I think commenter is suggesting a non custodial wallet with internet access would work fine, which is true. The problem seemed to be cell signal, not internet, as they were able to use the coinbase app or website.

Not disagreeing with any of you but a blockchain payment terminal that’s itself connected to the internet could technically receive your signed transaction from your (offline) phone and then submit it to the network on your behalf. The balance on your phone wouldn’t update until it itself gets back onto the network and resyncs its state with the blockchain.

Credit card payments have the same problem.

having all of your currency on an exchange, regardless of the currency, has never been a good idea.

(signed a MtGox victim.)

> if the people in the vanguard of this movement can't figure this out

the people “in the vanguard of [the cryptocurrency] movement” absolutely use non-custodial wallets (SW or HW). the part of this story where “the vanguard” is using custodial wallets is the least believable.

the average speculator, sure — they’ll go with whatever’s easiest for them, which is probably to keep their crypto on the exchange. “vanguard” users? lmao.

Then 90% of people don't get crypto or don't care. Which seems to be true. They just keep it in their coinbase or robinhood account and wait for the price to go (back) up until they sell.

I think 90% is a massive underestimate.

EDITED to correct autocorrect.