4 ms·

Those aren't free, they drive up prices by a few percent and frankly fraud only matters for large transactions and/or untrusted merchants. Bitcoin is cash, not

by zorga 8y ago

Those aren't free, they drive up prices by a few percent and frankly fraud only matters for large transactions and/or untrusted merchants. Bitcoin is cash, not credit, and avoiding 2-3% of fees tacked on by credit card companies is more than enough reason to want internet cash for purchases where you're not concerned with fraud.

village-idiot 8y ago
I know they’re not free, and I’m happy to pay for the service. I can name a large number of smallish purchases I would not have done online if I didn’t know that Visa would make it right should the unknown vendor stiff me. Bitcoin is piss poor cash, given the wild exchange rate swings and the ability for it to be stolen online. It literally has no property that I desire.
- zorga 8y ago
  > Bitcoin is piss poor cash Agree, but I'm not promoting Bitcoin, I think it's poorly designed by someone who doesn't understand the properties of good money. Another crytpo with better properties will supersede it. It's the idea of crypto that's great, not the particular implementation of that idea called Bitcoin. Once you know an trust a vendor, paying with cash will eventually be a few percent cheaper just as it often is as brick and mortar places sometimes when they offer cash discounts because they too don't like the fees the cards companies force on them. It's not an either or scenario, it's a both scenario; you should have the option of cash or credit online, just like you do in the real world.
anigbrowl 8y ago
frankly fraud only matters for large transactions Largeness is relative. The counter to your argument is that widespread use of existing payment methods means the market prefers them.
- baddox 8y ago
  Where “the market” is a small number of firms with tremendous market power. “Market power” essentially means “power to do something other than what a competitive market would want.”
- zorga 8y ago
  > The counter to your argument is that widespread use of existing payment methods means the market prefers them. That's not a valid argument. The market always prefers what "is" until a critical mass understands benefits of a new technology. The existing credit system was not designed for today's world, is pull based, and is rife with fraud on both the merchant and the consumer side. Merchants absolutely despise credit cards, we can't wait for something better to be invented. The market preferred horses when cars were first invented; it takes time for new technology to penetrate. Internet cash will be a thing, Bitcoin might not be the successful implementation of that thing, but that thing's time will come. Credit card companies are despised by merchants.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Market dominance is absolutely a fair argument for something being preferred by consumers, unless if you’re going to allege fraud or assert that everyone is dumb. It of course doesn’t mean that things will remain this way forever. Credit cards have risen to prominence within living memory, there’s no reason why this has to remain. But it also means that if you expect something to replace credit cards, it must overcome both consumer preference and comfort, as well as all the advantages that the incumbents have. As an aside, we have internet money. They’re called credit cards and debit cards, and we all use them daily to purchase ludicrous amounts of goods and services online and offline. What I have yet to see is an actual explanation for how any proposed “internet money” is superior to my Visa without relying on any ideological claims.
    - icebraining 8y ago
      Well, some people prefer it. Many countries have alternative systems that are more used than CCs, and which they consider superior. Having a single system that maintains those advantages but is usable worldwide would be nice.
      - village-idiot 8y ago
        Sure, local preferences and regulations do vary, and they matter. I'm sure a lot of countries are hesitant to use American CC networks too, given how American/everyone-else interactions sometimes go. But, that doesn't really solve the problem, it merely pushes things around a bit. It's insufficient to say "credit cards aren't universally loved", because that does not imply that Bitcoin is the correct choice anywhere. It's perfectly possible that the local alternatives to CCs in other nations would still be preferred to Bitcoin. If one wants to sell the idea that BTC is a better choice than X, one must produce compelling reasons why this is so, preferably without relying on ideological statements that don't have universal appeal; I'm sure the goldbugs love BTCs anti-inflation nature, but that argument only carries the day with a very small group of people.
bunderbunder 8y ago
The baseline price for payment processing is well below 2-3%. In the EU, credit card processing fees are capped at 0.3%, and these companies are still able to make a decent profit despite. What those high fees really come from is the need to cover the cost of all those rewards programs that are so ubiquitous in some countries such as the USA. Those would probably disappear pretty quickly in the presence of a law allowing merchants to add any processing fees (perhaps above some nominal baseline cost) on to the bill. 1% cash back doesn't seem like nearly so great a deal when you have to reckon with the fact that what's really going on is that you pay 2% more, and then the issuing bank gives half of it back to you, along with a generous dose of smoke up the ass, and then pockets the other half.
- zorga 8y ago
  Solid point, thanks for the additional context.
- quadrangle 8y ago
  > a law allowing merchants to add any processing fees (perhaps above some nominal baseline cost) on to the bill This!! So much. The status quo amounts to price manipulation that harms the market and is utter B.S. Item 8 from http://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system http://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to...
  - joecool1029 8y ago
    Actually most states do permit credit card surcharges by the merchant. California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Oklahoma and Texas are the ones that ban it. Some of those states have pending litigation against those laws. Some of them also allow discounts for paying cash (as if it's any different than a surcharge for processing) There was a time from 2013 to 2017 that merchants were permitted by processing agreement to do it, but Visa and Mastercard convinced an appeals court to throw it out. A few places in my state still do surcharges, but it's pretty rare.
    - 8y ago
vorticalbox 8y ago
>frankly fraud only matters for large transactions. Maybe in the world of the wealthy.

by zorga 8y ago

village-idiot 8y ago

I know they’re not free, and I’m happy to pay for the service. I can name a large number of smallish purchases I would not have done online if I didn’t know that Visa would make it right should the unknown vendor stiff me. Bitcoin is piss poor cash, given the wild exchange rate swings and the ability for it to be stolen online. It literally has no property that I desire.

zorga 8y ago
> Bitcoin is piss poor cash Agree, but I'm not promoting Bitcoin, I think it's poorly designed by someone who doesn't understand the properties of good money. Another crytpo with better properties will supersede it. It's the idea of crypto that's great, not the particular implementation of that idea called Bitcoin. Once you know an trust a vendor, paying with cash will eventually be a few percent cheaper just as it often is as brick and mortar places sometimes when they offer cash discounts because they too don't like the fees the cards companies force on them. It's not an either or scenario, it's a both scenario; you should have the option of cash or credit online, just like you do in the real world.

anigbrowl 8y ago

frankly fraud only matters for large transactions Largeness is relative. The counter to your argument is that widespread use of existing payment methods means the market prefers them.

baddox 8y ago
Where “the market” is a small number of firms with tremendous market power. “Market power” essentially means “power to do something other than what a competitive market would want.”
zorga 8y ago
> The counter to your argument is that widespread use of existing payment methods means the market prefers them. That's not a valid argument. The market always prefers what "is" until a critical mass understands benefits of a new technology. The existing credit system was not designed for today's world, is pull based, and is rife with fraud on both the merchant and the consumer side. Merchants absolutely despise credit cards, we can't wait for something better to be invented. The market preferred horses when cars were first invented; it takes time for new technology to penetrate. Internet cash will be a thing, Bitcoin might not be the successful implementation of that thing, but that thing's time will come. Credit card companies are despised by merchants.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  Market dominance is absolutely a fair argument for something being preferred by consumers, unless if you’re going to allege fraud or assert that everyone is dumb. It of course doesn’t mean that things will remain this way forever. Credit cards have risen to prominence within living memory, there’s no reason why this has to remain. But it also means that if you expect something to replace credit cards, it must overcome both consumer preference and comfort, as well as all the advantages that the incumbents have. As an aside, we have internet money. They’re called credit cards and debit cards, and we all use them daily to purchase ludicrous amounts of goods and services online and offline. What I have yet to see is an actual explanation for how any proposed “internet money” is superior to my Visa without relying on any ideological claims.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    Well, some people prefer it. Many countries have alternative systems that are more used than CCs, and which they consider superior. Having a single system that maintains those advantages but is usable worldwide would be nice.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      Sure, local preferences and regulations do vary, and they matter. I'm sure a lot of countries are hesitant to use American CC networks too, given how American/everyone-else interactions sometimes go. But, that doesn't really solve the problem, it merely pushes things around a bit. It's insufficient to say "credit cards aren't universally loved", because that does not imply that Bitcoin is the correct choice anywhere. It's perfectly possible that the local alternatives to CCs in other nations would still be preferred to Bitcoin. If one wants to sell the idea that BTC is a better choice than X, one must produce compelling reasons why this is so, preferably without relying on ideological statements that don't have universal appeal; I'm sure the goldbugs love BTCs anti-inflation nature, but that argument only carries the day with a very small group of people.

bunderbunder 8y ago

The baseline price for payment processing is well below 2-3%. In the EU, credit card processing fees are capped at 0.3%, and these companies are still able to make a decent profit despite. What those high fees really come from is the need to cover the cost of all those rewards programs that are so ubiquitous in some countries such as the USA. Those would probably disappear pretty quickly in the presence of a law allowing merchants to add any processing fees (perhaps above some nominal baseline cost) on to the bill. 1% cash back doesn't seem like nearly so great a deal when you have to reckon with the fact that what's really going on is that you pay 2% more, and then the issuing bank gives half of it back to you, along with a generous dose of smoke up the ass, and then pockets the other half.

zorga 8y ago
Solid point, thanks for the additional context.
quadrangle 8y ago
> a law allowing merchants to add any processing fees (perhaps above some nominal baseline cost) on to the bill This!! So much. The status quo amounts to price manipulation that harms the market and is utter B.S. Item 8 from http://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system http://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to...
- joecool1029 8y ago
  Actually most states do permit credit card surcharges by the merchant. California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Oklahoma and Texas are the ones that ban it. Some of those states have pending litigation against those laws. Some of them also allow discounts for paying cash (as if it's any different than a surcharge for processing) There was a time from 2013 to 2017 that merchants were permitted by processing agreement to do it, but Visa and Mastercard convinced an appeals court to throw it out. A few places in my state still do surcharges, but it's pretty rare.
  - 8y ago

vorticalbox 8y ago

>frankly fraud only matters for large transactions. Maybe in the world of the wealthy.