4 ms·

I'm mixing merchant's and end user's perspectives here - no chargebacks, low tx fees, no need to share sensitive data with anyone, easy p2p transactions, no cro

I'm mixing merchant's and end user's perspectives here - no chargebacks, low tx fees, no need to share sensitive data with anyone, easy p2p transactions, no cross border tx fees, few other things.

sanswork 11y ago
No chargebacks - this is a huge negative for users Low tx fees - most users currently don't see tx fees with most payment systems. Bitcoin puts them on the user. Sensitive data - if you consider a credit card number sensitive you are doing it wrong. They are designed to be easy to replace if compromised and even then new technology is making single use numbers common. Easy - which is why sorryforyourloss is a thing. Bitcoin is confusing for most people and difficult to secure for everyone. Cross border - unless you need local currency
- Natanael_L 11y ago
  Multisignature transactions with mutually trusted arbitrators. Payment channels. No need to worry about replacing any numbers, your software does it for you. Hardware wallets, etc... Use your brain, common sense prevents the majority of losses.
  - danbruc 11y ago
    Multisignature transactions with mutually trusted arbitrators. Why then mine in the first place, you just reintroduced trusted parties? Hardware wallets, etc... Use your brain, common sense prevents the majority of losses. If you are careful enough, everything is fine almost by definition. But a good, i.e. user friendly, system is one that lets you make mistakes without hurting you too badly. Therefore asking what to do in order to be fine is kind of the wrong question, one should better ask with what kind of stupidity you can still get away.
    - Natanael_L 11y ago
      Because they only need to be trusted until the transaction is complete. Banks must be trusted in perpetuity. The trust model is much stronger when any breach of trust can lead to instant reaction, moving all funds away in seconds and blacklisting them. That's why friendlier hardware and software wallets are being developed, and protocols to automate most of the tedious work. Look at for example the payments protocol with the ability to verify the identity of the seller (via TLS certificates), transmit your delivery address and get a digitally signed receipt in one click. With support for extensions it can even do things like silently negotiate for who to use as a trusted arbitrator and the time period for settlement (after X time without it being contested, the seller can withdraw the money without need for interaction). Bitcoin can emulate everything banks do, and still have far stronger security guarantees. Banks simply can not do the same without adopting public cryptographic logs like that of Bitcoin.
- ChemicalWarfare 11y ago
  Low tx fees compared to CC and even ACH transactions is a win-win as long as the merchants are passing the savings on to the consumers (which some do). Same with chargebacks. Realistically they've become more of a fraud tool then a protection mechanism. Sensitive data - PAN and CVV data is sensitive to the point where merchants are forced to spend millions to be compliant with the PCI DSS standard so yes this is a huge deal. That same tokenization technology you're referring to is there to reduce the PCI footprint. This tech isn't cheap but is worth it for the merchants and again is a non-issue for BTC.
  - Sanddancer 11y ago
    With chargebacks, you're missing the bigger picture. If someone mugs you and steals your credit card, you call the bank and your stolen card's cancelled, plus the mugger now has a paper trail. Bitcoin, someone mugs you and steals your hardware wallet, well, sucks to be you. Regarding PCI, a lot of the things that are mentioned are things that you should be doing anyways. Walling off your billing network, getting a third party to audit your systems, testing your systems. I've been with a company going through a PCI compliance audit, and I think the only thing that really needed changing was making a few configuration changes to the web server to disable a few legacy defaults. Perhaps I'm just too old for the break early, break often scheme that most teams want to run under, but having certain areas of code need a bit more diligence before being pushed out is not a terrible thing.
    - ChemicalWarfare 11y ago
      Chargebacks - well sure they can be used as intended (although in your particular scenario the mugger would have to be able to get into the wallet), the reality however is that chargebacks are a source of fraud which is costly for the merchants to deal with and as a result the cost is passed on to the consumer. With bitcoin, just like with cash, the merchant knows that they are safe from the chargeback scenario and is in position to offer discounts to consumers paying with bitcoin. My local gas station is charging less if you pay with cash vs a credit card for example. PCI data is "toxic". I spent about 10 years working for a company whose primary business was working with the merchants to help them reduce their PCI footprint - they were paying us millions of dollars to do that. Guess who was paying for it at the end of the day? I'm not saying accepting bitcoin as a method of payment means throwing caution to the wind. I'm also not saying PCI is unreasonable - but again things like PCI are there because the way Credit Card processing works makes Credit Card data extremely sensitive and prone to abuse.

I'm mixing merchant's and end user's perspectives here - no chargebacks, low tx fees, no need to share sensitive data with anyone, easy p2p transactions, no cross border tx fees, few other things.

sanswork 11y ago

No chargebacks - this is a huge negative for users Low tx fees - most users currently don't see tx fees with most payment systems. Bitcoin puts them on the user. Sensitive data - if you consider a credit card number sensitive you are doing it wrong. They are designed to be easy to replace if compromised and even then new technology is making single use numbers common. Easy - which is why sorryforyourloss is a thing. Bitcoin is confusing for most people and difficult to secure for everyone. Cross border - unless you need local currency

Natanael_L 11y ago
Multisignature transactions with mutually trusted arbitrators. Payment channels. No need to worry about replacing any numbers, your software does it for you. Hardware wallets, etc... Use your brain, common sense prevents the majority of losses.
- danbruc 11y ago
  Multisignature transactions with mutually trusted arbitrators. Why then mine in the first place, you just reintroduced trusted parties? Hardware wallets, etc... Use your brain, common sense prevents the majority of losses. If you are careful enough, everything is fine almost by definition. But a good, i.e. user friendly, system is one that lets you make mistakes without hurting you too badly. Therefore asking what to do in order to be fine is kind of the wrong question, one should better ask with what kind of stupidity you can still get away.
  - Natanael_L 11y ago
    Because they only need to be trusted until the transaction is complete. Banks must be trusted in perpetuity. The trust model is much stronger when any breach of trust can lead to instant reaction, moving all funds away in seconds and blacklisting them. That's why friendlier hardware and software wallets are being developed, and protocols to automate most of the tedious work. Look at for example the payments protocol with the ability to verify the identity of the seller (via TLS certificates), transmit your delivery address and get a digitally signed receipt in one click. With support for extensions it can even do things like silently negotiate for who to use as a trusted arbitrator and the time period for settlement (after X time without it being contested, the seller can withdraw the money without need for interaction). Bitcoin can emulate everything banks do, and still have far stronger security guarantees. Banks simply can not do the same without adopting public cryptographic logs like that of Bitcoin.
ChemicalWarfare 11y ago
Low tx fees compared to CC and even ACH transactions is a win-win as long as the merchants are passing the savings on to the consumers (which some do). Same with chargebacks. Realistically they've become more of a fraud tool then a protection mechanism. Sensitive data - PAN and CVV data is sensitive to the point where merchants are forced to spend millions to be compliant with the PCI DSS standard so yes this is a huge deal. That same tokenization technology you're referring to is there to reduce the PCI footprint. This tech isn't cheap but is worth it for the merchants and again is a non-issue for BTC.
- Sanddancer 11y ago
  With chargebacks, you're missing the bigger picture. If someone mugs you and steals your credit card, you call the bank and your stolen card's cancelled, plus the mugger now has a paper trail. Bitcoin, someone mugs you and steals your hardware wallet, well, sucks to be you. Regarding PCI, a lot of the things that are mentioned are things that you should be doing anyways. Walling off your billing network, getting a third party to audit your systems, testing your systems. I've been with a company going through a PCI compliance audit, and I think the only thing that really needed changing was making a few configuration changes to the web server to disable a few legacy defaults. Perhaps I'm just too old for the break early, break often scheme that most teams want to run under, but having certain areas of code need a bit more diligence before being pushed out is not a terrible thing.
  - ChemicalWarfare 11y ago
    Chargebacks - well sure they can be used as intended (although in your particular scenario the mugger would have to be able to get into the wallet), the reality however is that chargebacks are a source of fraud which is costly for the merchants to deal with and as a result the cost is passed on to the consumer. With bitcoin, just like with cash, the merchant knows that they are safe from the chargeback scenario and is in position to offer discounts to consumers paying with bitcoin. My local gas station is charging less if you pay with cash vs a credit card for example. PCI data is "toxic". I spent about 10 years working for a company whose primary business was working with the merchants to help them reduce their PCI footprint - they were paying us millions of dollars to do that. Guess who was paying for it at the end of the day? I'm not saying accepting bitcoin as a method of payment means throwing caution to the wind. I'm also not saying PCI is unreasonable - but again things like PCI are there because the way Credit Card processing works makes Credit Card data extremely sensitive and prone to abuse.