So 'safer than a swiss bank' (and implicitly the swiss government) was a bit of an overstatement? Or do you still maintain that BTS has a lower systemic risk than a swiss bank/the swiss government?
I've only seen BTS comments relating to counterparty risk. Systemic risk not being mentioned, only allusions to BTS being equal to an insurance company or Fortune 500 company or other organisation that has significantly less risk of collapsing around you. And, presumably, hoping the reader equates the risk between the two as equal by association.
I've only seen BTS comments relating to counterparty risk. Systemic risk not being mentioned, only allusions to BTS being equal to an insurance company or Fortune 500 company or other organisation that has significantly less risk of collapsing around you. And, presumably, hoping the reader equates the risk between the two as equal by association.
I'm not worried about banks collapsing, I'm worried about them brazenly stealing from people with government blessings. Ask the Cyprus bank customers who got a 40% haircut, or more.
There are actually many places where we talk about systemic risk. For BitShares, this risk is equivalent to where any new crypto product would be expected to be in its second year of development. Over time, as the system matures, that risk tends to settle out to a level where more and more people feel comfortable.
The "safer than a Swiss bank" tag line is intended to emphasize that, while banks and cryptos each have their own unique array of systemic risks, blockchain-based systems can be designed to be less vulnerable to the risks of arbitrary actions from unscrupulous governments. In particular, Swiss banks used to be famous for their privacy and safety from outside government interference. This has been completely lost in recent years. So in that sense, BitShares is much safer that what used to be the safest place to keep your assets - a Swiss Bank!
Given the new Cyprus-style "bail-in" banking laws now sweeping the globe that permit banks to confiscate customer money to cover their own risky investments (e.g. MF Global), it is not hard to make the case that a mature crypto currency has much, much less systemic risk than the modern banking system.
Quote
I'm not worried about banks collapsing, I'm worried about them brazenly stealing from people with government blessings. Ask the Cyprus bank customers who got a 40% haircut, or more.
Good dodge and misdirection (and I thought you had changed). I was talking about the systemic risk of BTS collapsing, I didn't ask if you were worried about banks. What you won't acknowledge and continue to draw attention from is that BTS isn't as secure as a bank from a systemic "collapse of market" failure as they have governments stood behind banks, ready to bail them out. If BTS goes down, there is no one there to pick them up again. It works, until it doesn't.
All cryptos have blockchains, so you must think that all cryptos are safer than a swiss bank account? So why say that at all, if this is what you truly meant at the time. Would you market a car using features that were commonplace across all cars?
"BitsharesCar has eye-level translucent windows, symmetrically positioned circular wheels and ergonomic posterior envelopment systems (seats)" ...No? Maybe you would..
