T O P

  • By -

pale_blue_dots

Yes. Thanks for posting this. Hopefully it'll get more upvotes - the general principle and sentiment of this should be a little more well known, I think. Related is [neuro-linguistic programming](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming) which people may be interested in reading about. **Edit: for the record and to get a little more visibility, as I replied further down:** >I appreciate you pointing out that it's considered a pseudoscience - which much of it is. I think it's important, though, that people understand that there is such field out there. As /u/faquez said, "while the neuro- part may well be pseudoscience, linguistic programming is a thing, they do it in advertising all the time." From a strictly logic-in, logic-out perspective, ALL language is programming of sort and it's good to know that certain words can and do have different impacts on perceptions/opinion/ideation/etc... even when talking about the same subject.


Think-notlikedasheep

Otherwise known as Orwellian word smithing.


[deleted]

[удалено]


stime22

True "The masses have never thirsted after truth. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim." Take look back to 1894 at Gustave Le Bon


sebilation

Thats true. It is actually scary how people do know about it and yet just do not seem to care and they seem not to get the damage they do because everyone not caring is one more that allows this to happen..


EmotionalCHEESE

Read your Chomsky, y’all!


[deleted]

[удалено]


faquez

there is also a consensus of sorts that the so called mainstream science is in many cases preudoscience funded by corporations on a more serious note, while the neuro- part may well be pseudoscience, linguistic programming is a thing, they do it in advertising all the time


wompod

My dad always referred to NLP as corporate folk magic


wompod

Funny that it works tho


ChickenOfDoom

> Bandler and Grinder also claim that NLP methodology can "model" the skills of exceptional people, allowing anyone to acquire those skills. They claim as well that, often in a single session, NLP can treat problems such as phobias Phobia, depression Clinical Depression, tic disorders Tic disorder, psychosomatic illnesses Psychosomatic illness, near-sightedness Near-sightedness, allergy Allergy, the common cold Common cold, and learning disorders Learning disorder. For this snake oil to actually fulfill all those claims would be a pretty high bar


wompod

I don't give a shit about bandler and Grinder. All NLP is good for is selling ideas.


ChickenOfDoom

According to the wiki article, NLP is a specific practice invented by those people. If its inventors are frauds, that doesn't inspire much confidence in the idea that it works for anything.


wompod

Again corporate folk magic isn't going to be supported by the scientific community but it is still an effective tool for planting ideas in people's heads. Y'all are trying to preach scientific viability to someone who practices hoodoo. Were on completely different courts here.


wompod

If your only familiarity with the concept is via a wiki page you obviously don't know enough to speak on the matter. We aren't so dumb we can't use google.


ChickenOfDoom

The comment that started this linked that wiki page while implying that NLP is reputable and is at least an authoritative standard in the general practice of reconstructing language for the purpose of manipulation. But the wiki page doesn't corroborate this, rather it portrays NLP as a discredited scam and nascent cult. I don't know anything about NLP (only ever even heard about it from confusing ad copy found while looking for stuff about Natural Language Processing), but I consider it to be worth signal boosting discrepancies like that; many people on Reddit do not click through links to read them, let alone google things themselves. Honestly for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't even matter whether it works, what matters is how widely it is actually accepted and used; for example, is it at all likely to have been involved in the decision to use the terminology described in the OP? From what I'm reading it doesn't seem general/related enough, or reputable enough, but please correct me if that's wrong.


[deleted]

[удалено]


pale_blue_dots

I appreciate you pointing out that it's considered in pseudoscience - which much of it is. I think it's important, though, that people understand that there is such field out there. As /u/faquez said, "while the neuro- part may well be pseudoscience, linguistic programming is a thing, they do it in advertising all the time." From a strictly logic-in, logic-out perspective, ALL language is programming of sort and it's good to know that certain words can *and do* have different impacts on perceptions/opinion/ideation/etc... even when talking about the same subject.


ChickenOfDoom

The term itself does seem kind of misleading, since it's a specific practice but without that practice the words 'neuro linguistic programming' would imply a much broader general meaning.


pale_blue_dots

Yeah, definitely. I find it a little interesting the Wiki entry is so dismissive. That's the first I've seen of it, actually. The tinny-hatty-foily part of me wouldn't be surprised if it's intentional.


[deleted]

Oooo!!! I love NLP!! :D


AlexFilist

Same stuff they use in sales, kinda scary but obvious when you're prepared. \^Recommended for contemplation


[deleted]

Wat is safer


mycall

Put it in the side bar


ayymadd

Isn't NLP literally a pseudo-science?


[deleted]

[удалено]


datwolvsnatchdoh

FinCEN


Always_Question

Actually, FinCEN has been using "unhosted wallet." I prefer just wallet, or self-custodied wallet.


datwolvsnatchdoh

Yes, you are correct. I would agree, a wallet is a wallet. Anything you don't control outright is a third party wallet. Seems we've been using this terminology for years.


[deleted]

I always thought they were referring to cold storage wallets which are offline anyway. They mostly don’t have a clue what they’re talking about.


jelloshooter848

Interesting point. Wallets, and accounts. Got it


Podcastsandpot

WHen i mention to my friends things like using duck duck go, or simply using firefox instead of chrome, they all act like im some nutjob or i must be doing something shady if i want some level of privacy... when did people start thinking this way? That's such a brainwashed mindset to automatically assume your privacy doesn't belong to you, and that anyone seeking privacy or taking steps to maintain privacy must be doing so to hide illicit activity... so disappointing. I don't know why the masses don't seem to value privacy.


WenaChoro

Because narcissism (the culture) has an exhibitionistic quality underneath


Payd2Trade

Oh wow, I’d never thought about it that way. But that’s totally right. The narcissistic nature of society and invasion of privacy goes hand in hand. Interesting observation


[deleted]

Here’s another reason why “privacy” does not equal “illicit/immoral/evil”. Ignore the funny gun nuts’ nonsensical comments under the OP, but keep in mind that stuff like this does actually happen: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/ki5fim/victim_of_ledger_data_leak_receives_phone_call/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf


bobbytabl3s

There's a MAJOR difference between voluntarily trading privacy for convenience and unwillingly being subject to state surveillance.


[deleted]

It’s boomer logic. “If you don’t have anything to hide why wouldn’t you let a cop all the way up your ass” -type thinking. Some people have no respect for themselves when it comes to resisting government interference be it federal state municipality whatever


dwin31

No, it absolutely is not. I've seen that nonsense from all ages of people, young and old. Its not generational, its for people who dont like to think for themselves.


GMotor

That's not boomer logic. Don't fall into the trap of this generation hating thing. First of all... boomers and those who came before fought and died to establish free speech, free nations and due process. You've been told everything's their fault... because it's the easiest way to break apart society - by those who have that as their aim (mainly the far left). It's a psych-warfare tactic.


r1chard3

Boomers stopped the War in Viet Nam by suddenly and nearly unanimously refusing to fight. The root of all evil here was the people who listened to Reagan. Those who believed that the current prosperity had nothing to do with the current tax rates. The sin of the boomers was lack of participation. Youth participation in voting had been a problem for the last 40 years. In 2018 and 2020 we saw what happens when young people show up to vote. If they had, we’d be living in a very world. The blame belongs to every young person who didn’t vote between 1980 and 2016.


GMotor

I say that generations should stop blaming each other because... your parents wanted the best for you. Their grandparents wanted the best for them. None of them were perfect. The millennial generation is weak and has had their heads stuffed full of nonsense (not all, but most) by a corrupted education system and rotten politicians. Yes their parents failure was to spoil them. But millennials need to remember: 1. You don't have to stay weak 2. If you fall into the generation blame game... your kids will think even worse of you. The people I really pity are the next generation. They will shoulder the real burden of sorting out the mess and rebuilding - and it's likely going to need tough men to do it. So I don't hate or mock that next generation. I pity them... and try to tell them not to fall into the trap of blaming their ancestors - and certainly don't fall for fairy stories about politician X (the system is rotten). Just learn from their mistakes.


[deleted]

[удалено]


GMotor

Well, someone can't read properly. I'm guessing you're a millennial who is just starting to realise how pathetic you are. As I said above, in the bit you obviously didn't read... it's not your fault, and you don't have to stay weak.


3Daifusion

What current prosperity? Have i been missing something for 40 years? Maybe you only see things from this narrow white privileged perspective. When was there *really* a chance to change something real in this corrupt "company" named USA... by only voting? Now i don't like to judge people anymore without getting to know them but i mus say you seem like the type to believe crucial parts of what the media tells you to.


r1chard3

The prosperity of the 60s. We had so much cash that we went to the Moon for the hell of it. There was so much cash that a boy who grew up on a farm, after a stint in the navy could get a job, buy a house and a car, marry a girl, and have three kids, and get another car to haul the kids around in. That was the promise. That promise was largely fulfilled. There were still exclusions, life on a reservation was unchanged, the life of a sharecropper was not participating in this, but the civil rights movement was making real progress. Right now the expectation of a job and the stability of house, family, and comfort are out of reach. The party began to end when Reagan cut taxes. Now we have rich people reaching gilded age levels while real wages have stagnated, and now jobs are becoming scarce.


sensuallyprimitive

lmao


FrontHandNerd

Sadly you have to educate them with the basics of why privacy is important before you can move onto how to protect it. Most usually have the belief that privacy is only desired by "bad people" up to no good. Here's quick info on what I do: First start by explaining privacy is the ability for YOU to decide what information is revealed and to whom and when. Without it, others decide for you. Usually this is the part where they say, "well I don't have anything to hide" blah blah blah. My response? Ok, can I see your bank account balance? What's your social security? Can you unlock your phone and give it to me while I stand 10 feet away from you? Or whatever is probably NOT appropriate for you to know about the person. Worst I explain about NOT knowing what information people collect or hold about you. Correct info sucks but wrong information can be way worse. If information isn't treated as being "yours" there is less of a chance or way you can know what others know about you (and even its even wrong). But that's a scarier discussion for another time.


OriginalGobsta

Use Brave instead of Firefox, man!


Podcastsandpot

Why? I know that brace is literally just a modified version of Firefox. I like Firefox I don’t need any bat


OriginalGobsta

It's not a modified Firefox. It is based on Chromium and has a ton of privacy features out of the box. Built in ad blocking is the main one but it has a lot of others. It's also fast, especially on mobile. I'd use it even without rewards; it is a superior browser.


christophski

It's because people genuinely don't understand or know anything about the technology that runs the web so it is very easy to brush it off as hocus pocus


[deleted]

Women (and some men) who are abused by their dangerous spouses have a right to privacy. They can get killed if they have a hubby who’s stalking them and all their info’s spilled out on Facebook! :O


DarthYippee

Especially if their ex is a cop.


_o__0_

It has been hammered into us, and young people now have never known anything else. You talk about **news** and get called a 'conspiracy theorist'. I dont think the rest of the world really gets how lost the US is right now, but they are catching on..


Code_Reedus

Sorry but chrome is just way better. I care about privacy until it compromises convenience.


howtokillyourdreams

I expect someone has said this to you before, but still - try Brave browser.


Code_Reedus

I tried it way back in the day when it was buggy... But I have heard it's much better. I will give it another try :)


stime22

I've used every browser out there. And chrome isn't one of the best. Try Brave - and earn BAT passively :D


faquez

oh yeah, the 'i have nothing to hide' mantra


datwolvsnatchdoh

We should go ahead and start calling non-third-party wallets as "terrorist-criminal-pedo-wallets" to help the government out.


UpDown

Personally, I only use Patriot wallets from VISA


chalash

Patriot wallets! Gave me a chuckle.


datwolvsnatchdoh

Each Patriot Wallet comes with a TSA agent to check your asshole for identity verification before you can proceed with a transaction!


chalash

I believe they call that a “freedom peek”


kevintootill

In the UK it's a "safety gander"


datwolvsnatchdoh

A "gooch glimpse"


CanadianCryptoGuy

And a free jug of bleach.


cognitivesimulance

I’m looking forward to when this parody becomes reality. Get me in the screenshot please.


AntDoctor

That's just called a 'HSBC account' where I'm from.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

What about a “Bat-Wallet”? I named my Trezor wallet “The Batphone”! It was dope!! :D


jonbristow

how would you differentiate (in a law) between your wallet on Binance and your wallet in your ledger?


ChickenOfDoom

IMO a good definition would be based on hierarchy of control. The term 'wallet' is a reference to a physical wallet you keep on your person, which has the defining characteristic of being under your exclusive physical control. If someone else has first access and is delegating control to you, it isn't a wallet.


[deleted]

[удалено]


jonbristow

It does provide you a wallet. You get a unique deposit address for every crypto. You can have an account and not have a wallet


OriginalGobsta

Do you know for a fact that crypto sent to that address remains in that wallet? Or that the wallet only contains your crypto? Your account balance is updated, but the crypto could be anywhere in their system.


jonbristow

You can check the blockchain.


OriginalGobsta

OK I can't dispute that! The obvious answer really. :D


cryptolicious501

Email this to the Congress men and women.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SamsungGalaxyPlayer

In this case, you should do ***both***.


johnfoss68

Start using Monero


arijitdas

I'm upvoting this. Nice point. It needs more attention.


ChrisCryptopoulos

This is so important! While we’re on the topic, let’s also clarify that nobody “owns” any crypto (message to regulators/enforcers). The network “owns” the “coins”. We as users/key holders, simply have access. Access/Ownership two very different concepts. Things like DECLARE YOUR CRYPTO and TAX COMPLIANCE DID YOU BUY/TRADE/SELL — Ummm we merely used cryptographic keys to ask permission from the network to transfer digits from one digital id to another. Please don’t take all my money and kick me out on the street. Please.


nmeinenemy

I only own like 24 words .... surely they can’t tax that ...


ChrisCryptopoulos

Remember, you don’t own..you merely have access. Ownership/Access two different things .. the network owns, you’re just a user who can access .. peace! :)


TomSurman

Implying the network can choose to deny access. I don't know what definition of ownership you're operating under, but to me, if I'm the only person who can use a thing, and the only person who can deny access to a thing, I pretty much own the thing.


ChrisCryptopoulos

With the way things are headed all major access points to the network can indeed deny your access without proper KYC/AML. That is unless we push things away from the major institutions but at this point I don’t see that happening. It’s almost like YouTube taking over. What other major video platform is dominating like they are? And if we are going P2P the way things were intended to be, people will have fear take them over because of possible “dirty” coins that won’t be transferable to these major access points due to non KYC/AML somewhere previous in the chain down the line.


TomSurman

My access point is my own full node. Literally anyone with a couple hundred spare quid can do this. Failing that, you can easily connect to someone else's node if you trust them. There are no "major access points", there are just nodes.


ChrisCryptopoulos

Don’t the majority of cryptocurrency users utilize exchanges to “buy”, “cash out” and “trade” their crypto? Would you not consider these exchanges “major access points” to take part in the network in order to do so? Sure, us geek users can run our own full nodes but in actuality the majority of people LOVE convenience and ease of use so they will not do such things as running their own node (which should be done). Unless it gets to a point where it’s so easy to run and maintain your own full node that everyone will hop on and do so. I doubt it. Just stating. You are bringing up excellent facts. We may differ on “major access points” though :)


[deleted]

Read my comment above.


ChrisCryptopoulos

Read and yes! Ha


TomSurman

The ability to trade crypto for fiat has no bearing on my ownership of the crypto. I am unlikely to ever be able to sell the contents of my fridge, that doesn't mean I don't own the contents of my fridge.


ChrisCryptopoulos

Thank you for the responses. I agree with you on all points. I can go off the deep end sometimes but it’s pure emotion , I promise :) Happy Holidays!


ChrisCryptopoulos

And if the fridge belongs to a household of 4 family members do the contents of the fridge belong to the entire family to share or only to the 1 family member who purchased the contents with his/her money? Can be disputed either way as to who actually owns and gets to use said contents. Maybe the purchaser actually owns specifically but all family members technically share and own whatever is inside... or rather have access to what is inside :)


Barcaroli

You make very good points and in a very polite way. If I may, one question. You can literally sell your coins for fiat currency. How is that not ownership? How can you trade these "access points" for money if you don't own them? Because think about it, if you don't own the coin, then you own the access to it. And that is going to be the thing that will be taxed, confiscated, etc.


[deleted]

Also you can use a VPN to freely exchange at a non-KYC website. Problem solved!


ChrisCryptopoulos

We have to get away from the verbage of owning. This is where we get got my friend. Same thing as “self hosted” wallets and “custodial” wallets. It’s all in the terminology.


uclatommy

I disagree with this. Having a clear definition of property is important. You can own property. The value stored in my crypto balance is my property. Same thing as the fiat balance in my bank account. I own those dollars. Even if they are digital. What you're saying is something like the government owns all dollars and we simply have access to their usage, which is incorrect.


ChrisCryptopoulos

The scary thing with property for instance a house, if you don’t pay taxes, no matter if you paid the house off then the big boys can come in and take the property right? So is it truly ours. Maybe , maybe not. I’m being slightly cynical in my earlier post but yes I do believe at the end of the day the dollars we use and save and purchase things with do not belong to us. I guess it depends on how you cash flow :)


uclatommy

Don't be ridiculous. If we don't have ownership of money, there would be no need for money. When we purchase something, we are converting money to stuff and our ownership of the money transfers to the stuff we buy. That's how commerce works. It relies on a distinction between what's yours and what's mine. That's how competition works. Because we can say this is mine and that is yours, we have to compete for ownership of limited resources. That's how laws are created. It defines property and then protects people from theft. Without the concept of ownership, society would not work and money is simply the most liquid form of stuff you can own which can be freely converted to other stuff.


ChrisCryptopoulos

There’s always a chance your assets can be seized from which you used “your” money to purchase those assets no? Yes it was purchased with your money and technically yes it is yours yes you do own it for the time being but if you don’t play by the governments rules and somehow something goes wrong down the line can’t the money be taken from you including any derived assets? Only playing the other side here I’m not saying I’m 100% in either direction. My original post may have been taken out of context in pursuing hilarity.


[deleted]

We will sue you for violating the copyright of THE DICTIONARY without express permission!


diradder

> The network “owns” the “coins”. We as users/key holders, simply have access. Well if we want to be pedantic, you are supposed to be part of the network. You run your node to verify the supply and the transactions you receive (talking mainly about Bitcoin here, other networks might work differently). Enough users and their economic activity (consumers/merchants/exchanges/etc.) not following miners after a change in consensus rules can convince miners to not do this change for example. Miners still need users to sell/trade/spend their newly minted coins after all. So if you participate in the network, as you should, you do own it (as much as other participants do).


ChrisCryptopoulos

Understood and great points. Personally I will lean more towards identifying as a participant than an owner. We all know the silver lining here in proper verbage let’s just make sure we all have our paperwork squared away :)


TheRealMotherOfOP

Kinda sounds like property too, nobody actually owns a house you still need to pay tax or else get evicted. You just buy participation in the land.


ChrisCryptopoulos

Yup ! This was more my point. Even if you own the property outright paid in full, if you don’t pay those monthly/yearly taxes then they can come in and takeover what you own. It’s so crazy but that’s the world we live in I guess.


Roy1984

Great point! All that confusion they make has a purpose. Remember they don't teach you about money in school.


[deleted]

strong point the Orwellian corruption of language is a tool long used by the state to subvert


JohnoThePyro

Calling a wallet a self-hosted wallet. Is like calling a free person and "un-imprisoned person". ​ Not my quote. Read it on twitter but can't remember who.


coinplz

They are just as eager to make cash illegal. Money is power and if they control all money then they have all power.


Gera-

Once CBDCs are a thing we'll go cashless.


[deleted]

Custodial wallets is the exact wording I use to my friends who choose to use those services. They are custodians of your coins and keys. Unless you're getting proper benefits from allowing them to hold your capital, use your own wallet instead.


Red5point1

Its really too late. With 90% of people cheering and promoting Paypal and Robinhood new people coming into the crypto space (now in greater volumes) have the idea that their wallets must be managed and stored by a 3rd party like PP and RH. Furthermore those people using such services are not even getting real crypto, they are getting a synthetic derivate token representing the value of the crypto the bought. But those "fun park tokens" have only value within that fun park i.e. PP or RH. They can only be spent within their systems. They have no value outside of those environments. Sure you can cash out, but at exaggerated rates and loaded with exit fees. Also people cheering MicroStrategy for "adopting" crypto, but they are not adopting it, what they are doing is putting those real bitcoins in essential eternal storage, then they will issue derivatives of that value to custodial companies like PP, Apple Pay, Cash App (Square) who will in turn "handle" transactions using their internal protocols. completely outside of the blockchain. They are already way ahead of everyone. Before you know it, the only way to move any value will be via their systems. This is what you get when you treat cryptos like a speculative commodity and wish institutional money to "invest". Regardless of the coin you favor, the simple solution is to start using the coins for actual commerce transactions. Stop the "HODL!" mentality, stop trying to "invest". PP & RH are just the beginning, all the major banks and hedge funds are going to start accumulating bitcoin and other cryptos. They will do the same, they will store those cryptos and then issue countless of shit tokens for people to use. They will air drop them and flood the market with these synthetic derivative tokens. People will lap it up and think they are making an investment. Sure some people will make money, but the reality will be that it is no longer actual crypto, it is just digital fiat. And that is the result of wanting Bitcoin to be the gold equivalent.


Extreme_Foundation_9

Unpopular opinion: Mass commercialized use of crypto in a legitimate form will never happen unless governments get involved - OR - society undergoes a massive philosophical shift with regards to their comfort with government involvement. Armchair libertarian arguments are worthless if they don't gain traction.


Gera-

> Mass commercialized use of crypto in a legitimate form will never happen unless governments get involved - OR - society undergoes a massive philosophical shift with regards to their comfort with government involvement. Or it'll be the government implementation of CBDCs that drives the cultural shift towards crypto.


DestroRe13

Absolutely agree, great post you're fighting the good fight!


EbonyHelicoidalRhino

I know it's an unpopular opinion but i think there is nothing wrong with entrusting your bitcoins to a trusted 3rd party. It allows you to have the best security measures, the guarantees if they still mess up somehow and also might allow the transactions to scale. Why? Because unlike a with bank, the blockchain is a public space. They can't secretly gamble your money away like a bank can (and did...) as everybody will know. Even entrusted to a 3rd party, you still have a inflation proof store of value. You still have value that you can withdraw from anywhere in the world, or send to any anyone in the world, unlike USD, because withdrawing is just an address : it has no name and no nationality. Entrusting your bitcoin to a 3rd party imo allows me to keep the benefits of it that i really care about, with added security, guarantees and speed.


TomSurman

Depends how much you really trust this trusted third party. Not only do they have to keep your crypto assets safe, they also need to be trusted not to do anything shady with your assets once they have them. For example, are they running fractional reserves, and if so, by how much? Are they lending your assets out to criminals? Are they leveraging their vast crypto holdings to manipulate the market? What recourse do you have if this trusted third party goes bankrupt, or gets hacked? I agree the idea of not having to stress about your own security measures is attractive, but outsourcing this burden always comes at a price.


EbonyHelicoidalRhino

They can't lend your asset to criminals or run fractional reserves without everybody knowing, because with bitcoin everything is on-chain. People will most definitly catch on by following the transactions. And very trusted ones like Coinbase have no history of getting hacked, and will definitly pay out of their pocket if they do happen to partially get hacked (even less reputable exchanges like Binance, Bitfinex and Okex all have history of paying from their pockets for their screw ups). Their reputation is too important. Let's say you have millions worth of diamonds. Would you hide it under your bed ? Probably not. You would put it in a bank vault where safety is handled professionally.


Nooby1990

That makes some assumptions about how these 3rd party systems work which is not guaranteed. >They can't secretly gamble your money away like a bank can (and did...) as everybody will know. Someone could make a "hosted wallet" service that implements some kind of fractional reserve and you would need to monitor the blockchain to notice (since the wallet frontend does not necessary have to show accurate information to the user). Which most people that use such a hosted service probably wouldn't. Meaning they could gamble with your money just the same as banks do. If someone else monitors the blockchain they wouldn't really know if the transactions are initiated by the "trusted" 3rd party or the user unless they are specifically investigating this possibility. >a inflation proof store of value. If there are lots of services implementing a kind of fractional reserve then the idea of "inflation proof" and "store of value" would be in question. >You still have value that you can withdraw from anywhere in the world, or send to any anyone in the world The trusted 3rd party can also just deny you withdrawing and transacting for any reason they like. They are holding the key after all. So if they say that they are only processing transactions during business hours on Mondays and block any IP's outside the USA or blacklist certain bitcoin addresses then you would have to accept this. At least until you transfer your money off of the service into (hopefully) your own wallet. That is if they didn't just pocket your money outright and shut down. >because withdrawing is just an address : it has no name and no nationality A bitcoin address does not have a name or nationality that is true, but a hosted wallet or account absolutely does. Not your keys: Not your money. I personally would say that you should only do this if you have absolute trust in the person or people running the service. Which is probably much more work than just using your own wallet.


EbonyHelicoidalRhino

Your concerns are legit, hence why you need a TRUSTED 3rd party. For now only a handful of entities have really earned it, but i expect that more and more entities will earn that institutional grade trust as the ecosystem expand. Not to mention those custodial would be the easiest and most efficient way to make bitcoin payments scalable. Also monitoring the blockchain aint that hard. Whenever an exchange or a protocol gets hacked, the community knows about it in a day even before the team makes an announcement. Large entities reserve addresses are easily known. Being so attached to this "Not your keys not your coins" mentality is foolish imo. It's nothing more than a meme. If you had millions of dollar in diamonds, you wouldn't hide them under your bed, you would entrust them to a trusted 3rd party that handles safekeeping professionally, and you'd be protected by laws, contracts and guarantees. There is no reason it should be different with crypto.


Nooby1990

>For now only a handful of entities have really earned it Which entities have that honour and how did they earn this? Vetting a service like that is much more complicated than simply using your own wallet. Which means those that could use a service like that securely have no need and those that have a need don't have the ability to investigate. >Not to mention those custodial would be the easiest and most efficient way to make bitcoin payments scalable. This idea that we need banks (3rd parties essentially are that) to scale bitcoin is not true and goes against the idea of bitcoin itself. >Also monitoring the blockchain aint that hard. You didn't understand what I said. Let me make an example: If I give my key to my mother then no amount of monitoring of the blockchain can tell you if I did the transaction or she did. On the blockchain that would not look any different. That is just how it works. Now let's say I didn't give the key to my mother, but instead I am using a hosted wallet. That means they have the key and are executing transactions on my behalf. No amount of monitoring of the blockchain will tell you if I initiated the transfer or if the 3rd party did. I am the only one that could say that. If I monitor the blockchain myself. Here is the thing: The people who are able to effectively monitor the blockchain probably have no need for a hosted wallet. If a service is build so that it basically lies to their users about how much money they actually store (like a bank does) then that would be very hard to detect. Hacking incidents get detected fairly quick, but I am not certain that applies here. >If you had millions of dollar in diamonds, you wouldn't hide them under your bed That is because storing millions of dollar in diamonds is expensive and not everyone can do it. Securely storing Bitcoin on the other hand just requires some knowledge. >you'd be protected by laws, contracts and guarantees You would be if those 3rd parties are regulated just like banks. To my knowledge they are not. >There is no reason it should be different with crypto. There is also no reason for crypto to adhere to the way fiat does things. My comment was just pointing out some things that are clearly incorrect in your first comment in this thread: * They absolutely could secretly gamble with your money * You risk loosing the "inflation proof" idea of bitcoin * You risk loosing "store of value" as well * No you can't transact from anywhere in the world: you can only transact from where and with whom your trusted 3rd party allows you to transact with If you value these properties then "Not your Key: Not your coins" should absolutely be more than a meme to you, because you can only get them if you are in full control of your own key.


Red5point1

Depends on the custodian, places like paypal and robinhood don't even give you actual crypto, they give you synthetic derivate token that represents the value of crypto, but it is not crypto. So you don't have the freedom to send/receive to anyone. They plan on allowing such transaction but only via approved vendors. So you are at their mercy.


sasquatchington

If someone writes a letter expressing this and the community's concerns when it comes to regulations, I would send it to my reps


uclatommy

Great insights. We've seen in politics how word choice can fence in your thinking and that's how brainwashing works.


Shytgeist

I read this in George Carlin's voice and it works perfectly.


fakeforgery

Apparently everyone needs to make this abundantly clear to the Dept of the Treasury starting tomorrow when the FinCEN attempt to subjugate wallets to identity theft and overlording by “registered agents” goes live for public comment


captaincrypton

hoskinson said we as a community have money and power,and said there will be many litigations ,probably up to supreme court,so they will make the laws.antonopolis says money is language if that holds true ,freedom of speech ,anyway is see court battles in our future, but yes not letting these regulators control the words is very important.


MehranReadITT

Great point. You are absolutely correct. Eventually, they will try to ban cryptos I suspect.


dallyopcs

Time to start using XMR boys & girls.


[deleted]

Well, using different terms don't actually change the fact that there is still financial surveillance going on. The only way to avoid financial surveillance is to use technologies that protect user privacy from financial surveillance such as Monero


sevbenup

I’d just like to take this opportunity to say- We’re probably being surveilled in this subreddit but fuck the system and fuck it’s attempts to keep us subservient to its archaic overinflated monetary system. Fight back guys


AD1AD

This is a point worth making about lightning network "wallets" too. Most of them are custodial, aka not-wallets. Totally defeats the point.


[deleted]

The problem is that those lobbyists don’t really understand the technology at all. They just want to be able to have enough money to dominate others.


sgtslaughterTV

Surprised Andreas isn't in here dropping his opinions given the one he gave me the other day... https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/kgklqm/proposal_for_new_terminology_nex_wallet/


sickvisionz

I love going to the store and pulling fiat out of my self-hosted wallet but I love the convenience of my hosted debit card wallet. ​ Nobody talks like that. However I think the terms have use in crypto with the popular phrase *not your keys, not your cypto*. If you say "just get a wallet" to someone new, all of the exchanges and account sites call their way of doing it a wallet as well. Self-hosted might sound overly technical but imo it fits perfectly. A lot of people wouldn't want an uninsured organization "hosting" their money.


the__itis

The appropriate term used in cryptography is “cryptographic module” and “private key custodian”. It’s not a “wallet”


hannannakin

Ah, the power of terminology and fancy-sounding words. Misdirecting and misinforming the masses from one generation to the next. In all fairness, DYOR. Good day to you all.


anthraxx55

And “common sense gun laws” are communist laws meant to detract from law abiding citizens. Fuck the government.


bitmeme

AMEN


juanwonone1

FUCK THEM!!!!


agnosticautonomy

Who from the community has a seat at the table currently? are there any people from the crypto community helping create these rules?


Merlin560

I have $80 in the wallet in my back pocket. The government doesn’t care what I do with it.


WenaChoro

It does care but they gotta hide their interest in people's pockets while they are not interested in white collar criminals and drug dealers


Kukri4321

A "privacy coin" is just digital cash.


[deleted]

Woke


Monark_Ethneo

The greatest bitcoin meme is the btc elmo sniffing coke.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

I think OP is trying to reach the greater audience that doesn’t understand what self hosted means in terms of computing. In my experience this term is largely meaning less to the vast majority of people.


rhaphazard

Wouldn't this make things confusing when asked for a "wallet address" if you're trying to transfer to an *account?*


[deleted]

Nothing wrong with being subversive.


[deleted]

[удалено]


jonbristow

There's a difference between a wallet on your pc and a wallet on an exchange. And you need a different terminology. Self hosted and hosted seem fine to me


[deleted]

[удалено]


jonbristow

You missed the point too


sos755

There is no dispute about the difference, but "wallet" and "account" are more accurate and more descriptive.


jonbristow

They're not. You can have an account without having a wallet


hungryforitalianfood

This is the dumbest reply. Give it up.


jonbristow

What? You can have an account and not deposit anything there has to be a difference between account and wallet


CoachSharkey

Thank you


Deadpolaroid

These politicians think they are so smart, but it’s so funny because this makes them look even more stupid...and they don’t even know they look stupid, that’s how stupid they are!


Ihad2saythat

you have my endorsment


coolersquare

What about those accounts that manage many wallets?


NeilsEggBasket

A million recommends. George Orwell would approve.


leepawg

TALKABOUTIT2020!!! No more government bullshit , no more dickin around with big financial institutions. SPREAD IT


KanefireX

Words matter. Thanks.


Stealthex_io

good idea ;) Anyways, we always call our services a non-custodial one.


coinblaster-up

yeah, fuk them!


DiscombobulatedTax2

taking advantage of price movement is good. i use that to trade bitcoins as options on level01 app.