61–70 of 132 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That usage is not a generic payment usage. This is a use case it is good for. But if 8 billion people should use Bitcoin for their everyday shopping, that is a totally different case...
Wire transfer is better?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was thr original intent of thr Satoshi paper, except BTC is probably the worst payment network you can think about, which is why it failed to gain any use as such over the past 18 years…
Worst for whom? Lack of chargeback risk seems nice for businesses.
Chargebacks exist in the real world because long, long ago people recognized that electronic payment systems are fertile soil for scammers. The "lack of chargeback risk" that cryptobros keep chirping about is nowhere near the flex they think it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worst for whom? Lack of chargeback risk seems nice for businesses.
Only if they're on the receiving end. You need to remember that businesses also buy things, and often by credit card. Chargebacks exist in the real world because long, long ago people recognized that electronic payment systems are fertile soil for scammers. The "lack of chargeback risk" that cryptobros keep chirping about is nowhere near the flex they think it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was thr original intent of thr Satoshi paper, except BTC is probably the worst payment network you can think about, which is why it failed to gain any use as such over the past 18 years…
Worst for whom? Lack of chargeback risk seems nice for businesses.
(Chargeback exists for a reason, and the reason isn't to piss off businesses).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worst for whom? Lack of chargeback risk seems nice for businesses.
Only if they're on the receiving end. You need to remember that businesses also buy things, and often by credit card. Chargebacks exist in the real world because long, long ago people recognized that electronic payment systems are fertile soil for scammers. The "lack of chargeback risk" that cryptobros keep chirping about is nowhere near the flex they think it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worst for whom? Lack of chargeback risk seems nice for businesses.
Until customers don't want to but because they are afraid they have no way to get their money back if anything goes wrong. (Chargeback exists for a reason, and the reason isn't to piss off businesses).
American-style words are really hard these days. I thought 'open' meant source code is available, but at some point, starting with OpenAI, it seems like 'open' has come to mean 'we'll open your wallet.
"open" is simply a vague word that you are assigning more meaning to than it actually means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are both useful. Monero is a bit more tricky to use, there is no concept of Lightning network, you still have to wait around 7 minutes for the transaction to settle. It's not bad, but it is different. The transparency in Bitcoin is a feature not a bug.
CIA uses Bitcoin for intelligence gathering: https://cryptobriefing.com/cia-bitcoin-intelligence-gatherin... Really? Did we IT people decide giving up privacy for security is a good idea?
https://www.chainalysis.com/blockchain-intelligence/
They also do work to deanonymize other blockchains, including monero.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I sent a transfer from the UAE to Spain and another one to the Netherlands. They took 5 days and 7 days respectively. The same transfer takes 10 minutes in Bitcoin. You don't do transfers to pay for stuff at the grocery store, the same way you would not pay using the Bitcoin network. You would use lightning network, which takes less than 2 seconds finality.
That usage is not a generic payment usage. This is a use case it is good for. But if 8 billion people should use Bitcoin for their everyday shopping, that is a totally different case...
MasterCard was around in the 1950's, in 2026 they do not still use the same method of exchanging money as they did back then and have had to make big changes to their systems as time has gone on, Bitcoin does the same thing except it's not controlled by a banking cartel but by all it's userbase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worst for whom? Lack of chargeback risk seems nice for businesses.
Only if they're on the receiving end. You need to remember that businesses also buy things, and often by credit card. Chargebacks exist in the real world because long, long ago people recognized that electronic payment systems are fertile soil for scammers. The "lack of chargeback risk" that cryptobros keep chirping about is nowhere near the flex they think it is.