Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 72 posts

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#21

Post by dashundchen »

iamthirsty wrote: post #13
zitterbewegung wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the big pluses to bitcoin is the fact that you can move large amounts of money relatively quickly instead of relying on banks.

Illegal operations would obviously not rely on banks.

HSBC and Wachovia were recently involved in the laundering of hundreds of billions of dollars for Mexico's biggest drug cartel (and pretty much every executive involved came out unscathed once it was revealed).

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/15/hsbc-h...

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#22

Post by Kiro »

> Still, CME Group Inc., the world’s largest exchange owner, has said it plans to introduce bitcoin futures by the end of the year, citing pent-up demand from clients. That pushes bitcoin closer to the mainstream by making it easier to trade without the hassles of owning the currency directly.

What's the difference between that and CFDs on eToro?

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#23

Post by mikeash »

nxsynonym wrote: post #15
zitterbewegung wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the big pluses to bitcoin is the fact that you can move large amounts of money relatively quickly instead of relying on banks.

is that different than cash - especially surrounding illegally obtained cash? I'm not saying it's not a risk - I just don't see it as inherently more risky than currently viable currencies.

One big difference is that cash is too popular to ban entirely. If a major attack were somehow linked to Bitcoin, the US government could make the whole thing illegal. We all know that wouldn't do much to actually stop terrorist attacks, but it would be a major problem for a wealth manager trying to operate within the law, and being ineffective certainly hasn't stopped the US government from passing dumb anti-terror laws in the past.

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#24

Post by samsonradu »

Snackchez wrote: post #7

>“All it would take would be one terrorist incident in the U.S. funded by bitcoin for the U.S. regulator to much more seriously step in and take action, he said. “That’s a risk, an unquantifiable risk, bitcoin has that another currency doesn’t." You can't make this up... or maybe I'm not understanding something. So, what's currently funding terrorist attacks?

I think the point is that bitcoin is very fragile and any powerful enough state-actor can bash it to the ground. There are various ways to achieve this, from shorting to propaganda, to attacking (hacking) large exchanges or miner networks and so on. Only time will tell of course, maybe that is already priced in.

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#26

Post by Danihan »

iamthirsty wrote: post #13
zitterbewegung wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the big pluses to bitcoin is the fact that you can move large amounts of money relatively quickly instead of relying on banks.

Illegal operations would obviously not rely on banks.

Don't be so sure...

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#27

Post by nyolfen »

imustbeevil wrote: post #3
pdog wrote: post #2

> How do you know when to get out of a bitcoin investment? That's the thing. When Bitcoin succeeds, you won't have to get out of the investment.

If the best case scenario is Bitcoin hits $1,000,000 per coin and never moves again, why would anyone ever put more money into it? The only value Bitcoin has is appreciation. If it ever becomes stable it will necessarily be worthless.

it's great for drugs and money laundering

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#28

Post by JamesBarney »

nxsynonym wrote: post #9
Snackchez wrote: post #7

>“All it would take would be one terrorist incident in the U.S. funded by bitcoin for the U.S. regulator to much more seriously step in and take action, he said. “That’s a risk, an unquantifiable risk, bitcoin has that another currency doesn’t." You can't make this up... or maybe I'm not understanding something. So, what's currently funding terrorist attacks?

I don't understand the comment either. It's not like terrorist groups are currently un-funded. Cash is still king around illegal activities of all kinds. Why is using bitcoin for illegal activity any different than untraceable cash?

He's not arguing that Bitcoin would be responsible for the terrorist action. He's arguing that hysteria would hold Bitcoin accountable. And this would create pressure to pass legislation that would crack down on it.

And deserved or not Bitcoin is perceived differently than cash. Its seen as something nefarious, and strange. Where cash is something familiar.

Re: The World's Biggest Wealth Manager Won't Touch Bitcoin

#30

Post by adamnemecek »

samsonradu wrote: post #24
Snackchez wrote: post #7

>“All it would take would be one terrorist incident in the U.S. funded by bitcoin for the U.S. regulator to much more seriously step in and take action, he said. “That’s a risk, an unquantifiable risk, bitcoin has that another currency doesn’t." You can't make this up... or maybe I'm not understanding something. So, what's currently funding terrorist attacks?

I think the point is that bitcoin is very fragile and any powerful enough state-actor can bash it to the ground. There are various ways to achieve this, from shorting to propaganda, to attacking (hacking) large exchanges or miner networks and so on. Only time will tell of course, maybe that is already priced in.

The same thing could be/could have been said about the internet as a whole.
Post reply on HN