If I choose to self-custody, it's much safer to memorize a seed phrase than to store cash in my mattress. Most people don't bother and use banks. But I think it's good that people now have a choice in the matter.
That isn’t what the sales pitch has been for the last 13 years, with lots of fanciful rhetoric about removing the need for banks (“you can be your own bank!” is basically a cliché by now).
> If I choose to self-custody, it's much safer to memorize a seed phrase than to store cash in my mattress.
Are you sure about this? Lots of people have been phished or compromised, whereas someone breaking in and searching your house is relatively uncommon and limited to people in the same area whereas your cryptocurrency can be stolen by anyone in the world.
> Are you sure about this?
Whether I'm sure or not... I think everyone should be given the choice.
No, but when something has completely failed to live up to the sales pitch and then people try to pretend they'd never made those claims, it's important to remember that track record when deciding whether to trust the new claims. This is especially true in the case of cryptocurrencies which have no value other than social consensus because the same people who were making those original claims stand to gain the most if the new claims convince someone else to buy otherwise worthless tokens.
> Whether I'm sure or not... I think everyone should be given the choice.
Which they have and nobody is saying should be taken away from them. This is about the conflict between the stated goals and actual demonstrated behaviour.
If someone keeps changing their claims or is otherwise acting scummy, just ignore them. There are shysters in every industry.
https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~mjw03/PersonalWebpage/pdfs/quickso...