Why? To accept it you need to instantly convert it to lightning anyway to make sure it’s “real”. At that point why not use lightning to begin with?
Discussion
Because if lightning is sent it's final while cashu is not until redeemed by the seller 😀
So we’re re-adding visa-like chargeback liabilities to payments. Why would anyone want this
Imagine you give your waiter a tip or gift someone else some sats via cashu as a present. If you see then after xyz time that they still have not redeedem your gift you can just take them back instead they getting lost/unused. Obviously as soons as they are accepted/reedem you can't get them back.
So I guess what nostr:npub1g53mukxnjkcmr94fhryzkqutdz2ukq4ks0gvy5af25rgmwsl4ngq43drvk was saying is e.g. I could send you know now 100k sats in cashu via DM and say please build xyz into damus. And if you don't want or ignore my request I could always get my sats back without having to ask for a refund.
so its explicitly designed to be doublespend + rugpull tech. makes sense. I guess that is technically a feature for the sender
None of this is great for adoption.
No, once you accept the payment it's yours. No way to get it back. But in the end thats not the main use cases for ecash. More about scalabiltiy and privacy imo.
I don’t think this is a good argument.
The perfect recipe for rug pulls.
Hey! Because it allows an asynchronous yet automatic checkout flow. Otherwise the merchant (or an agent controlling their nsec) needs to be present to generate a Lightning invoice and finalize the transaction. It’s a really cool part of the nostr:npub1gmmrkec8een5jelrxq5rz260nqzpnj45yzznpaerqv0yma3s86gqpfe2h0 spec that nostr:npub16dhgpql60vmd4mnydjut87vla23a38j689jssaqlqqlzrtqtd0kqex0nkq is already using for Nostrized e-commerce. Yes it requires an extra step to get back to Lightning that seems redundant, and trust in an ecash mint, but it takes the burden off the merchant to run an ever-present server for automatic checkout.