Posting this because the summary going around does not say what the paper says, and the difference matters for how people here are using it.
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.
Where I think it is weakest: the subgroup findings are the part I trust least — with enough subgroups something is always significant, and these were not all pre-registered.
What I am after is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both. Happy to be told the question itself is wrong.
LibrarianMeg said:The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
LibrarianMeg said:The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
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. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
NeuroNate said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.