You forgot the risk of not owning the wallet which is the largest problem with schemes like torque. No matter how "awesome" it may seem, you need to understand that not your keys ... not your crypto .
You forgot the risk of not owning the wallet which is the largest problem with schemes like torque. No matter how "awesome" it may seem, you need to understand that not your keys ... not your crypto .
You are right. This is the same as storing your crypto in Binance, Kraken or other crypto exchanges where you also don't own the private keys.
That is why it is very important to do your own in-depth due diligence to know who are the people behind Torque and whether they have any tractions, competence and trustworthy. We surely do not want to hand our crypto to someone who is a nobody.
i guess you are already blinded by the fact that the risk factor vs the "monetary" returns has already clouded your judgement and there is no point in further pursuing this conversation. good luck in your scheme.
And after 11 years, Bitcoin for example only has 6 million addresses globally.
Obviously the mass market doesn't want to own their own keys cause they have no motivation or have the technical ability to understand and operate
That's why so far only attract the geeks into the crypto space. If we want to attract 100 million users, we need to be user friendly and do it for them - ie. help them protect their keys, make it less technical to them.
Not your keys not your crypto is correct but unfortunately the real world psychology of mass market doesn't care. So it's not wrong to be centralized in a decentralized world, as long the community can verify the transparency of the centralized party.
Never store long term assets on exchanges. Period. That's crypto 101 as well too.
Posted using Dapplr