It seems like quite a stretch to think the public feels significantly greater affinity to wealthy people who hold stocks, real-estate, and other traditional assets compared to cryptocurrency speculators. It seems like a much more parsimonious explanation that the attacks are more prevalent in the less secure medium since attackers are more likely to succeed.
“Be your own bank” makes a cool bumper sticker but it’s like saying “be your own pilot” or “do your own surgery” in terms of complexity and risk. There’s a reason why these things traditionally involve teams of people with various safety precautions baked in to make attacks riskier.
Comments
Because the public doesn’t relate to these victims.
It seems like quite a stretch to think the public feels significantly greater affinity to wealthy people who hold stocks, real-estate, and other traditional assets compared to cryptocurrency speculators. It seems like a much more parsimonious explanation that the attacks are more prevalent in the less secure medium since attackers are more likely to succeed.
“Be your own bank” makes a cool bumper sticker but it’s like saying “be your own pilot” or “do your own surgery” in terms of complexity and risk. There’s a reason why these things traditionally involve teams of people with various safety precautions baked in to make attacks riskier.
…Are we doing a “persecuted crypto-holders” thing now?
In all seriousness I think most people relate to kidnapping and mutilation and not wanting it to happen to them.
I mean it’s not like the traditionally rich receive much love.