In general the need for consumer protection mechanisms is of course already a failing of the justice system. Virtually every case where consumer protection is useful is covered by existing laws and shouldn't require anything from the payment facilitator.
No, it's not, because the problem being addressed with consumer protection is power imbalance in the marketplace; mutually voluntary mechanisms cannot be the answer to it.
Also, escrow notionally solves exactly the same problem as cryptocurrency: providing the ability to rely on a transaction with an untrusted counterparty. If you need escrow for anything with cryptocurrency, the cryptocurrency is not doing the one thing that is it's defining purpose. So, why cryptocurrency at all?
...except a lawyer, more money and a non-trivial part of your life.
I don’t know of any state that has ever tried to optimize for a low-overhead justice system “in the small” (e.g. many, more efficient, more convenient small-claims courts; or the introduction of another triage layer of “medium-claims” courts, where most all civil contractual disputes would land) which is an interesting fact all by itself. Speedy+cheap justice goes somewhat hand-in-hand with things like red-tape reduction, in that both are attempts to “oil the wheels” of the state apparatus—yet you’d never hear the same people (e.g. libertarians) espouse both.
Both small-claims courts themselves and rules giving effect to binding arbitration agreements are attempts to do that, as are many specialized, domain-specific administrative forums.
But sure, other than all those things.
A lot of money and research has gone into this, and the tech is being tightened up all the time.
> which increases the risk profile, and thus cost.
Except the cost isn't actually higher.
> You can do this in traditional approaches because you just pass on these costs and there's no need to improve beyond what people are willing to pay.
In the US perhaps, not in places where these costs are regulated.
> Crypto represents...
A much more expensive and more risky way to do basically anything, because you have neither solved security nor trust problems, you've just moved them.
Yeah, but it's not being deployed at consumer level, nor are the savings being passed on.
> A much more expensive and more risky way to do basically anything
Risky, yeah. Like any new technology. But transaction cost is cheaper.
Sorry, I didn't mean to get involved in some holy war. I can see there's people with a lot vested in both sides of the debate. I'm neither. Just pointing out the obvious.
It absolutely is, not sure where you're getting your ideas from here.
> Risky, yeah. Like any new technology. But transaction cost is cheaper.
It's not risky because it's new technology, it's risky because you've passed all the risk to the end user and their opsec. The cost per transaction of something like the VISA network is utterly tiny compared to most cryptocurrency transactions, particularly if you factor in the externalities (mining) and it's a pretty small cost to the merchant as well in places where regulation has been put in place (i.e. not the US). To the consumer it's free. See also bank transfers in most advanced economies.
> Just pointing out the obvious.
You're not pointing out anything that's actually true though.
This was exactly my point. With pervasive crypto end users can assume this to a greater degree, whether you believe that appropriate or not.
Visa e.g. requires specialist terminal equipment, complicated issuer and acquirer and banking relationships and is heavily dependent on legal enforcement wherever you use it. Try using mastercard or visa in a third world country.
For “actual” money transfer, compare with western union where toure talking about ~10% fee.
> ... nothing that’s actually true
Oh you’re a rude one. But I’m sure to somebody you’re very special. Good boy.
It's not a point you made before this, you just said it was "more secure" and "cheaper" without qualification. Now you're just trotting out 'coiner memes about the third world and Western Union.
(You can use Visa in 200 countries by the way)
Have a nice evening, I'm done here.
It's basically the same how a business would recover money from a bad supplier. With small claims court it's even somewhat efficient for small sums, but of course still orders of magnitude more work than a credit card dispute.