9 ms·

The concept that Stripe may be moving away from strictly supporting Credit Card payments (which are awful, but necessary for now) and into alternatives is so ex

The concept that Stripe may be moving away from strictly supporting Credit Card payments (which are awful, but necessary for now) and into alternatives is so exciting to me that I am literally shaking. We're building infrastructure to make bank-to-bank transfers palatable to consumers and drive their cost toward zero, but it's only if thought leaders like the Collisons embrace the move away from CC's that the move will happen. This is such a huge step!

hnnewguy 13y ago
>which are awful, but necessary for now As a consumer or business? Because as a consumer, I've never had a complaint about my CC, ever. With the NFC chips built into all new CCs (at least here in Canada) I tap my card and leave. You can't get more convenient than that. As such, I don't think credit cards are going anywhere.
- tomasien 13y ago
  Credit Card payments in person can be great - swipe and go, why not? Online, it's 23 digits that you don't know, and then 3-23 more fields (shipping address, billing address, name, email, etc. etc.) That sucks. Even at it's best in the Stripe Checkout model, it's less than ideal and extremely unsafe - it's so unsafe that American Express is RUNNING COMMERCIALS ADVERTISING HOW UNSAFE THEIR PROCESS IS! For your convenience, let's 2.9% and $0.30 of every transaction. That's a huge drain on the margin for a business of any size, but especially someone with checkout size about 10-50 bucks and margins of 10-40%. So to summarize - online it's bad for consumers, bad for businesses, but it's the only way right now because hell if I know my account and routing number, and if I do the business still needs 3 days to make sure I own that account. That's the problem we've solved (I believe) but it's in its nascent stages. Bitcoin could potentially lend a lot of relief there too, which is why this is so exciting.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    I let my password manager handle the multiple fields required, although it's still not the best solution ever. What are these commercials that AmEx is running? I assume they're presenting it as "convenient" rather than "unsafe" but it's obvious enough if you know what's going on?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - tomasien 13y ago
    Can't respond to individual comments - chargeback protection is NOT a credit-card thing - it's a consumer protection called Regulation E that all payment processors must have. We have it for ACH for example.
    - srdev 13y ago
      That seems to be at odds with how Bitcoin works with the handful of large retailers that accept it. Reading online experiences, there are a subset where they order something at Overstock/Tiger Direct, the order does not go through, but the Bitcoins are sent, and they are told to complain to Coinbase. The alternative is I spend 5 minutes on the phone with a third party to issue a chargeback. ACH are also reversible by a third party (the bank). Is my understanding flawed? How does a chargeback work when a third party does not exist and the protocol does not allow chargebacks. Edit: Note that the merchant itself doing a refund is not equivalent. The important feature of a chargeback is that its a third party issuing it.
    - gamblor956 13y ago
      Regulation E only applies to specified forms of electronic funds transfer. For example, it would not apply to prepaid cards. It is not clear that Regulation E would apply to Bitcoin transactions, and so far most retailers and BTC payment processors have taken the stance that Regulation E does not apply to BTC transactions.
      - tomasien 13y ago
        Solid point. Sometimes I forget if I'm talking about Knox or BTC - either way, Reg E is NOT a CC thing
  - srdev 13y ago
    > Online, it's 23 digits that you don't know, and then 3-23 more fields (shipping address, billing address, name, email, etc. etc.) That sucks. Shipping address, name, and email are necessary even if you use bitcoin. Billing address is usually the same as shipping address. That leaves the CC number, in which case the equivalent is your bitcoin address. So there's no real win here. And if you're using a regular online shop, then they probably have all these details saved. With Amazon, I can buy things with one click. With Newegg and other stores that I use regularly, its two. I haven't seen any bitcoin experience that matches that. Reading up on "experiences" people have with Overstock and Tiger Direct, it all seems very roundabout and inconvenient. And then you're hit with shit like no refunds to top it off. > Even at it's best in the Stripe Checkout model, it's less than ideal and extremely unsafe - it's so unsafe that American Express is RUNNING COMMERCIALS ADVERTISING HOW UNSAFE THEIR PROCESS IS! Pull is less safe than push, yes. Bitcoin is undoubtedly more secure than giving your CC number. But pull is more convenient for consumers, as I outlined above. There's work-arounds for credit cards, such as virtual card numbers, but they haven't gained broader consumer penetration for the exact reason that they're inconvenient. In practice, the "unsafe but you can get the charges reversed" system works well enough that promoting a new system based on the fact that its safer isn't really enough. > For your convenience, let's 2.9% and $0.30 of every transaction. That's a huge drain on the margin for a business of any size, but especially someone with checkout size about 10-50 bucks and margins of 10-40%. Not every business charges 2.9%. Many get rates as low as 1% (this is what we charged large corporations, if I remember correctly). With bitcoin, you're going to get hit with transaction fees, exchange fees, and exchange spread. For small shops, its likely that will come out less than the CC fees, but for bigger stores its questionable. Edit: Note that I hope these problems will be solved. Ideally, we see the Bitcoin protocol and ecosystem mature such that it is as convenient as a credit card and safer to boot.
    - evv 13y ago
      > Shipping address, name, and email are necessary even if you use bitcoin. Billing address is usually the same as shipping address. That leaves the CC number, in which case the equivalent is your bitcoin address. Maybe I'm confused. Why is the address, name and email necessary for BTC payments? Is it a stripe requirement? And, as you probably know, a bitcoin address is WAY more secure than a CC#. They are nowhere near "equivalent"
  - Guvante 13y ago
    Bitcoin is equivalent to cash, of course businesses want a cash equivalent as their method of online payment. However many consumers have gotten used to the protections credit cards offer.
    - pbreit 13y ago
      No it's not. Since businesses have to convert most or all of it to real cash and it can take hours or days for this process to complete, there would be padding built in to account for the volatility.
- ejfox 13y ago
  If you had the option to tap a Bitcoin card and have the same experience, but save 3% on the transaction, would you?
  - jeffgreco 13y ago
    Not if the value of Bitcoin continues to fluctuate. How am I supposed to know if I can afford the cup of coffee without checking an exchange value?
  - tomasien 13y ago
    Our user tests suggest that people will pay with their online banking when offered even a 1% discount, which is awesome. More than 40%.
  - dvcc 13y ago
    What about consumer protections? Extended warranties, painless returns, fraud protection, etc. I am at no risk when using a credit card. Why would I even want to switch?
  - pbreit 13y ago
    Probably not. I'd prefer the mileage, peace of mind that I have recourse, consolidated statementing, free 30 day loan, etc. And you would not save 3%. In fact, with Bitcoin's volatility, you might be charged 3% as you are now when you purchase in a different currency. Bitcoin enthusiasts have a difficult time understanding the cost of currency volatility.
    - baddox 13y ago
      And yet, it's pretty common to pay with cash at any brick and mortar store, where you have no electronic protection (like chargebacks) and not even any physical protection for the cash you carry around.
      - srdev 13y ago
        If I pay with cash at a store then I'm literally walking out with the goods. For services, I've already received the services before paying. You're correct that there is no physical protection for the cash, but that is why most people do not carry lots of cash. Most store it in an insured bank account.
- netcan 13y ago
  The 1st order effects are on business. It's mostly the 2nd order effects that consumers feel. Marginally higher costs that inevitably pass to consumers . Merchant refusal to ship to "high risk" locations. More difficult international transactions generally. Fewer online vendors (=less choice & higher prices) of high risk (easily resellable) items. Then there are the effects of having such a thick intermediary, a duopoly. Some consumers can't get a credit card. It's hard for consumers vulnerable to overspending & borrowing to avoid the card's expensive credit component. There's also a general brokenness (IMO) of the "pull" nature of credit cards. I want to send vendors money, not authorize them to take some themselves while reserving the right to dispute the charge. Even for recurring transactions I would rather an easy bill paying service that works like invoices & checks do, but with a 10X simpler UI.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - wdewind 13y ago
    > Marginally higher costs that inevitably pass to consumers Massive statement that I sincerely doubt is true (increased revenue off of increased liquidity drives prices down for everyone).
    - netcan 13y ago
      I don't understand this statement. It's controversial that an extra cost attached to every transaction in a big wide chunk of the economy will bring up costs to consumers. It's not very different to sales tax.
      - wdewind 13y ago
        No, it's completely different from sales tax because while the company will have slightly increased costs (usually ~2.5%), they will also move significantly more inventory which will allow quicker reinvestment cycles, and thus more growth. This is the value of credit/debt in general: assuming everyone trusts everyone else transaction volume can greatly increase. And that trust comes from the credit card companies.
- amorphid 13y ago
  I recently tried buying a something online with a credit card, and the transaction was declined due to a fraud alert. I happened to have a few bucks worth of BitCoin, and the merchant accept BitCoin, so I used BitCoin to make the purchase. Making the purchase felt like cash, and it felt oddly satisfying. For some purchases, there is MasterCard. For everything else, there's BitCoin.
- baddox 13y ago
  > Because as a consumer, I've never had a complaint about my CC, ever. I take it you've never had your CC details stolen, or less seriously, had your CC automatically shut down when you're traveling due to "suspicious activity."
  - etchalon 13y ago
    I've had both happen to me. Neither take more than a few moments on the phone to resolve without the lose of any funds.
  - hnnewguy 13y ago
    >I take it you've never had your CC details stolen No, but I've had fraudulent charges, which required only a phone call to complain, and they were reversed.
- aestra 13y ago
  >Because as a consumer, I've never had a complaint about my CC, ever. With the NFC chips built into all new CCs (at least here in Canada) I tap my card and leave. I don't want to tap my card and leave. I wish I could turn off that "feature." A way credit cards are bad for consumers? Science proves that you tend to spend less money when you pay with cash, especially on unplanned and/or impulse purchases. I guess the psychology of actually handing something over then having less of it afterwards makes people think twice about if they really need to spend the money. Also getting extra cash when you over budget has an extra step (trip to bank/ATM) so you're probably more likely to stay in budget or to rethink if you really need that over budget purchase. http://www.livescience.com/2849-study-credit-cards-spending.html http://www.livescience.com/2849-study-credit-cards-spending.... http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/08/pay-in-cash.asp http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/08/pay-in-cash.asp http://seekingalpha.com/article/20333-guide-to-credit-cards-how-credit-cards-encourage-you-to-overspend http://seekingalpha.com/article/20333-guide-to-credit-cards-... http://business.time.com/2013/08/08/turns-out-you-only-think-youre-spending-less-money/ http://business.time.com/2013/08/08/turns-out-you-only-think... I especially think this is interesting: >McDonald's found that the average transaction rose from $4.50 to $7 when customers used plastic instead of cash
  - hnnewguy 13y ago
    >I don't want to tap my card and leave. Then don't. No one forces you. Use signature only, or "chip and pin".
    - aestra 13y ago
      No, but I'd rather not have my credit cards have that option in them. Basically, I do not like the fact someone can tap my card and then get money from it. I just am not a fan of that type of payment, because it is too easy. I don't like the argument "don't use it" because it isn't an optional "feature," if your card has it, it has it. You cannot turn it off. http://www.mymoneycoach.ca/credit_rating/how-to-protect-self-from-electronic-smart-card-identity-credit-card-theft.html http://www.mymoneycoach.ca/credit_rating/how-to-protect-self... "a $3 smart card reader purchased online can steal people’s credit card information if the thief can get close enough to your purse or wallet. I know you're thinking "you're not liable for fraud." Doesn't mean I want fraud to happen, that it isn't a pain in the ass. Especially unsettling is the RFID chips in passports. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/15/AR2006091500923.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09... http://www.emc.com/emc-plus/rsa-labs/staff-associates/epc-rfid-tag-security-defenses.htm http://www.emc.com/emc-plus/rsa-labs/staff-associates/epc-rf...
piokoch 13y ago
"which are awful, but necessary for now". I am not sure what is exactly that awful in having free credit for X days, rewards for making purchases (which effectively cancels fees) and, the most important thing, chargebacks. I can understand Credit Card issues from seller point of view, but for clients (that is most of us), they are not that bad. Bitcoin will have to provide the same level of consumer comfort and safety to have wider adoption. This also touches banking system as a whole. If I make an error in my bank transfer, I will get my money back and this is up to bank to return them, I don't have to worry about this. Who will give me back my bitcoin payment done by mistake?
- tomasien 13y ago
  That's a good point, BTC doesn't have that figured out yet but I bet Stripe will be able to help figure that out! We handle that for ACH if you're interested.
  - pbreit 13y ago
    Bitcoin does have the capability of "2 of 3" authorizations which can mitigate some of the upfront risk. The idea being that a payment only completes after 2 parties approve it, the 3rd being an independent 3rd party in this case (who could be configured to auto-approve if a complaint isn't filed in x days).
    - danielweber 13y ago
      And what stops the customer from filing a bogus complaint, same as they do now if they use a credit card?
      - pbreit 13y ago
        Getting kicked out of the system.
        seabee 13y ago
        Only if the incentives of the third party align this way, which is very unlikely as many merchants burned by PayPal/eBay can attest to.
tuhins 13y ago
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_G777JJtwUs/TyHaeYfCcDI/AAAAAAAAApo/vjZeRGwQLQw/s1600/black-guy-gif-star-trek.gif http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_G777JJtwUs/TyHaeYfCcDI/AAAAAAAAAp...
frade33 13y ago
would you please lend me few bitcoins to see how things work. /s My CC got hacked twice on the internet, every time I got my money back., it took 90 days but ultimately was credited. Can I expect it from Bitcoin? Anyway 99.9% people do not have bitcoins to spend. I like it, however it is far from becoming a mainstream payment method., and perhaps never will sadly.
tomasien 13y ago
The rush to defend credit cards on this thread is staggering but extremely interesting to me! It seems the consensus is that in the absence of an ideal solution, we love credit cards (especially in the USA). Two really important things: 1. Consumer protections are not a Credit Card thing - chargebacks and literally every single protection CC's give you are legally mandated by Regulation E - all payment processors must have them in place. It's unclear how this will relate to BTC, but other solutions (including my own) have this to the letter the same way CC's do. CC's want you to believe it's them, it's not - the US Government made those regulations. 2. Yes Billing and Shipping Address are needed in every instance - but there are better ways than typing them out, especially on a mobile phone. Sure there are services that can save that info for you, but a better solution is a network that already knows that info. Stripe could build that with their "remember me" features, I've built that by using the information your bank has. There are solutions, and we need them to move into mobile commerce where it's impossible for every app to have your info pre-saved. In a world outside the browser, we need better options.
- tim333 13y ago
  Re 1) Maybe in the US that's true but in the UK the protections on credit cards are not the same as for other payment methods such as debit cards. Debit cards do not cover you if the business you paid goes broke for example while credit cards do. This happens fairly often with travel companies who sell holidays and then go bust before you travel.
mbesto 13y ago
I've seen a lot of replies to this comment that are missing the point tomasien is trying to make. BTC can actually completely wipe out the need for VISA, MC, etc. as it can serve for the underlying technology for transactions. The only thing stopping this from happening today is illiquidity of the BTC<>(insert fiat currency) market. Once we see more liquidity, this dream can become a reality.
- dvcc 13y ago
  But BTC cannot simply wipe out the need. Transactions per second is absurdly low currently (7) and confirmations take more than an instant to complete. I just don't see how it can replace the well structured payment networks that exist.
- Nursie 13y ago
  Transactions are not reversible. This feature is important. No, BTC cannot replace Visa/MC etc.
  - runeks 13y ago
    > Transactions are not reversible. This feature is important. No, BTC cannot replace Visa/MC etc. How do you think merchants are paid by VISA? Through wire transfers. Are wire transfers reversible? Nope. Yet VISA is a reversible payment system built on top of bank-to-bank wire transfers. Customers deposit funds into their bank account, they get a credit card tied to this account, they pay a merchant with this credit card, the merchant receives the money into their bank account. Just because the lowest layer is not reversible, does not mean reversibility cannot be built on top. In fact, it's preferable that the lowest layer be irreversible, because irreversibility cannot be built on top of a reversible system. Bitcoin is the IP Protocol of payment protocols. I'm sure that companies are busy building the TCP/IP protocl of payment protocols on top of Bitcoin right now.
    - Nursie 13y ago
      >> Just because the lowest layer is not reversible, does not mean reversibility cannot be built on top. But it might mean it's not a great consumer payments product on its own, which is what the BTC crowd are cheerleading for, incessantly.
tbrownaw 13y ago
I thought most of Europe does bank accounts differently, in a way that allows people to safely transfer money directly?

hnnewguy 13y ago

>which are awful, but necessary for now As a consumer or business? Because as a consumer, I've never had a complaint about my CC, ever. With the NFC chips built into all new CCs (at least here in Canada) I tap my card and leave. You can't get more convenient than that. As such, I don't think credit cards are going anywhere.

tomasien 13y ago
Credit Card payments in person can be great - swipe and go, why not? Online, it's 23 digits that you don't know, and then 3-23 more fields (shipping address, billing address, name, email, etc. etc.) That sucks. Even at it's best in the Stripe Checkout model, it's less than ideal and extremely unsafe - it's so unsafe that American Express is RUNNING COMMERCIALS ADVERTISING HOW UNSAFE THEIR PROCESS IS! For your convenience, let's 2.9% and $0.30 of every transaction. That's a huge drain on the margin for a business of any size, but especially someone with checkout size about 10-50 bucks and margins of 10-40%. So to summarize - online it's bad for consumers, bad for businesses, but it's the only way right now because hell if I know my account and routing number, and if I do the business still needs 3 days to make sure I own that account. That's the problem we've solved (I believe) but it's in its nascent stages. Bitcoin could potentially lend a lot of relief there too, which is why this is so exciting.
- mikeash 13y ago
  I let my password manager handle the multiple fields required, although it's still not the best solution ever. What are these commercials that AmEx is running? I assume they're presenting it as "convenient" rather than "unsafe" but it's obvious enough if you know what's going on?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- tomasien 13y ago
  Can't respond to individual comments - chargeback protection is NOT a credit-card thing - it's a consumer protection called Regulation E that all payment processors must have. We have it for ACH for example.
  - srdev 13y ago
    That seems to be at odds with how Bitcoin works with the handful of large retailers that accept it. Reading online experiences, there are a subset where they order something at Overstock/Tiger Direct, the order does not go through, but the Bitcoins are sent, and they are told to complain to Coinbase. The alternative is I spend 5 minutes on the phone with a third party to issue a chargeback. ACH are also reversible by a third party (the bank). Is my understanding flawed? How does a chargeback work when a third party does not exist and the protocol does not allow chargebacks. Edit: Note that the merchant itself doing a refund is not equivalent. The important feature of a chargeback is that its a third party issuing it.
  - gamblor956 13y ago
    Regulation E only applies to specified forms of electronic funds transfer. For example, it would not apply to prepaid cards. It is not clear that Regulation E would apply to Bitcoin transactions, and so far most retailers and BTC payment processors have taken the stance that Regulation E does not apply to BTC transactions.
    - tomasien 13y ago
      Solid point. Sometimes I forget if I'm talking about Knox or BTC - either way, Reg E is NOT a CC thing
- srdev 13y ago
  > Online, it's 23 digits that you don't know, and then 3-23 more fields (shipping address, billing address, name, email, etc. etc.) That sucks. Shipping address, name, and email are necessary even if you use bitcoin. Billing address is usually the same as shipping address. That leaves the CC number, in which case the equivalent is your bitcoin address. So there's no real win here. And if you're using a regular online shop, then they probably have all these details saved. With Amazon, I can buy things with one click. With Newegg and other stores that I use regularly, its two. I haven't seen any bitcoin experience that matches that. Reading up on "experiences" people have with Overstock and Tiger Direct, it all seems very roundabout and inconvenient. And then you're hit with shit like no refunds to top it off. > Even at it's best in the Stripe Checkout model, it's less than ideal and extremely unsafe - it's so unsafe that American Express is RUNNING COMMERCIALS ADVERTISING HOW UNSAFE THEIR PROCESS IS! Pull is less safe than push, yes. Bitcoin is undoubtedly more secure than giving your CC number. But pull is more convenient for consumers, as I outlined above. There's work-arounds for credit cards, such as virtual card numbers, but they haven't gained broader consumer penetration for the exact reason that they're inconvenient. In practice, the "unsafe but you can get the charges reversed" system works well enough that promoting a new system based on the fact that its safer isn't really enough. > For your convenience, let's 2.9% and $0.30 of every transaction. That's a huge drain on the margin for a business of any size, but especially someone with checkout size about 10-50 bucks and margins of 10-40%. Not every business charges 2.9%. Many get rates as low as 1% (this is what we charged large corporations, if I remember correctly). With bitcoin, you're going to get hit with transaction fees, exchange fees, and exchange spread. For small shops, its likely that will come out less than the CC fees, but for bigger stores its questionable. Edit: Note that I hope these problems will be solved. Ideally, we see the Bitcoin protocol and ecosystem mature such that it is as convenient as a credit card and safer to boot.
  - evv 13y ago
    > Shipping address, name, and email are necessary even if you use bitcoin. Billing address is usually the same as shipping address. That leaves the CC number, in which case the equivalent is your bitcoin address. Maybe I'm confused. Why is the address, name and email necessary for BTC payments? Is it a stripe requirement? And, as you probably know, a bitcoin address is WAY more secure than a CC#. They are nowhere near "equivalent"
- Guvante 13y ago
  Bitcoin is equivalent to cash, of course businesses want a cash equivalent as their method of online payment. However many consumers have gotten used to the protections credit cards offer.
  - pbreit 13y ago
    No it's not. Since businesses have to convert most or all of it to real cash and it can take hours or days for this process to complete, there would be padding built in to account for the volatility.
ejfox 13y ago
If you had the option to tap a Bitcoin card and have the same experience, but save 3% on the transaction, would you?
- jeffgreco 13y ago
  Not if the value of Bitcoin continues to fluctuate. How am I supposed to know if I can afford the cup of coffee without checking an exchange value?
- tomasien 13y ago
  Our user tests suggest that people will pay with their online banking when offered even a 1% discount, which is awesome. More than 40%.
- dvcc 13y ago
  What about consumer protections? Extended warranties, painless returns, fraud protection, etc. I am at no risk when using a credit card. Why would I even want to switch?
- pbreit 13y ago
  Probably not. I'd prefer the mileage, peace of mind that I have recourse, consolidated statementing, free 30 day loan, etc. And you would not save 3%. In fact, with Bitcoin's volatility, you might be charged 3% as you are now when you purchase in a different currency. Bitcoin enthusiasts have a difficult time understanding the cost of currency volatility.
  - baddox 13y ago
    And yet, it's pretty common to pay with cash at any brick and mortar store, where you have no electronic protection (like chargebacks) and not even any physical protection for the cash you carry around.
    - srdev 13y ago
      If I pay with cash at a store then I'm literally walking out with the goods. For services, I've already received the services before paying. You're correct that there is no physical protection for the cash, but that is why most people do not carry lots of cash. Most store it in an insured bank account.
netcan 13y ago
The 1st order effects are on business. It's mostly the 2nd order effects that consumers feel. Marginally higher costs that inevitably pass to consumers . Merchant refusal to ship to "high risk" locations. More difficult international transactions generally. Fewer online vendors (=less choice & higher prices) of high risk (easily resellable) items. Then there are the effects of having such a thick intermediary, a duopoly. Some consumers can't get a credit card. It's hard for consumers vulnerable to overspending & borrowing to avoid the card's expensive credit component. There's also a general brokenness (IMO) of the "pull" nature of credit cards. I want to send vendors money, not authorize them to take some themselves while reserving the right to dispute the charge. Even for recurring transactions I would rather an easy bill paying service that works like invoices & checks do, but with a 10X simpler UI.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- wdewind 13y ago
  > Marginally higher costs that inevitably pass to consumers Massive statement that I sincerely doubt is true (increased revenue off of increased liquidity drives prices down for everyone).
  - netcan 13y ago
    I don't understand this statement. It's controversial that an extra cost attached to every transaction in a big wide chunk of the economy will bring up costs to consumers. It's not very different to sales tax.
    - wdewind 13y ago
      No, it's completely different from sales tax because while the company will have slightly increased costs (usually ~2.5%), they will also move significantly more inventory which will allow quicker reinvestment cycles, and thus more growth. This is the value of credit/debt in general: assuming everyone trusts everyone else transaction volume can greatly increase. And that trust comes from the credit card companies.
amorphid 13y ago
I recently tried buying a something online with a credit card, and the transaction was declined due to a fraud alert. I happened to have a few bucks worth of BitCoin, and the merchant accept BitCoin, so I used BitCoin to make the purchase. Making the purchase felt like cash, and it felt oddly satisfying. For some purchases, there is MasterCard. For everything else, there's BitCoin.
baddox 13y ago
> Because as a consumer, I've never had a complaint about my CC, ever. I take it you've never had your CC details stolen, or less seriously, had your CC automatically shut down when you're traveling due to "suspicious activity."
- etchalon 13y ago
  I've had both happen to me. Neither take more than a few moments on the phone to resolve without the lose of any funds.
- hnnewguy 13y ago
  >I take it you've never had your CC details stolen No, but I've had fraudulent charges, which required only a phone call to complain, and they were reversed.
aestra 13y ago
>Because as a consumer, I've never had a complaint about my CC, ever. With the NFC chips built into all new CCs (at least here in Canada) I tap my card and leave. I don't want to tap my card and leave. I wish I could turn off that "feature." A way credit cards are bad for consumers? Science proves that you tend to spend less money when you pay with cash, especially on unplanned and/or impulse purchases. I guess the psychology of actually handing something over then having less of it afterwards makes people think twice about if they really need to spend the money. Also getting extra cash when you over budget has an extra step (trip to bank/ATM) so you're probably more likely to stay in budget or to rethink if you really need that over budget purchase. http://www.livescience.com/2849-study-credit-cards-spending.html http://www.livescience.com/2849-study-credit-cards-spending.... http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/08/pay-in-cash.asp http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/08/pay-in-cash.asp http://seekingalpha.com/article/20333-guide-to-credit-cards-how-credit-cards-encourage-you-to-overspend http://seekingalpha.com/article/20333-guide-to-credit-cards-... http://business.time.com/2013/08/08/turns-out-you-only-think-youre-spending-less-money/ http://business.time.com/2013/08/08/turns-out-you-only-think... I especially think this is interesting: >McDonald's found that the average transaction rose from $4.50 to $7 when customers used plastic instead of cash
- hnnewguy 13y ago
  >I don't want to tap my card and leave. Then don't. No one forces you. Use signature only, or "chip and pin".
  - aestra 13y ago
    No, but I'd rather not have my credit cards have that option in them. Basically, I do not like the fact someone can tap my card and then get money from it. I just am not a fan of that type of payment, because it is too easy. I don't like the argument "don't use it" because it isn't an optional "feature," if your card has it, it has it. You cannot turn it off. http://www.mymoneycoach.ca/credit_rating/how-to-protect-self-from-electronic-smart-card-identity-credit-card-theft.html http://www.mymoneycoach.ca/credit_rating/how-to-protect-self... "a $3 smart card reader purchased online can steal people’s credit card information if the thief can get close enough to your purse or wallet. I know you're thinking "you're not liable for fraud." Doesn't mean I want fraud to happen, that it isn't a pain in the ass. Especially unsettling is the RFID chips in passports. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/15/AR2006091500923.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09... http://www.emc.com/emc-plus/rsa-labs/staff-associates/epc-rfid-tag-security-defenses.htm http://www.emc.com/emc-plus/rsa-labs/staff-associates/epc-rf...

piokoch 13y ago

"which are awful, but necessary for now". I am not sure what is exactly that awful in having free credit for X days, rewards for making purchases (which effectively cancels fees) and, the most important thing, chargebacks. I can understand Credit Card issues from seller point of view, but for clients (that is most of us), they are not that bad. Bitcoin will have to provide the same level of consumer comfort and safety to have wider adoption. This also touches banking system as a whole. If I make an error in my bank transfer, I will get my money back and this is up to bank to return them, I don't have to worry about this. Who will give me back my bitcoin payment done by mistake?

tomasien 13y ago
That's a good point, BTC doesn't have that figured out yet but I bet Stripe will be able to help figure that out! We handle that for ACH if you're interested.
- pbreit 13y ago
  Bitcoin does have the capability of "2 of 3" authorizations which can mitigate some of the upfront risk. The idea being that a payment only completes after 2 parties approve it, the 3rd being an independent 3rd party in this case (who could be configured to auto-approve if a complaint isn't filed in x days).
  - danielweber 13y ago
    And what stops the customer from filing a bogus complaint, same as they do now if they use a credit card?
    - pbreit 13y ago
      Getting kicked out of the system.
      - seabee 13y ago
        Only if the incentives of the third party align this way, which is very unlikely as many merchants burned by PayPal/eBay can attest to.

tuhins 13y ago

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_G777JJtwUs/TyHaeYfCcDI/AAAAAAAAApo/vjZeRGwQLQw/s1600/black-guy-gif-star-trek.gif http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_G777JJtwUs/TyHaeYfCcDI/AAAAAAAAAp...

frade33 13y ago

would you please lend me few bitcoins to see how things work. /s My CC got hacked twice on the internet, every time I got my money back., it took 90 days but ultimately was credited. Can I expect it from Bitcoin? Anyway 99.9% people do not have bitcoins to spend. I like it, however it is far from becoming a mainstream payment method., and perhaps never will sadly.

tomasien 13y ago

The rush to defend credit cards on this thread is staggering but extremely interesting to me! It seems the consensus is that in the absence of an ideal solution, we love credit cards (especially in the USA). Two really important things: 1. Consumer protections are not a Credit Card thing - chargebacks and literally every single protection CC's give you are legally mandated by Regulation E - all payment processors must have them in place. It's unclear how this will relate to BTC, but other solutions (including my own) have this to the letter the same way CC's do. CC's want you to believe it's them, it's not - the US Government made those regulations. 2. Yes Billing and Shipping Address are needed in every instance - but there are better ways than typing them out, especially on a mobile phone. Sure there are services that can save that info for you, but a better solution is a network that already knows that info. Stripe could build that with their "remember me" features, I've built that by using the information your bank has. There are solutions, and we need them to move into mobile commerce where it's impossible for every app to have your info pre-saved. In a world outside the browser, we need better options.

tim333 13y ago
Re 1) Maybe in the US that's true but in the UK the protections on credit cards are not the same as for other payment methods such as debit cards. Debit cards do not cover you if the business you paid goes broke for example while credit cards do. This happens fairly often with travel companies who sell holidays and then go bust before you travel.

mbesto 13y ago

I've seen a lot of replies to this comment that are missing the point tomasien is trying to make. BTC can actually completely wipe out the need for VISA, MC, etc. as it can serve for the underlying technology for transactions. The only thing stopping this from happening today is illiquidity of the BTC<>(insert fiat currency) market. Once we see more liquidity, this dream can become a reality.

dvcc 13y ago
But BTC cannot simply wipe out the need. Transactions per second is absurdly low currently (7) and confirmations take more than an instant to complete. I just don't see how it can replace the well structured payment networks that exist.
Nursie 13y ago
Transactions are not reversible. This feature is important. No, BTC cannot replace Visa/MC etc.
- runeks 13y ago
  > Transactions are not reversible. This feature is important. No, BTC cannot replace Visa/MC etc. How do you think merchants are paid by VISA? Through wire transfers. Are wire transfers reversible? Nope. Yet VISA is a reversible payment system built on top of bank-to-bank wire transfers. Customers deposit funds into their bank account, they get a credit card tied to this account, they pay a merchant with this credit card, the merchant receives the money into their bank account. Just because the lowest layer is not reversible, does not mean reversibility cannot be built on top. In fact, it's preferable that the lowest layer be irreversible, because irreversibility cannot be built on top of a reversible system. Bitcoin is the IP Protocol of payment protocols. I'm sure that companies are busy building the TCP/IP protocl of payment protocols on top of Bitcoin right now.
  - Nursie 13y ago
    >> Just because the lowest layer is not reversible, does not mean reversibility cannot be built on top. But it might mean it's not a great consumer payments product on its own, which is what the BTC crowd are cheerleading for, incessantly.

tbrownaw 13y ago

I thought most of Europe does bank accounts differently, in a way that allows people to safely transfer money directly?