4 ms·
> You could eliminate a lot of the fraud by moving off a mostly-static identifier to merchant, amount and time-limited tokens the user generates with their bank
by hugs 2y ago
> You could eliminate a lot of the fraud by moving off a mostly-static identifier to merchant, amount and time-limited tokens the user generates with their bank (or the merchant redirects them there). This would address a lot of the issues - the tokens are useless when leaked...
This almost sounds like a subtle recommendation for the Lightning Network. It's based on single-use invoices that are locked to a specific recipient and is usually limited to specific amounts.
- egypturnash 2y agoThere's a lot of interesting ideas around cryptocurrency but they all kind of have the problem that they're associated with cryptocurrency, which is now strongly associated with absurdly high transaction fees, get-rich-quick scams, and wasting colossal amounts of energy for a pathetically-low transaction throughput. Good luck convincing J. Random User that your cryptocurrency is none of these things.
- quohort 2y agoIt's pretty much how every cryptocurrency works, with separation of public (receive) and private (send) keys. The fact that invoices are temporary in LN is a weakness of the design, not an intentional choice. The lightning network represents a regression from the typical use-case of cryptocurrency because both sender and receiver need to be online to make a payment.
- kinakomochidayo 2y agoLightning Network will never get widespread adoption because the UX is horrible.
- hugs 2y agoThat hasn't been my experience using Alby and Primal's Nostr client. It's been as easy as Venmo.
- EasyMark 2y agoI would never recommend anything as volatile as crypto for a payment system.