I can do all those things with Web 2.0 (or even 1.0).
Are you (really) sure? The article that I linked says otherwise.
So for a merchant, there are absolutely no problems in friendly fraud, failing cards in other countries, etc in Web 2 then? Especially sending money to people in sanctioned countries using bank accounts?
My point is that it is not hard to pay with cryptocurrency using "Web 2.0" technology (or at least any problems you run into aren't directly 'Web' related).
Well I'm arguing as to why exactly one would use cryptocurrencies for payments "Web 3" over using "Web 2.0" payment companies and I just explained that and its use cases.
Of course one can use cryptocurrencies with Web 2. But try doing the above with the banks, PayPal, Visa, Mastercard, etc.
It seems that this is proof that cryptocurrencies not only can work together with Web 2 websites but they are also here to stay.
So purely paying with cryptocurrency is now somehow "web"?
So one can't write a web 3 app using this technology between wallets names (something like ENS for identity and domains [0][1]) and use that as a platform to accept cryptocurrencies to official and verified accounts in a decentralized manner, with all of the advantages and use cases above?
So that is not even utility then?
Yeah. Why not try donating to NGOs through a bank account if your friend or penpal happens to be stuck in a sanctioned country? [0]
I also don't think merchants and businesses would like to tolerate the knowingly abused chargeback system which friendly fraud hurts both the customer and the merchants.
Cryptocurrencies completely eliminate that abuse. The user can contact the merchant for a refund instead of filing a costly dispute which the final decision always sides with the banks, who doesn't even know if it is friendly fraud or not, but takes the money anyway.
I can see them using it for Stripe or Coinbase Commerce.
[0] https://theintercept.com/2022/01/19/crypto-afghanistan-sanct...