Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The lack of charge back is really a small issue. I don't think it applies here. Crypto does solve this problem. Even if there's the lack of charge back, it still overcomes the censorship problem, which traditional systems do not. So do you want censorship + charge back? Or no censorship and no charge back? In this case, I think it's clearly the latter.


You're missing the point. "Chargeback" happens to be a mechanism that exists to promote trust in the market. Trust is the requirement, not mechanism. Right now no one uses crypto to send folks $20 a month for n00dz. Period. No one does this. Why?

Trust. Crypto providers don't trust they won't be hacked. Crypto consumers don't trust they aren't being scammed. There's no trust.

But their Visa card or OnlyFans account? Those they trust. Credit card billing has been around for decades and we all know it works.

Crypto needs to be like that. Address the Trust Problem. Stop fixating on anonymity.


The traditional banking mechanisms are designed to pull money from accounts. That requires a way to correct errors and fraud. If the only way to transact is for a verified account owner to push the money out, a chargeback isn't needed as much.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: