Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,801
The whole premise of Bitcoin is decentralised money and so at the point of origin, the likes of QuadrigaCX would have been anathema to the original proponents of cryptocurrency. It's not decentralised when a centralised exchange is implicated.The whole premise of Bitcoin was that there should be no regulation. But now that investors have lost their money held by Quadriga, they are looking for someone to sue to get their money back.
Bitcoin is made up money and anyone who sinks their funds into it in any meaningful way might as well go down the bookies and put it on a horse at Cheltenham. It reminds me of all the "genuises" who "made a fortune" in property during the Celtic Tiger because they were so clever and the rest of were fools that we did not follow down their path. I've no sympathy for anyone who loses their shirt on Bitcoin.
Those investors that are out of pocket at QuadrigaCX wouldn't be had they stored their own crypto.
I had thought that the whole point was that you kept your own Bitcoin yourself rather than in a "bank", but I thought that maybe I had got it wrong.
However, we've all been conditioned to leave funds in the hands of a third party.
Definitely.Yeah, and I'd imagine many people using such a service are doing so because they're not technically savvy enough to be comfortable with cryptography / key management to do so themselves.
To not do so is to miss one of the great advantages of crypto. However, we've all been conditioned to leave funds in the hands of a third party. It is a hell of a responsibility to take control of it yourself. People have to be really disciplined as if they go about it the wrong way, they will have their crypto stolen from them. If that happens, there is nothing anyone can do for them.
This is something that's a stumbling block to adoption for sure. The industry needs to make it much easier and much more intuitive to store and use cryptocurrency. Otherwise, I think that there will need to be a range of options - self custody for those that can stomach it and third party custody.
Where there is third party custody, most in crypto understand that regulation is needed - so long as it's sane regulation (that doesn't stymie innovation). The QuadrigaCX saga is bad for the industry - but it is always likely to happen without proper regulation in place. Various aspects of the industry are being held back - due to a lack of regulation or regulatory uncertainty.
There can sometimes be a silver lining. Mt Gox remains the most infamous of cryptocurrency exchange hacks. It is the reason that Japan has far more progressive regulation than most other countries. They had the experience before anyone else and had to spend the time to understand crypto and regulate it so that another Mt Gox couldn't happen. Hopefully, the Canadian regulator will act in response to the QuadrigaCX shambles.
For sure. And there are multiple issues in that respect. Some of them can be improved upon overtime to make it easier for people to achieve this. In the meantime, for sure - this is one thing that you pay for/get with a third party.I have no idea about crypto or block chain or storage of crypto but found your posts to be very interesting. The storage of it sounds like cash, except online. Keep cash in your house, you risk someone breaking in and robbing it. And it's likely to be gone. Keep it in a bank and it is safe from being robbed...unless the bank is hacked.
What I see emerging here are two tracks. People have the option - they can store their own or they can use third party custody. Nothing has changed with regard to the former. Wall Street is getting involved in crypto - so its being brought in to the conventional world. The original cypherpunks don't care for this - but there's nothing stopping crypto being used in either way.On regulation, is that not what the crypto founding fathers were trying to stay away from? Having regulated currency. But it is now needed because your money isn't safe otherwise?
Wall Street is getting involved in crypto - so its being brought in to the conventional world.
Fidelity Investments - they're getting involved with crypto custody. Institutional Investors don't go on to cryptocurrency exchanges like the rest of us. Hence, why Fidelity are getting into crypto custody - to cater for the institutions.Can you give examples of this?
Yes, there are headaches for institutional investors in terms of the storage of digital assets - which is why they won't bite without crypto custody solutions being in place, backed by established names.I thought that some institutions had backed away from doing anything because of the security issues.
It's the very same principal. If clients had held their own crypto rather than store it on a centralised exchange, then they wouldnt have been out of pocket.It was similar with Mount Gox, once the bitcoins were taken from the wallets from Mount Gox, they were gone. A lot of people felt bad about missing out on BTC a while back, but if a lot of them had done so a few years ago, they would have done so at Mount Gox.
Former Mt Gox CEO Karpeles was acquitted of embezzlement earlier this month.It wasn't deliberate by the founder at mount Gox, he and the company lacked the skills to secure against hackers. Never trust a crypto exchange not built on a good domain
Consensus involves more than just miners. It's miners, merchants, exchanges, web-wallets and end users. If miners were to fork away contentiously, they'll be mining blocks without transactions in them....ergo mining centralisation is not the concern it's made out to be.Very ironic to see BTC becoming more and more centralized the bigger the mining gets.
The moral of the Quadriga story? 'Not your keys, not your bitcoin'. If people self custody cryptocurrency responsibly, nobody can run off with it.Bitcoin follows you to the grave.
Investors who lost €170m demand exhumation of cryptocurrency mogul
Company founder died in ‘questionable circumstances’ and took crucial password to the gravewww.irishtimes.com
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?