5 ms·

What I object to is any doubt that today it is unsafe for anyone to self custody given the appropriate operational security. A hardware wallet is probably suffi

What I object to is any doubt that today it is unsafe for anyone to self custody given the appropriate operational security. A hardware wallet is probably sufficient for nearly all cases of even non technical user. Where people go wrong these days is a) phished [education, instruct never never type those words into the computer…] b) tricked approvals [just don’t mess with eth until you know what you are doing. You will probably get scammed cos eth had a lot of scams.] Self custody is a critical part of this ecosystem. It’s been the biggest mantra of the ecosystem, so I really don’t understand how you can think this is for a small segment. A vast majority of BTC and ETH is not on exchanges. It’s the entire point. What you are admitting to is saying “I was there at the start but I still don’t really get why…”

nl 5y ago
> "I was there at the start but I still don’t really get why…” Where do you get that? I understand the reasoning entirely. I disagree that it is important or that the security trade off is appropriate for almost anyone.
- randomhodler84 5y ago
  It’s the entire point. This is basically the entire purpose and meaning behind satoshis invention. It’s the first sentence on the first page of the white paper: “A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution“ Nah, who needs it???
  - nl 5y ago
    I am aware of what Bitcoin is. I'm saying (again!) that I don't think the trade-offs involved with self-custody are worth it. So far all you've done is (a) attacked me personally, and (b) made some kind of circular argument that either I don't understand what Bitcoin is or restated your argument that it is important. Ok, I get you think that. Just saying the same thing over and over again isn't actually a convincing argument. I don't think that trade off is worthwhile because the risks associated with it outweigh the risk associated with it for almost anyone.

nl 5y ago

> "I was there at the start but I still don’t really get why…” Where do you get that? I understand the reasoning entirely. I disagree that it is important or that the security trade off is appropriate for almost anyone.

randomhodler84 5y ago
It’s the entire point. This is basically the entire purpose and meaning behind satoshis invention. It’s the first sentence on the first page of the white paper: “A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution“ Nah, who needs it???
- nl 5y ago
  I am aware of what Bitcoin is. I'm saying (again!) that I don't think the trade-offs involved with self-custody are worth it. So far all you've done is (a) attacked me personally, and (b) made some kind of circular argument that either I don't understand what Bitcoin is or restated your argument that it is important. Ok, I get you think that. Just saying the same thing over and over again isn't actually a convincing argument. I don't think that trade off is worthwhile because the risks associated with it outweigh the risk associated with it for almost anyone.