... How is nabbing a gold ingot and different than nabbing a storage device? If anything, the threat surface of a digital wallet is much greater (you could steal it remotely if the user doesn't have good cybersecurity practices, unlike a gold ingot).
You can trivially prove your gold ingot exists because you can just find it. It's also way harder to move your gold ingot out of your war-torn country, harder to transact with it, etc. The storage device does not hold the actual coins, just a private key that lets you update the public ledger that determines ownership (thinking the storage device holds the coins is a common misunderstanding).
I'm an open-minded skeptic, but there are real technology advantages to blockchain and cryptocurrency, there are a lot of scams too for sure - but that's not the interesting part. The HN median opinion on this is wrong as it often is (it was wrong about EVs and Tesla too).
The device itself doesn't really matter if you know these 12 words.
The key is what lets you update ownership information on the public block chain. The wallet doesn't hold any coins on the device, just a key that let's you update the chain of public ownership.
For example:
- You live in Russia and see the writing on the wall for invasion and currency collapse
- Prior to the invasion you move 90% of your wealth into a BTC wallet.
- The invasion happens and the currency collapses.
- You want to escape the country, but the border exits are guarded by corrupt guards that will steal any money/valuables you try to cross with.
- You memorize the 12 seed words of your wallet and cross the border with nothing.
- On the other side you recreate your wallet and restore access to your wealth in a safe country.
This isn't just a hypothetical, this kind of thing has already happened: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29518181
That's why I said before the invasion, if the market already crashed probably too late to matter, but you'd still want to get whatever you have out.
> "And finally, movements of capital across borders are highly regulated. You can't simply cross the border and "recreate" your wealth on the other side, because all you will have re-created is a pile of dirty money that now will have to be laundered at a great expense. All this is illegal, by the way."
We're talking about escaping an autocratic authoritarian government. With BTC you can simply cross the border and recreate your wealth in a way that protects you from that government accessing it - that's my point.
I don't think you're arguing in good faith so this is the last reply from me.
Would it be very different if that asset was Euros? Or ownership of gold that's stored in Chile?
If you need any documents you can store them in a secret passworded account.
Crypto is the only option where you have the (practical) capability of true custodial ownership (as opposed to trusting a third party to hold it for you). Practical meaning you can actually take it with you in a low risk way (you're probably not escaping your hostile government with gold bars if you're even able to buy them in the first place).