But that's already possible without bitcoin ever getting involved. Not to mention that (I'd wager) 95% of transactions online are single-currency.
I guess I'm just not seeing the benefit to the end user here. Bitcoin is cool and all, but so far it hasn't actually solved anyone's problems (and isn't it incredibly slow to process a transaction these days?)
If anything Bitcoin would be much, much worse. If I pay for something with Bitcoin, and it doesn't arrive, I'm left without any recourse whatsoever (just as if I'd mailed an envelope full of currency). At least with a credit card, I can file a chargeback claim.
Offloading the issue of converting it to something usable to them? This only makes sense if you already have a bunch of bitcoin and makes no sense for the receiver.
>for ecommerce through services like Bitpay
Which doesn't fix the charge back or scam problems. Scammers can use Bitpay too.
It is not the transaction fees itself, but the currency exchange rates that kill you at one end or the other.
Wouldn't the incredibly volatile currency exchange rate of Bitcoin also cause problems? It is not immune to this as it is free floating against other currencies.
I'd love to see a world-currency which does away with existing credit card companies and transfer fees worldwide, but Bitcoin is not suitable, and I suspect if we see one emerge it will quickly be regulated and taxed by governments like all other means of storing wealth.
Credit card transactions are reversible and the numbers are easy to steal, so it would be too easy to scam an exchange in this way. It's just as hard to convert local currency into any other currency, so it's not really unique to Bitcoin, and it probably won't get much more "effortless".
I didn't say the problems only occur if you treat bitcoin like a credit card. I said the problem occurs.
You said that you can not worry about charge backs because you can just ask for the money back. Problem solved.
I gave you a list of occasions where no you couldn't just ask for the money back. You have ignored this and focused on this irrelevant argument to avoid having to face the main discussion.
Just because you're avoiding looking at the problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Ok educate me, because I really don't know (my grandmothers both lived in the US): what's wrong with Western Union or PayPal for this purpose?
In many ways this simply moves the problem (overall complication) from a private sector solution much closer to a government solution because it means exchanging bitcoin for real currency will be intensely regulated and have its own fees associated with it.
And maybe someday bitcoin will be worth some monetary value other than the currencies you can exchange it for, but we are not near that.
That's a terrible idea. Bitcoin is difficult to use for both buyer and seller, has high transaction costs, and is associated in the minds of many customers with illegal transactions.
All that is secondary though to the extreme lack of stability of value, which is pretty important in a medium of exchange. You might as well be telling him to accept tulips.
Almost all the downsides you listed apply to cash as well which is why people don't keep cash under their mattress anymore and don't do large cash transactions.
Bitcoin should be seen as a currency first and a payment system second. Nothing should prevent the current banking system from adopting it as a currency while keeping all their existing checks in place. Credit cards could support BTC denominated payments and still have all of their chargeback policies in place.
In that world, doing a large Bitcoin transaction would be the analogous of moving trucks of cash around and keeping a large amount of Bitcoin would be like hiding tons of cash in under your mattress (reserved for experts). The majority of payments would be "off chain" while still allowing for people to opt out.
You might ask what's the point of Bitcoin then? Well, I think it would still have a couple of benefits over traditional currencies like USD:
- Supply of currency not controlled by any government or entity
- Easier to "opt out" from system than with physical cash
- Transparency (institutions that wish to do so could use the blockchain to be transparent about their finance)
- Efficiency (though there's been a lot of criticism about the energy consumption of Bitcoin mining, think of all the human capital, real estate and transportation cost that goes into physically moving and securing cash)
I'd also add that I'm not sure bitcoin ever needs to be anything more than a medium of exchange. In digital commerce there is no reason not to denote in one currency, exchange in another while marking to a third.
Chargebacks, speed, etc all get translated to transaction costs. Lower transaction costs by an order of magnitude or two and all sorts of things become possible.
Not to mention that since people aren't actually conducting business exclusively in bitcoin they are forced to transfer back to fiat currency constantly which is a transaction that has all the same risks.
I don't think that was the main issue. Bitcoin's main use as an actual currency was for things like drugs, where the legal system wouldn't be on your side anyway. So lack of chargebacks wasn't an issue anyway.
The bigger issues with BTC is the onboarding problem, limited capacity and rapidly fluctuating exchange rate.
There are a few issues - there are no "chargebacks" with Bitcoin. You get a lot less protections in your capability to return things - its all up to the merchant. Also, the transaction times are too slow right now, esp for small purchases. Finally, there is so much volatility with the value of cryptos - would a merchant want to see the amount you paid him lose 20% value the next day just due to the market?
It's non-trivial to convert bitcoin into a regular currency, you have to use 3rd party sites that have a terrible record with security
It's not understood and accepted by most people.
You can't do chargebacks.
reply