Hacker News Reader

Those intermediaries replace your money if it's fraudulently stolen, and have protections in place from allowing your accounts to be fully drained (and have ways to let you control those protections). For the vast majority of people, banks do more good in their lives than harm.

Cryptocurrency isn't a bank. It's a virtual mattress to stuff your money into, and one that lends itself very well to torturing you until you unlock the wallet.

View on HN

All of those points seem invalid to me when you consider that people have the option for custodial multi-signature systems and time-delays etc. If you want certain behaviour you can do it, often without giving a corrupt organisation complete control over your money

Further, many people live in countries where the people simply cannot trust their institutions or the value of their currencies, to the point where they are better off storing USD under their mattress, so the technology should be there for those people

You’re just inviting bad actors to work on “probably has a lot of crypto” to beat you silly with a wrench until you give it up. They’ll just go with less certainty.

In an imagined future where well-designed custody systems were the norm, bad actors would realise there's no point because they don't want to be locked in a house torturing someone for 3 days for no payoff

Reply on news.ycombinator.com