Writing this once so I can stop repeating it across threads. It is about paying for it, and it is deliberately narrow — everything I am not confident about is marked as such.
The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both. Card payments are reversible and disclose the most; crypto discloses least and is irreversible, which is precisely why pressure toward it is a warning sign when it comes from a seller rather than a buyer. Escrow only means anything where the escrow agent is independent of both parties, which is rarely the case in practice.
One detail people underrate: an irreversible payment removes your only leverage in a dispute, so it should be the last step rather than the first.
What I am after is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both. I would rather have one careful answer than five confident ones.
adam_van said:The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
adam_van said:The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsThis one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.
Dr.RaviCardio said:Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.