4 ms·

> Yes there will probably be a minor uptick in merchants being dishonest. But I doubt it will be as bad... Simply wishful thinking. If that were the case consu

> Yes there will probably be a minor uptick in merchants being dishonest. But I doubt it will be as bad... Simply wishful thinking. If that were the case consumer protections never would have been a very interesting feature. But they are. Especially for ecommerce. > Your argument is like saying in the early days of Blu-ray that "no one will buy Blu-ray discs... No and I clearly stated otherwise. Apple Pay is more like launching a new disc standard that is compatible with millions of existing players already deployed, compared to one that requires brand new hardware and has fewer features. No contest. You also ignored -- probably because it is in your interest to ignore it -- that the reason merchants have no incentive to adopt is that nobody uses it. Payments are a two-sided market. Advances need to offer benefits to both sides of the market. You've only cited an advantage to one side, the merchant, which comes directly at the cost of a regression in benefits to the other side, the consumer. Bitcoin as it stands is a major regression in consumer benefits, and you've only managed to cite one extremely narrow case where it offers any advantage whatsoever (no transaction limits or approval step). This is nowhere near enough to offer a compelling value proposition to consumers. As for P2P, your own use case was sending lunch money. You've offered nothing to suggest that Apple Pay won't dominate this category. You're also incorrect in your "guarantee" about delays in access to funds; they are debit transactions that process instantly.

mrb 9y ago
«Simply wishful thinking» People will pay in BTC only merchants that they already trust. Think high-reputation businesses like Amazon, Costco. Do you really think companies like that would start being dishonest if they accepted bitcoins? «compared to one that requires brand new hardware» No, accepting Bitcoin doesn't require new hardware. It's a software update to a website or to a point-of-sale. «You also ignored -- probably because it is in your interest to ignore it -- that the reason merchants have no incentive to adopt is that nobody uses it» You can continue writing they have "no incentive" but it doesn't make it true. This is the 3rd time you ignore it, and the 3rd time I point it out: their #1 incentive to accept BTC is to avoid chargeback fraud. Will I have to repeat it a 4th time? As to "nobody uses it", I am not ignoring you, it is simply that you are wrong. Usage is growing: we got from 0 to 160,000 merchants in a few years, the transaction rate is doubling every 18 months (not due to speculation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15281860 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15281860) «Bitcoin as it stands is a major regression in consumer benefits» It is a (small) regression, yes, no denying that, but it is far outweighed by the advantages: permissionless, near-instant international payments, no inflation, censorship-resistant, gives access to the underbanked/unbanked, etc. As to Apple P2P, it is pointless to continue discussing it before it is rolled out and before we have a clear idea of its advantages and inconvenients. But I maintain my position that, if not delays, there will be transactions limits, and it also won't ever be used widely (for starters, only 2-3% of the world population has an iPhone.)

mrb 9y ago

«Simply wishful thinking» People will pay in BTC only merchants that they already trust. Think high-reputation businesses like Amazon, Costco. Do you really think companies like that would start being dishonest if they accepted bitcoins? «compared to one that requires brand new hardware» No, accepting Bitcoin doesn't require new hardware. It's a software update to a website or to a point-of-sale. «You also ignored -- probably because it is in your interest to ignore it -- that the reason merchants have no incentive to adopt is that nobody uses it» You can continue writing they have "no incentive" but it doesn't make it true. This is the 3rd time you ignore it, and the 3rd time I point it out: their #1 incentive to accept BTC is to avoid chargeback fraud. Will I have to repeat it a 4th time? As to "nobody uses it", I am not ignoring you, it is simply that you are wrong. Usage is growing: we got from 0 to 160,000 merchants in a few years, the transaction rate is doubling every 18 months (not due to speculation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15281860 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15281860) «Bitcoin as it stands is a major regression in consumer benefits» It is a (small) regression, yes, no denying that, but it is far outweighed by the advantages: permissionless, near-instant international payments, no inflation, censorship-resistant, gives access to the underbanked/unbanked, etc. As to Apple P2P, it is pointless to continue discussing it before it is rolled out and before we have a clear idea of its advantages and inconvenients. But I maintain my position that, if not delays, there will be transactions limits, and it also won't ever be used widely (for starters, only 2-3% of the world population has an iPhone.)