5 ms·

I don't believe the broader financial system ever tried out making transactions impossible to reverse. They might not have ever had the power to do it. Another

I don't believe the broader financial system ever tried out making transactions impossible to reverse. They might not have ever had the power to do it. Another thing to bear in mind is that none of the participants in the financial system have ever been interested in designing a financial system. They have been interested in making money.

samhw 5y ago
> none of the participants in the financial system have ever been interested in designing a financial system I agree to some extent with the view that we should see systems as emergent phenomena arising from countless participants none of whom understands or intends the entire thing, but you can go overboard with that. There are clearly some participants who have taken a 'God's eye view' and tried to re/design an entire system (Bretton Woods, Dodd-Frank, Visa/Mastercard, &c).
- whatshisface 5y ago
  Breton Woods and Visa/Mastercard were top level designs... But they were designed to make money. (For the US and Visa/Mastercard respectively.) Nobody has ever taken the "god's eye view" with the intent to be nice.
  - samhw 5y ago
    > Nobody has ever taken the "god's eye view" with the intent to be nice. I second what the other guy said: this is an interesting point. But I'd also second the point about not knowing their intent (more with Bretton Woods than Visa/Mastercard; the latter is obviously fair enough). Also, I think it's telling that you left out Dodd-Frank when making that point, because it pretty clearly undercuts it.
  - mistermann 5y ago
    > Nobody has ever taken the "god's eye view" with the intent to be nice. This is a really good point. There are some kinda exceptions[1] now and then, but there are many reasons why they tend to not work (not short term profitable being one of the main ones). Despite that, it seems we're pretty short even on good ideas lately, like our culture has lost the ability to dream big about positive things (we're excellent at doomsday dreaming, especially about our political outgroup members). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller
  - squabble 5y ago
    How do you know their intent?
soco 5y ago
When a store charged me twice for the same item last month I was very happy to be able to reverse the transaction.
- moffkalast 5y ago
  Maybe it's just me, but we all place an awful lot of trust giving vendors essentially all credit card details possible AND where we live so that they're capable of skimming a self defined sum off by themselves. It's like an inherently insane system. We're supposed to be the one wiring the cash, not the vendor themselves with our data.
  - MauranKilom 5y ago
    By that notion, the fact that almost all home locks are easily pickable and glass windows breakable is also insane. There's tons of valuables behind almost all of these! We found meaningful ways of disincentivizing theft, which turns out to be largely sufficient even in face of fallible security. The exact same applies to card data in the hands of merchants.
    - serverholic 5y ago
      "We found meaningful ways of disincentivizing X". Take that logic and apply it to crypto and hopefully that'll help you understand why crypto enthusiasts believe in it. The fact is that we can and do find ways around flaws in a system. Crypto folks just think that a crypto foundation is better than the current foundation of our financial systems.
      - MauranKilom 5y ago
        > Take that logic and apply it to crypto and hopefully that'll help you understand why crypto enthusiasts believe in it. That's exactly the point of the article: You need some form of guardrail, and that has to be centralized. > Crypto folks just think that a crypto foundation is better than the current foundation of our financial systems. How so? I am not under the impression that current financial providers have significant issues in consistently exchanging numbers...
solveit 5y ago
> I don't believe the broader financial system ever tried out making transactions impossible to reverse. They might not have ever had the power to do it. I mean, cash transactions are irreversible right? Unless you mean that there was always a government willing to force a reversal, in which case crypto (and all technical solutions) isn't all that different. It's just another day in the never-ending arms race between the regulator and the regulatee.
- moffkalast 5y ago
  That's a pretty good point actually, cash worked perfectly fine without this feature for centuries.
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  Cash transactions, by definition, are pretty much always in-person. Thus, the risk of fraud or "significantly not as described" goods are significantly reduced. On the contrary, the modern world depends on being able to transact remotely. Even then, there is still recourse if you pay for something with cash and the thing you buy ends up being non-functional (e.g. small claims court). And since the transaction was in person it's less likely you have no idea who the seller is.
- andrewprock 5y ago
  Cash transactions are easily reversible. I'm not sure why we think they are not.
  - solveit 5y ago
    How do you reverse a cash transaction in a way that doesn't apply to crypto?
    - andrewprock 5y ago
      You simply hand the money back. There is no transaction fee, there is no lengthy clearing time. It's dirt simple.
frockington1 5y ago
Wire transfers are next to impossible to reverse, that's why fraud is so rampant

samhw 5y ago

> none of the participants in the financial system have ever been interested in designing a financial system I agree to some extent with the view that we should see systems as emergent phenomena arising from countless participants none of whom understands or intends the entire thing, but you can go overboard with that. There are clearly some participants who have taken a 'God's eye view' and tried to re/design an entire system (Bretton Woods, Dodd-Frank, Visa/Mastercard, &c).

whatshisface 5y ago
Breton Woods and Visa/Mastercard were top level designs... But they were designed to make money. (For the US and Visa/Mastercard respectively.) Nobody has ever taken the "god's eye view" with the intent to be nice.
- samhw 5y ago
  > Nobody has ever taken the "god's eye view" with the intent to be nice. I second what the other guy said: this is an interesting point. But I'd also second the point about not knowing their intent (more with Bretton Woods than Visa/Mastercard; the latter is obviously fair enough). Also, I think it's telling that you left out Dodd-Frank when making that point, because it pretty clearly undercuts it.
- mistermann 5y ago
  > Nobody has ever taken the "god's eye view" with the intent to be nice. This is a really good point. There are some kinda exceptions[1] now and then, but there are many reasons why they tend to not work (not short term profitable being one of the main ones). Despite that, it seems we're pretty short even on good ideas lately, like our culture has lost the ability to dream big about positive things (we're excellent at doomsday dreaming, especially about our political outgroup members). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller
- squabble 5y ago
  How do you know their intent?

soco 5y ago

When a store charged me twice for the same item last month I was very happy to be able to reverse the transaction.

moffkalast 5y ago
Maybe it's just me, but we all place an awful lot of trust giving vendors essentially all credit card details possible AND where we live so that they're capable of skimming a self defined sum off by themselves. It's like an inherently insane system. We're supposed to be the one wiring the cash, not the vendor themselves with our data.
- MauranKilom 5y ago
  By that notion, the fact that almost all home locks are easily pickable and glass windows breakable is also insane. There's tons of valuables behind almost all of these! We found meaningful ways of disincentivizing theft, which turns out to be largely sufficient even in face of fallible security. The exact same applies to card data in the hands of merchants.
  - serverholic 5y ago
    "We found meaningful ways of disincentivizing X". Take that logic and apply it to crypto and hopefully that'll help you understand why crypto enthusiasts believe in it. The fact is that we can and do find ways around flaws in a system. Crypto folks just think that a crypto foundation is better than the current foundation of our financial systems.
    - MauranKilom 5y ago
      > Take that logic and apply it to crypto and hopefully that'll help you understand why crypto enthusiasts believe in it. That's exactly the point of the article: You need some form of guardrail, and that has to be centralized. > Crypto folks just think that a crypto foundation is better than the current foundation of our financial systems. How so? I am not under the impression that current financial providers have significant issues in consistently exchanging numbers...

solveit 5y ago

> I don't believe the broader financial system ever tried out making transactions impossible to reverse. They might not have ever had the power to do it. I mean, cash transactions are irreversible right? Unless you mean that there was always a government willing to force a reversal, in which case crypto (and all technical solutions) isn't all that different. It's just another day in the never-ending arms race between the regulator and the regulatee.

moffkalast 5y ago
That's a pretty good point actually, cash worked perfectly fine without this feature for centuries.
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
Cash transactions, by definition, are pretty much always in-person. Thus, the risk of fraud or "significantly not as described" goods are significantly reduced. On the contrary, the modern world depends on being able to transact remotely. Even then, there is still recourse if you pay for something with cash and the thing you buy ends up being non-functional (e.g. small claims court). And since the transaction was in person it's less likely you have no idea who the seller is.
andrewprock 5y ago
Cash transactions are easily reversible. I'm not sure why we think they are not.
- solveit 5y ago
  How do you reverse a cash transaction in a way that doesn't apply to crypto?
  - andrewprock 5y ago
    You simply hand the money back. There is no transaction fee, there is no lengthy clearing time. It's dirt simple.

frockington1 5y ago

Wire transfers are next to impossible to reverse, that's why fraud is so rampant