[solardev]

Contrarian opinion: As a regular consumer, I don't WANT a decentralized, anonymous currency. For users like me, crypto totally misses the point. I don't want digital cash that can't be traced. I'm not buying drugs or illegal shit.

I want a centralized, safe way of sending small amounts of money to some content producers, microtransactions, etc., but with basic banking guarantees. Like being able to charge back a transaction if the merchant fails to deliver, or not being liable for fraudulent uses (as opposed to losing my entire wallet, oh well, too bad).

Decentralized crypto actively hurts instead of helps my confidence in being able to conduct a safe, easy transaction online. One wrong move and I lose all my funds to some scammer. How is that even remotely enticing?

Instead, I wish there was something as easy to use as a credit card, but without the exorbitant fees (for the merchant) and interests rates (for me). I just wish we had a financial organization like Visa/Mastercard but run as a nonprofit (or at least a credit union) so they can provide similar services with similar guarantees but just make less money on the returns.

Services like Privacy.com kinda do that, but merchants still get dinged with the Visa fees, so it's not entirely practical for microtransactions. So so far the best thing I've found is still just using Google or Apple to temporarily hold transactions and batch process them at the end of a month. (Lyft also does something similar, I think, batching rides and tips until the end of the day or week or something).

[lostmsu]

IMHO, you don't quite understand what you are talking about. Your centralized requirement is entirely bogus. If participants wish so, they could use any of the cryptos to run a subnet with an external oracle/moderator. Or even just build moderation right into smart contracts.

[solardev]

Why? I don't want a bunch of small operators independently moderating, or hope for a bug free implementation of a smart contract. The whole point is regulatory instead of technical protection. I don't want code to supercede the laws that exist to protect us.

I especially don't want my finances under the care of the kinds of companies and opportunistic individuals normally drawn to crypto. One mistake and everything is gone. That's only a plus if you're a cyber libertarian. I would much sooner trust a reputable brand or government.

[dns_snek]

> One mistake and everything is gone.

What do you mean? You could lose 1 transaction if the merchant turns out to be a scammer and there was no escrow involved, same as cash.

[solardev]

"Same as cash" is part of the problem here. Credit cards offer way more protection. I don't want to give cash-equivalent to somebody I've never done business with, unless it's a physical good I can immediately examine in person and take possession of.

But really I meant more user error, like getting phished or hacked out of a wallet, a mistake in coding up a smart contract, a mistake in choosing which third-party moderator or online exchange to trust, etc. Every step of the way is fraught with risk. The same crypto opportunities that opportunists get rich on seem to be built on other people's misfortunes. It's a zero-sum game.