5 ms·

Part of the question for me is this: There's a reasonable amount of tracking required to pass these tokens around (and I'm a little confused as to how you avoi

by IanCal 9y ago

Part of the question for me is this: There's a reasonable amount of tracking required to pass these tokens around (and I'm a little confused as to how you avoid 'double spending' of tokens). This is treated as cheaper than doing the transactions at the bank level. Why are the bank level transactions expensive? What is it that means that moving tickets around is near free but electronic references to money not?

runeks 9y ago
As far as I can see, there is zero difference between a) an electronic IOU each worth exactly 1 cent, which can only be redeemed in bundles of at least 1,000 IOUs, and b) a $10 IOU/lottery ticket with a 0.1% chance of winning. In both cases the average IOU is worth 1 cent, and in both cases the issuer avoids handling very small amounts by only allowing redemption of IOUs worth at least $10. The bottleneck here is the process of issuing these IOUs, which must be done by a trusted party in order to avoid the double spend problem.
amelius 9y ago
Even if the bank transactions are expensive, we should consider that most people don't mind paying a small amount for content every month, say $25. Losing that money would be no disaster. So why not pay that amount to a party that pays content creators, so they can distribute the money. They are not banks, but if they screw up, then it's not a disaster happening, it's only 25 bucks. But they will not screw up anyway, since they would lose all their customers. And after you've used up your $25, you could "refill" your account by depositing another $25. I actually don't see what the big problem is.
- mnx 9y ago
  This exists. https://flattr.com/ https://flattr.com/ (they changed their model, so if you remember the "Flattr this" buttons, they are no longer needed)
pjc50 9y ago
I believe it's all in the fraud handling. On https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15592192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15592192 I came up with the phrase "the problem with micropayments is microscams". Whereever there is value there will be attempts at fraud, and on the internet you can automate them. Dealing with fraud inevitably requires a skilled human making decisions and dealing with complaints.
- IanCal 9y ago
  That does make sense, but would I be right in saying the proposal doesn't address any of this?

by IanCal 9y ago

runeks 9y ago

As far as I can see, there is zero difference between a) an electronic IOU each worth exactly 1 cent, which can only be redeemed in bundles of at least 1,000 IOUs, and b) a $10 IOU/lottery ticket with a 0.1% chance of winning. In both cases the average IOU is worth 1 cent, and in both cases the issuer avoids handling very small amounts by only allowing redemption of IOUs worth at least $10. The bottleneck here is the process of issuing these IOUs, which must be done by a trusted party in order to avoid the double spend problem.

amelius 9y ago

Even if the bank transactions are expensive, we should consider that most people don't mind paying a small amount for content every month, say $25. Losing that money would be no disaster. So why not pay that amount to a party that pays content creators, so they can distribute the money. They are not banks, but if they screw up, then it's not a disaster happening, it's only 25 bucks. But they will not screw up anyway, since they would lose all their customers. And after you've used up your $25, you could "refill" your account by depositing another $25. I actually don't see what the big problem is.

mnx 9y ago
This exists. https://flattr.com/ https://flattr.com/ (they changed their model, so if you remember the "Flattr this" buttons, they are no longer needed)

pjc50 9y ago

I believe it's all in the fraud handling. On https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15592192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15592192 I came up with the phrase "the problem with micropayments is microscams". Whereever there is value there will be attempts at fraud, and on the internet you can automate them. Dealing with fraud inevitably requires a skilled human making decisions and dealing with complaints.

IanCal 9y ago
That does make sense, but would I be right in saying the proposal doesn't address any of this?