4 ms·

>By the way you still fail at providing any data why it was a "huge flop" Fewer transactions and lower volume than last year. Multiple vendors on /r/bitcoin c

>By the way you still fail at providing any data why it was a "huge flop" Fewer transactions and lower volume than last year. Multiple vendors on /r/bitcoin claiming little to no volume either compared to last year. >I am confident you are able to find some anecdotes on /r/bitcoin from a few mom-and-pop shops disappointed by their bitcoin sales this year. But anecdotes are not data. Data is the "+82%" number I reported above. Right so reports from multiple vendors about lackluster sales are anecdotes. A vanity number like 82% increase with no indication of the size of the transactions, etc is data. How about the fact that bitpay has been claiming the 1m a day in transactions now for over half a year? How about that for no growth? >Their sales are not declining anymore. They have reached a steady state of $7000-8000 a day for the last 3 months That is a decline Here are the figures from their releases so far Jan 10 - 130K Jan 11-29 - $26K/day average Next 36 days to March 4th they do $400K - $11K/day average Next 83 days to May 27th they do $600K - $7200/day average Now they are claiming $7000 a day. Given that the $7200 * the number of days left in the year = $3m I'm guessing we'll see that $3m number change again when they actually release their financials. >That's why cash works. You go to a restaurant and pay cash because you don't care about giving up the ability to contest the charge: you trust the restaurant Cash works like this because you are physically present with the merchant when you use it so you can validate immediately if you are getting ripped off or not. >Bitcoin doesn't have to satisfy 100% of use cases to be successful. Right but it has to satisfy enough common ones to convince users to make the additional effort to acquire it. It's not doing that. >I chuckled at this. Obviously you are unfamiliar with how it's done. The standard way of doing a "charge back" in Bitcoin is to ask the customer to provide a refund address. Easy peasy :) Yes that explains why there are no scams in bitcoin at all. And there were no complaints about Tigerdirect fulfillment related to bitcoin orders. >You completely ignored what I said: despite not losing money, it can be a tremendous annoyance and hassle to cancel and replace a CC, with the incident affecting your credit score, etc. These are real problems, real annoyances, NOT solved by credit cards. Bitcoin fixes that. But it's not a tremendous hassle. You call the bank tell them the card was stolen(or they detect it) list any transactions you didn't make and the money is refunded and a new card is posted. There are a handful of cases where it is more difficult than that. Do you have examples of it affecting credit scores? >Second time you completely ignored what I said: yes security is hard, but hardware wallets are improving security. You can't deny this. Walk me through the steps to buying and putting bitcoin on your hardware wallet that wouldn't be compromised by the user having a virus on their computer that targeted bitcoin. >They do work (I have used one). Please enlighten us Which one have you used and I'll tell you how to abuse it. >Wrong. As I explained, my example (sendbitcoin.mx) does not need physical presence, as they rely on an existing bank ATM network, even if you don't have a bank account. That is a physical presence. The fact that they are using someone elses physical presence doesn't mean they don't need one. It means they are using someone elses locations to subsidize their own. Companies tend to not like that which is why I would put money on sendbitcoin.mx being shut down within the next 6 months. >Banks don't do it for the same reason large companies often fail to innovate compared to small agile startups: inertia, redtape, etc. Actually there were a lot of banks doing the US->MX remittance up until a few years ago when regulations and compliance got to be way too expensive for it to be profitable.

timeal 12y ago
> Fewer transactions and lower volume than last year. Again, for the 4th(!) time, you have no data proving this. > Multiple vendors on /r/bitcoin claiming little to no volume either compared to last year. A few anecdotes != reliable statistics > Right so reports from multiple vendors about lackluster sales are anecdotes. Yes. Your "multiple vendors" probably means "less than a dozen vendors", which is insignificant given there are tens of thousands of vendors in the world accepting Bitcoin. > How about the fact that bitpay has been claiming the 1m a day in transactions now for over half a year? How about that for no growth? Ha! Now you change your claim. You talked earlier about a significant reduction, a "huge flop". Now you claim stagnation, no growth. That's very different. > Here are the figures from their releases so far > Jan 10 - 130K Jan 11-29 - $26K/day average Next 36 days to March 4th they do $400K - $11K/day average Next 83 days to May 27th they do $600K - $7200/day average > Now they are claiming $7000 a day. Given that the $7200 * the number of days left in the year = $3m I'm guessing we'll see that $3m number change again when they actually release their financials. Sales were declining, but not anymore, not since September, not since the last 3 months. That is exactly what I claimed, and nothing more. I said: "They have reached a steady state of $7000-8000 a day FOR THE LAST 3 MONTHS" (emphasis mine). > Cash works like this because you are physically present with the merchant when you use it so you can validate immediately if you are getting ripped off or not. Exactly, and I am glad to see you acknowledge that Bitcoin's lack of CC-like consumer protections is a total non-problem in such scenarios. You made it sound like such protections were absolutely necessary, at all time, or else Bitcoin can never work!!!!!1!one > Right but it has to satisfy enough common ones to convince users to make the additional effort to acquire it. It's not doing that. Yes, and I think you will agree that "reducing fraud to zero for merchants" is a pretty major use case given that fraud is a huge problem for merchants online. As well as "being able to pay a trusted merchant online while guaranteeing not having a CC number that can be stolen" since financial theft is becoming more and more frequent. > Yes that explains why there are no scams in bitcoin at all. And there were no complaints about Tigerdirect fulfillment related to bitcoin orders. Technological problems from one merchant's deployment of Bitcoin is hardly a sign that "OMG Bitcoin totally doesn't work and will never be adopted" as you make it seem to be. For every customer who experiences one issue paying/getting a refund in Bitcoin, there are many more customers who do so without any problem. > But it's not a tremendous hassle. You call the bank tell them the card was stolen(or they detect it) list any transactions you didn't make and the money is refunded and a new card is posted. There are a handful of cases where it is more difficult than that. Do you have examples of it affecting credit scores? Obviously, whether it is a tremendous or a minor hassle is a matter of personal experience, and a matter of how much of your life depends on credit cards. But my point is: it can be a tremendous hassle, and credit cards do not automatically make a theft a non-issue. Some examples of major hassles: having you card stolen and having to cancel it during a vacation away from home. After a theft you have to re-configure all automatic periodic payments that were due to be processed on the CC. You forgot to give the new CC number to your cloud service provider? Oops they can suddenly shut down your instances at 3am with little to no notice. Your wife had set up some other random online service paid through the CC, but you were not aware of it? Oops her online account will be closed as fraudulent and it will take multiple phone calls and emails to the support department to get it re-opened. The CC thief's actions lead to some negative events added to you credit history? Oops good luck spending multiple WEEKS contacting the credit scoring agencies indepedentently to get your records cleaned up, and submit the proper documentation to prove it was all due to a theft. Bottom line: you know how some Bitcoin fanboys blatantly ignore its kinks? Well you are guilty of the same thing when you blatantly and childishly ignore the kinks of credit cards when they are stolen and have to be replaced. > Walk me through the steps to buying and putting bitcoin on your hardware wallet that wouldn't be compromised by the user having a virus on their computer that targeted bitcoin. You mean the same computer where the virus will also steal the CC number that the user enters on a website when making a payement? Hmm? How does this virus scenario demonstrates that credit cards are safer? If the user cancels the first CC, gets a second one, what prevents the virus from stealing the second CC number at the next purchase? CCs don't solve this virus problem at all. However I can envision scenarios where Bitcoin hardware wallets actually solve this virus problem. The simplest one is: you could buy a pre-loaded cheap disposable wallet (maybe in the form factor of a credit card) hence completely skipping the virus-ladden PC. > Which one have you used and I'll tell you how to abuse it. I used casascius's Bitcoin Address Utility. It has a self-escrow (two-party escrow) functionality which is not user-friendly, but the it is cryptographically well implemented and very secure. > That is a physical presence. The fact that they are using someone elses physical presence doesn't mean they don't need one. It means they are using someone elses locations to subsidize their own. Companies tend to not like that which is why I would put money on sendbitcoin.mx being shut down within the next 6 months. We shall see.

timeal 12y ago

> Fewer transactions and lower volume than last year. Again, for the 4th(!) time, you have no data proving this. > Multiple vendors on /r/bitcoin claiming little to no volume either compared to last year. A few anecdotes != reliable statistics > Right so reports from multiple vendors about lackluster sales are anecdotes. Yes. Your "multiple vendors" probably means "less than a dozen vendors", which is insignificant given there are tens of thousands of vendors in the world accepting Bitcoin. > How about the fact that bitpay has been claiming the 1m a day in transactions now for over half a year? How about that for no growth? Ha! Now you change your claim. You talked earlier about a significant reduction, a "huge flop". Now you claim stagnation, no growth. That's very different. > Here are the figures from their releases so far > Jan 10 - 130K Jan 11-29 - $26K/day average Next 36 days to March 4th they do $400K - $11K/day average Next 83 days to May 27th they do $600K - $7200/day average > Now they are claiming $7000 a day. Given that the $7200 * the number of days left in the year = $3m I'm guessing we'll see that $3m number change again when they actually release their financials. Sales were declining, but not anymore, not since September, not since the last 3 months. That is exactly what I claimed, and nothing more. I said: "They have reached a steady state of $7000-8000 a day FOR THE LAST 3 MONTHS" (emphasis mine). > Cash works like this because you are physically present with the merchant when you use it so you can validate immediately if you are getting ripped off or not. Exactly, and I am glad to see you acknowledge that Bitcoin's lack of CC-like consumer protections is a total non-problem in such scenarios. You made it sound like such protections were absolutely necessary, at all time, or else Bitcoin can never work!!!!!1!one > Right but it has to satisfy enough common ones to convince users to make the additional effort to acquire it. It's not doing that. Yes, and I think you will agree that "reducing fraud to zero for merchants" is a pretty major use case given that fraud is a huge problem for merchants online. As well as "being able to pay a trusted merchant online while guaranteeing not having a CC number that can be stolen" since financial theft is becoming more and more frequent. > Yes that explains why there are no scams in bitcoin at all. And there were no complaints about Tigerdirect fulfillment related to bitcoin orders. Technological problems from one merchant's deployment of Bitcoin is hardly a sign that "OMG Bitcoin totally doesn't work and will never be adopted" as you make it seem to be. For every customer who experiences one issue paying/getting a refund in Bitcoin, there are many more customers who do so without any problem. > But it's not a tremendous hassle. You call the bank tell them the card was stolen(or they detect it) list any transactions you didn't make and the money is refunded and a new card is posted. There are a handful of cases where it is more difficult than that. Do you have examples of it affecting credit scores? Obviously, whether it is a tremendous or a minor hassle is a matter of personal experience, and a matter of how much of your life depends on credit cards. But my point is: it can be a tremendous hassle, and credit cards do not automatically make a theft a non-issue. Some examples of major hassles: having you card stolen and having to cancel it during a vacation away from home. After a theft you have to re-configure all automatic periodic payments that were due to be processed on the CC. You forgot to give the new CC number to your cloud service provider? Oops they can suddenly shut down your instances at 3am with little to no notice. Your wife had set up some other random online service paid through the CC, but you were not aware of it? Oops her online account will be closed as fraudulent and it will take multiple phone calls and emails to the support department to get it re-opened. The CC thief's actions lead to some negative events added to you credit history? Oops good luck spending multiple WEEKS contacting the credit scoring agencies indepedentently to get your records cleaned up, and submit the proper documentation to prove it was all due to a theft. Bottom line: you know how some Bitcoin fanboys blatantly ignore its kinks? Well you are guilty of the same thing when you blatantly and childishly ignore the kinks of credit cards when they are stolen and have to be replaced. > Walk me through the steps to buying and putting bitcoin on your hardware wallet that wouldn't be compromised by the user having a virus on their computer that targeted bitcoin. You mean the same computer where the virus will also steal the CC number that the user enters on a website when making a payement? Hmm? How does this virus scenario demonstrates that credit cards are safer? If the user cancels the first CC, gets a second one, what prevents the virus from stealing the second CC number at the next purchase? CCs don't solve this virus problem at all. However I can envision scenarios where Bitcoin hardware wallets actually solve this virus problem. The simplest one is: you could buy a pre-loaded cheap disposable wallet (maybe in the form factor of a credit card) hence completely skipping the virus-ladden PC. > Which one have you used and I'll tell you how to abuse it. I used casascius's Bitcoin Address Utility. It has a self-escrow (two-party escrow) functionality which is not user-friendly, but the it is cryptographically well implemented and very secure. > That is a physical presence. The fact that they are using someone elses physical presence doesn't mean they don't need one. It means they are using someone elses locations to subsidize their own. Companies tend to not like that which is why I would put money on sendbitcoin.mx being shut down within the next 6 months. We shall see.