YOINK DOT ADIOS BACKSLASH LOSERS SIMPSONS TRIAL
It's not "the result of decades of learnings and trial and error." It's the result of banking regulations which impose huge risks on anyone who receives money through the banking and credit card system, in order to avoid imposing risks on people who send money. Obviously any payment method that is a layer over credit cards and US bank transactions is going to want to support reversal otherwise, in cases like these, the payment processor gets left holding the bag. Cashier's-check scams are another classic form of this crime. PayPal automatically took her side because he didn't have a shipping tracking number. Listed it on Craigslist for sale, a woman paid by PayPal and then came by to pick it up, and after she left she reversed the payment. A friend of mine had his laptop stolen via payment reversal. Payment reversal is an open invitation to criminals to steal from sellers. Sure, you could trace all of that, but then what? Would you instruct the Blockchain network to not authorise any spends originating from those addresses? Kind of maintain a black list?
If I do a thought exercise with bitcoin what are the potential options to prevent such a heist? I would imagine within an hour or so $1B would get distributed to to thousands of wallets. Also I imagine the 4 individuals, the final recipients of the money are being pursued. I would say the system has worked as intended, for sure there's a scope for improvement which I'm sure are being worked upon. traced.US$81 million to the Philippines.out of which US$18 million has been recovered. with US$20 million traced to Sri Lanka.recovered The Federal Reserve Bank of New York blocked.US$850 million The net loss was in fact minuscule (in % terms) compared to the attempted amount. So I actually followed Bangladesh heist because it's a fascinating at multiple levels. Right, not having worked with it my knowledge of SWIFT is at a superficial level. The soft human trust networks can and do break in a myriad of ways, so often we given them a name - "black swan events". While the crypto currencies have their weaknesses - the 51% attack is very real and the power consumption of Argentina can seem over the top, they provide a very concrete, measurable level of trustworthiness. I think it is fair to say crypto currencies look most attractive when the traditional trust networks we humans have crafted out of out of bankers, institutions and laws break down. In that scenario, the non-reversibility of Bitcoin transactions looks real attractive. I don't know if their savings were permanently taken or merely "borrowed" for a while, but in any case the move to Australia was taken off the table when it looked most desirable. > As a result of monetary policies implemented by central bank Governor Riad Salameh, people are currently unable to withdraw money even from local currency accounts, she added. The solution was apparently to raid the citizens savings accounts. Then the explosion happened, and the government literally ran out of money. An Australian who had married a Lebanese wife and moved to Lebanon reported the couple had decided the move was a bad idea, and were saving for a relocation back to Australia. One was what happened in Lebanon after the port explosion. Some things are near incomprehensible to us in the West. That is not a transaction in a meaningful sense. Note that there is a legitimate use case for moving large piles of cash, say casino depositing daily earnings at their local bank. That leaves us with suitcase piles of cash being paid and it's not hard to guess it's mostly being done to avoid authorities. Due to safety reasons customer as well as merchant wouldn't want to deal with big sums of physical cash. Now for larger ticket items I'd hypothesise that 99% of them are done through online through credit-card, bank transfer and what not. The spender will not transact at the merchant again so in fact more often than not merchants are willing to settle in favour of customers. Also, about 90% of cases ticket size is ~20$ so even if a dispute isn't settled in spender's favour it's no big deal. So disputes are settled right there and then, merchant and customer talk it out. Like I go to a grocery store, buy a pound of bread and pay cash. The vast majority of cash transactions take place in exchange for goods/services rendered immediately. Right, so it's important to understand the context in which cash is used.
0 kommentar(er)
