Really? Are you sure? Give it a go and see what happens.
All you're doing is moving the fraud potential from the customer to the merchant. Without the network and with instant finality, you've left them with no recourse.
Both credit cards and crypto as a payment primitive in isolation are secure. However, that's a very myopic view of a transaction. A transaction extends beyond simply the payment rails. You're leaving customers significantly worse off by forcing them into no-recourse payments with instant finality. Merchants, being businesses, are significantly better able to protect themselves - as they are able to insure against these losses - and the ability to charge back transactions increases the transaction volume at the store because it gives customers confidence in the payment.
[edit] I already have :)
Have what? Committed fraud? Bold statement. How much did you steal and how often?
There's zero basis to believe that crypto reduces the incidence of fraud. Citation needed.
P.S. all transactions rely on some basis of trust between the merchant and the customer. Cryptocurrency doesn't prevent fraud altogether, but it does severely limit the extent and direction of fraud.
P.P.S. (response to your edit)
>Both credit cards and crypto as a payment primitive in isolation are secure. However, that's a very myopic view of a transaction. A transaction extends beyond simply the payment rails. You're leaving customers significantly worse off by forcing them into no-recourse payments with instant finality. Merchants, being businesses, are significantly better able to protect themselves - as they are able to insure against these losses
No, the credit card payment system is insecure because the information you need to authorize a payment is the same as the information you need to receive a payment (give or take a 4-digit PIN). In cryptocurrency (or even non-cryptocurrency, cryptographic payment systems like GNU Taler or DigiCash) there is the distinction between the public/private key.
Also, on what basis are you supposing that all recipients of a payment are merchants? I don't agree with that assumption.
>the ability to charge back transactions increases the transaction volume at the store because it gives customers confidence in the payment.
Cryptocurrencies are (ideally) designed for payments between low-trust parties, like a drug transaction or a donation to a pseudo-anonymous party. Senders are expected to have the same vigilance that they do with cash payments in an alleyway.
P.P.P.S.
>There's zero basis to believe that crypto reduces the incidence of fraud. Citation needed.
Cryptocurrency makes identity theft attacks impossible by having payments signed by the payee (e.g. rather than requiring proof of open source, personally identifiable information)
Cryptocurrency makes chargeback fraud impossible insofar as the attacker cannot conduct a 51% attack or a finney attack.
As for merchant fraud, users are expected to establish business relationships with trustworthy vendors and hold them accountable themselves. If these trust networks work for the DN and private trackers, then it's secure enough for me. You learn about the trustworthiness of vendors directly through the reviews of your peers, and you limit your risk accordingly.
> As for merchant fraud, users are expected to establish business relationships with trustworthy vendors
That might work for large transactions, or repeated small transactions with the same vendor (assuming there isn't a major regression of trust), but it utterly collapses at scale and diversity of buyers and sellers who can't possibly vet each other for trust (AKA any modern economy). It also would balkanize/silo trade.
> and hold them accountable themselves.
Sounds a lot like the old "break some kneecaps" approach. There's a reason such accountability mechanisms tend to be utilized in criminal enterprises.
>Cryptocurrency makes chargeback fraud impossible insofar as the attacker cannot conduct a 51% attack or a finney attack.
>As for merchant fraud, users are expected to establish business relationships with trustworthy vendors and hold them accountable themselves. If these trust networks work for the DN and private trackers, then it's secure enough for me.
My brother-in-Christ, how are you supposed to achieve mass adoption when you list *as a benefit* that you are stacking the deck in favour of the merchant?
> As for merchant fraud, users are expected to establish business relationships with trustworthy vendors and hold them accountable themselves.
I’d just like to point out that a huge part of the reason credit cards are successful is that I can pay untrusted merchants with relatively low risk to myself. You are describing a massive drawback, bordering on deal breaker.
All you're doing is moving the fraud potential from the customer to the merchant. Without the network and with instant finality, you've left them with no recourse.
Both credit cards and crypto as a payment primitive in isolation are secure. However, that's a very myopic view of a transaction. A transaction extends beyond simply the payment rails. You're leaving customers significantly worse off by forcing them into no-recourse payments with instant finality. Merchants, being businesses, are significantly better able to protect themselves - as they are able to insure against these losses - and the ability to charge back transactions increases the transaction volume at the store because it gives customers confidence in the payment.
[edit] I already have :)
Have what? Committed fraud? Bold statement. How much did you steal and how often?
There's zero basis to believe that crypto reduces the incidence of fraud. Citation needed.