9 ms·

It does feel like the security protocols necessary to secure $100k to $Ms of crypto which transfers instantly and non-reversibly is a challenge for the average

It does feel like the security protocols necessary to secure $100k to $Ms of crypto which transfers instantly and non-reversibly is a challenge for the average user. Even as a fairly tech enabled GenX, I have forgotten passwords and had to reset them (usually accounts I haven’t used in a while), had files corrupted without a good backup, lost a Yubikey somewhere in the house (I think at least). From what I can tell I would need to have my crypto seed laser etched into titanium, and then treat that talisman as if it was made of pure platinum as far as securing and tracking it. Versus keeping my money in SIPC and FDIC protected accounts. I will say, the BTC appreciation is a big attraction of course, but long term I don’t see how it becomes widely adopted with so much logistics risk, and appreciation… well who knows about that.

ToucanLoucan 2y ago
I have no doubt that at least some especially in the early days envisioned crypto as a legitimate alternative to fiat currency. That being said, in it's mature state as a technology, it amounts to nothing more than a clone of the modern financial system with a different set of oligarchs, except that it has far fewer consumer protections, and the nature of it makes implementing said protections in any way extremely difficult. That combined with the extreme volatility of value that is not only endemic to any coin with meaningful usage, but is generally a goal of most coins, makes it only really useful as a speculative vehicle, and those same properties also make it uniquely bad in terms of a store of value to be used in commerce unless the seller also plans to speculate on the value. And, even if you're good with all of that: Yes, the tech itself is decentralized, but if you don't have at least some background in basic software development or scripting, you're almost certainly going to end up using some product or another to manage your wallets and transactions, and while the wallet is anonymous, the accounts you connect the wallet to are often quite the opposite, and because of the structure of the chains, your entire transaction history is visible to everyone on the network, at all times. So it's private by default, but basically any casual user is immediately and forever doxxable.
- f33d5173 2y ago
  Xmr aims to be a digital cash, and basically achieves that. Btc has goals more akin to digital gold, hence being more useful to speculators than people buying things is somewhat intentional. I don't know who the oligarchs you're talking about are. Buterin? Bankman Fried? In either case, their position is quite different from that of a banking titan.
ForHackernews 2y ago
> I will say, the BTC appreciation is a big attraction of course What are the other desirable features of BTC?
- henry2023 2y ago
  Non centralized proof of ownership is pretty cool.
  - Analemma_ 2y ago
    How is it non-centralized? Basically everybody actually using crypto uses exchanges.
    - zaik 2y ago
      You don't have to.
      - bdangubic 2y ago
        he said “basically everyone” which is true. I don’t have to eat this large apple pie that is front me now but I’m about to :)
      - okanat 2y ago
        Then how would you exchange it with real money? There are few things that accept cryptographic coins as currency.
        berkes 2y ago
        Depending on how you use it, you mightn't need to exchange it often, or at all. Companies that use it as hedge, or diversification, just need to "hold" it. Investors (not traders, there's a big difference) also commonly just "hodl" it. Also no need to exchange it. And several more such use-cases. Sure, after a while, they might want to exchange it for something they "need". Like housing, healthcare, food, materials, etc. But often that's a one-time after years of not exchanging. And we still don't know how the future may look. Some believe Bitcoin is what we'll be paying with in a few decades (I don't, not really). I'm pretty sure I can buy almost any house for a few bitcoin, especially if that's "overpriced" in dollar-terms, today already.
ashleyn 2y ago
1) if you don't exclusively have the private key (wallet), you don't own the crypto. if someone else gets the private key unwittingly, they now own the crypto 2) split cumulative funds into two wallets, a "hot" wallet and a "cold" wallet. keep the funds in the "hot" wallet to no more than for which total unintentional loss is tolerable. keep the private key to the "cold" wallet off any internet connected device except for the minimum duration required to transfer funds to the hot wallet. 3) print the recovery phrase for the cold wallet and store it in a physically secure location 4) if an ideally secure physical location is not possible, split risk across multiple "cold" wallets
- thousand_nights 2y ago
  that sounds tedious af and still prone to error, i'd rather literally pay someone to handle all of this for me, let's say, some kind of institution which specializes in storing and handling money
  - hatthew 2y ago
    Hey, what if there was a way to get paid to have someone else handle this for you? That would be crazy right
  - dullcrisp 2y ago
    While practically that’s true of course, I think a hardware appliance that did this that you had to physically interact with to release the funds from would be cyberpunk and cool. Imagine exchanging a handful of currency chips for like a flying motorcycle or something.
    - stouset 2y ago
      And when that hardware fails? The problem with crypto is that every problem requires additional layers of complication which each have their own failure modes which then need to be further addressed. And the complication itself adds yet more ways to breed failure. This is the fundamental challenge with a system where any mistake or error results in the instantaneous and irrevocable loss of unbounded funds.
TacticalCoder 2y ago
> From what I can tell I would need to have my crypto seed laser etched into titanium, and then treat that talisman as if it was made of pure platinum as far as securing and tracking it. Not sufficient. You'd also need someone you trust 100% to have another seed protected as if it was the gold of Fort Knox. And then you'd only only use "multisig" to sign transfers. And that other person needs to live on another continent. And you both need a backup plan in case you die if you plan to leave these 0.1 Bitcoin to your heirs. This makes the $5 wrench attack impossible to succeed. As to whether the attacker is willing to add gratuitous (because it's impossible it'd succeed) torture/killing to its list of crime is something else though. > I will say, the BTC appreciation is a big attraction of course, but long term I don’t see how it becomes widely adopted... I think mid-term to long-term people simply buy a Bitcoin ETF or stocks from a company holding shitloads of Bitcoins like MicroStrategy. Just like I buy SLV (paper silver) or the ZKB silver ETF (physical replication, in vaults in Switzerland). Keeping your own Bitcoins is not unlike keeping physical gold coins. It's doable but risky. Multisig really helps a lot but buying a Bitcoin ETF is simply easier. Open bank or broker website, click click. Done. I'm not saying Satoshi's dream or the Bitcoin maximalists' dream is good old Wall Street manipulating Bitcoin's price using paper Bitcoin (silver ETFs were in big trouble in 2021) but what I'm saying is I think that's how it's going to end.
- nytesky 2y ago
  I feel that crypto offers a different risk profile than say the gold ETF. There certainly is significant risk and expense to storing and securing the physical gold backing the ETF. I think it also needed to be audited as matching expected reserves occasionally? But crypto has similar it and physical security costs at a minimum, though physical storage will be cheaper. Auditing maybe similar costs, I’m not quite sure how you confirm ownership of an address or pile of BTC without transactions? The big risk is that these big holding companies of bitcoin become targets of state-scale cybercrime hacking armies. Can you imagine an adversary deploying constant attack on every facet of you IT infrastructure, from accessing the private keys presumably stored in hot wallets to support active trading to the interface where they may try interfere with client functions to all sorts of ends from theft to market manipulation.
- 2y ago
mmaunder 2y ago
SIPC and FDIC don’t protect against fraud.

ToucanLoucan 2y ago

I have no doubt that at least some especially in the early days envisioned crypto as a legitimate alternative to fiat currency. That being said, in it's mature state as a technology, it amounts to nothing more than a clone of the modern financial system with a different set of oligarchs, except that it has far fewer consumer protections, and the nature of it makes implementing said protections in any way extremely difficult. That combined with the extreme volatility of value that is not only endemic to any coin with meaningful usage, but is generally a goal of most coins, makes it only really useful as a speculative vehicle, and those same properties also make it uniquely bad in terms of a store of value to be used in commerce unless the seller also plans to speculate on the value. And, even if you're good with all of that: Yes, the tech itself is decentralized, but if you don't have at least some background in basic software development or scripting, you're almost certainly going to end up using some product or another to manage your wallets and transactions, and while the wallet is anonymous, the accounts you connect the wallet to are often quite the opposite, and because of the structure of the chains, your entire transaction history is visible to everyone on the network, at all times. So it's private by default, but basically any casual user is immediately and forever doxxable.

f33d5173 2y ago
Xmr aims to be a digital cash, and basically achieves that. Btc has goals more akin to digital gold, hence being more useful to speculators than people buying things is somewhat intentional. I don't know who the oligarchs you're talking about are. Buterin? Bankman Fried? In either case, their position is quite different from that of a banking titan.

ForHackernews 2y ago

> I will say, the BTC appreciation is a big attraction of course What are the other desirable features of BTC?

henry2023 2y ago
Non centralized proof of ownership is pretty cool.
- Analemma_ 2y ago
  How is it non-centralized? Basically everybody actually using crypto uses exchanges.
  - zaik 2y ago
    You don't have to.
    - bdangubic 2y ago
      he said “basically everyone” which is true. I don’t have to eat this large apple pie that is front me now but I’m about to :)
    - okanat 2y ago
      Then how would you exchange it with real money? There are few things that accept cryptographic coins as currency.
      - berkes 2y ago
        Depending on how you use it, you mightn't need to exchange it often, or at all. Companies that use it as hedge, or diversification, just need to "hold" it. Investors (not traders, there's a big difference) also commonly just "hodl" it. Also no need to exchange it. And several more such use-cases. Sure, after a while, they might want to exchange it for something they "need". Like housing, healthcare, food, materials, etc. But often that's a one-time after years of not exchanging. And we still don't know how the future may look. Some believe Bitcoin is what we'll be paying with in a few decades (I don't, not really). I'm pretty sure I can buy almost any house for a few bitcoin, especially if that's "overpriced" in dollar-terms, today already.

ashleyn 2y ago

1) if you don't exclusively have the private key (wallet), you don't own the crypto. if someone else gets the private key unwittingly, they now own the crypto 2) split cumulative funds into two wallets, a "hot" wallet and a "cold" wallet. keep the funds in the "hot" wallet to no more than for which total unintentional loss is tolerable. keep the private key to the "cold" wallet off any internet connected device except for the minimum duration required to transfer funds to the hot wallet. 3) print the recovery phrase for the cold wallet and store it in a physically secure location 4) if an ideally secure physical location is not possible, split risk across multiple "cold" wallets

thousand_nights 2y ago
that sounds tedious af and still prone to error, i'd rather literally pay someone to handle all of this for me, let's say, some kind of institution which specializes in storing and handling money
- hatthew 2y ago
  Hey, what if there was a way to get paid to have someone else handle this for you? That would be crazy right
- dullcrisp 2y ago
  While practically that’s true of course, I think a hardware appliance that did this that you had to physically interact with to release the funds from would be cyberpunk and cool. Imagine exchanging a handful of currency chips for like a flying motorcycle or something.
  - stouset 2y ago
    And when that hardware fails? The problem with crypto is that every problem requires additional layers of complication which each have their own failure modes which then need to be further addressed. And the complication itself adds yet more ways to breed failure. This is the fundamental challenge with a system where any mistake or error results in the instantaneous and irrevocable loss of unbounded funds.

TacticalCoder 2y ago

> From what I can tell I would need to have my crypto seed laser etched into titanium, and then treat that talisman as if it was made of pure platinum as far as securing and tracking it. Not sufficient. You'd also need someone you trust 100% to have another seed protected as if it was the gold of Fort Knox. And then you'd only only use "multisig" to sign transfers. And that other person needs to live on another continent. And you both need a backup plan in case you die if you plan to leave these 0.1 Bitcoin to your heirs. This makes the $5 wrench attack impossible to succeed. As to whether the attacker is willing to add gratuitous (because it's impossible it'd succeed) torture/killing to its list of crime is something else though. > I will say, the BTC appreciation is a big attraction of course, but long term I don’t see how it becomes widely adopted... I think mid-term to long-term people simply buy a Bitcoin ETF or stocks from a company holding shitloads of Bitcoins like MicroStrategy. Just like I buy SLV (paper silver) or the ZKB silver ETF (physical replication, in vaults in Switzerland). Keeping your own Bitcoins is not unlike keeping physical gold coins. It's doable but risky. Multisig really helps a lot but buying a Bitcoin ETF is simply easier. Open bank or broker website, click click. Done. I'm not saying Satoshi's dream or the Bitcoin maximalists' dream is good old Wall Street manipulating Bitcoin's price using paper Bitcoin (silver ETFs were in big trouble in 2021) but what I'm saying is I think that's how it's going to end.

nytesky 2y ago
I feel that crypto offers a different risk profile than say the gold ETF. There certainly is significant risk and expense to storing and securing the physical gold backing the ETF. I think it also needed to be audited as matching expected reserves occasionally? But crypto has similar it and physical security costs at a minimum, though physical storage will be cheaper. Auditing maybe similar costs, I’m not quite sure how you confirm ownership of an address or pile of BTC without transactions? The big risk is that these big holding companies of bitcoin become targets of state-scale cybercrime hacking armies. Can you imagine an adversary deploying constant attack on every facet of you IT infrastructure, from accessing the private keys presumably stored in hot wallets to support active trading to the interface where they may try interfere with client functions to all sorts of ends from theft to market manipulation.
2y ago

mmaunder 2y ago

SIPC and FDIC don’t protect against fraud.