568 sats \ 1 reply \ @jimmysong 10 Sep \ on: "We don't need scaling because almost no one wants self-custody" bitcoin
I've said this in other places, but there's lots of room between impersonal company holding your keys and only holding coins in a cold hardware wallet.
I think that's where the sweet spot is, because instagibbs is more or less correct. People don't trust themselves with self-custody. But that doesn't mean they have to trust Coinbase. They can, for example, trust a techy relative. I know I'm that guy for my extended family because none of them are comfortable with self-custody.
What we need to do is acknowledge this reality and take advantage of it to make more scalable solutions. Something like Fedi for families or communities where there are existing trust relationships would do really well, especially if there was some strict multisig controls over the Bitcoin.
However taking responsibility of your own funds is very different than taking responsibility for someone else's. The stakes are much higher, especially if the amounts are non-trivial.
In other words I trust myself with my own self-custody, but I wouldn't ever want to be in a position where I can lose someone else's savings (people close to me that trust my judgement, to make things worse). Maybe the group of potential Uncle Jims is much smaller than the group of people who know how to self custody.
reply