Hacker News Reader

Comment by perryizgr8 | Hacker News Reader

I don't get this. I would have thought it would be the other way around. Paypal and credit card companies do a lot of KYC and other checks on their users. Bitcoin does none. If you need to verify a user's identity for some reason, you need to do it more if they pay by Bitcoin!

View on HN

The point is not the KYC, the point is to eliminate chargebacks.

Since a lot of their customers will be on the grey side of legitimacy, I imagine credit card fraud would be common which can get their seller account shut down.

Why not 3DS with pre-charge $1 with random description for the customer to later verify?

Sorry but they're not getting my ID. Strikethrough.

Think that’s sort of the point. They don’t want your ID, they want you to use Bitcoin

You've got it all backwards.

Bitcoin doesn't need identity to prevent fraudulent payments. It uses math for that.

The legacy banking system has no real, complete solution to fraudulent payments. So instead they bodge on this identity-checking nonsense, which maybe sorta works sometimes, with very high overhead. Privacy is collateral damage here.

KYC for cryptocurrencies is like horse-buggy manufacturers requiring a whip and manure-scooper in every automobile. The horse-buggy industry is very desperately trying to convince you that this requirement is for your own good. And that without it, the terrorists will win.

You have it all mistaken. It's for AML, not for fraud.

If this business is concerned about AML, why do they accept anonymous bitcoin payments? They care about chargebacks, not AML.

I don't care about this business. I'm responding to the rant of poster above me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com