What's the Latest on Crypto?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only actual use case I have heard of that makes sense is for transactions that involve no trust issues, such that you do not need all the bells and whistles of our current payment processing system. Eg - you could use crypto instead of your debit/credit card to buy coffee because you are getting the coffee then and there and won’t ever need to do a charge back. The idea is that crypto in that scenario could be cheaper for vendors and consumers compared to the high expense of card processing fees.

But AFAIK, the crypto “rails” are not developed enough to make that scenario into a reality because it takes so much longer to process a crypto transaction on the blockchain vs the Visa/MC system.

But yes, if crypto and blockchain can break the Visa/MC stranglehold on payment processing and lower the fees there could be a use case.

This argument has never made any sense to me. The inherent processing costs for credit card transactions are orders of magnitude lower than bitcoin transactions. Part of it is that recipients don't pay them- it is currently being paid through mining rewards and the rampant speculation. But the other part that you alluded to is that we're not getting some important things from bitcoin. Those credit card processing fees are paying for scale, speed, stability, and fraud/consumer protection. If you want those same characteristics from bitcoin, the processing fees will go up significantly. And because the inherent costs are higher than credit card transactions, I'd certainly expect the cryptocurrency costs to be higher.

I think the idea specifically with small retail transactions is that you don’t need all the fraud and consumer protections of the payment processors. Sort of just like paying in cash.

As for the rest - yes the idea is that the cost and speed of crypto and blockchain would need to be below the current system for this to work. AFAIK that is not the case yet.

As a consumer I don’t need protections, but as a vendor I would in these cases. Many businesses have moved away from cash because of loss, theft, and maybe counterfeits.

Really? Even if you don't think you need chargeback abilities for products that were never delivered, you don't think consumers want protections from the bitcoin equivalent of stolen credit cards/numbers? There have been some rather large cases of that.

There’s a difference between the security of the deposit and the security of the transaction/payment. It’s the latter that crypto could *theoretically* *someday* be cheaper than the current payment system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only actual use case I have heard of that makes sense is for transactions that involve no trust issues, such that you do not need all the bells and whistles of our current payment processing system. Eg - you could use crypto instead of your debit/credit card to buy coffee because you are getting the coffee then and there and won’t ever need to do a charge back. The idea is that crypto in that scenario could be cheaper for vendors and consumers compared to the high expense of card processing fees.

But AFAIK, the crypto “rails” are not developed enough to make that scenario into a reality because it takes so much longer to process a crypto transaction on the blockchain vs the Visa/MC system.

But yes, if crypto and blockchain can break the Visa/MC stranglehold on payment processing and lower the fees there could be a use case.

This argument has never made any sense to me. The inherent processing costs for credit card transactions are orders of magnitude lower than bitcoin transactions. Part of it is that recipients don't pay them- it is currently being paid through mining rewards and the rampant speculation. But the other part that you alluded to is that we're not getting some important things from bitcoin. Those credit card processing fees are paying for scale, speed, stability, and fraud/consumer protection. If you want those same characteristics from bitcoin, the processing fees will go up significantly. And because the inherent costs are higher than credit card transactions, I'd certainly expect the cryptocurrency costs to be higher.

Yes, every time there is some theoretical example of something crypto/block chain is good for, once you start comparing it to current options, it is never better. It's perfect for crime though!

Not to belabor the point, but payment processing really is one area where a functional cheaper alternative could win out, and blockchain/crypto at least has a colorable case for being it (albeit still far from there). I believe for example crypto remittances are much cheaper already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only actual use case I have heard of that makes sense is for transactions that involve no trust issues, such that you do not need all the bells and whistles of our current payment processing system. Eg - you could use crypto instead of your debit/credit card to buy coffee because you are getting the coffee then and there and won’t ever need to do a charge back. The idea is that crypto in that scenario could be cheaper for vendors and consumers compared to the high expense of card processing fees.

But AFAIK, the crypto “rails” are not developed enough to make that scenario into a reality because it takes so much longer to process a crypto transaction on the blockchain vs the Visa/MC system.

But yes, if crypto and blockchain can break the Visa/MC stranglehold on payment processing and lower the fees there could be a use case.

But as a vendor, I don’t want to accept payments that could halve between when coffee was poured and when it was drank!

Right … that is where stablecoin comes in. In theory!!!!

Does a stablecoin need Bitcoin or Etherium or any of these other crypto currencies?

I get the utility of the blockchain and a stablecoin. I don't understand the utility of a crypto currency that moves 5% - 10% per day either higher or lower.

Most people completing transactions just turn around and convert the crypto into actual $$$s or Euros or whatever local currency.

[Anonymous]

We really need to stop saying "investors" are putting money into crypto.

It's gambling. More so than any mainstream financial vehicle. They are gamblers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only actual use case I have heard of that makes sense is for transactions that involve no trust issues, such that you do not need all the bells and whistles of our current payment processing system. Eg - you could use crypto instead of your debit/credit card to buy coffee because you are getting the coffee then and there and won’t ever need to do a charge back. The idea is that crypto in that scenario could be cheaper for vendors and consumers compared to the high expense of card processing fees.

But AFAIK, the crypto “rails” are not developed enough to make that scenario into a reality because it takes so much longer to process a crypto transaction on the blockchain vs the Visa/MC system.

But yes, if crypto and blockchain can break the Visa/MC stranglehold on payment processing and lower the fees there could be a use case.

This argument has never made any sense to me. The inherent processing costs for credit card transactions are orders of magnitude lower than bitcoin transactions. Part of it is that recipients don't pay them- it is currently being paid through mining rewards and the rampant speculation. But the other part that you alluded to is that we're not getting some important things from bitcoin. Those credit card processing fees are paying for scale, speed, stability, and fraud/consumer protection. If you want those same characteristics from bitcoin, the processing fees will go up significantly. And because the inherent costs are higher than credit card transactions, I'd certainly expect the cryptocurrency costs to be higher.

I think the idea specifically with small retail transactions is that you don’t need all the fraud and consumer protections of the payment processors. Sort of just like paying in cash.

As for the rest - yes the idea is that the cost and speed of crypto and blockchain would need to be below the current system for this to work. AFAIK that is not the case yet.

As a consumer I don’t need protections, but as a vendor I would in these cases. Many businesses have moved away from cash because of loss, theft, and maybe counterfeits.

Really? Even if you don't think you need chargeback abilities for products that were never delivered, you don't think consumers want protections from the bitcoin equivalent of stolen credit cards/numbers? There have been some rather large cases of that.

There’s a difference between the security of the deposit and the security of the transaction/payment. It’s the latter that crypto could *theoretically* *someday* be cheaper than the current payment system.

No, that's exactly my point. The security of the payment system will always be a significant problem. You're always going to need some ability to revert transactions in cases of fraud/theft/errors. And you need that regardless of transaction size, because small transactions will add up.