4 ms·

Have you considered allowing them if you have a valid credit card on file. For example, I'm currently a Humble Monthly subscriber which already gives me a one c

Have you considered allowing them if you have a valid credit card on file. For example, I'm currently a Humble Monthly subscriber which already gives me a one click purchase options through the credit card on file. Vultr, a VPS Host, accepts Bitcoins but started to require a valid credit card or Paypal purchase before accepting Bitcoins to prevent ToS violators who used Bitcoin.

kevindong 10y ago
But would that not defeat the purpose of Bitcoin (don't need to interact with the massive financial institutions, anonymity, etc.)?
- samb1729 10y ago
  It's not necessarily the case that someone would want to use Bitcoin for anonymity, it might just be a more convenient payment method or something else. Doesn't hurt to give people more places to spend their Bitcoin even if the circumstances are less than ideal.
  - kevindong 10y ago
    In what way can Bitcoin be considered a meaningful alternative (however you define it) if you also have to input a valid credit card number (that, presumably, the merchant will run the traditional $1 verification charge on)? The reality is that Bitcoin is less convenient than using a regular credit card (because, realistically, you're not going to be mining Bitcoin but rather you'll be buying Bitcoin using your regular credit card/bank account). I would argue that Bitcoin is also worse in every way (no chargebacks, wild fluctuations in the valuation of a unit of Bitcoin, etc.) if you also don't care about anonymity and the product you're buying is fully legal.
    - rtpg 10y ago
      CC serves as verification. Bitcoin has less fees. So it's like "providing an ID", and then paying. Even if bitcoin is not "anonymous" (pseudonymous), there's still the decentralised+cheap nature of it that's worthwhile.
      - traviscj 10y ago
        Fees argument doesn't really hold water because authorizations costs money too, even if subsequently voided.

kevindong 10y ago

But would that not defeat the purpose of Bitcoin (don't need to interact with the massive financial institutions, anonymity, etc.)?

samb1729 10y ago
It's not necessarily the case that someone would want to use Bitcoin for anonymity, it might just be a more convenient payment method or something else. Doesn't hurt to give people more places to spend their Bitcoin even if the circumstances are less than ideal.
- kevindong 10y ago
  In what way can Bitcoin be considered a meaningful alternative (however you define it) if you also have to input a valid credit card number (that, presumably, the merchant will run the traditional $1 verification charge on)? The reality is that Bitcoin is less convenient than using a regular credit card (because, realistically, you're not going to be mining Bitcoin but rather you'll be buying Bitcoin using your regular credit card/bank account). I would argue that Bitcoin is also worse in every way (no chargebacks, wild fluctuations in the valuation of a unit of Bitcoin, etc.) if you also don't care about anonymity and the product you're buying is fully legal.
  - rtpg 10y ago
    CC serves as verification. Bitcoin has less fees. So it's like "providing an ID", and then paying. Even if bitcoin is not "anonymous" (pseudonymous), there's still the decentralised+cheap nature of it that's worthwhile.
    - traviscj 10y ago
      Fees argument doesn't really hold water because authorizations costs money too, even if subsequently voided.