4 ms·

I'm not sure how desirable the new features are compared to existing currencies. It also doesn't seem any freer. Don't know what the association with GNU entail

I'm not sure how desirable the new features are compared to existing currencies. It also doesn't seem any freer. Don't know what the association with GNU entails. Furthermore, its name is easily confused with the ancient denomination of "Thaler", I guess it's on purpose, but, once again, maybe not the greatest idea. If they want to centralize a currency, perhaps that would be better done by a government or other experienced institution.

saalweachter 11y ago
As near as I can tell, they aren't trying to be a digital currency, just a digital payment system. This is really an iteration on PayPal (and similar businesses): the new feature is that it is a system for letting multiple PayPals compete. Instead of being forced to make an account with a specific company, you can pick from a hopefully-large number of mints, who will be competing on things like fees and the customer experience. That will hopefully make things suck less. BitCoin solves a lot of problems most people don't care about. Most people don't care about Byzentine Generals or trustless transactions or very limited forms of anonymity. What most people care about are low-cost transactions which don't suck. We'll have to wait and see if Taler can actually deliver.
- pervycreeper 11y ago
  >a digital payment system Existing cryptocurrencies already perform this function well. If that's the sole claimed advantage of Taler, it's a step backwards.
  - saalweachter 11y ago
    Cryptocurrencies (by which I mean, Bitcoin, since it is the one with significant adoption) perform this function, but not particularly well. For a payment system, being a currency is a negative -- fluctuations between the value of the digital currency and the value of the currency goods are priced in is a headache few people enjoy. A payment system that is set up as a payment system -- instead of a decentralized trustless network -- can also better optimize things like transaction time (transactions can happen ~instantly if you're willing to trust central agencies) or having a known transaction cost. Right now Bitcoin's transaction cost is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- some combination of inflation from printing money to pay the miners and direct payments to the miners per transaction and payments to the exchanges to put cash in or take cash out and the risk of currency fluctuations mid-transaction. Regardless of whether it costs a little more or a little less, just knowing the transaction cost is a huge benefit to consumers and merchants.

saalweachter 11y ago

As near as I can tell, they aren't trying to be a digital currency, just a digital payment system. This is really an iteration on PayPal (and similar businesses): the new feature is that it is a system for letting multiple PayPals compete. Instead of being forced to make an account with a specific company, you can pick from a hopefully-large number of mints, who will be competing on things like fees and the customer experience. That will hopefully make things suck less. BitCoin solves a lot of problems most people don't care about. Most people don't care about Byzentine Generals or trustless transactions or very limited forms of anonymity. What most people care about are low-cost transactions which don't suck. We'll have to wait and see if Taler can actually deliver.

pervycreeper 11y ago
>a digital payment system Existing cryptocurrencies already perform this function well. If that's the sole claimed advantage of Taler, it's a step backwards.
- saalweachter 11y ago
  Cryptocurrencies (by which I mean, Bitcoin, since it is the one with significant adoption) perform this function, but not particularly well. For a payment system, being a currency is a negative -- fluctuations between the value of the digital currency and the value of the currency goods are priced in is a headache few people enjoy. A payment system that is set up as a payment system -- instead of a decentralized trustless network -- can also better optimize things like transaction time (transactions can happen ~instantly if you're willing to trust central agencies) or having a known transaction cost. Right now Bitcoin's transaction cost is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- some combination of inflation from printing money to pay the miners and direct payments to the miners per transaction and payments to the exchanges to put cash in or take cash out and the risk of currency fluctuations mid-transaction. Regardless of whether it costs a little more or a little less, just knowing the transaction cost is a huge benefit to consumers and merchants.