[rtkwe]

> how to achieve consensus on a distributed ledger without trusting any participant

The problem is that that is just a solution in disguise as a problem. Why do we need to achieve consensus on a distributed ledger without trusting any participant? It works, I think, for bitcoin because the ledger is an end unto itself and didn't have to interface with any existing system (no existing accounts/items/entries to assign to existing owners).

[cwkoss]

Credit card fraud and chargebacks online are brutal, and can sink many innocent and legitimate online small businesses.

The 'cash-like' quality of Bitcoin, that the sender cannot take it back or contest the transaction after the fact, is a solution to a real problem.

[spiralx]

> Credit card fraud and chargebacks online are brutal, and can sink many innocent and legitimate online small businesses.

Unless you're talking adult businesses, gambling or one of the other industries with known issues with card fraud and/or excessive charge-backs, they aren't a significant problem for legitimate businesses at all. Even a 1% charge-back rate is unusual enough that card providers will flag the retailer for investigation.

[cwkoss]

Not sure that's totally accurate, here is a counterpoint article I read on here recently.

https://www.candyjapan.com/behind-the-scenes/how-i-got-credi...

[rtkwe]

On the opposite side of the coin the same reversibility is also great for fighting fraud from scammy sellers. For consumers anything interacting with real world items really needs to be reversible or scammers will have a field day with it and damage the brand.

[rspeer]

You think online small businesses are transacting directly with their customers using Bitcoin?