5 ms·

If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the mont

by adtac 5y ago

If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the month. The bank will follow up with the merchant and/or law enforcement and, in most cases, the bank will get its money back somehow. In the cases where it doesn't, I'm sure the bank is insured against losses. Banks and insurance companies probably have a complicated model for estimating $X/yr in theft. If someone steals my wallet's private key (= stealing my credit card), I'm done. There is no recourse AFAIK.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
thaumasiotes 5y ago
> If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the month. This is an epically terrible argument for why you shouldn't have to pay for things someone else purchased with your stolen credit card. "I shouldn't have to because I don't have to"? Compare tptacek's claim: >>> which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff. There are four parties involved: you, the thief, the bank, and the merchant. When you can afford to pay, here's a win/loss table in the case where you have to pay: you: lose bank: win merchant: win thief: win And in the case where you don't have to pay, but the bank collects from the merchant: you: win bank: win merchant: lose thief: win You don't have to pay, and the bank can't collect from the merchant: you: win bank: lose merchant: win thief: win When you have to pay, but you can't afford it: you: win bank: lose merchant: win thief: win Where's the lose/lose scenario?
- tptacek 5y ago
  I was sure someone would make this argument and debated dumping more words into my comment to address it preemptively, but figured instead I'd wait for someone to spell it out first. So, just to clear this up: you, the customer, and your credit card company agree that it's lose-lose for retail customers to be on the hook for credit card fraud. It makes it much harder to actually use the credit card transaction processing system, which you want to do because it's way better and safer than carrying cash, and the credit card companies want you to do because they're credit card companies. In any given situation, a merchant on the hook for stolen stuff does not agree that this is lose-lose. Them getting paid with stolen money is a win-lose for them. But the credit card company takes the long view: if customers were always on the hook for this stuff, customers would stop using credit cards as much. It's better for everyone if it's easy to buy things, and not terrifying to shop online. Merchants that disagree with this assessment can refuse to take credit cards. They can just take Bitcoins, The Currency Of The Future. The consensus view here is not hard to discover.
- frumper 5y ago
  As the holder of the credit card I can't think of a good reason why I would/should pay the debt off for a purchase I didn't make. I did not initiate the sale with the merchant, I did not verify I was the rightful card holder, I did not authorize the funds to be transferred, and I will not send money to that bank to make up for any of that. Banks are in the business of encouraging transactions and my card number could be skimmed from a physical device, or from hacked website on the internet, or I used it at Target https://money.cnn.com/2013/12/18/news/companies/target-credit-card/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2013/12/18/news/companies/target-credi..., or someone physically stole my wallet. If they did try to collect then that sounds like a great reason to go back to cash because even if I get mugged, criminals can't spend me tens of thousands of dollars into debt by stealing my cash on hand. They are limited to what's in my wallet.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    > As the holder of the credit card I can't think of a good reason why I would/should pay the debt off for a purchase I didn't make. This applies to everyone involved, but someone's going to pay for the loss anyway, unless you can recover from the thief. There is no reason for the merchant to pay for the purchase either -- he is even less culpable than you are. But that's what everyone is advocating here.
    - tptacek 5y ago
      There obviously is a reason for merchants to eat the losses, or else virtually every merchant in the modern world wouldn't accept credit cards. The reason is that merchants (on the whole) agree with credit card companies that it is better for customers to feel safe and comfortable shopping, and thus increase transaction volume, even if doing so means that merchants will occasionally eat losses from fraud.
      - thaumasiotes 5y ago
        You are discussing a different level of "reasons" than frumper is. In your sense, there is a reason for merchants to take the losses, and there is also a reason for customers to take the losses. But in the sense that there is no reason why customers should take these losses: >>> I did not initiate the sale with the merchant, I did not verify I was the rightful card holder, I did not authorize the funds to be transferred there is also no reason why merchants should. The fact that the system currently operates in a certain way is not actually evidence that it cannot operate in a different way.
G3rn0ti 5y ago
But there is a price to pay for the responsibility you burden off onto the bank. Banks charge fees, pay almost zero interest (at least currently) and are usually very unpleasant to deal with when you want to borrow money. I’d say it depends. You probably shouldn’t manage your life savings using a crypto wallet. Keep some money at a bank. Keep some money in cryptos. Cryptos are not a solution to every financial problem out there but they add new and exciting options for us. Don’t think black and white. But embrace more freedom to choose.
- akerl_ 5y ago
  Crypto transactions have fees, crypto wallets don’t accrue interest, and my exchange won’t loan me coins. So I’m not sure this is the slam dunk on banks that you were going for.
  - G3rn0ti 5y ago
    > crypto wallets don’t accrue interest The Coinbase wallet integrates the major lending protocols. Ethereum fees are reasonable these days. So lending USDC or DAI and earning interest has become a great alternative to saving accounts. If you hold fair amounts of Bitcoin or Ethereum long term, you can use it as collateral and borrow USDC. This way you can not only let your money work for you, you can also use it to borrow dollars for a short term credit — like getting a mortgage but without a bank. Furthermore, these days there are other emerging financial tools that banks simply can’t provide. Earning exchange fees on liquidity pools, for example, or staking cryptos and earn validation fees like a miner for Proof-Of-Stake networks. Point is: Lots of innovation, here. When I look at banks nothing really has been happening there for decades.

by adtac 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

thaumasiotes 5y ago

> If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the month. This is an epically terrible argument for why you shouldn't have to pay for things someone else purchased with your stolen credit card. "I shouldn't have to because I don't have to"? Compare tptacek's claim: >>> which is why when your credit card gets stolen you don't end up paying for stuff. There are four parties involved: you, the thief, the bank, and the merchant. When you can afford to pay, here's a win/loss table in the case where you have to pay: you: lose bank: win merchant: win thief: win And in the case where you don't have to pay, but the bank collects from the merchant: you: win bank: win merchant: lose thief: win You don't have to pay, and the bank can't collect from the merchant: you: win bank: lose merchant: win thief: win When you have to pay, but you can't afford it: you: win bank: lose merchant: win thief: win Where's the lose/lose scenario?

tptacek 5y ago
I was sure someone would make this argument and debated dumping more words into my comment to address it preemptively, but figured instead I'd wait for someone to spell it out first. So, just to clear this up: you, the customer, and your credit card company agree that it's lose-lose for retail customers to be on the hook for credit card fraud. It makes it much harder to actually use the credit card transaction processing system, which you want to do because it's way better and safer than carrying cash, and the credit card companies want you to do because they're credit card companies. In any given situation, a merchant on the hook for stolen stuff does not agree that this is lose-lose. Them getting paid with stolen money is a win-lose for them. But the credit card company takes the long view: if customers were always on the hook for this stuff, customers would stop using credit cards as much. It's better for everyone if it's easy to buy things, and not terrifying to shop online. Merchants that disagree with this assessment can refuse to take credit cards. They can just take Bitcoins, The Currency Of The Future. The consensus view here is not hard to discover.
frumper 5y ago
As the holder of the credit card I can't think of a good reason why I would/should pay the debt off for a purchase I didn't make. I did not initiate the sale with the merchant, I did not verify I was the rightful card holder, I did not authorize the funds to be transferred, and I will not send money to that bank to make up for any of that. Banks are in the business of encouraging transactions and my card number could be skimmed from a physical device, or from hacked website on the internet, or I used it at Target https://money.cnn.com/2013/12/18/news/companies/target-credit-card/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2013/12/18/news/companies/target-credi..., or someone physically stole my wallet. If they did try to collect then that sounds like a great reason to go back to cash because even if I get mugged, criminals can't spend me tens of thousands of dollars into debt by stealing my cash on hand. They are limited to what's in my wallet.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > As the holder of the credit card I can't think of a good reason why I would/should pay the debt off for a purchase I didn't make. This applies to everyone involved, but someone's going to pay for the loss anyway, unless you can recover from the thief. There is no reason for the merchant to pay for the purchase either -- he is even less culpable than you are. But that's what everyone is advocating here.
  - tptacek 5y ago
    There obviously is a reason for merchants to eat the losses, or else virtually every merchant in the modern world wouldn't accept credit cards. The reason is that merchants (on the whole) agree with credit card companies that it is better for customers to feel safe and comfortable shopping, and thus increase transaction volume, even if doing so means that merchants will occasionally eat losses from fraud.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      You are discussing a different level of "reasons" than frumper is. In your sense, there is a reason for merchants to take the losses, and there is also a reason for customers to take the losses. But in the sense that there is no reason why customers should take these losses: >>> I did not initiate the sale with the merchant, I did not verify I was the rightful card holder, I did not authorize the funds to be transferred there is also no reason why merchants should. The fact that the system currently operates in a certain way is not actually evidence that it cannot operate in a different way.

G3rn0ti 5y ago

But there is a price to pay for the responsibility you burden off onto the bank. Banks charge fees, pay almost zero interest (at least currently) and are usually very unpleasant to deal with when you want to borrow money. I’d say it depends. You probably shouldn’t manage your life savings using a crypto wallet. Keep some money at a bank. Keep some money in cryptos. Cryptos are not a solution to every financial problem out there but they add new and exciting options for us. Don’t think black and white. But embrace more freedom to choose.

akerl_ 5y ago
Crypto transactions have fees, crypto wallets don’t accrue interest, and my exchange won’t loan me coins. So I’m not sure this is the slam dunk on banks that you were going for.
- G3rn0ti 5y ago
  > crypto wallets don’t accrue interest The Coinbase wallet integrates the major lending protocols. Ethereum fees are reasonable these days. So lending USDC or DAI and earning interest has become a great alternative to saving accounts. If you hold fair amounts of Bitcoin or Ethereum long term, you can use it as collateral and borrow USDC. This way you can not only let your money work for you, you can also use it to borrow dollars for a short term credit — like getting a mortgage but without a bank. Furthermore, these days there are other emerging financial tools that banks simply can’t provide. Earning exchange fees on liquidity pools, for example, or staking cryptos and earn validation fees like a miner for Proof-Of-Stake networks. Point is: Lots of innovation, here. When I look at banks nothing really has been happening there for decades.