In nearly all the posts I read regarding Bitcoin people mention that irreversible transactions are fantastic and the way forward.
 
I can understand this from the point of view of businesses but not from the point of view of the consumer. Why would people switch to start paying in BTC if they have no comeback should whatever it is they purchased not be as described or not received?

I read it all the time, people saying how they sent x thousands of $ to a random company they found on the internet in expectation that they would receive BTC in return - of course many people get ripped off and have no comeback as they are sending payments by non reversible methods.

If Bitcoin will continue to gain ground it will not only change how payments are sent and received but will change the very nature of how things are done leading to a survival of the fittest scenario where people not blessed with a large amount of common sense end up penniless and destitute.

I have read so many sob stories on this forum from people who have sent money for BTC to a company with no address listed on their site based in some backward country that it makes you think how could someone be so stupid? I have also read recently someone who sent money 3 times to the same company as each time they gave an excuse as to why they needed more? I mean come on!

Just wondering if the general consensus from long time Bitcoin users is that if someone is stupid enough to send money to a company that is so obviously not legitimate they deserve to loose their money?

A chargeback system doesn't necessarily protect the consumer. Here's a link explaining why porn industry merchants prefer credit cards.

https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/392310.0;topicseen

Another issue then is who sends to the escrow agent first?

Say I want to sell 1BTC for $750 - If I send the BTC to the escrow agent and then the buyer negates on the deal then I have lost time and effort.

Also if I'm running an online business for example I would not want to ship anything until the money was safely in my account/wallet. You have to bear in mind that you still need to trust the escrow agent - I don't want to have to trust anyone or trust that the escrow agent will find in my favour in case of an issue.

I really hope that a solution that is not escrow can be found to this issue.

Everyone is saying Escrow, but as a business owner, I don't want a middle man in my transactions with my customers.  No way.  I don't know what the alternative could be, but that will not fly IRL. 

Small businesses will need to develop a strategy to handle this concern from their customers, for sure. 

So the middleman/escrow is only for untrusted accounts, as they gain rep.?  That makes sense.  That's true that a refund will be simple to accomplish, but as someone pointed out, going from untrusted > trusted could be a very challenging task for small businesses.  Local businesses it's much easier to handle that situation, with face to face transactions. 

I'm definitely excited to be able to accept a new global customer, and a new form of currency!!  For small businesses that sell online, this is great!

Confidence Chains can support chargebacks natively.  This capability is critical to conducting e-commerce.

http://altchain.org.

-bm

No, the advantage is clear and huge. Chargebacks are the main vector of credit card fraud and probably the biggest source of all fraud in the world.

This leads to higher prices for goods and services which are passed directly to the consumer.

By eliminating these excessive fees, Bitcoin allows businesses to operate with much lower margins which has a massive benefit to everyone.

Furthermore, credit cards as they exist today are simply exploitive of the 99%. I own a couple simply for credit score purposes.

If you cant afford to buy something or cant be sure you trust the company you are buying from, you shouldnt be buying the product at all. Period.

No, the advantage is clear and huge. Chargebacks are the main vector of credit card fraud and probably the biggest source of all fraud in the world.