Bitfinex just spent $23.7M in fees to make a single Ethereum transaction

Re:Bitfinex just spent $23.7M in fees to make a single Ether... by p4bl0 on Monday September 27, 2021 @05:43PM (#28676400)

Not in every case, for sure. But many cases are pretty easy to arbitrate. This one for example: when the transaction fees 230× greater than the transaction amount, it is fair to assume that is was not meant to be that way. If I loose my credit card and/or it gets stolen, and someone uses it in the time between when I declare I lost it and when it is blocked, my bank is required by law to refund me (and I guess my bank attempts to get their money back too, but that's not really my problem).

Also:

> There's fraud where people buy an item online, then claim they never received it and get their payment refunded while keeping the item.

A blockchain can't solve that kind of problems. And it never will. It is not because something is written on a blockchain that it is true, except for cryptocurrencies because that is how they define truth. But as soon as you have something happen in the real-world (in your example, an item sent in exchange for a payment), then a blockchain is useless, or at least, it is not any more useful than any type of ledger.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bitfinex just spent $23.7M in fees to make a single Ether... by exporectomy on Monday September 27, 2021 @11:44PM (#28679086)

Everyday credit card users who rely on the bank to protect them from fraud should not be using cryptocurrency directly. They also should not carry their money around in cash, yet cash still exists and people can take personal responsibility for the risk of loss if they choose.

A blockchain can solve "didn't receive the item" fraud because the merchant has the payment before they send the item and can refuse to refund it. Of course it creates a new kind of risk for the buyer, but that's not what we're talking about here.

[ Parent | on HN ]