Introduction
The three preceding papers in this series have laid out, in turn, what cryptocurrency is and what it promises, why the field attracts unusual concentrations of fraud, and what specific forms that fraud takes. A reader who has followed the series this far has all the information needed to make an informed decision about whether to participate at all, and has the recognition tools needed to avoid most of the schemes circulating in the field.
This final paper is for the reader who has weighed the promise and the peril and concluded that some measured involvement is right for him. It is a practical handbook. It does not assume that participation is wise, and it begins by inviting the reader to reconsider the question. It then walks through the operational details — position sizing, choosing where to transact, custody, due diligence, security, taxes, recovery posture, and the often-overlooked discipline of knowing when to step away — that distinguish prudent participation from reckless involvement.
A word on tone before beginning. The voice that follows is the voice of a calm older friend who has watched a great many people make a great many mistakes in this field and would like to spare the reader from repeating them. The recommendations are not infallible, and circumstances vary. But the basic shape of prudent participation is reasonably stable across cases, and a reader who follows it will avoid most of the disasters that befall those who do not.
The Threshold Question First
Before any operational question, the prior question: should you participate at all?
The honest answer is that for many people, the right number is zero. There is no moral or financial obligation to hold cryptocurrency. A person who declines to participate is not being left behind by history; he is exercising the same prudence that has served careful savers across centuries. The success stories that circulate in the field are real but unrepresentative, and the losses that do not circulate are far more common than the gains that do.
Several categories of people should be especially slow to enter, and in most cases should not enter at all. A person who is in debt — particularly consumer debt with high interest rates — has a guaranteed return available by paying down that debt, of a magnitude that no speculative investment can reliably match. A person whose income does not yet cover his expenses, or whose emergency reserves are inadequate, has more pressing uses for any spare funds. A person who would be materially harmed by losing the amount under consideration should not put that amount at risk, since loss is among the more likely outcomes in this field.
Two categories deserve particular mention. A person who is being pressured by family, friends, or members of his community to “get in” before some perceived opportunity passes is being recruited rather than informed, and should treat the pressure itself as a reason for caution rather than as evidence of the opportunity. A person whose interest in cryptocurrency has been kindled by a specific individual — a romantic interest, an online acquaintance, a confident friend with impressive recent gains — should examine that influence honestly before acting on it.
The principle underlying all of these considerations is the old one: the borrower is servant to the lender, and the man who is hasty to be rich shall not be innocent. Speculation conducted from a position of financial vulnerability is not investment but gambling, and gambling with money one cannot afford to lose is, regardless of the instrument, a form of self-harm.
If the threshold question is answered in the affirmative, the next question is how much.
Position Sizing
The single most important operational decision in cryptocurrency participation is not which assets to buy, or when, or through what platform, but how much of one’s total wealth to expose to the field at all. Most of the people who have been seriously harmed by this market have been harmed not because they made bad selections within their cryptocurrency allocation, but because their cryptocurrency allocation was too large relative to their overall financial picture.
The traditional rule of thumb for highly speculative assets is that one should not commit more than one can afford to lose without changing one’s life. This rule is correct as far as it goes but is often interpreted too generously. A person who tells himself he can “afford to lose” ten percent of his net worth is usually telling himself a story; the actual experience of losing ten percent of one’s net worth is uncomfortable in ways one tends to underestimate in advance.
A more conservative formulation: commit only an amount that, if it went to zero tomorrow and you discovered the loss in the morning, would prompt mild regret rather than meaningful distress. The test is emotional as well as financial, because the emotional response to loss is what produces the panic decisions that turn moderate losses into severe ones. A position sized correctly produces no panic when it declines; a position sized incorrectly produces panic, and the panic produces the worst outcomes.
For most people without specialized expertise or unusual risk tolerance, this works out to a percentage of total investable assets in the low single digits. A figure of one to five percent is reasonable for most participants who want exposure to the asset class. Higher figures are appropriate only for those whose overall financial position is robust enough to absorb a total loss without consequence, or for those whose work in the field gives them an information advantage that ordinary participants do not have.
A note on what the position is for. Cryptocurrency, in a prudent portfolio, is a small allocation to an uncorrelated and speculative asset, not a path to wealth. The expectation should be that the position either produces a modest gain over a long period, declines to a small fraction of its value, or goes to zero entirely. Each of these outcomes should be financially survivable. None of them should be the basis for plans about one’s life.
Choosing Where to Transact
If you have decided how much to commit, the next question is where to do business. The choice of platform is one of the most consequential decisions in the field, because a platform’s failure or fraud can result in total loss regardless of how the underlying assets perform.
The criteria for evaluating an exchange or custodian, in rough order of importance:
Regulatory standing. The platform should be licensed and supervised by financial regulators in the jurisdictions where it operates, including the jurisdiction where you reside. The regulatory framework is imperfect, but it provides a baseline of disclosure, reserve requirements, and recourse that unregulated platforms do not. Platforms that advertise their lack of regulatory entanglements are advertising a feature you do not want.
Operating history. A platform that has operated for many years without major incidents has demonstrated, at minimum, the absence of an immediate exit-scam plan. This is a low bar but a real one. New platforms, even well-funded ones with credible-sounding teams, should be approached with caution until they have established a track record.
Reserve attestations or audits. Several major exchanges now publish periodic attestations from independent accounting firms confirming that customer balances are backed by actual assets in the platform’s custody. These attestations are not as strong as full audits, but they are stronger than nothing. A platform that does not publish any such evidence is asking you to take its word on a question for which the relevant evidence is straightforward to provide.
Insurance. Some platforms carry insurance against certain types of loss — typically theft from the platform’s own systems, not loss caused by user error or by user-authorized fraudulent transactions. Insurance coverage is worth understanding in detail, but its presence is generally a sign of greater institutional seriousness.
Jurisdiction. A platform incorporated in a jurisdiction with strong financial supervision and reliable courts is preferable to one incorporated in a jurisdiction known primarily for its accommodation of regulatory arbitrage. The convenience of using an “offshore” platform is rarely worth the loss of recourse when something goes wrong.
A separate principle, often summarized as “not your keys, not your coins,” underlies all of these considerations. Funds held by an exchange on your behalf are functionally a promise by that exchange to deliver the funds when you ask for them. The promise is only as good as the exchange’s solvency and honesty. For any holding you intend to keep for a meaningful period — anything beyond active trading — the prudent practice is to move the funds into custody you control yourself. The next section addresses what that means in practice.
Custody Basics
Self-custody of cryptocurrency means holding the private keys to your funds directly, rather than having a third party hold them on your behalf. It is one of the most distinctive features of the technology and one of its most unforgiving disciplines.
The basic vocabulary:
A wallet is a piece of software or hardware that manages your private keys and allows you to authorize transactions. The wallet does not “contain” your cryptocurrency in any literal sense; the cryptocurrency exists on the network. What the wallet contains is the key that proves you have the right to move it.
A hot wallet is a wallet running on a device that is connected to the internet — typically a phone or computer. Hot wallets are convenient for frequent use but more exposed to attack.
A cold wallet is a wallet whose private keys have never touched an internet-connected device. The most common form is a hardware wallet — a small dedicated device that generates and stores keys offline and signs transactions internally, so that the keys themselves never leave the device.
A seed phrase (sometimes called a recovery phrase) is a sequence of words, typically twelve or twenty-four, from which all of the wallet’s private keys can be derived. Anyone who has the seed phrase has full and permanent control of the wallet and everything in it.
The discipline of self-custody comes down to a small set of inviolable practices.
For any holding above a trivial amount, use a hardware wallet from a reputable manufacturer. The hardware-wallet market has consolidated around a handful of established firms; using one of them is far safer than using an obscure alternative, regardless of any features the obscure alternative advertises.
When the hardware wallet is initialized, it will generate a seed phrase and display it to you. Write the seed phrase down on paper, by hand, and store the paper somewhere safe. Do not photograph the seed phrase. Do not type it into any computer. Do not save it in any cloud service, password manager, email draft, or note-taking application. The reason for this absolute prohibition is that any digital copy of the seed phrase is a target for theft, and any theft of the seed phrase is the end of your holdings. The handful of seconds you save by typing the words into a password manager is not worth the lifetime risk it creates.
Consider storing a second copy of the seed phrase in a separate physical location, in case the first is lost to fire or flood. Some users engrave seed phrases on small steel plates for fire resistance; this is a reasonable practice for substantial holdings. Some users split the seed phrase across multiple locations using a formal technique called Shamir’s Secret Sharing; this is for advanced users and adds complexity that introduces its own risks.
Never share your seed phrase with anyone, for any reason. There is no scenario in which a legitimate party needs your seed phrase. Customer support does not need it. Wallet recovery does not require providing it to a third party. Tax authorities do not need it. The only legitimate use of the seed phrase is to restore your own wallet on a new device when the original is lost or damaged, and even then the words are typed into the wallet software, not provided to any service.
A separate discipline: when you receive a new hardware wallet, initialize it yourself. Do not use a device that arrives pre-initialized with a seed phrase, regardless of how plausible the explanation. Several documented cases have involved attackers selling tampered devices through unofficial channels.
A Due-Diligence Framework
For any particular cryptocurrency project that you are considering — whether a major established asset or a newer offering — a basic framework of questions will eliminate most of the unsound ones quickly.
Who built it? The team behind a project should be identifiable, with credentials and history that can be confirmed through independent sources. Anonymous teams are not automatically fraudulent — Bitcoin’s creator remains anonymous to this day — but anonymity raises the burden of evidence elsewhere. For a smaller or newer project, an anonymous team is a substantial warning sign.
Where does the money come from? Every economic activity has to produce value from somewhere. A project that promises returns must have a credible answer to the question of where those returns are generated. “Trading,” “arbitrage,” “DeFi yields,” and similar one-word answers are not credible answers; they are placeholders that should prompt further questions. The further questions should produce specific descriptions of specific activities that can, in principle, be verified.
Who holds the supply? The distribution of a token’s supply across holders tells you a great deal about the project’s risk profile. If a small number of addresses hold most of the supply, those holders can move the price substantially by selling, and have strong incentives to do so once retail buyers have arrived. Blockchain explorers allow anyone to examine these distributions for any major token; the examination is worth the few minutes it takes.
What does the token actually do? Many tokens have no economic function beyond being bought and sold. This is not necessarily disqualifying — gold has no economic function beyond being bought and sold either, and has retained value for several thousand years — but it does mean that the token’s price depends entirely on the willingness of future buyers to pay more for it than current buyers paid. Tokens that claim economic functions should be examined carefully to confirm that those functions actually exist and produce real value.
Can the answers be verified independently? A project that requires you to take the founders’ word for its claims is asking for trust that is, in this field, repeatedly abused. A project whose claims can be confirmed through independent sources — court filings, blockchain data, audited financial statements, working products with actual users — has cleared a meaningful bar that most fraudulent projects cannot.
A useful complement to these questions is the test of explanation. If you cannot explain to a thoughtful friend, in clear language, what a project does, how it produces value, and what could go wrong with it, you do not understand it well enough to invest in it. The technical complexity of the field is sometimes used as cover for the absence of a coherent underlying idea; insisting on a clear explanation is one of the most effective defenses available.
Operational Security
Beyond the discipline of seed-phrase storage, prudent participation requires a set of operational practices that protect the accounts and devices through which you interact with the field.
Unique passwords for every account. Use a reputable password manager to generate and store unique, long passwords for every cryptocurrency-related account. Password reuse is the single most common cause of account compromise across the internet, and the consequences are more severe in cryptocurrency than in most other contexts because there is no chargeback mechanism.
Hardware-based two-factor authentication. For any account holding meaningful value, use a physical security key (such as a YubiKey) as the second factor, rather than text messages or authenticator applications. Text-message-based authentication is vulnerable to SIM-swap attacks; authenticator applications are better but still software-based and can be compromised if the underlying device is. Hardware keys are not invulnerable but are far harder to compromise remotely.
Dedicated browser profile or device. Consider conducting cryptocurrency-related activity through a separate browser profile, or even a separate device, that is used for nothing else. This limits the exposure of your cryptocurrency activity to compromises elsewhere on your primary system. For substantial holdings, a dedicated computer that is used only for managing the holdings is reasonable, not paranoid.
Email hygiene. The email address associated with your cryptocurrency accounts is itself a target. Use a dedicated email address for these accounts, not your primary personal address. Secure that email address with the same hardware-based two-factor authentication you use for the cryptocurrency accounts themselves. If the email account is compromised, every account that uses it for password recovery is potentially compromised as well.
Beware of installed software. Browser extensions, wallet plugins, and desktop applications related to cryptocurrency are vectors that have been used in many documented thefts. Install only software from official sources, confirmed through multiple independent channels. Remove any cryptocurrency-related software you are not actively using.
These practices are not optional refinements; they are the baseline. A user who skips them is relying on luck, and luck in this field tends to expire eventually.
Tax and Recordkeeping
Cryptocurrency transactions are generally taxable events in most jurisdictions, including in ways that surprise participants who have not thought about it.
In the United States, the Internal Revenue Service treats cryptocurrency as property rather than currency for tax purposes. This means that every disposition of cryptocurrency — including selling for dollars, trading one cryptocurrency for another, and using cryptocurrency to purchase goods or services — is a taxable event that may produce a capital gain or loss. The gain or loss is calculated as the difference between the disposition price and the cost basis (what you paid for the asset originally).
Several implications follow that participants frequently miss. Trading one cryptocurrency for another is taxable in the same way as selling for dollars; the absence of any dollars in the transaction does not exempt it. Receiving cryptocurrency as payment for goods, services, or work is ordinary income at the fair market value on the date received. Receiving cryptocurrency through certain network mechanisms — staking rewards, airdrops, hard forks — is generally also taxable income at the time of receipt, although the specific treatment of some of these has been the subject of evolving guidance.
The practical implication is that recordkeeping needs to begin on the first transaction. For each acquisition, record the date, the asset, the quantity, the cost in your home currency, and the source. For each disposition, record the date, the asset, the quantity, the proceeds in your home currency, and the destination. Several commercial services can help reconstruct records from exchange and wallet data, but reconstruction is invariably harder and less reliable than recording the data as you go.
A separate consideration: the tax treatment of cryptocurrency continues to evolve, and rules vary substantially across jurisdictions. For any participant with holdings above a trivial amount, consulting a tax professional familiar with cryptocurrency is a sound investment. The cost is modest relative to the cost of mistakes.
Recovery Posture
Despite every precaution, things sometimes go wrong. A device is lost. An account is compromised. A transaction is sent to the wrong address. The question is what to do when something goes wrong, and the candid answer is that recovery is harder in cryptocurrency than in most other financial contexts.
If you suspect that an account has been compromised — unexpected emails about logins, transactions you did not authorize, password reset notifications you did not request — act immediately. Move any remaining funds to a wallet you control, change passwords on all related accounts, and contact the platform’s official support through its official website. Document everything: timestamps, transaction hashes, screenshots, communications.
If funds have been stolen, report the theft to the appropriate authorities. In the United States, this means the Internet Crime Complaint Center operated by the FBI, the Federal Trade Commission, and the platform involved. State financial regulators also accept these reports. Recovery is uncommon, but reports help build the broader patterns that occasionally lead to enforcement actions, and aggregated data informs the warnings that protect future victims.
If you have been the victim of an investment fraud or a relationship-based scheme such as the kind described in the previous paper, additional resources exist. Victim-support organizations can help with the practical and emotional aftermath, and certain civil-recovery firms specialize in tracing stolen funds through blockchain analysis. Approach the latter with caution: a meaningful number of “recovery services” that contact victims of theft are themselves fraudulent, offering to recover the stolen funds for an additional fee that itself disappears. Legitimate recovery work is expensive, slow, and rarely fruitful in absolute terms.
The hardest part of the recovery posture, and the one that prevents the largest secondary losses, is acceptance. Money stolen from a cryptocurrency wallet is, in the great majority of cases, gone permanently. Accepting this quickly prevents the additional losses that come from desperate attempts to recover what cannot be recovered. The Scriptures observe that wealth gotten by vanity shall be diminished, and the corresponding wisdom for wealth lost to fraud is that the dignity of the victim is preserved by mourning the loss honestly rather than by chasing it further into the trap.
Knowing When to Step Away
The final discipline, and the one most often neglected, is the discipline of recognizing when participation has stopped serving you and starting walking away.
The warning signs are usually internal rather than external. You find yourself checking prices more often than you intended. The state of your holdings affects your mood in ways that seem disproportionate to the amounts involved. You think about cryptocurrency at times when you would rather be thinking about other things. You make decisions about your participation in ways that you would not endorse if you stopped to examine them.
These are signs that the position has grown larger than it should be, or that the involvement has crossed from financial activity into something closer to compulsion. Both are good reasons to reduce exposure substantially, regardless of what the price chart is doing. A holding that does not interfere with your peace is a tolerable holding; one that does is not, no matter how well it may be performing in any given week.
A related warning sign concerns the people around you. If your involvement in cryptocurrency is creating tension in your marriage, distance from your family, or conflict with people whose judgment you respect, the position itself may not be the problem, but the position is interacting with something that is. Honest conversation with those people, before further action, is far more valuable than any analysis of the market.
The deepest version of this warning sign is spiritual. If the love of money has begun to crowd out other loves, if anxiety about gains and losses has displaced the peace that should belong to a believer, if cryptocurrency activity has begun to compete with prayer, family, work, or worship, the right response is not to fine-tune the position but to step back from it. The Apostle Paul warned Timothy that they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. The warning is general, but it applies with particular force to a market designed to exploit exactly these vulnerabilities.
The man who walks away from a position because it is harming his soul has not lost; he has won the only victory that matters. The man who clings to a position while it harms his soul has not gained, regardless of what the price chart shows.
Conclusion
The four papers in this series have attempted, together, to give an honest account of cryptocurrency: where it came from and what it promises, why it attracts so much fraud, what specific forms that fraud takes, and how a person who chooses to participate can do so with reasonable care.
The picture that emerges is neither the triumphant one painted by the field’s promoters nor the dismissive one favored by its critics. Cryptocurrency is a genuine technological innovation that addresses real problems imperfectly, embedded in a market that has been hospitable to unusual concentrations of fraud, surrounded by a culture that frequently works against the interests of the ordinary participant. Prudent involvement is possible, but it requires discipline, modest expectations, and the willingness to walk away when participation stops being prudent.
The reader who has followed this series to the end has done more diligence than the great majority of people who enter the field. That diligence will not guarantee good outcomes — nothing can — but it shifts the odds significantly. May the reader who chooses to participate do so wisely, and may the reader who chooses not to participate hold his decision with confidence rather than regret. Both choices, made thoughtfully, are honorable.
A final thought, in keeping with the perspective that has shaped this series throughout. Whatever decisions one makes about cryptocurrency, the principles that should govern those decisions are not new. The wisdom of the Proverbs about diligence and the warnings of the Epistles about the love of money were given to people who had never imagined a distributed ledger, but they speak to the situation of someone considering one with full and unchanged force. The instruments change; the human heart does not. A person who attends to the latter while reasoning carefully about the former will find his way through this field, as through any other, with the help of the same Lord who has guided his people through every previous one.
Notes
- The recommendation against committing more than a small single-digit percentage of investable assets is conservative relative to some advice in the field but consistent with how speculative and highly volatile assets are generally treated in portfolio theory. Readers whose circumstances differ — for example, those whose total assets are small enough that single-digit percentages would be trivial in absolute terms, or those with specialized expertise — may reasonably arrive at different figures. The principle behind the recommendation, that the position should be financially and emotionally survivable in the event of total loss, is the part that travels.
- The injunction against storing seed phrases in cloud services, password managers, or any digital form is sometimes resisted by readers who find the discipline inconvenient. The inconvenience is real, but the alternative is not “slightly elevated risk” but “the most common single point of failure that leads to total loss of holdings.” Several major thefts of substantial value have been traced directly to seed phrases stored in cloud-synced notes applications. The convenience and the catastrophe are linked.
- The point about distinguishing legitimate from fraudulent “recovery services” deserves emphasis. Victims of cryptocurrency theft are themselves targets for a secondary class of fraud in which a “recovery service” claims to be able to trace and retrieve stolen funds for a fee. A high percentage of these services are themselves fraudulent. Genuine blockchain-analysis work exists and is performed by reputable firms, but those firms generally work with law-enforcement agencies and large institutions rather than soliciting individual victims through unsolicited contact. An offer of recovery services that arrives through email, social media, or a forum post in the aftermath of a theft should be treated as itself almost certainly fraudulent.
- The remarks on tax treatment focus on United States rules because they are the framework most directly familiar to the largest portion of likely readers. Readers in other jurisdictions should not assume that the treatment is identical in their country; many jurisdictions have substantially different rules, some more favorable and some less so. The general point that recordkeeping must begin on the first transaction applies in essentially all jurisdictions.
- The closing discussion of knowing when to step away may strike some readers as out of place in a paper otherwise concerned with operational mechanics. It is included because the most consistent finding in the literature on financial harms — across cryptocurrency, gambling, day-trading, and other speculative pursuits — is that the largest losses are concentrated in participants for whom the activity has crossed from financial to compulsive. No operational discipline can substitute for the self-awareness to recognize that crossing when it happens. The signs described in that section are drawn from clinical literature on problem gambling and behavioral addiction, adapted to the cryptocurrency context.
- The scriptural references throughout the paper — to the borrower being servant to the lender (Proverbs 22:7), to the hasty being not innocent (Proverbs 28:20), to wealth gotten by vanity (Proverbs 13:11), and to the love of money (1 Timothy 6:9–10) — are not ornamental. The wisdom literature of the Scriptures contains some of the most concentrated practical instruction on money ever written, and its applicability to speculative markets is direct. A reader who finds these references useful may also find profit in a sustained reading of Proverbs alongside any further engagement with the field.
- The recommendation to consult a tax professional, made briefly in the paper, is worth amplifying. The tax rules surrounding cryptocurrency are unsettled in several respects, and even professionals must work harder than usual to stay current. A modest professional fee paid annually is among the highest-value expenditures available to a participant with non-trivial holdings, both for the direct return in tax efficiency and for the considerable reduction in anxiety that comes from knowing that one’s records are in order.
References
Antonopoulos, A. M. (2017). Mastering Bitcoin: Programming the open blockchain (2nd ed.). O’Reilly Media.
Antonopoulos, A. M. (2023). Mastering the Lightning Network. O’Reilly Media.
Bartos, J. (2024). Hardware wallet security: A comparative analysis of supply-chain and physical attack vectors. Journal of Cryptocurrency Research and Practice, 9(2), 145–172.
Cong, L. W., Landsman, W., Maydew, E., & Rabetti, D. (2023). Tax-loss harvesting with cryptocurrencies. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 76(2–3), Article 101607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2023.101607
Conlon, T., Corbet, S., & McGee, R. J. (2020). Are cryptocurrencies a safe haven for equity markets? An international perspective from the COVID-19 pandemic. Research in International Business and Finance, 54, Article 101248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2020.101248
Delgado-Segura, S., Pérez-Solà, C., Navarro-Arribas, G., & Herrera-Joancomartí, J. (2019). Analysis of the Bitcoin UTXO set. In A. Zohar et al. (Eds.), Financial cryptography and data security (pp. 78–91). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-58820-8_6
Eisenbach, T. M., Kovner, A., & Lee, M. J. (2022). Cyber risk and the U.S. financial system: A pre-mortem analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 145(3), 802–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.10.007
Federal Trade Commission. (2024). Consumer Sentinel Network data book 2023. Federal Trade Commission. https://www.ftc.gov/reports
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. (2023). Guidance on virtual currencies. U.S. Department of the Treasury. https://www.fincen.gov/
Internal Revenue Service. (2024). Frequently asked questions on virtual currency transactions. https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/frequently-asked-questions-on-virtual-currency-transactions
International Organization of Securities Commissions. (2023). Policy recommendations for crypto and digital asset markets: Final report. IOSCO. https://www.iosco.org/
Liebau, D., & Schueffel, P. (2019). Cryptocurrencies and ICOs: Are they scams? An empirical study. Journal of the British Blockchain Association, 2(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.31585/jbba-2-1-(5)2019
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2022). Blockchain technology overview (NISTIR 8202). U.S. Department of Commerce. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8202
North American Securities Administrators Association. (2023). Informed investor advisory: Cryptocurrencies. NASAA. https://www.nasaa.org/
Productivity Commission. (2022). Problem gambling and consumer harms: A review of the evidence. Australian Government. https://www.pc.gov.au/
Schär, F. (2021). Decentralized finance: On blockchain- and smart contract-based financial markets. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 103(2), 153–174. https://doi.org/10.20955/r.103.153-74
Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy. (2023). Investor bulletin: Digital asset and “crypto” investment scams. https://www.sec.gov/investor
Sklaroff, J. M. (2017). Smart contracts and the cost of inflexibility. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 166(1), 263–303.
Williams, R. J., West, B. L., & Simpson, R. I. (2012). Prevention of problem gambling: A comprehensive review of the evidence and identified best practices. Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre. https://www.gamblingresearch.org/
Yermack, D. (2019). Blockchain technology’s potential in the financial system. In Proceedings of the 2019 Financial Market’s Quality Conference. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3309602
