Topic: Stop saying Bitcoin is good for money transfer. It isn't. - page 2. (Read 10088 times)

The sad truth is that Bitcoin is a dream for scammers.  No chargebacks is great for the seller, it is absolutely horrible for the buyer.  No recourse sucks.  It's the price we pay for something decentralized with no Government ties.

People need the nanny-state to wipe their ass.  Mass acceptance will not be achieved unless recourse is implemented...somehow...I don't know how that is possible.

I'm just glad to see prophets are prophesying about Bitcoin profits :-)

The only donation he will be making, would be to himself LOL 

I assume you mean private keys?

Or were you planning on making a donation to them?

Avoid Localbitcoins for the next 24 hours.

They are dealing with a potential security issue and have temporarily disabled all bitcoin withdrawals.

The extent of the issue is not yet clear.  Hopefully it will not destroy them, but until the dust settles you don't want to be transferring any additional bitcoins to their service.

lol, true.

Just post one of your public keys, and I'll show you how easy it is to use bitcoins to transfer wealth.

I have to agree with OP on his points.  I've tried to do larger investment deal with BTC and its rare to get any takers.  The conclusion though should be that wherever there is pain, there is opportunity.  We don't need to apologize for crypto-currency being in its relative infancy.  We need to see the opportunities it presents and work to make them a reality.

Those that see opportunities and act on them to make bitcoins more practical (for use as investments or wealth storage or everyday purchasing) are those that will be at the helm of a fundamental shift in the banking industry. 

I don't get this thread.  I asked for money, sent my btc address, they sent me funds.  Seems a bloody good way to transfer money.

It's the only way to the perfect coin -- discussion.

The problem you are describing is not really a fault of bitcoin's design, but that most of the world does not accept it in normal transactions. This can be a problem with any currency, however the current global banking system has the infrastructure to handle most currency exchange issues. This, of course, comes with a cost that bitcoin tries to reduce or eliminate.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are still a relatively new concept, a concept that clashes with the existing financial system. If bitcoin continues to succeed then we will see the infrastructure grow along with it. Unfortunately it will probably take some time for bitcoin to become easily traded with fiat, especially in large quantities.

There is no reason this isn't Bitcoin in the future.  However, today, in most areas your assessment of the current state of Bitcoin's utility for transfer of fiat money is valid.  Where bank wire transactions complete in under a full day and fees are relatively trivial (for large amounts), Bitcoin is no real competition just yet.

But try sending a wire on Saturday.   Try sending a wire to the billions of people who are unbanked.  Try sending a wire to (most anywhere of) the developing world.  That's why there is today hawala (or hundi) in a pretty large chunk of the world yet.

In those areas, bitcoin can be very good for money transfer.   Even there, it isn't (yet).    But it can be.    With the advantages Bitcoin offers, (essentially no fees and fast settlement) there's good reason to believe it will be used for money transfer in the future.   Those using it that way today are not complaining.   Mang Sweeney's customers who regularly send funds to family members in the Philippines aren't jumping ship to a competing service.  Bitcoin works for them.

Now remember, for money transfer outside the banking system (e.g., Western Union), Bitcoin has the advantage where traditional money transfer has the biggest challenge.    A Western Union needs agents on the sender's side as well as at the recipient's side.  That's a very expensive method to send fiat funds internationally.   With Bitcoin there isn't an international fiat transaction. There are instead two domestic transactions.  Those can be cheap.    Buying bitcoins in one country can cost less than 1% (e.g., via Dwolla USD transfer to Camp BX), and selling bitcoins in another country can cost a trivial amount as well.

Since there is a potential for profit in providing bitcoin exchange, this street-level exchange (versus Western Union agent offices) can happen without a large financial company like Western Union offering it.  Individuals can compete against Western Union by providing exchange at the street level.   They will network and larger traders will broker bitcoins, providing a way for the street-level traders to replenish their inventory of cash.  

Everything needed to make this happen is there, it just emerges slowly when there is no marketing effort and/or subsidy to build the "street level" exchange network.  There is enough profit in the money transfer industry though to ensure that a Bitcoin avenue will exist.  Check back in a few years, you will likely be very surprised with Bitcoin's progress in this area.

what is your motivation ? you don´t like it, why do you waste your time telling others ?

Transferring $50,000 to Japan via BTC/MtGox is a snap if you have trusted status. The problem is local regulations in various countries, and the exchange infrastructure, not Bitcoin itself.

Indeed true. Sadly the investment wont wait for the regulators to get their act together.

And then what, how does he get that BTC to the share holders whom are probably expecting FIAT? In the answer to that we are back at square one: solving the huge latency and burden when wanting to go from BTC to FIAT.

got it. analogies are bad in general. i only meant that you response that the issue was myself or family member were denominating things in FIAT was the source of my problem with transfer/exchange delays... is true, but sadly because I live in a FIAT world I can't remove that problem for now.

Nothing wrong with bitcoin, there just appears to be a problem with converting them to cold, hard cash.

As the bitcoin ecosystem grows, so will the ability to do large cashouts.

If you have interest, please read this:
http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

12.Conclusion
" We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust. "

That is most important of bitcoin's concept.

As you say, Large amount ($3K~) transaction is not comfortable for non-bank wire.
But all of people knows that.
You don't need worry.

For what amounts have you had success with bitstamp?

your analogy is true but i'd propose another. I agree one day bitcoin could be great for FIAT transfer even at values greater than $1k but I'm bothered that at this stage people run around saying its great for this when at the moment its not. It would be like people in the early very 1990's saying "look you can buy anything online!" when in fact at that time there was next to nothing. So, I'm bothered that the statement is way to early and misleading to those looking for exactly the feature some claim is so widespread.