4 ms·

Your card being stolen has nothing to do with chargebacks. Your mobile could be stolen with your cryptowallet inside and you could do a remote wipe of the devi

Your card being stolen has nothing to do with chargebacks. Your mobile could be stolen with your cryptowallet inside and you could do a remote wipe of the device. You can also use multi-signature protections for large transactions, etc.

Nursie 8y ago
> Your mobile could be stolen with your cryptowallet inside and you could do a remote wipe of the device So long as the cryptocurrency hasn't gone already. If it has.. well whoops, bye bye money.
- decentralised 8y ago
  Of course. Likewise, if you hold some bank notes in your wallet next to your credit card, an attack will deprive you or your money. The bank might cover any charges made on the card pending some admin and police work. For that service you pay a fee to the bank.
  - Nursie 8y ago
    Except we weren't talking about cash, we were talking about cards. Nice diversionary tactic there.
    - decentralised 8y ago
      "So long as the cryptocurrency hasn't gone already. If it has.. well whoops, bye bye money." This was the comment I replied to. It says money and I'm talking about money. Bank cards represent account holdership, not money. Losing a card entitles you to get a new one for a small charge. Your bank held funds are protected by law, and you can expect somewhere between 75% and 100% of your assets being covered from fraud.
      - Nursie 8y ago
        In response to your stuff about chargebacks and lost phones. Let me retread the steps - You said - "Your card being stolen has nothing to do with chargebacks. Your mobile could be stolen with your cryptowallet inside and you could do a remote wipe of the device." You do this in order to try to establish cryptocurrency as being as secure in that situation as a credit card, i.e. theft resilient. I pointed out that if the cryptocurrency was already used, unlike with a credit card, you're unlikely ever to be able to recover the money. Then you started handwaving about cash. This appears to me to be a disingenuous move of the goalposts.
        decentralised 8y ago
        I see your point but I disagree.. I'm comfortable with what I wrote though. Bank cards don't represent money and the management framework that allows for chargebacks is unrelated to the card itself, it's law. I've clarified what I think is a consistent view, and no goalposts are being moved when I point out that cryptocurrencies == money but bank cards != money.
        village-idiot 8y ago
        That's all good and well, but you've lost sight of the consumer's motivations. Consumers want to know that they will be made whole if something really bad happens. They're not really interested in the fine distinctions between possession of the currency and possession of the account that contains the currency. They want their money back if someone hacks their account, if their card is stolen, if the bank goes under, or if the merchant doesn't ship the right product as promised. If bitcoin does not offer these features, I cannot imagine it ever taking off as a currency (as compared to a speculative instrument, which is what it is now).
        decentralised 8y ago
        I partially agree with you here. The thing is, Bitcoin or Ethereum are technologies and the protections and guarantees the "masses" will look for are not provided at protocol level, this is where entrepreneurs step up and offer services based off these technologies.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    I carry two digits worth of cash in my wallet. Losing that would be more of a frustration than an actual financial setback. Honestly I'd be more pissed about losing various IDs than the actual money. Losing all the cash deposits I have would be so much worse, which is why I do business with a FDIC insured bank that will protect me against some contingencies, including account takeovers. Bitcoin offers me significantly less protection than my current setup, and would require far more mental effort to maintain my security.

Nursie 8y ago

> Your mobile could be stolen with your cryptowallet inside and you could do a remote wipe of the device So long as the cryptocurrency hasn't gone already. If it has.. well whoops, bye bye money.

decentralised 8y ago
Of course. Likewise, if you hold some bank notes in your wallet next to your credit card, an attack will deprive you or your money. The bank might cover any charges made on the card pending some admin and police work. For that service you pay a fee to the bank.
- Nursie 8y ago
  Except we weren't talking about cash, we were talking about cards. Nice diversionary tactic there.
  - decentralised 8y ago
    "So long as the cryptocurrency hasn't gone already. If it has.. well whoops, bye bye money." This was the comment I replied to. It says money and I'm talking about money. Bank cards represent account holdership, not money. Losing a card entitles you to get a new one for a small charge. Your bank held funds are protected by law, and you can expect somewhere between 75% and 100% of your assets being covered from fraud.
    - Nursie 8y ago
      In response to your stuff about chargebacks and lost phones. Let me retread the steps - You said - "Your card being stolen has nothing to do with chargebacks. Your mobile could be stolen with your cryptowallet inside and you could do a remote wipe of the device." You do this in order to try to establish cryptocurrency as being as secure in that situation as a credit card, i.e. theft resilient. I pointed out that if the cryptocurrency was already used, unlike with a credit card, you're unlikely ever to be able to recover the money. Then you started handwaving about cash. This appears to me to be a disingenuous move of the goalposts.
      - decentralised 8y ago
        I see your point but I disagree.. I'm comfortable with what I wrote though. Bank cards don't represent money and the management framework that allows for chargebacks is unrelated to the card itself, it's law. I've clarified what I think is a consistent view, and no goalposts are being moved when I point out that cryptocurrencies == money but bank cards != money.
        village-idiot 8y ago
        That's all good and well, but you've lost sight of the consumer's motivations. Consumers want to know that they will be made whole if something really bad happens. They're not really interested in the fine distinctions between possession of the currency and possession of the account that contains the currency. They want their money back if someone hacks their account, if their card is stolen, if the bank goes under, or if the merchant doesn't ship the right product as promised. If bitcoin does not offer these features, I cannot imagine it ever taking off as a currency (as compared to a speculative instrument, which is what it is now).
        decentralised 8y ago
        I partially agree with you here. The thing is, Bitcoin or Ethereum are technologies and the protections and guarantees the "masses" will look for are not provided at protocol level, this is where entrepreneurs step up and offer services based off these technologies.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  I carry two digits worth of cash in my wallet. Losing that would be more of a frustration than an actual financial setback. Honestly I'd be more pissed about losing various IDs than the actual money. Losing all the cash deposits I have would be so much worse, which is why I do business with a FDIC insured bank that will protect me against some contingencies, including account takeovers. Bitcoin offers me significantly less protection than my current setup, and would require far more mental effort to maintain my security.