Bitcoin transaction Times SUCK

[turvarya]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a charge back can occur 6 months later. A charge back can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

It's easy to do and must happen more that is reported. Find a vendor, say a coffee shop, that accepts zero confirm transactions and buy your $20 worth of coffee and donuts using your phone wallet. Sit down, open your laptop and initiate a transaction to yourself that you constructed earlier spending the same coins but increase the fee to $0.50. The transaction with the fifty cent fee will be included in a block first and make the other transaction invalid. Close your laptop and walk out with your $0.50 box of donuts and three large coffees. It works well. lol

That's also not how it works. If a node already has the other transaction in his mempool, it won't accept the transaction, even if it has a higher fee.
Learn the fundamentals of Bitcoin before posting bullshit

[QuestionAuthority]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a charge back can occur 6 months later. A charge back can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

It's easy to do and must happen more that is reported. Find a vendor, say a coffee shop, that accepts zero confirm transactions and buy your $20 worth of coffee and donuts using your phone wallet. Sit down, open your laptop and initiate a transaction to yourself that you constructed earlier spending the same coins but increase the fee to $0.50. The transaction with the fifty cent fee will be included in a block first and make the other transaction invalid. Close your laptop and walk out with your $0.50 box of donuts and three large coffees. It works well. lol

That's also not how it works. If a node already has the other transaction in his mempool, it won't accept the transaction, even if it has a higher fee.
Learn the fundamentals of Bitcoin before posting bullshit

It does work. Try it.

[turvarya]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a charge back can occur 6 months later. A charge back can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

It's easy to do and must happen more that is reported. Find a vendor, say a coffee shop, that accepts zero confirm transactions and buy your $20 worth of coffee and donuts using your phone wallet. Sit down, open your laptop and initiate a transaction to yourself that you constructed earlier spending the same coins but increase the fee to $0.50. The transaction with the fifty cent fee will be included in a block first and make the other transaction invalid. Close your laptop and walk out with your $0.50 box of donuts and three large coffees. It works well. lol

That's also not how it works. If a node already has the other transaction in his mempool, it won't accept the transaction, even if it has a higher fee.
Learn the fundamentals of Bitcoin before posting bullshit

It does work. Try it.

Have you bought this account?
I don't remember QuestionAuthority writing such a bullshit.
I can't remember if he was tech savy, but someone who is that long on the forums would at least pick up basic stuff.

[Hopalong]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

Orchestrating a double-spend at a bar or restaurant would be more complicated and expensive than earning that money and paying your bill... The answer is that people are hysterical. They are non-technical non-developers and cry about 10 minute confirmations or long waiting times. They have illusions about what is and isn't, and feel clever when they complain.

If you don't like or understand it, stop using Bitcoin and leave. Bitcoin is for a new generation of economically empowered individuals who wish to put their trust in mathematics rather than human beings. Just consider that some of the same people whining could be working at a bank and handling your money in the same, callous and uninformed manner. No thank you. If someone feels addressed by this, by all means, please go back to Paypal. 

Ohhh how smart you are.. Can you go past a mirror without stopping to admire yourself?

[Borisz]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a chargeback can occur 6 months later. A chargeback can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

The coloured parts that you didn't understand and/or reflect upon are explained in greater detail below. I hope this will help.

Chargeback
I see people bring this argument trying to promote bitcoin that there is no chargebacks and that when paying with card you can get a chargeback even after >>insert time that is not important here<<. I know that it is trendy to dislike banks and similar, but why this argument? It is a different system based on different merits. It is not hard to understand what you are saying and repeating it won't make you understand why a merchant has trust in the payment processor even when chargebacks can happen. This trust is what I was talking about.

Let us take an example:
Merchant <==> Payment Processor <==> Consumer

The merchant, say BuyBigTVsOnline, sells 1000 TVs online in the USA and accepts credit card payment where there is a possibility for a chargeback for 100 years. Just for the sake of argument. 999 customers are satisfied with the product but one (let's call this person randomly) Bob wants to scam BuyBigTVsOnline and files a charge back claiming that his TV never arrived/was damaged or who cares. He gets his money back and BuyBigTVsOnline lost some negligible amount of money. Bob then goes on and does this 3 more times at which point the Payment Processor freezes his account due to fraud (spice it with lawsuit or whatever pleases you) and Bob is out of the picture. Hence, scammers are eventually caught and the fear of this (or hopefully just the wish to be a decent being) motivates average people not to scam others (e.g BuyBigTVsOnline) for no reason (aka the system works). Here BuyBigTVsOnline (!) has trust in the Payment Processor that it catches scammers and on a grand scale his company (BuyBigTVsOnline) won't lose money and also trusts that the majority of his sales will not be charged back. Hence the trust and a working system.

Note: don't confuse chargeback with return policy where BuyBigTVsOnline gets its TV back and delivery fees should be in its business model. Also some chargebacks are probably included in the same business model, after all we don't live in a world with unicorns. If as a retailer your business model does not include and anticipate such customer behaviour and unfortunate events, then it is probably a bad business plan.

Get fast, automatic access to those funds. Transactions are typically settled in 24-72 hours, not up to seven business days, as it takes with paper checks.

source

The funds are available to you most likely in a few days with a possible chargeback that you should aim to avoid. So after you have read and considered the above, why is chargeback important? Or how is this relevant to bitcoin?

Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

Double-spend "issue"
I think you didn't not fully understand the sentence I wrote previously to which (I think) you were referring. Don't worry, it is not a problem and I will explain it again for you. It is not me who needs to hope/trust that a (for example) double-spend doesn't happen, but the merchant. The blue highlighted parts below refer to one another.

With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance).

Here I will add that he, the merchant, cannot trust the person or Payment Processor organization as an intermediary (or lack of the latter), but he may trust the bitcoin system and underlying software, algorithms as a whole. However, there were issues in the past where coins sent e.g. without a fee were simply held behind and eventually were not included into any block. This needed a manual reset of the transaction and an intentional "double-spend" to transfer the stuck coins. First it appeared that the transaction was sent, but turns out it wasn't. Although this has been fixed a good while ago.

More recent events with Chinese farms also caused a small panic attack, it was settled fast, automatically and no major harm was done. There was also a fixe since, as far as I know.

These two examples are just to show that unanticipated things can happen, have happened before and probably will also happen in the future. We cannot anticipate and prepare for unknowns that we don't know of.

I hope it is all clear for you now!

[turvarya]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a chargeback can occur 6 months later. A chargeback can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

The coloured parts that you didn't understand and/or reflect upon are explained in greater detail below. I hope this will help.

Chargeback
I see people bring this argument trying to promote bitcoin that there is no chargebacks and that when paying with card you can get a chargeback even after >>insert time that is not important here<<. I know that it is trendy to dislike banks and similar, but why this argument? It is a different system based on different merits. It is not hard to understand what you are saying and repeating it won't make you understand why a merchant has trust in the payment processor even when chargebacks can happen. This trust is what I was talking about.

Let us take an example:
Merchant <==> Payment Processor <==> Consumer

The merchant, say BuyBigTVsOnline, sells 1000 TVs online in the USA and accepts credit card payment where there is a possibility for a chargeback for 100 years. Just for the sake of argument. 999 customers are satisfied with the product but one (let's call this person randomly) Bob wants to scam BuyBigTVsOnline and files a charge back claiming that his TV never arrived/was damaged or who cares. He gets his money back and BuyBigTVsOnline lost some negligible amount of money. Bob then goes on and does this 3 more times at which point the Payment Processor freezes his account due to fraud (spice it with lawsuit or whatever pleases you) and Bob is out of the picture. Hence, scammers are eventually caught and the fear of this (or hopefully just the wish to be a decent being) motivates average people not to scam others (e.g BuyBigTVsOnline) for no reason (aka the system works). Here BuyBigTVsOnline (!) has trust in the Payment Processor that it catches scammers and on a grand scale his company (BuyBigTVsOnline) won't lose money and also trusts that the majority of his sales will not be charged back. Hence the trust and a working system.

Note: don't confuse chargeback with return policy where BuyBigTVsOnline gets its TV back and delivery fees should be in its business model. Also some chargebacks are probably included in the same business model, after all we don't live in a world with unicorns. If as a retailer your business model does not include and anticipate such customer behaviour and unfortunate events, then it is probably a bad business plan.

Get fast, automatic access to those funds. Transactions are typically settled in 24-72 hours, not up to seven business days, as it takes with paper checks.

source

The funds are available to you most likely in a few days with a possible chargeback that you should aim to avoid. So after you have read and considered the above, why is chargeback important? Or how is this relevant to bitcoin?

Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

Double-spend "issue"
I think you didn't not fully understand the sentence I wrote previously to which (I think) you were referring. Don't worry, it is not a problem and I will explain it again for you. It is not me who needs to hope/trust that a (for example) double-spend doesn't happen, but the merchant. The blue highlighted parts below refer to one another.

With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance).

Here I will add that he, the merchant, cannot trust the person or Payment Processor organization as an intermediary (or lack of the latter), but he may trust the bitcoin system and underlying software, algorithms as a whole. However, there were issues in the past where coins sent e.g. without a fee were simply held behind and eventually were not included into any block. This needed a manual reset of the transaction and an intentional "double-spend" to transfer the stuck coins. First it appeared that the transaction was sent, but turns out it wasn't. Although this has been fixed a good while ago.

More recent events with Chinese farms also caused a small panic attack, it was settled fast, automatically and no major harm was done. There was also a fixe since, as far as I know.

These two examples are just to show that unanticipated things can happen, have happened before and probably will also happen in the future. We cannot anticipate and prepare for unknowns that we don't know of.

I hope it is all clear for you now!

Your post just confirmed what I said.
Just because you are trying to paint the picture, that a charge back just occurs in 0.1% of the times, doesn't change, that they happen all the time. It is still just hope, that there will be no charge back. There is no certainty. If you as a merchant are more or less often a target of such a scenario is pure luck.
Your examples in the Bitcoin World don't show anything, what would be called a Double Spend.

Making your post colorful doesn't change anything about these facts.

[Hopalong]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a chargeback can occur 6 months later. A chargeback can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

The coloured parts that you didn't understand and/or reflect upon are explained in greater detail below. I hope this will help.

Chargeback
I see people bring this argument trying to promote bitcoin that there is no chargebacks and that when paying with card you can get a chargeback even after >>insert time that is not important here<<. I know that it is trendy to dislike banks and similar, but why this argument? It is a different system based on different merits. It is not hard to understand what you are saying and repeating it won't make you understand why a merchant has trust in the payment processor even when chargebacks can happen. This trust is what I was talking about.

Let us take an example:
Merchant <==> Payment Processor <==> Consumer

The merchant, say BuyBigTVsOnline, sells 1000 TVs online in the USA and accepts credit card payment where there is a possibility for a chargeback for 100 years. Just for the sake of argument. 999 customers are satisfied with the product but one (let's call this person randomly) Bob wants to scam BuyBigTVsOnline and files a charge back claiming that his TV never arrived/was damaged or who cares. He gets his money back and BuyBigTVsOnline lost some negligible amount of money. Bob then goes on and does this 3 more times at which point the Payment Processor freezes his account due to fraud (spice it with lawsuit or whatever pleases you) and Bob is out of the picture. Hence, scammers are eventually caught and the fear of this (or hopefully just the wish to be a decent being) motivates average people not to scam others (e.g BuyBigTVsOnline) for no reason (aka the system works). Here BuyBigTVsOnline (!) has trust in the Payment Processor that it catches scammers and on a grand scale his company (BuyBigTVsOnline) won't lose money and also trusts that the majority of his sales will not be charged back. Hence the trust and a working system.

Note: don't confuse chargeback with return policy where BuyBigTVsOnline gets its TV back and delivery fees should be in its business model. Also some chargebacks are probably included in the same business model, after all we don't live in a world with unicorns. If as a retailer your business model does not include and anticipate such customer behaviour and unfortunate events, then it is probably a bad business plan.

Get fast, automatic access to those funds. Transactions are typically settled in 24-72 hours, not up to seven business days, as it takes with paper checks.

source

The funds are available to you most likely in a few days with a possible chargeback that you should aim to avoid. So after you have read and considered the above, why is chargeback important? Or how is this relevant to bitcoin?

Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

Double-spend "issue"
I think you didn't not fully understand the sentence I wrote previously to which (I think) you were referring. Don't worry, it is not a problem and I will explain it again for you. It is not me who needs to hope/trust that a (for example) double-spend doesn't happen, but the merchant. The blue highlighted parts below refer to one another.

With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance).

Here I will add that he, the merchant, cannot trust the person or Payment Processor organization as an intermediary (or lack of the latter), but he may trust the bitcoin system and underlying software, algorithms as a whole. However, there were issues in the past where coins sent e.g. without a fee were simply held behind and eventually were not included into any block. This needed a manual reset of the transaction and an intentional "double-spend" to transfer the stuck coins. First it appeared that the transaction was sent, but turns out it wasn't. Although this has been fixed a good while ago.

More recent events with Chinese farms also caused a small panic attack, it was settled fast, automatically and no major harm was done. There was also a fixe since, as far as I know.

These two examples are just to show that unanticipated things can happen, have happened before and probably will also happen in the future. We cannot anticipate and prepare for unknowns that we don't know of.

I hope it is all clear for you now!

Your post just confirmed what I said.
Just because you are trying to paint the picture, that a charge back just occurs in 0.1% of the times, doesn't change, that they happen all the time. It is still just hope, that there will be no charge back. There is no certainty. If you as a merchant are more or less often a target of such a scenario is pure luck.
Your examples in the Bitcoin World don't show anything, what would be called a Double Spend.

Making your post colorful doesn't change anything about these facts.

Does it change anything that he is right?

Repeating a lie countless times does not make it true. The debet/credit card system is trusted because it works. Bitcoin has no security for me as a buyer. If a seller does not send the promised goods i dont have any way of getting my coins back but with my credit card i have.

Also with the spam attack i have no problem making a transaction that i know will be rejected. Minimum fee will take care of that...

[BitAddict]

I agree, Bitcoin should confirm faster because waiting for 1, 3 or even 6 confirmations is horrible and non aceptable nowadays when nearly all is instantaneous. I know some companies are working on it, so all the business will be able to accept 0 confirmation transactions with a extremely very low risk of being rejected (Being able to choose how much risk you are willing to take when receiving payments).

[Borisz]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a chargeback can occur 6 months later. A chargeback can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

The coloured parts that you didn't understand and/or reflect upon are explained in greater detail below. I hope this will help.

Chargeback
I see people bring this argument trying to promote bitcoin that there is no chargebacks and that when paying with card you can get a chargeback even after >>insert time that is not important here<<. I know that it is trendy to dislike banks and similar, but why this argument? It is a different system based on different merits. It is not hard to understand what you are saying and repeating it won't make you understand why a merchant has trust in the payment processor even when chargebacks can happen. This trust is what I was talking about.

Let us take an example:
Merchant <==> Payment Processor <==> Consumer

The merchant, say BuyBigTVsOnline, sells 1000 TVs online in the USA and accepts credit card payment where there is a possibility for a chargeback for 100 years. Just for the sake of argument. 999 customers are satisfied with the product but one (let's call this person randomly) Bob wants to scam BuyBigTVsOnline and files a charge back claiming that his TV never arrived/was damaged or who cares. He gets his money back and BuyBigTVsOnline lost some negligible amount of money. Bob then goes on and does this 3 more times at which point the Payment Processor freezes his account due to fraud (spice it with lawsuit or whatever pleases you) and Bob is out of the picture. Hence, scammers are eventually caught and the fear of this (or hopefully just the wish to be a decent being) motivates average people not to scam others (e.g BuyBigTVsOnline) for no reason (aka the system works). Here BuyBigTVsOnline (!) has trust in the Payment Processor that it catches scammers and on a grand scale his company (BuyBigTVsOnline) won't lose money and also trusts that the majority of his sales will not be charged back. Hence the trust and a working system.

Note: don't confuse chargeback with return policy where BuyBigTVsOnline gets its TV back and delivery fees should be in its business model. Also some chargebacks are probably included in the same business model, after all we don't live in a world with unicorns. If as a retailer your business model does not include and anticipate such customer behaviour and unfortunate events, then it is probably a bad business plan.

Get fast, automatic access to those funds. Transactions are typically settled in 24-72 hours, not up to seven business days, as it takes with paper checks.

source

The funds are available to you most likely in a few days with a possible chargeback that you should aim to avoid. So after you have read and considered the above, why is chargeback important? Or how is this relevant to bitcoin?

Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

Double-spend "issue"
I think you didn't not fully understand the sentence I wrote previously to which (I think) you were referring. Don't worry, it is not a problem and I will explain it again for you. It is not me who needs to hope/trust that a (for example) double-spend doesn't happen, but the merchant. The blue highlighted parts below refer to one another.

With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance).

Here I will add that he, the merchant, cannot trust the person or Payment Processor organization as an intermediary (or lack of the latter), but he may trust the bitcoin system and underlying software, algorithms as a whole. However, there were issues in the past where coins sent e.g. without a fee were simply held behind and eventually were not included into any block. This needed a manual reset of the transaction and an intentional "double-spend" to transfer the stuck coins. First it appeared that the transaction was sent, but turns out it wasn't. Although this has been fixed a good while ago.

More recent events with Chinese farms also caused a small panic attack, it was settled fast, automatically and no major harm was done. There was also a fixe since, as far as I know.

These two examples are just to show that unanticipated things can happen, have happened before and probably will also happen in the future. We cannot anticipate and prepare for unknowns that we don't know of.

I hope it is all clear for you now!

Your post just confirmed what I said.
Just because you are trying to paint the picture, that a charge back just occurs in 0.1% of the times, doesn't change, that they happen all the time. It is still just hope, that there will be no charge back. There is no certainty. If you as a merchant are more or less often a target of such a scenario is pure luck.
Your examples in the Bitcoin World don't show anything, what would be called a Double Spend.

Making your post colorful doesn't change anything about these facts.

I can see that not even the colours could help you to get that it was not about whether or not chargebacks occur. Unfortunately I don't think this issue could be simplified any further for you.
Keep living in a world where millions of companies are still in business because they all hope to one day receive money for their services and as such remain in business.

[turvarya]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a chargeback can occur 6 months later. A chargeback can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

The coloured parts that you didn't understand and/or reflect upon are explained in greater detail below. I hope this will help.

Chargeback
I see people bring this argument trying to promote bitcoin that there is no chargebacks and that when paying with card you can get a chargeback even after >>insert time that is not important here<<. I know that it is trendy to dislike banks and similar, but why this argument? It is a different system based on different merits. It is not hard to understand what you are saying and repeating it won't make you understand why a merchant has trust in the payment processor even when chargebacks can happen. This trust is what I was talking about.

Let us take an example:
Merchant <==> Payment Processor <==> Consumer

The merchant, say BuyBigTVsOnline, sells 1000 TVs online in the USA and accepts credit card payment where there is a possibility for a chargeback for 100 years. Just for the sake of argument. 999 customers are satisfied with the product but one (let's call this person randomly) Bob wants to scam BuyBigTVsOnline and files a charge back claiming that his TV never arrived/was damaged or who cares. He gets his money back and BuyBigTVsOnline lost some negligible amount of money. Bob then goes on and does this 3 more times at which point the Payment Processor freezes his account due to fraud (spice it with lawsuit or whatever pleases you) and Bob is out of the picture. Hence, scammers are eventually caught and the fear of this (or hopefully just the wish to be a decent being) motivates average people not to scam others (e.g BuyBigTVsOnline) for no reason (aka the system works). Here BuyBigTVsOnline (!) has trust in the Payment Processor that it catches scammers and on a grand scale his company (BuyBigTVsOnline) won't lose money and also trusts that the majority of his sales will not be charged back. Hence the trust and a working system.

Note: don't confuse chargeback with return policy where BuyBigTVsOnline gets its TV back and delivery fees should be in its business model. Also some chargebacks are probably included in the same business model, after all we don't live in a world with unicorns. If as a retailer your business model does not include and anticipate such customer behaviour and unfortunate events, then it is probably a bad business plan.

Get fast, automatic access to those funds. Transactions are typically settled in 24-72 hours, not up to seven business days, as it takes with paper checks.

source

The funds are available to you most likely in a few days with a possible chargeback that you should aim to avoid. So after you have read and considered the above, why is chargeback important? Or how is this relevant to bitcoin?

Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

Double-spend "issue"
I think you didn't not fully understand the sentence I wrote previously to which (I think) you were referring. Don't worry, it is not a problem and I will explain it again for you. It is not me who needs to hope/trust that a (for example) double-spend doesn't happen, but the merchant. The blue highlighted parts below refer to one another.

With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance).

Here I will add that he, the merchant, cannot trust the person or Payment Processor organization as an intermediary (or lack of the latter), but he may trust the bitcoin system and underlying software, algorithms as a whole. However, there were issues in the past where coins sent e.g. without a fee were simply held behind and eventually were not included into any block. This needed a manual reset of the transaction and an intentional "double-spend" to transfer the stuck coins. First it appeared that the transaction was sent, but turns out it wasn't. Although this has been fixed a good while ago.

More recent events with Chinese farms also caused a small panic attack, it was settled fast, automatically and no major harm was done. There was also a fixe since, as far as I know.

These two examples are just to show that unanticipated things can happen, have happened before and probably will also happen in the future. We cannot anticipate and prepare for unknowns that we don't know of.

I hope it is all clear for you now!

Your post just confirmed what I said.
Just because you are trying to paint the picture, that a charge back just occurs in 0.1% of the times, doesn't change, that they happen all the time. It is still just hope, that there will be no charge back. There is no certainty. If you as a merchant are more or less often a target of such a scenario is pure luck.
Your examples in the Bitcoin World don't show anything, what would be called a Double Spend.

Making your post colorful doesn't change anything about these facts.

Does it change anything that he is right?

Repeating a lie countless times does not make it true. The debet/credit card system is trusted because it works. Bitcoin has no security for me as a buyer. If a seller does not send the promised goods i dont have any way of getting my coins back but with my credit card i have.

Also with the spam attack i have no problem making a transaction that i know will be rejected. Minimum fee will take care of that...

Right about what?
Where did I tell a lie?
Every merchant will thank you for using cash. There is pressure to accept credit cards because everybody does. That doesn't mean they like it.
Yes, for a buyer it is convenient, but the involved risk means, that merchants have to make their products more expensive. Do you think, that is not true?
For Bitcoin, there is escrow, which, at least for me, seems like a more fair system as the "The buyer is always right"-policy from credit card companies.

@Borisz
The merchants stay in business, because they put the risk into the price, like you learn in every basic economy education.

[scarsbergholden]

I think a 1 to 5 minute confirmation would be great, i just dont know about how they go about restructuring the block reward in that case to have more blocks with in a less period of time with less reward.

[Hopalong]

We should just never have told anybody about confirmations.
Bitcoin are send instantly. I never waited long after paying for my beer, since the barman accepts 0-confirmation transactions.
People handle Bitcoin like there are double spend attacks all the time. Maybe I am in the wrong sections of this forum, but I don't see them anywhere.
Where are all this double spends, that justify waiting 6 confirmations to be sure for a >$10 item?
So, the fault is with the merchants. Do they wait 6 months to accept a credit card payments, since it could be charged back in this time? No? Why are they doing this with bitcoin? A 0-confirmations Bitcoin transaction is safer, than waiting a month after getting paid with a credit card.

The problem is different with chargeback. When paying with a card you trust the operators and so does the merchant. He trusts that the money will come into his account, because a third party takes care of it and vouches for it.
With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance). This is a consequence of bitcoin removing trust from the equation. A benefit, and a drawback some other times.

See, that is the real problem. You have obviously no idea, how a double spend works, if you say, you have to trust/hope, that no double spend occurs.
That is just not how Bitcoin works.
There is also no third party that guarantees, that you really got your money when someone paid with a credit card. I don't know, why it is so hard to understand that a chargeback can occur 6 months later. A chargeback can occur= no guarantee that you really got your money.
Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

So, for the people, who neither understand Credit Cards nor Bitcoin, it should be enough to understand: Bitcoin transactions are instant and please don't try to tell them anything about confirmations or double spends. They most probably will get it wrong.

The coloured parts that you didn't understand and/or reflect upon are explained in greater detail below. I hope this will help.

Chargeback
I see people bring this argument trying to promote bitcoin that there is no chargebacks and that when paying with card you can get a chargeback even after >>insert time that is not important here<<. I know that it is trendy to dislike banks and similar, but why this argument? It is a different system based on different merits. It is not hard to understand what you are saying and repeating it won't make you understand why a merchant has trust in the payment processor even when chargebacks can happen. This trust is what I was talking about.

Let us take an example:
Merchant <==> Payment Processor <==> Consumer

The merchant, say BuyBigTVsOnline, sells 1000 TVs online in the USA and accepts credit card payment where there is a possibility for a chargeback for 100 years. Just for the sake of argument. 999 customers are satisfied with the product but one (let's call this person randomly) Bob wants to scam BuyBigTVsOnline and files a charge back claiming that his TV never arrived/was damaged or who cares. He gets his money back and BuyBigTVsOnline lost some negligible amount of money. Bob then goes on and does this 3 more times at which point the Payment Processor freezes his account due to fraud (spice it with lawsuit or whatever pleases you) and Bob is out of the picture. Hence, scammers are eventually caught and the fear of this (or hopefully just the wish to be a decent being) motivates average people not to scam others (e.g BuyBigTVsOnline) for no reason (aka the system works). Here BuyBigTVsOnline (!) has trust in the Payment Processor that it catches scammers and on a grand scale his company (BuyBigTVsOnline) won't lose money and also trusts that the majority of his sales will not be charged back. Hence the trust and a working system.

Note: don't confuse chargeback with return policy where BuyBigTVsOnline gets its TV back and delivery fees should be in its business model. Also some chargebacks are probably included in the same business model, after all we don't live in a world with unicorns. If as a retailer your business model does not include and anticipate such customer behaviour and unfortunate events, then it is probably a bad business plan.

Get fast, automatic access to those funds. Transactions are typically settled in 24-72 hours, not up to seven business days, as it takes with paper checks.

source

The funds are available to you most likely in a few days with a possible chargeback that you should aim to avoid. So after you have read and considered the above, why is chargeback important? Or how is this relevant to bitcoin?

Got it? Or do I have to rephrase it again?

Double-spend "issue"
I think you didn't not fully understand the sentence I wrote previously to which (I think) you were referring. Don't worry, it is not a problem and I will explain it again for you. It is not me who needs to hope/trust that a (for example) double-spend doesn't happen, but the merchant. The blue highlighted parts below refer to one another.

With a 0 confirmation Bitcoin transaction the merchant cannot trust anyone, the best is to hope that the transaction will happen and it is not a double-spend or not in a sidechain (by chance).

Here I will add that he, the merchant, cannot trust the person or Payment Processor organization as an intermediary (or lack of the latter), but he may trust the bitcoin system and underlying software, algorithms as a whole. However, there were issues in the past where coins sent e.g. without a fee were simply held behind and eventually were not included into any block. This needed a manual reset of the transaction and an intentional "double-spend" to transfer the stuck coins. First it appeared that the transaction was sent, but turns out it wasn't. Although this has been fixed a good while ago.

More recent events with Chinese farms also caused a small panic attack, it was settled fast, automatically and no major harm was done. There was also a fixe since, as far as I know.

These two examples are just to show that unanticipated things can happen, have happened before and probably will also happen in the future. We cannot anticipate and prepare for unknowns that we don't know of.

I hope it is all clear for you now!

Your post just confirmed what I said.
Just because you are trying to paint the picture, that a charge back just occurs in 0.1% of the times, doesn't change, that they happen all the time. It is still just hope, that there will be no charge back. There is no certainty. If you as a merchant are more or less often a target of such a scenario is pure luck.
Your examples in the Bitcoin World don't show anything, what would be called a Double Spend.

Making your post colorful doesn't change anything about these facts.

I can see that not even the colours could help you to get that it was not about whether or not chargebacks occur. Unfortunately I don't think this issue could be simplified any further for you.
Keep living in a world where millions of companies are still in business because they all hope to one day receive money for their services and as such remain in business.

If i start to count up cash they look at me like i am an idiot. Noone use cash i my country. Cash will be removed in a few years because noone want it.

[turvarya]

...
If i start to count up cash they look at me like i am an idiot. Noone use cash i my country. Cash will be removed in a few years because noone want it.

Then you are living in a strange country. Which is it?

[Hopalong]

...
If i start to count up cash they look at me like i am an idiot. Noone use cash i my country. Cash will be removed in a few years because noone want it.

Then you are living in a strange country. Which is it?

A modern country in northern Europe.

[NewLiberty]

...
If i start to count up cash they look at me like i am an idiot. Noone use cash i my country. Cash will be removed in a few years because noone want it.

Then you are living in a strange country. Which is it?

A modern country in northern Europe.

My guess would be Sweden.  It is one of the more complicit in the banks' war on cash.

[Hopalong]

...
If i start to count up cash they look at me like i am an idiot. Noone use cash i my country. Cash will be removed in a few years because noone want it.

Then you are living in a strange country. Which is it?

A modern country in northern Europe.

My guess would be Sweden.  It is one of the more complicit in the banks' war on cash.

All the Scandinavian countries are thinking this way. Cash is not trusted anymore.

[gentlemand]

My guess would be Sweden.  It is one of the more complicit in the banks' war on cash.

Denmark is the first to actually become serious about it.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/02/technology/cashless-society-denmark/

People are sleepwalking into some odious shit.

[ticoti]

I agree this has been a problem since the beginning of bitcoin and should be solved to give bitcoin more expansion

[cyberpinoy]

BTC transaction time right now is more than hour on average. I think there is a problem and hope it will be solved  

i can't see how this is contemplated as a problem, when with fiat bank or paypal is the same

with the above services, that i mentioned you see your transaction processed immediately like bitcoin

but the true is that the money are not yet arrived to the recipient, only the order of it was recieved, which can be comparable to confirmation

this mean that bitcoin is anyway, miles ahead of any fiat system albeit it seems the contrary, in the last days

Bitcoin  brags and advertises FAST 10 minute transaction times (a transaction for basic users, is when they have access to the funds and can safely spend them NOT just when it hits the chain!)

Bitcoin brags and advertises low fees yet in order to have a nice transaction time you are asked to increase the fees. Which I have found does not actually lower the time it takes to actually allow the transaction to be safely spendable by the networks advice.

Bitcoin  is not (in my eyes) "miles ahead" of anything yet. For me, I see a lot of false advertising, inability to come thru with what they promise, a lot of back peddling to cover up thier false advertising, and very little ambition from the developers to actually fix problems and make their product more user friendly and easier adaptable.

At the end of the day it all comes down to the developers, and for the past 2 years they have done nothing but sit back and watch the time go by. They seem to worry more about the programmers and coders and forget they need regular people to be using their product as it is them who make transactions internationally every day not the programmer who can decipher RPC commands and understands C++

[achow101]

BTC transaction time right now is more than hour on average. I think there is a problem and hope it will be solved  

i can't see how this is contemplated as a problem, when with fiat bank or paypal is the same

with the above services, that i mentioned you see your transaction processed immediately like bitcoin

but the true is that the money are not yet arrived to the recipient, only the order of it was recieved, which can be comparable to confirmation

this mean that bitcoin is anyway, miles ahead of any fiat system albeit it seems the contrary, in the last days

Bitcoin  brags and advertises FAST 10 minute transaction times (a transaction for basic users, is when they have access to the funds and can safely spend them NOT just when it hits the chain!)

Bitcoin brags and advertises low fees yet in order to have a nice transaction time you are asked to increase the fees. Which I have found does not actually lower the time it takes to actually allow the transaction to be safely spendable by the networks advice.

Bitcoin  is not (in my eyes) "miles ahead" of anything yet. For me, I see a lot of false advertising, inability to come thru with what they promise, a lot of back peddling to cover up thier false advertising, and very little ambition from the developers to actually fix problems and make their product more user friendly and easier adaptable.

At the end of the day it all comes down to the developers, and for the past 2 years they have done nothing but sit back and watch the time go by. They seem to worry more about the programmers and coders and forget they need regular people to be using their product as it is them who make transactions internationally every day not the programmer who can decipher RPC commands and understands C++

Tell us then. What should the developers do? There is nothing they can do to make CONFIRMATION times faster. Even if the block target time was reduced to 1 minute, due to the randomness of mining, there will still be outliers that take maybe an hour or two to mine. That is the nature of Bitcoin and ALL CRYPTOCURRENCIES.

Where is the false Advertising? The fees to send Bitcoin are significantly lower than the fees to send money using any other system. Look up their fees and you will see the difference.

Bitcoin is "miles ahead" of many other payment systems. Take credit cards or PayPal for example. They can reverse the transactions up to 180 days after the payment. Sure the money can be spent, but if it is reversed, sucks to be the guy that received. Bitcoin on the other hand, will make your transaction irreversible anywhere between a couple of seconds to a couple of days, much shorter than credit cards or paypal.