[notch656a]

A bitcoin wallet is generally meant to denote a wallet that contains bitcoin. Chivo is not a wallet for bitcoin. It is a 'wallet' that gives you proper authentication to trade on a lightning network. The actual bitcoin, and as is my understanding even the lightning wallet, is in custody of a more centralized location.

Calling Chivo app a 'bitcoin wallet' is an intentionally misrepresentation, if not by the confused writer of the article then of the government that confused the person writing it.

These people didn't 'ditch' a bitcoin wallet, or at least not the one mentioned, because Chivo never was one.

[philihp]

Noncustodial bitcoin wallets are still wallets. The function of a wallet is to keep your money secure and facilitate sending it to others. Having a bank be a proxy to this is both absurd and normal.

Users should be aware and make a conscious decision about where their keys are kept, however this is usually something that doesn't matter until they either lose their phone or law enforcement freezes/seizes their money. It's pretty high up on Maslow's hierarchy of financial freedom.

[notch656a]

>The function of a wallet is to keep your money secure

Do you have evidence that the money secured by Chivo is actually 'secure.' If not then it fails to meet your own definition of a wallet. It's the constant HN semantic argument ("well it lets you log into something to trade something that isn't actually bitcoin but you could get bitcoin eventually so therefore it's a bitcoin wallet!!!") Yes if you want to play semantic games my work computer (sans bitcoin software) is also a bitcoin wallet because I can access my online banking which in turn allows me to, eventually, get bitcoin after a number of operations.

Having credentials that in turn allow you to trade on the lightning network that in turn allows you to get bitcoin does not a bitcoin wallet make.

[throwmeariver1]

Not a single person in the general public would even know half of the buzzwords you just used and the other half isn't interested in technicalities. The wallet is used to pay and receive bitcoin. It's a bitcoin wallet at least for 99% of people on the planet.

[notch656a]

OK, lets put it in laymen's terms.

The headline says the customer's threw away their wallet that holds their cash.

In reality, they through away their debit card which, if everything goes right and their accounts aren't seized and their bank stays honest, they can pull out a wad of cash. They probably threw away this debit card because they already transferred their cash to a different bank.

A debit card is not a wallet of cash. Throwing away the debit card doesn't tell you anything of what you did with the cash the debit card could possibly access. Chivo is a debit card for maybe, hopefully controlling the ability to trade bitcoin held in custody somewhere else on the lightning network, not a wallet containing bitcoin. Calling it a bitcoin wallet is intentional deception, if not by the author then by the person that told them that.

Now if I told you everyone threw away the wallet that held their national cash, that would paint a very different portrait than saying they all threw away their debit cards to a particular insecure bank that they already transferred their national cash out of. The first would imply they gave up national cash (bitcoin), the second would just imply they gave up on one particular stupid bank that might give them access to their national cash (chivo).

>Not a single person in the general public would even know half of the buzzwords you just used and the other half isn't interested in technicalities. The wallet is used to pay and receive bitcoin. It's a bitcoin wallet at least for 99% of people on the planet.

And yet apparently many El Salvadorans apparently did. Because they chose to transfer their assets to 'more secure' apps and actual bitcoin wallets. The thing is, when it concerns someones money, they tend to learn very fast. The same country boy that may laugh at nerds and chemical terms and academic 'buzzwords', may actually learn and know a ton about chemistry when it comes to maintaining their crops. People in Central America are not stupid.

[throwmeariver1]

Still not really helping grandma or the other 45% of the population that don't have a bank account. If they don't use a bank account they most certainly won't use bitcoin to do their daily shopping especially with a mobile network coverage of only 30% with only 50% over 3G. For your conclusion we don't know if they switched they could have just stopped using bitcoin altogether we have no way of knowing so the assumption of you that they switched and learned really fast is NIL.

[notch656a]

> we don't know if they switched they could have just stopped using bitcoin altogether we have no way of knowing so the assumption of you that they switched

Did you not read the article? It literally quoted people talking about using other apps instead. Operative words: "Have transitioned." I didn't say EVERYONE transitioned, sure some likely did ditch 'bitcoin' entirely.

"Meanwhile, many living in tourist hot spots on the Pacific coast, where Bitcoin usage is highest, have transitioned to other crypto wallets, such as the privately developed Bitcoin Beach."

>Still not really helping grandma or the other 45% of the population that don't have a bank account.

Crypto and bitcoin doesn't require a bank account. Transitioning from chivo doesn't require a bank account.

>learned really fast is NIL.

Come again? Is this supposed to be some racist dig at Salvadorans to suggest they can't learn quickly? For many people using crypto can be more accessible than signing up for a bank account.

[throwmeariver1]

Most of them don't even have smartphones, only 50% of the population uses the internet and you are talking about learning to use crypto when they didn't even use a normal bank or google before.

Racist my ass, you entitled first world country geek.

[notch656a]

The majority has internet access, the super majority has social media account of some sort (at least by one survey) [0], and there are 1.5x as many mobile lines as PERSONS in El Salvador (with global market share of smartphones yearly increasing), and yet you use an acrid tone when discussing the notion of El Salvadorans having the ability to learn how to use crypto.

You paint a picture of people in El Salvador that simply isn't the case. The supermajority CAN get access to internet if they like. I have lived in the third world, including places poorer than even El Salvador, and for less than a common days wage even in war-torn syria you can pay a shop-keep for internet access at a cafe. Those of us who have spent time in the third world understand that people often share resources there, including computers and smartphones, so seeing the proportion of people who say have a smartphone is only a slice of the picture of who can actually get access to one (as an example, if only the wife of every household had a smartphone then the whole nuclear family would still effectively have access despite a much smaller number reflected on the statistics). Even having a cousin / uncle / whatever can be enough to be good for the extended family, as that person can serve as a nexus to internet based utilities to the family. These types of relationships often aren't reflected on the statistics, but people in the first world often don't understand this.

[0] https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-el-salvador#:~...).