5 ms·

Around here, if one half of a married couple dies, the surviver can't access the shared account until the state gives its OK. Which can take up to 6 months. I

Around here, if one half of a married couple dies, the surviver can't access the shared account until the state gives its OK. Which can take up to 6 months. Imagine living without money for 6 months while having to pay a funeral. I saw it happen to an elder woman. She had to loan from friends and family because of this. Now I heard the law has been updated to avoid the most egregious excesses, but the basic principle still stands. I know of a few people who keep 1 or 2 months worth of money at home, just in case. Can't blame them. Banks are generally good at what they do, but don't put all your eggs in 1 basket. Someone will make a mistake at your expense, better be prepared and have some buffer.

UncleMeat 5y ago
I'd wager that "oh fuck, my partner died and I have no idea how to access their private key" is considerably more likely than "my partner died and I cannot access their traditional bank account but it's all good because I've got their private key to access emergency funds stored in BTC."
- toqy 5y ago
  Yes if they didn’t already have a joint bank account why would crypto magically change this
- av500 5y ago
  and of course they couple could have shared access to each other's bank accounts
  - hyperman1 5y ago
    This does not work. When married, all your and his/her accounts are locked, as they are considered shared property, no matter the name on the account. The legal proces after death is to decide who owns what as this decides what share the state gets. Also not advocating for crypto, just saying you should be able to live a while without access to a bank.
    - oblio 5y ago
      Cash, separate personal accounts. This is not a hard problem.
- lrvick 5y ago
  If I die, a quorum of friends around the world can verify this fact independently and when satisfied can provide those I will my funds to pieces of a private key that when assembled can recover all funds without my help. Schemes like that are not easily possible with physical assets or fiat currency.
  - qayxc 5y ago
    > Schemes like that are not easily possible with physical assets or fiat currency. Of course they are. It's called last will and testament. You can easily set this up, choose a lawyer to hold it and your friends don't even need to know. If you have substantial assets it's even much safer that way, because using your method you'd actually put them in danger as criminals might pay them a visit one by one whether you're still alive or not. Not to mention the fact that your friends could also just get together and cash out early...
    - lrvick 5y ago
      1. Said friends have no need to know who each other are. They only need to know their role to deliver a package to designated individuals. 2. The shards they hold can only be used by the recipient via hardware they have physical access to. They can not collude without the recipient. I also trust the, far more than any potentially malicious bank insiders. 3. Wills can take a long time to process and bank accounts can be frozen for months following the death of a spouse. I want a plan that gives those I wish access to capital as soon as they are in a safe location to receive it and get the bulk of it stored in a coercion resistant way with a new quorum.
      - qayxc 5y ago
        > 1. Said friends do not know who each other are. Security by obscurity is a poor choice. > The shards they hold can only be used by the recipient via hardware they have physical access to. Sounds like multiple points of failure right there. From lost/faulty hardware to friends passing away. If your scheme relies on every single one of them having access to working hardware of sorts and being alive and well, that's an elaborate way to setup for failure, but maybe I just completely misunderstood your setup there. > 3. Wills can take a long time to process and bank accounts can be frozen for months following the death of a spouse. I don't see how that's a problem given that your scattered group of friends needs to verify your demise and somehow get on a quest to gather the key shards without even knowing of each other's existence (again, I could totally have misinterpreted your scheme here). This all sounds more like a D&D questline to me than a solid plan to ensure your assets get to the right people after your passing.

UncleMeat 5y ago

I'd wager that "oh fuck, my partner died and I have no idea how to access their private key" is considerably more likely than "my partner died and I cannot access their traditional bank account but it's all good because I've got their private key to access emergency funds stored in BTC."

toqy 5y ago
Yes if they didn’t already have a joint bank account why would crypto magically change this
av500 5y ago
and of course they couple could have shared access to each other's bank accounts
- hyperman1 5y ago
  This does not work. When married, all your and his/her accounts are locked, as they are considered shared property, no matter the name on the account. The legal proces after death is to decide who owns what as this decides what share the state gets. Also not advocating for crypto, just saying you should be able to live a while without access to a bank.
  - oblio 5y ago
    Cash, separate personal accounts. This is not a hard problem.
lrvick 5y ago
If I die, a quorum of friends around the world can verify this fact independently and when satisfied can provide those I will my funds to pieces of a private key that when assembled can recover all funds without my help. Schemes like that are not easily possible with physical assets or fiat currency.
- qayxc 5y ago
  > Schemes like that are not easily possible with physical assets or fiat currency. Of course they are. It's called last will and testament. You can easily set this up, choose a lawyer to hold it and your friends don't even need to know. If you have substantial assets it's even much safer that way, because using your method you'd actually put them in danger as criminals might pay them a visit one by one whether you're still alive or not. Not to mention the fact that your friends could also just get together and cash out early...
  - lrvick 5y ago
    1. Said friends have no need to know who each other are. They only need to know their role to deliver a package to designated individuals. 2. The shards they hold can only be used by the recipient via hardware they have physical access to. They can not collude without the recipient. I also trust the, far more than any potentially malicious bank insiders. 3. Wills can take a long time to process and bank accounts can be frozen for months following the death of a spouse. I want a plan that gives those I wish access to capital as soon as they are in a safe location to receive it and get the bulk of it stored in a coercion resistant way with a new quorum.
    - qayxc 5y ago
      > 1. Said friends do not know who each other are. Security by obscurity is a poor choice. > The shards they hold can only be used by the recipient via hardware they have physical access to. Sounds like multiple points of failure right there. From lost/faulty hardware to friends passing away. If your scheme relies on every single one of them having access to working hardware of sorts and being alive and well, that's an elaborate way to setup for failure, but maybe I just completely misunderstood your setup there. > 3. Wills can take a long time to process and bank accounts can be frozen for months following the death of a spouse. I don't see how that's a problem given that your scattered group of friends needs to verify your demise and somehow get on a quest to gather the key shards without even knowing of each other's existence (again, I could totally have misinterpreted your scheme here). This all sounds more like a D&D questline to me than a solid plan to ensure your assets get to the right people after your passing.