> if the judge says that the transaction must be reversed, you get it reversed, even if that means delivering cash in briefcases or something like that

So if I pay cash for something, I can get it back if a judge orders the counterparty to do so.

Why is cryptocurrency not the same? Can I not go to a court and get an order, exactly the same?

Of course I may not know the counterparty's identity or they may be in a hostile jurisdiction, but how is that different to cash that has escaped my jurisdiction?

> If the North Koreans take your money, your money is taken

If you wire your money to North Korea, forget about it for a week, and then ask a court to intervene you aren’t getting your funds back.

> In systems with a basis in technology, final means final. If the North Koreans take your money, your money is taken.

This seems obviously not true. If someone in New York steals your money then courts in New York can order them to give it back even if it's Bitcoin. If they don't comply then they get held in contempt until they do or the police seize their computer with the keys on it etc.

If the person who stole it is in North Korea then the courts with jurisdiction would be the ones in North Korea, which may not be to your advantage, but how is it any different from what happens after the money was transferred to a bank in North Korea? Or, for that matter, what happens if someone in North Korea has the stolen money deposited into a US account and then spends it before you get around to reversing the transaction?

The problem isn't what kind of technology you use, it's that someone can transfer stolen assets into a jurisdiction that won't help you get them back. Regardless of what payment system you use, they can get the same effect by using the stolen money to buy gold bullion or similar and have it shipped to them in their jurisdiction, and once it crosses the border they're not giving it back.

And if you do feel confident, you probably shouldn't own crypto either.

Even if you are not hacked, or otherwise lose access to the funds, they are not unlikely to become worthless simply due to the system with the stable coins collapsing.

The liquidity can easily disappear, much more so than with Fiat currency or other assets linked to real economies.

You cannot protect yourself from being scammed in that way, even if you do hold on to your keys.

I’m not saying they are perfect, but on aggregate they are better than hardware wallets. Legally they will be responsible if your money is lost. They are about as close as you can get to the type of legal assurances provided by a bank.