key on,at which point the wallet is gone forever. One could say "don't do that, have elaborate backup strategies" but that brings us back to UX. Even professionals who should know better tend to be awful at this.
      - jonathan-adly 5y ago
        I have no problems with this. Like I said in the original comment, people not wanting to run their bank is a solvable UX problem. Fundamentally, I don't see why it has to stay this way.

hvidgaard 5y ago

We're at a point where you can have your coins on a hardware wallet, and have a simple route into an proper exchange with the possibility to pay fiat to your bank account. Documenting this and updating it yearly is not that much extra work if you really believe in it. Every year, practice the process with your wife/sibling/whoever and 10$ so they are accustomed to it. It's work, but you are running your own bank.

dmitriid 5y ago

> got a muun wallet and was very happy about the experience. Developed by a centralised developer that you trust not to screw up your money transfers. > But the space is moving like a rocket and who knows what the future holds. We know. All the crypto bros will slowly and inefficiently learn why regulations and centralisation exist

jonathan-adly 5y ago
It's a self-custody wallet. Money moves over the Bitcoin network or the lighting network. Developer has no control. (literally, can't be evil vs. won't be evil is the whole point). Are you sure you know how Bitcoin and self-custody wallets work?
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > Developer has no control. Developer literally created the software you use.
  - jonathan-adly 5y ago
    Ok. Let me explain to you how Bitcoin works. Satoshi created the software and nodes maintain it. Anyone can maintain a node and enforce the rules of the network. A ledger lives on the network says who has what. To interact with the ledger on an easy non-technical way, you can: 1. Use a centralized exchange (coinbase) 2. Use a self-custody cold-storage wallet (ledger) 3. Use a self-custody hot wallet (muun) 4. Use a custodial wallet For #2, and #3. You have your own private keys. The developer of the wallet can’t do anything to your money. Even if they shut off the servers(#2 doesn’t have servers), the ledger on the network still says you have x amounts of Bitcoins. You can access the ledger and interact with the network in another way. Literally can’t be evil!
    - 300bps 5y ago
      Respectfully, you need to do more research on this. Look up how ETC (Ethereum Classic) came into being. Look up a 51% attack. Look up forks from BTC to BCH and then BSV. Look up Craig Wright and his claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto. Again, respectfully, your many comments here make you appear to be someone that just learned about cryptocurrency in the last six months and you have only the simplest of surface understandings of it. You’re INcorrecting several people that have been at the forefront of cryptocurrency for over a decade.