4 ms·

All we need is fast ACH (seconds, even low minutes will do) with no charge back. From there you can develop single-charge ephemeral accounts and you're good to

All we need is fast ACH (seconds, even low minutes will do) with no charge back. From there you can develop single-charge ephemeral accounts and you're good to go. Sadly crypto will get us there faster. It just speaks volumes that a pseudo decentralized solution will beat the logical and easier centralized solution because of misaligned incentives

daveguy 1y ago
And then you can have untrackable and irreversible scams, money laundering and ransomware without the crypto? Yay?
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  "Transaction is irreversible via automated system" and "transaction is irreversible via court order" are two different things. The first is a problem when you have merchants that legitimately provided a service (e.g. adult content, buying fungible commodities that themselves can't be clawed back) because customers issue chargebacks against merchants that didn't scam them, e.g. because the spouse disputes a charge for adult content that the person who made the purchase doesn't want to admit to buying. But the second is the thing you need to prevent scams and ransomware.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- eviks 1y ago
  You already have all of that now without the benefits for regular use
  - daveguy 1y ago
    Sorry, but you are incorrect. Most payment systems today can be tracked and reversed. Crypto will too, after it becomes well regulated, and then it will lose its appeal and crash. No one wants to mess with some convoluted cryptography based money system if they don't have to.
    - eviks 1y ago
      > Most So do criminals use only the "Most" or also.the other ones that can't be reversed?
      - daveguy 1y ago
        ... and which ones are the ones that can't be reversed?
        daveguy 1y ago
        Well, at least you didn't try to claim fiat currency. Because crypto sure does make it easier when you don't need a bag transfer (even then you have serial numbers which aren't as easy to launder as crypto). Much easier for NK to extract ransomware payouts for their nuclear program when they can launder it immediately through untraceable crypto.
jdietrich 1y ago
We already have that in many countries. It doesn't change much, because the vast majority of consumers prefer to use a payment method that does have chargebacks and various other consumer protections. As long as you have a majority of customers who want to pay via Visa or Mastercard, then the vast majority of merchants will need to accept those payments and play by their rules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payment_System_(United_Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payment_System_(United_...
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  The premise is that the thing consumers want is "chargebacks and various other consumer protections" but in practice the problem is that those things are really hidden costs, i.e. merchants have to pass on the cost of chargebacks and fraud to honest customers. In a normal market this would result in the merchants passing on those costs to the customers who require a payment method that incurs them, i.e. there would be a 5-10% discount for using a different payment method, or more than that for industries with a high rate of customer chargeback fraud. But then the payment networks prohibit merchants from providing the full value of the discount to people not insisting on payment methods that impose those costs, which ought to be an antitrust violation because it's obviously uncompetitive to prevent an alternative with lower costs from actually passing those lower costs on to the customer. And then fraud is rampant, costs billions of dollars, makes certain types of services non-viable, but gets folded into the price of ordinary goods and services to keep ordinary people from realizing that they're still paying it.
  - Panzer04 1y ago
    Could not agree more. Have never used a chargeback and wouldn't want that ability in the vast majority of transactions. If I'm buying something on steam I know what I'm getting and they already have a robust refund capability regardless. If there was a good alternative to CC I'd happily use that. I use cards because they're the defacto standard for online payment, but that's the only reason. (side note: This issue becomes more obvious with the addition of the afterpays of the world, which charge iirc 7% fees to the merchant but forbid them from surcharging the difference)

daveguy 1y ago

And then you can have untrackable and irreversible scams, money laundering and ransomware without the crypto? Yay?

AnthonyMouse 1y ago
"Transaction is irreversible via automated system" and "transaction is irreversible via court order" are two different things. The first is a problem when you have merchants that legitimately provided a service (e.g. adult content, buying fungible commodities that themselves can't be clawed back) because customers issue chargebacks against merchants that didn't scam them, e.g. because the spouse disputes a charge for adult content that the person who made the purchase doesn't want to admit to buying. But the second is the thing you need to prevent scams and ransomware.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
eviks 1y ago
You already have all of that now without the benefits for regular use
- daveguy 1y ago
  Sorry, but you are incorrect. Most payment systems today can be tracked and reversed. Crypto will too, after it becomes well regulated, and then it will lose its appeal and crash. No one wants to mess with some convoluted cryptography based money system if they don't have to.
  - eviks 1y ago
    > Most So do criminals use only the "Most" or also.the other ones that can't be reversed?
    - daveguy 1y ago
      ... and which ones are the ones that can't be reversed?
      - daveguy 1y ago
        Well, at least you didn't try to claim fiat currency. Because crypto sure does make it easier when you don't need a bag transfer (even then you have serial numbers which aren't as easy to launder as crypto). Much easier for NK to extract ransomware payouts for their nuclear program when they can launder it immediately through untraceable crypto.

jdietrich 1y ago

We already have that in many countries. It doesn't change much, because the vast majority of consumers prefer to use a payment method that does have chargebacks and various other consumer protections. As long as you have a majority of customers who want to pay via Visa or Mastercard, then the vast majority of merchants will need to accept those payments and play by their rules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payment_System_(United_Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payment_System_(United_...

AnthonyMouse 1y ago
The premise is that the thing consumers want is "chargebacks and various other consumer protections" but in practice the problem is that those things are really hidden costs, i.e. merchants have to pass on the cost of chargebacks and fraud to honest customers. In a normal market this would result in the merchants passing on those costs to the customers who require a payment method that incurs them, i.e. there would be a 5-10% discount for using a different payment method, or more than that for industries with a high rate of customer chargeback fraud. But then the payment networks prohibit merchants from providing the full value of the discount to people not insisting on payment methods that impose those costs, which ought to be an antitrust violation because it's obviously uncompetitive to prevent an alternative with lower costs from actually passing those lower costs on to the customer. And then fraud is rampant, costs billions of dollars, makes certain types of services non-viable, but gets folded into the price of ordinary goods and services to keep ordinary people from realizing that they're still paying it.
- Panzer04 1y ago
  Could not agree more. Have never used a chargeback and wouldn't want that ability in the vast majority of transactions. If I'm buying something on steam I know what I'm getting and they already have a robust refund capability regardless. If there was a good alternative to CC I'd happily use that. I use cards because they're the defacto standard for online payment, but that's the only reason. (side note: This issue becomes more obvious with the addition of the afterpays of the world, which charge iirc 7% fees to the merchant but forbid them from surcharging the difference)