News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bitcoin is no long the only game in crypto-currency town by jdc0589 on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:03PM (#16126077)
I honestly don't know a ton about cryptocurrencies, but I though confirmed transactions were.....more or less whole point? can you give me an ELI5 version of why 0-confirmation transactions are ok?
Re:Bitcoin is no long the only game in crypto-currency town by Obi_Juan_Kenobi on Thursday January 11, 2018 @03:48PM (#16127692)
For small transactions, it's often a tolerable risk. You amortize any losses to double-spends and compare that to e.g CC fees.

For larger amounts, you want confirmations, but then it's generally alright to wait a little while for confirmation, too.

Note that replace-by-fee means this only works with Bitcoin Cash.

Re:Bitcoin is no long the only game in crypto-currency town by ericb on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:17PM (#16126238)
It depends on the use-case. If you look at credit card transactions, they are only "confirmed" after 120 days (when chargebacks become harder...not impossible). A 0-conf transaction will work for all scenarios where you would trust a credit card with about the same amount of certainty. For those other scenarios, 10 minutes is better.
Re:Bitcoin is no long the only game in crypto-currency town by Isomatik on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:37PM (#16126459)
I think it's really only comparable for online transactions, where all credit card transactions are Card Not Present and you aren't able to 100% guarantee that the delivery went to the correct person or that the card wasn't stolen, making fighting the chargeback sometimes not worth it. A brick and mortar doing swipe transactions should have everything they need to effectively fight chargebacks, so I wouldn't consider that money to be 'gone' the way it would be in a double-spend.