Bitcoin has brought about more exposure to the use of blockchain and i don't think related activities in this manner can happen with anything that has to deal with notes, maybe sooner we are going to see the banks adopting the use of blockchain for their safety since these bad actors knows how they can manage their way through of a centralized server and hack it, but on bitcoin network, there is high standard of security level and protocols that are unbroken, except they are in concession.

In practice this should not happen if a company or in this case bank has proper IT protocols such as backups. In theory it is possible that even in that case it happens, but the chance is very low I think.

There are so many copies of Bitcoin around the world that this kind of destructive hack is not possible in any case. Hacking individual wallets is possible in some cases, but hacking a completely unknown wallet is not possible. Like you can't just pick a wallet address from the blockchain explorer and try to hack it. You can try to hack known wallets or users using social engineering for example.

That is unfortunate but this is just proof that even banks can be unsafe. The crypto exchanges not the problem here but the infrastructure of their systems that makes it unsafe and easy to breach.
I do feel bad for Iran. I have been seeing news and it’s always like this about them. Their biggest crypto exchange got hacked, their oldest bank got hacked.I’m sure they’re going through a very hard time.

War is never a good thing, no matter how we look at it. There is too much damage that war causes to both the lives of people and those of the citizens of both countries that are affected. I'm not just talking about the advantages of having multiple sources of fund saving; I'm talking about the negative effect the trauma this will cause to those who have money in those banks—all their life savings just gone like that.

In time of war, haven your assets under your own custody is the best option because having it be on the traditional system will never be security wise because, openents will always target the government facilities and were area made vulnerable to be invaded due  complex bureaucracy of legacies system and slow inactive respondant even at when needed most.
Although since this involved hacking, bitcoin might not be so exemptional in a case of war unless it has to do with physical disasters where the banks, stocks and real estate assets have no escape routes. But then,  haven your funds on digital assets gives you an undercover.

It's an extraordinary case, for sure. It's a shame it happened. On the other hand, even without war, we can find so much news regularly about company database leaks and whatnot. Unfortunately, it's impossible to completely stop using centralized services as of now, so the best thing we can do is to minimize and store our wealth in a better place. I also moved some of my fiat savings to crypto and gold in the last few years or so because I don't trust my government that much. I can only hope the situation doesn't get worse and affect my savings significantly.

Banks collapse during times of war, and people lose access to their savings.On top of that, there are many other risks to keeping your money in a bank  including the possibility of a bank run when confidence is lost.A bank run happens when a large number of people suddenly try to withdraw their money from a bank at the same time But the worst part about banks and fiat currencies is something invisible something most people aren’t even aware of.
It’s called monetary inflation.Your money in the bank is quietly melting away like an ice cube under the spring sun.
You might think you have $10,000 and feel safe, believing that number is stable. But in reality, that $10,000 buys less and less every single day  fewer goods, fewer services, less value.
The number stays the same, but your purchasing power is silently stolen over time. This is the hidden tax of fiat money.

That’s why you need Bitcoin  a superior form of money.It can’t be inflated away.

So can the data be stored of Bitcoin or something? I don't see the point in creating this topic, it's not as if Bitcoin works better for data storage in a decentralised way, one bank is down many are still alive.

Fiat can't be killed just because Bitcoin exists, or can we store Fiat in Bitcoin as we do with banks without converting the fiats first into USDT or BTC? the right home for Fiat is Bank.

Blockchain is the solution for data storage that's more secured, this is why pokt, arweave and few others exist, I guess Bitcoin can't do it all, and to all haters out here feeling like Bitcoin is all that matters, Bitcoin can't do everything, it's not that hard to accept.

Because I don't trust anyone, this makes you wonder if it's real or if

1) The government of Iran is doing it themselves to make the population hate Israel more.
2) Inside job at the bank (and exchange) with a convenient target to blame it on
3) Someone else who did not want the spotlight on them.

Probably none of the above just a bit of tinfoil hat paranoia.

-Dave

Agreed, bitcoin cannot and will never be able to replace the role of banks no matter how many shortcomings banks have. Banks play a more important role and provide many essential services for the growth of the economy, things that bitcoin can never do.

I heard about this news and honestly I don't see what it has to do with bitcoin and bitcoin doesn't help in this case either. This is the consequence of war and we should find ways to oppose war, not use this to smear banks, centralized organizations and exaggerate the power of bitcoin.