[samsin]

The same argument could be made for physical cash

[hn_throwaway_99]

Physical cash is much more difficult to:

1. Handle in large quantities. The ransom paid here was $1 million. With crypto, transferring that much is a few keystrokes. With cash, it's basically a large bag of cash that needs to be moved around.

2. Hold for ransom. Given point #1, kidnappers (of people and data) know that it's much easier to demand payment of large amounts in crypto than cash. If you kidnap a rich person in the crypto world, kidnappers know it's easy for him to sign over a very large amount of bitcoin quickly, which looks to be what happened here. Even for a very wealthy person, it's not logistically easy to get a million dollars in cash, never mind hand it over in a way that isn't a huge risk for the kidnappers.

3. Launder. Crypto tumblers are still a thing despite US government crackdown. Laundering cash with recorded serial numbers is much harder.

I'm not denying that crypto may have some legitimate uses, but it's basically a dream come true for criminals.

[beloch]

I think this gets it right.

If criminals know somebody holds a significant amount of crypto, such as the CEO of a crypto company, they don't need to have them contact somebody else to withdraw and deliver a large amount of physical cash. They don't need to convince anyone they're serious. If the victim has their phone with them or can remember a password, then the criminals just have to coerce the victim into making a transfer.

Arguably, this isn't even really kidnapping in the traditional sense. It's high-tech mugging.

Owning a significant amount of crypto-currency and carrying the ability to make a transfer around in your head or pocket is basically the same as carrying a suitcase full of cash.

[cbsmith]

It's logistically pretty easy these days for a wealthy person without an ounce of crypto to buy crypto and transfer it to someone else.

On the other hand, if your business was a scam and you needed to explain where $1 million went to...

[lazzlazzlazz]

Crypto does have significant advantages (handling in large quantities and rapid payment, as you described) but it is meaningfully harder to launder since blockchains are public and forensics is straightforward. The DoJ and crypto forensics firms has posted about this at length.

You're just explaining why crypto is becoming increasingly popular for businesses in general: the tech works.

[Paradigma11]

If you are wealthy, why not put your hardware ledger(s) in bank vaults that can only be accessed with id?

It's not expensive.

[sealeck]

Not that many people keep a big stack of physical cash under their pillow, and organisations that do keep cash are well-known robbery targets (e.g. banks, mints).

It's substantially harder to kidnap someone and force them to sell their business and then give the cash to you than it is to make them transfer their crypto. And realistically most people's wealth will be in a company or some shares, etc.

[trillic]

This is why we don’t do Bearer Bonds anymore.

Die Hard inspired too many?

[notatoad]

yes, if you are holding millions or more in physical cash on your person, you're putting yourself at a significant safety risk.

that's why people don't do that very often, or if they do they walk around with armed guards until they aren't holding that cash anymore.

[potato3732842]

"but you see it's different because those thiefs have badges"

[theamk]

Well, yeah. Let's say someone has $100K in cash, in their home. What is their profession?

All of the answers I can think of are criminal.

[llm_trw]

Computer programmer. You just need to have been in a country that's had a civil war to realise how useful a pile of cash is for getting out quickly.

[Loughla]

I buy, restore, and sell woodworking and metalworking tools and vehicles. If I did it full time I could have that much on hand. I think I have like 25k in case a really good deal pops up, and it's a very side gig.

[_DeadFred_]

Had a Ukrainian girlfriend that had $25,000 in her go bag, just in case. She was not even close to wealthy and that was a considerable fraction of her yearly salary. She was the complete opposite of a criminal.