| > return the good or service, and then be assured of a refund from an unknown and untrusted actor Escrow systems are inherently a second layer atop a currency. The "issuing authority" of a currency does not engage in such dealings with the users of the currency; these arrangements are made by the seller (or a palatable third party on the seller's behalf) or by the buyer (or a third party contracted by the seller, e.g. a credit card company). With the "un-named payment system", escrow is entirely possible and has been successfully set up in many instances, most notably on popular darknet markets. A type of protocol-layer escrow is also possible, by the way, through the use of multi-signature transactions. > payment system that requires an internet-connected device This is exactly what the OP article is proposing to build, and what these comments are discussing. > no third parties with the ability to store and process SPV and other "light" wallets that remain cryptographically verifiable and decentralized without needing a constant, high-bandwidth connection exist and are, in fact, the default option for most people. |
If you read the white paper, which apparently nobody else did, they say (paraphrased) "Look, this thing is online but we recognize that not everyone has a computer or cellphone so part of the system is a physical card like a debit card that poor people can use".