4 ms·

The actual problem is that chargebacks are possible when using credit cards, and chargebacks are possible because of the legal concept of card fraud (i.e. the p

The actual problem is that chargebacks are possible when using credit cards, and chargebacks are possible because of the legal concept of card fraud (i.e. the person holding the credentials could actually not be legally "authorized" to realize the transaction), and the legal concept of card fraud exists mainly for two reasons: 1. Banks are bad at security. 2. People are bad at security. 3. The responsibility in the case of fraudulent transactions is not clear. Who is to blame? The bank or the user? Cryptocurrencies either solve these problems or neutralize the negative consequences of these problems: - There is no bank to impose dumb security rules - When credentials are "stolen", the user has no one else to blame than themselves. - There's no concept of fraud. Whoever holds the credentials (private key or nmemonic seed) is authorized to realize transactions using the credentials. - There are no chargebacks. Once a transaction is confirmed, the receiver can be certain that their money is not going to get pulled back.

hnarn 5y ago
> Banks are bad at security. I disagree. I live in Europe and all my online card transactions over a nominal sum (~$10) are tied to a certificate-based security application that requires confirmation on my phone. This same application is used by all banks and most government entities. There are of course banks in the world that are bad at security, but “banks”, as a general term, most definitely are not. The fundamental problem is, of course, that security is annoying, so any fundamental security improvement to online banking needs to be mandatory and centralized, and if there is no will to push something like that I’m not surprised nothing happens.
warkdarrior 5y ago
Shifting all liability to users ("the user has no one else to blame than themselves") is probably one of the most anti-consumer moves ever. Especially in the context of digital credentials that people do not know how to secure and for which good usable security mechanisms do not exist. Also, what happens in transactions where the seller does not deliver the right item? What if I buy a laptop off eBay, but I receive a box of rocks instead?
short_sells_poo 5y ago
So you are saying that cryptocurrencies are better because if I get scammed I have zero recourse to get my money back? Wow. And I was wondering why this modern marvel hasn't taken the payment industry yet.
supernovae 5y ago
zero recourse transactions sounds like a nightmare. screw everything about that
literallycancer 5y ago
Charge backs are not only intended to solve card fraud. It's the most convenient tool you have as a buyer to deal with seller fraud. If you have good evidence, you can win them consistently.

hnarn 5y ago

> Banks are bad at security. I disagree. I live in Europe and all my online card transactions over a nominal sum (~$10) are tied to a certificate-based security application that requires confirmation on my phone. This same application is used by all banks and most government entities. There are of course banks in the world that are bad at security, but “banks”, as a general term, most definitely are not. The fundamental problem is, of course, that security is annoying, so any fundamental security improvement to online banking needs to be mandatory and centralized, and if there is no will to push something like that I’m not surprised nothing happens.

warkdarrior 5y ago

Shifting all liability to users ("the user has no one else to blame than themselves") is probably one of the most anti-consumer moves ever. Especially in the context of digital credentials that people do not know how to secure and for which good usable security mechanisms do not exist. Also, what happens in transactions where the seller does not deliver the right item? What if I buy a laptop off eBay, but I receive a box of rocks instead?

short_sells_poo 5y ago

So you are saying that cryptocurrencies are better because if I get scammed I have zero recourse to get my money back? Wow. And I was wondering why this modern marvel hasn't taken the payment industry yet.

supernovae 5y ago

zero recourse transactions sounds like a nightmare. screw everything about that

literallycancer 5y ago

Charge backs are not only intended to solve card fraud. It's the most convenient tool you have as a buyer to deal with seller fraud. If you have good evidence, you can win them consistently.