this is just false. the document is just assignment of rights while they key is literal asset. trying to equate the two means you either don't understand or you have some agenda.
Why don't you explain why it isn't like this? Instead you accuse me of having an agenda, that is a very weak argument in a discussion.
The fact is, you cannot touch crypto currency or take it home, you can just tell somebody else to move it to another vault. You cannot do it yourself unless you are lucky enough to mine the block with the transaction in it, which is futile unless you have a mining farm.
It's closer to a document than a physical key to a safe deposit box at a bank.
absolutely false and misses the entire point - with document you own nothing but the document. whatever that document says can become false in an instant. whatever gold you are promised by that document might not even be where it purports to be.
with bitcoin key you own the bitcoin and you always know (can trivially verify) that your bitcoin is there.
You don't own the Bitcoin. You own a private key. If somebody else got the private key, they could drain the funds. That far from owning something. There is a saying in the CC world: not your keys, not your coins.
What you are talking about in regards to documents are scams. There have also been a plethora of scams in the crypto currency world. Making the distinction there is quite strange.
> What you are talking about in regards to documents are scams
yes, thanks, that's exactly what current financial and banking system is - a gigantic scam. all you own is bunch of documents pinky-promising that your assets are there, except they are not.
and yes, if your private key is stolen - your asset is stolen, that's how real ownership of a digital asset works.
strange is you trying to equate ownership of IOUs, that make you entirely dependent on some third party, in terms of accessing your assets, and ownership of a private key, which is the only way anybody can ever access your assets.
nice try. my only agenda is to clear up the confusion in your mind about cryptocurrency ownership.
> you rather want to destroy the current bankingsystem
who said anything about destruction? i know full well that i will need to suffer through the scam of fractional reserve banking until i die. bitcoin is just a partial escape hatch.
> I just wanted to have a discussion about the meta model of crypto currencies
if you did, you wouldn't begin with logical fallacies and prejudice.
notice how you don't even respond anymore about ownership aspect, yet this was your central argument - that crypto is no different from gold in that aspect.
i'll just wait for you to actually address that central point - that will indeed signify if you want to have a discussion.
The key is literally the bitcoin. So if you own the key, you own the bitcoin. Duh! And if you lose your key, you lose your bitcoin. That's what it means to own something.
And if you lose your gold bar or coin, you also lose your gold.
No, you are absolutely wrong. Owning something is way beyond having access to it. If I leave my bike unlocked and somebody took it, it would still be stealing.
So crypto currencies don't work without a working legal system to back it up? Why the hassle with ever increasing transaction logs, and decentralization with all its drawbacks then?
what are you talking about? the concept of ownership exists outside of any legal system. legal system is there to have a recourse if your ownership rights were infringed upon, regardless of whether it was gold or bitcoin or sheep.
They work with and without a legal system, and you can still steal them. When I know you stole my bitcoins, I won't go through the legal system either ;D
