Crypto Conversation

[Wheat/"/"/"]

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/bank-...-fraud-leading

Crypto making fraud easier. Who could have predicted it?

https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/...eo_disappears/

-jk

Now might be a good time to remember why Bitcoin was created in the first place.


“Bank of America to Pay $16.65 Billion in Historic Justice Department Settlement for Financial Fraud Leading up to and During the Financial Crisis”

Link

Bad people do bad things.

This sort of stuff is why it’s worth the time to educate yourself on how to self custody and not leave your money, (assets), on crypto exchanges…. or in banks.

[YmoBeThere]

Ahhh, the what-about-ism defense!!!!

[Phredd3]

I agree, just pointing out that the IRS ruling makes it highly unlikely that Bitcoin will be banned in the US.

And that's what I was pushing back against. The IRS tax ruling has no effect on that. I agree that the U.S. is vanishingly unlikely to ban Bitcoin. But the IRS ruling has nothing to do with that. The IRS ruling is simply bureaucratic fallout from holders of Bitcoin wondering how to correctly report it.

It's a minor point, so I'll drop it.

[thedukeman]

Doesn't seem like many people are interested, but the Duke NFTs drop later today. 20 of them will also provide a single pair of tickets to any one game of your choice (excluding UNC). 5 will provide a customized, personalized basketball as well as a video of Coach K signing it.

[YmoBeThere]

20 of them will also provide a single pair of tickets to any one game of your choice (excluding UNC). 5 will provide a customized, personalized basketball as well as a video of Coach K signing it.

Don't those kind of take it out of NFT realm?

[thedukeman]

Don't those kind of take it out of NFT realm?

I'm honestly not even sure what the NFT realm is. What do you mean though?

[YmoBeThere]

I'm honestly not even sure what the NFT realm is. What do you mean though?

I'm getting a signed Coach K basketball, a video of him signing it, and then an NFT. So, the NFT is nice but the inclusion of the physical object may make it worthwhile irrespective of the NFT.

[thedukeman]

I'm getting a signed Coach K basketball, a video of him signing it, and then an NFT. So, the NFT is nice but the inclusion of the physical object may make it worthwhile irrespective of the NFT.

Oh I see. The NFT aspect I think is to provide proof it was issued by Duke, and owned by you. I think it also comes with a fancy graphic. I agree though the main value is physical stuff you are getting and the video. I think of the NFT as a supplement that makes it easier to prove it isn't a copy or something.

[nmduke2001]

I'm getting a signed Coach K basketball, a video of him signing it, and then an NFT. So, the NFT is nice but the inclusion of the physical object may make it worthwhile irrespective of the NFT.

I actually bought the “golden ticket” for $42. Some of the money goes to the Emily K foundation so I’m looking at it like a donation. However, I wouldn’t be too surprised if it went up in value. I have some NBA Topshot NFTs. I have about $400 in and I’m sure that I could get $1,500 on the marketplace if I sold the entire collection (based on sales of similarly numbered “cards”).

[thedukeman]

I actually bought the “golden ticket” for $42. Some of the money goes to the Emily K foundation so I’m looking at it like a donation. However, I wouldn’t be too surprised if it went up in value. I have some NBA Topshot NFTs. I have about $400 in and I’m sure that I could get $1,500 on the marketplace if I sold the entire collection (based on sales of similarly numbered “cards”).

I bought some too. I'm glad I did. I was disappointed all season that my tickets were virtual and disappear from my phone's wallet as soon as the game is over and would have nothing to remember Coach K's final season. No ticket stubs, the concessions have been closed due to covid so no Duke cups, nothing. Then, Duke reopens concessions, I get my plastic, disposable Duke cup, and they announce they have NFT tickets celebrating K's final game against UNC. Made me happy. Wouldn't surprise me if they go up in value, but I don't care very much anyways. Not sure which I like more, the cups or my NFTs.

[nmduke2001]

I bought some too. I'm glad I did. I was disappointed all season that my tickets were virtual and disappear from my phone's wallet as soon as the game is over and would have nothing to remember Coach K's final season. No ticket stubs, the concessions have been closed due to covid so no Duke cups, nothing. Then, Duke reopens concessions, I get my plastic, disposable Duke cup, and they announce they have NFT tickets celebrating K's final game against UNC. Made me happy. Wouldn't surprise me if they go up in value, but I don't care very much anyways. Not sure which I like more, the cups or my NFTs.

I thinks that’s a great reason to get one. Apparently they are also selling an NFT after the game but you need to use the QR code only available in the stadium to have the opportunity to buy.

[snowdenscold]

The second major problem is Bitcoin’s completely key based security system. In theory it has great appeal because no person or entity, government or crooks, can access my wealth without the crypto key that is in my possession. Buy in practice it has massive downsides. A family fortune is lost forever if the crypto key is lost, or if a person with the sole knowledge of the location of the key dies. There is no coming back from that event, no back up security system that would allow the restoration of that wealth to the rightful owner. Those crypto coins are lost for all time. That is obviously NOT the case with traditional bank accounts.

And if you keep your crypto on an exchange, that internet-connected exchange will electronically store the keys somewhere, and we’ve already seen those key files being hacked and 100’s of millions of dollars have been stolen. So the banks themselves aren’t safe.

Agree. Only small amounts of Bitcoin on my phone.

My private keys are secure and my assets are offline.

If anyone wants to own any Crypto, they have to take security as the #1 priority.

I still think this is too lightly dismissed if cryptocurrency (using this form of security) is going to take hold long-term. I don't think enough time has passed for people to realize all the gotchas and caveats that will arise as we move from the months/years timeframe to decades/generations.

This thread made me go back and reread Bruce Schneier's column from 3 years ago:
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archiv...hain_and_.html

...
What blockchain does is shift some of the trust in people and institutions to trust in technology. You need to trust the cryptography, the protocols, the software, the computers and the network. And you need to trust them absolutely, because they’re often single points of failure.

When that trust turns out to be misplaced, there is no recourse. If your bitcoin exchange gets hacked, you lose all of your money. If your bitcoin wallet gets hacked, you lose all of your money. If you forget your login credentials, you lose all of your money. If there’s a bug in the code of your smart contract, you lose all of your money. If someone successfully hacks the blockchain security, you lose all of your money. In many ways, trusting technology is harder than trusting people. Would you rather trust a human legal system or the details of some computer code you don’t have the expertise to audit?

...

To the extent that people don’t use bitcoin, it’s because they don’t trust bitcoin. That has nothing to do with the cryptography or the protocols. In fact, a system where you can lose your life savings if you forget your key or download a piece of malware is not particularly trustworthy. No amount of explaining how SHA-256 works to prevent double-spending will fix that.

[Skydog]

I still think this is too lightly dismissed if cryptocurrency (using this form of security) is going to take hold long-term. I don't think enough time has passed for people to realize all the gotchas and caveats that will arise as we move from the months/years timeframe to decades/generations.

This thread made me go back and reread Bruce Schneier's column from 3 years ago:
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archiv...hain_and_.html

That Schneier quote is a more eloquent and insightful version of what I was trying to say.

[snowdenscold]

That Schneier quote is a more eloquent and insightful version of what I was trying to say.

I thought you also stated it pretty well!

[-jk]

“You've Got To Ask Yourself One Question: 'Do I Feel Lucky? ' Well, Do Ya, Punk?“ 😱

-jk

[OldPhiKap]

BA366809-4B85-4CD3-AB1B-A2157474EF8E.jpg

[Wheat/"/"/"]

This thread made me go back and reread Bruce Schneier's column from 3 years ago:
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archiv...hain_and_.html

We have to put our trust somewhere.

In my lifetime, unfortunately, it’s been proven over and over again that we can’t trust Banks or Government to protect the value of the savings we’ve earned through our work. Inflation caused by money printing, and politicians spending more than they have, simply eats savings alive. We’re on a hamster wheel trying to put our money to work, at greater and greater risks, just trying to stay ahead of inflation, which takes your savings value to zero in time if you don’t grow those savings somehow faster than inflation.

I see Bitcoin as a chance to change that, so I’ve put about 20% of my net worth in Bitcoin. And that has only happened after over a hundred hours of study and I have grown to trust the decentralized, proof of work, open source protocol, that runs the Bitcoin blockchain. If I’m wrong, it’s gonna leave a mark, but it won’t kill me. If I’m right, and I’m front running banks, institutions and governments, who I believe will all be buying Bitcoin at some point in the future, all will be good.

Schneier says…..”What blockchain does is shift some of the trust in people and institutions to trust in technology. You need to trust the cryptography, the protocols, the software, the computers and the network.

It’s clear we can’t trust humans when it comes to money. And the technology of the current financial system fails all the time. Maybe it’s time to trust math and a cryptography blockchain that is open sourced and can be checked/verified by anyone?

…And you need to trust them absolutely, because they’re often single points of failure.”

The “single points of failure” are all throughout the current financial system.

He is incorrect here. With Bitcoin, there is no “single point of failure”. The network is totally decentralized. There are 10’s of thousands of Bitcoin mining computers in a spider web network around the world running the exact same open source software, each updating all the transactions ever made on the ledger every ten minutes. And adding more hash rate all the time, continuing to strengthen the security of the network as it grows. It’s the strongest computer network in the world, and has not been hacked in 13 years. Never say never, but it would be a monumental tasks for the Bitcoin blockchain to be hacked, even by governments like the US or China..


….”When that trust turns out to be misplaced, there is no recourse. If your bitcoin exchange gets hacked, you lose all of your money. If your bitcoin wallet gets hacked, you lose all of your money. If you forget your login credentials, you lose all of your money. If there’s a bug in the code of your smart contract, you lose all of your money. If someone successfully hacks the blockchain security, you lose all of your money. In many ways, trusting technology is harder than trusting people. Would you rather trust a human legal system or the details of some computer code you don’t have the expertise to audit?

I would rather trust open sourced, peer reviewed computer code, and then demand my government provide a legal system to settle criminal charges against anyone violating that code.
To own Bitcoin, you can, and should, take on personal responsibility to secure it. If you can’t, or won’t, take the time to learn that process, you probably shouldn’t buy Bitcoin.

It’s really not that hard understand how a cold wallet works.

...To the extent that people don’t use bitcoin, it’s because they don’t trust bitcoin. That has nothing to do with the cryptography or the protocols. In fact, a system where you can lose your life savings if you forget your key or download a piece of malware is not particularly trustworthy. No amount of explaining how SHA-256 works to prevent double-spending will fix that.

The vast majority of people still don’t understand Bitcoin, therefore they have a hard time trusting it. That’s certainly understandable.

Later this year it’s expected the US will approve a BTC spot market exchange trading fund. When that happens, every day investors will be able to buy shares in the fund and have them backed by bitcoins the fund will be responsible for securing. Investors won’t have the custody concerns there are now to hold it yourself.

To join in an early adoption phase of a new technology, financial or otherwise, takes conviction and a lot of self education.

[Kdogg]

We have to put our trust somewhere.


I would rather trust open sourced, peer reviewed computer code, and then demand my government provide a legal system to settle criminal charges against anyone violating that code.
To own Bitcoin, you can, and should, take on personal responsibility to secure it. If you can’t, or won’t, take the time to learn that process, you probably shouldn’t buy Bitcoin.

It’s really not that hard understand how a cold wallet works.
[/B]

Just because some thing is open source does not mean it is infallible. Last year a major sudo bug was discovered in Linux that was there for ten years. There was another one a couple of months ago that was 12 years old and affected every distro in the world. Then there is the possibility of quantum computing breakthroughs that will make all current encryption moot. That may be years or decades away but it's increasing plausible. People can chant decentralized all they want but if the encryption is broken it's game, set and matches.

It seems that you are looking at Bitcoin as a stable store of buying power. I don't think Bitcoin is that.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Just because some thing is open source does not mean it is infallible. Last year a major sudo bug was discovered in Linux that was there for ten years. There was another one a couple of months ago that was 12 years old and affected every distro in the world. Then there is the possibility of quantum computing breakthroughs that will make all current encryption moot. That may be years or decades away but it's increasing plausible. People can chant decentralized all they want but if the encryption is broken it's game, set and matches.

It seems that you are looking at Bitcoin as a stable store of buying power. I don't think Bitcoin is that.

Nothing is infallible, I’ll grant you that. But like I said, we have to put our trust somewhere and I absolutely don’t trust politicians and bankers with my savings.

The quantum threat is very much on Bitcoin’s radar, the technical analysis I’ve seen thinks that threat can be overcome in the future. But yes, it’s a risk.

Lots of articles out there, but here’s a Forbes article take on that…

I do look at Bitcoin as a store of buying power. Not necessarily stable, yet, but I expect it to become much more stable as mass adoption kicks in and market cap rises.

[Skydog]

Nothing is infallible, I’ll grant you that. But like I said, we have to put our trust somewhere and I absolutely don’t trust politicians and bankers with my savings.
…
.

When has a politician or banker lost one dollar of your savings? Or one dollar for any American?

Obviously crypto banks can’t make the same claims. Several have lost depositors money. The crypto answer to this is often “well in the future we need gov’t backing” like the FDIC does for bank savings. But of course that contradicts the original premise of crypto not depending on gov’t politicians and banks.