Voted for
- Cryptocurrency hacking
Likely―as banks themselves are more likely to be attacked online than in the flesh, and that a physical robbery has several constraints including for example, how much the perpetrator can carry and how much physical cash the branch has on hand.
According to this:
On underground web forums, anyone can freely purchase software to conduct an attack (with detailed "how to" instructions), as well as make the acquaintance of unscrupulous bank employees and money launderers. If properly prepared, an attacker with minimal technical knowledge can steal millions of dollars by penetrating a bank network, although it might seem that such networks should be protected quite well.
You voted for cryptocurrency hacking and then argued for bank robberies. The cybercrime you described is bank theft, not cryptocurrency hacking.
Cryptocurrency hacking is likely more prevalent than bank robbery in light of bank theft by hacking being more prevalent than bank robbery.
Oh, i see. You're distinguishing between bank theft and bank robbery. It makes the original question sort of unusual doesn't it? It would be a completely irrelevant comparison. It's like asking whether more money is earned from picking up dropped coins versus earning regular paychecks.
It's a distinction that already exists in relevant fields such as law enforcement and actuarial risk assessment. I happened to be aware of it, and so I didn't even really think about the terms in a colloquial sense. No, I don't think it make the comparison pointless. But that's up to the asker, I suppose, or whoever chooses to interpret the poll.
I see your point, and in light of the actual definitions I agree with you that cryptohacking would outpace bank robberies, but bank larceny would dwarf them both.
Original question was badly constructed, I think, since a comparison between cryptohacking and regular bank hacking is much more meaningful.