[LyndsySimon]

> That's why this tech it's still not safe to use.

For many cryptocurrency users, it's not intended to be "safe" - it's intended to be free.

Consider that running `rm -rf "/$APP_ROOT"` in a shell script is unsafe. People writing their own shell scripts are doing so for the power it offers them, and should be aware that this power enables them to shoot themselves in the foot. Likewise, if you choose to "be your own bank" cryptocurrencies give you the power to do that - and the power to shoot yourself in the foot.

> Imagine someone sending $100.000 of his hard earned money and from loans to pay for his daughter operation and this gets lost because of a bug and a developer in panic mode!

Imagine someone bringing $100k in cash to the hospital to pay for that operation, only to have their car catch on fire and consume the cash on the way. The specific mode of failure here is different for cryptocurrencies, sure, but this category of failure is not unique.

[mikeash]

Most people would say that transporting $100,000 in cash in a normal car is a really, really bad idea. If that’s the analogy for cryptocurrency, it seems to be an unflattering one.

[zaarn]

What about putting all your money under your mattress and then your house burning down?

[bpicolo]

Most people would say that's a bad idea, too.

[toyg]

> this category of failure is not unique.

But it is solved by the banking system: if the bank burns down, insurance will make you whole. If a distributed cryptosystem burns down, you have a lot of worthless bits.

TBH the real category of failure we see here is more like a Central Bank suddenly declaring half the money in the country is fake and worthless, and inadvertently wiping half of the existing bank accounts. It's the sort of thing that might happen once in a century, or less; cryptocurrencies seem to see one every few weeks.

[meeton]

India did that!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonet...

[mercer]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that entirely different on account of not 'suddenly' declaring your money fake and worthless, but rather allowing people to bring their money to a bank for other notes?

[mywittyname]

The Fed has an entire department dedicated to replacing destroyed currency. Which I think is the big difference: paper money can be replaced.

[TYPE_FASTER]

Or, in this case, somebody lit their car on fire on purpose, and it burned all the cars of the same model.

[dumbfounder]

It doesn't matter whose fault it is. If people think it's unsafe people will stay away.