6 ms·

This feels more stream of consciousness (hyperventilation?) rather than a coherent argument against crypto-assets. For instance, the entire section "Why cryptoc

This feels more stream of consciousness (hyperventilation?) rather than a coherent argument against crypto-assets. For instance, the entire section "Why cryptocurrencies don't work" seems to defy the reality that they are in fact functional (at least to some degree). E.g., because they can't be clawed back -> they don't work? What about that thing we all used 30 years ago called cash?

NicoJuicy 5y ago
We also had charge backs then, where you can return things based on the receipt. After >10 years, it's still not even on the road may as far as I know.
- ccamrobertson 5y ago
  And the same would be true with a vendor who accepted Bitcoin and issued a receipt with a return policy. Generous return policies are also a modern artifact; historically most interactions with cash took place under the terms 'all sales final'. Societies functioned decently well for thousands of years this way with similar financial instruments.
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    And if the seller doesn't own it, you can't complain anywhere. That's not the case with cash, visa or Mastercard. You wouldn't want to get a bad rep with them. Malicious behavior isn't punished anywhere in crypto. There's an attempt for all those that are getting hacked though, despite the code=law sentiment.
  - zepto 5y ago
    Having a king also functioned decently well for thousands of years. Is that something you also want to bring back?
    - MrMan 5y ago
      Careful alot of these people will give you unexpected answers to that
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - cogman10 5y ago
    If you have cause, for hundreds of years "all sales are final" doesn't impart protections against damaged, defective, or falsely advertised goods. The only thing "all sales are final" prevents is someone deciding after purchase that they no longer want the item purchased. Even with the law telling a bitcoin vendor they must return the coin, there is no way to return the coin without the vendor performing that action. Cash can be forcibly taken as can property. Bitcoin, however, is completely locked away. Now imagine how much harder that is when the vendor is in a different nation. Societies functioned well for 1000s of years with these sorts of rules because the ability to remotely order goods/services wasn't in the reach of most society. The technology for someone to rob you from the other side of the globe simply did not exist.
cogman10 5y ago
> What about that thing we all used 30 years ago called cash? To steal cash, I need to know where it is AND I need to gain physical access to that location. To steal crypto, I need to know your passcode. I can steal it from any location in the world. The fact that cash theft requires physical presence makes it both easier to catch a thief and means you aren't dealing with international law to prosecute them (not likely they skip the country after robbing you).
- ccamrobertson 5y ago
  > To steal crypto, I need to know your passcode. I can steal it from any location in the world. Using the term 'passcode' for a 256 bit key generated from a good source of entropy is incredibly misleading. But yes, if you can either break secp256k1 or manage to steal a key that is stored with the same care as physical cash that is a distinction. It also doesn't mean that crypto doesn't work; thousands of people have safely stored cryptocurrencies this way for 10+ years now. My point stands: one cannot conduct a chargeback in a transaction using cash where sales are final. The example of chargebacks is a poor reason for 'why cryptocurrency doesn't work'.
  - cogman10 5y ago
    > one cannot conduct a chargeback in a transaction using cash where sales are final. You absolutely can, that's the entire point of receipts. If the seller refuses, that's where trade law comes into play and you can sue. This of course, isn't a great comparison because in the modern day cash is almost never used for anything other than small transactions (or by the uber paranoid). To even be close to the same you'd have to compare it to putting cash into an envelope and mailing it. Not exactly a common practice.
    - ccamrobertson 5y ago
      > You absolutely can, that's the entire point of receipts. If the seller refuses, that's where trade law comes into play and you can sue. 'Sales are final' is a trade statement; in most U.S. states under most conditions you cannot return an item when this is stated (even if you have a receipt). > This of course, isn't a great comparison because in the modern day cash is almost never used for anything other than small transactions (or by the uber paranoid). To even be close to the same you'd have to compare it to putting cash into an envelope and mailing it. Not exactly a common practice. Many people around the world still use cash for most of their transactions. And, as couched, the economy still functioned perfectly fine 30+ years ago where most people in the developed world used cash for most of their transactions as well.
2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
Wouldn’t depositing your money into a bank have some level of insurance so you could get it back off the bank lost out? Your argument is a bit weird though. We replaced cash by mostly electronic systems that are backed by some entity and we have recourse to get out money back. We generally want that feature. You arguing it’s good that we lost a feature that we want?
- ccamrobertson 5y ago
  No, my argument is that chargebacks are not the hallmark of a functional financial instrument.
boh 5y ago
News: We also use cash now Also "they are in fact functional (at least to some degree)" isn't a better argument.

NicoJuicy 5y ago

We also had charge backs then, where you can return things based on the receipt. After >10 years, it's still not even on the road may as far as I know.

ccamrobertson 5y ago
And the same would be true with a vendor who accepted Bitcoin and issued a receipt with a return policy. Generous return policies are also a modern artifact; historically most interactions with cash took place under the terms 'all sales final'. Societies functioned decently well for thousands of years this way with similar financial instruments.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  And if the seller doesn't own it, you can't complain anywhere. That's not the case with cash, visa or Mastercard. You wouldn't want to get a bad rep with them. Malicious behavior isn't punished anywhere in crypto. There's an attempt for all those that are getting hacked though, despite the code=law sentiment.
- zepto 5y ago
  Having a king also functioned decently well for thousands of years. Is that something you also want to bring back?
  - MrMan 5y ago
    Careful alot of these people will give you unexpected answers to that
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- cogman10 5y ago
  If you have cause, for hundreds of years "all sales are final" doesn't impart protections against damaged, defective, or falsely advertised goods. The only thing "all sales are final" prevents is someone deciding after purchase that they no longer want the item purchased. Even with the law telling a bitcoin vendor they must return the coin, there is no way to return the coin without the vendor performing that action. Cash can be forcibly taken as can property. Bitcoin, however, is completely locked away. Now imagine how much harder that is when the vendor is in a different nation. Societies functioned well for 1000s of years with these sorts of rules because the ability to remotely order goods/services wasn't in the reach of most society. The technology for someone to rob you from the other side of the globe simply did not exist.

cogman10 5y ago

> What about that thing we all used 30 years ago called cash? To steal cash, I need to know where it is AND I need to gain physical access to that location. To steal crypto, I need to know your passcode. I can steal it from any location in the world. The fact that cash theft requires physical presence makes it both easier to catch a thief and means you aren't dealing with international law to prosecute them (not likely they skip the country after robbing you).

ccamrobertson 5y ago
> To steal crypto, I need to know your passcode. I can steal it from any location in the world. Using the term 'passcode' for a 256 bit key generated from a good source of entropy is incredibly misleading. But yes, if you can either break secp256k1 or manage to steal a key that is stored with the same care as physical cash that is a distinction. It also doesn't mean that crypto doesn't work; thousands of people have safely stored cryptocurrencies this way for 10+ years now. My point stands: one cannot conduct a chargeback in a transaction using cash where sales are final. The example of chargebacks is a poor reason for 'why cryptocurrency doesn't work'.
- cogman10 5y ago
  > one cannot conduct a chargeback in a transaction using cash where sales are final. You absolutely can, that's the entire point of receipts. If the seller refuses, that's where trade law comes into play and you can sue. This of course, isn't a great comparison because in the modern day cash is almost never used for anything other than small transactions (or by the uber paranoid). To even be close to the same you'd have to compare it to putting cash into an envelope and mailing it. Not exactly a common practice.
  - ccamrobertson 5y ago
    > You absolutely can, that's the entire point of receipts. If the seller refuses, that's where trade law comes into play and you can sue. 'Sales are final' is a trade statement; in most U.S. states under most conditions you cannot return an item when this is stated (even if you have a receipt). > This of course, isn't a great comparison because in the modern day cash is almost never used for anything other than small transactions (or by the uber paranoid). To even be close to the same you'd have to compare it to putting cash into an envelope and mailing it. Not exactly a common practice. Many people around the world still use cash for most of their transactions. And, as couched, the economy still functioned perfectly fine 30+ years ago where most people in the developed world used cash for most of their transactions as well.

2muchcoffeeman 5y ago

Wouldn’t depositing your money into a bank have some level of insurance so you could get it back off the bank lost out? Your argument is a bit weird though. We replaced cash by mostly electronic systems that are backed by some entity and we have recourse to get out money back. We generally want that feature. You arguing it’s good that we lost a feature that we want?

ccamrobertson 5y ago
No, my argument is that chargebacks are not the hallmark of a functional financial instrument.

boh 5y ago

News: We also use cash now Also "they are in fact functional (at least to some degree)" isn't a better argument.