6 ms·

Micropayments on the web without users having to create an account. For example paying a few cents for reading a news article, without an account on the news si

Micropayments on the web without users having to create an account. For example paying a few cents for reading a news article, without an account on the news site and without the high fees for a payment processor. (Via Lightning Network) Example news site: https://yalls.org https://yalls.org Example browser extension for great UX: https://github.com/wbobeirne/joule-extension https://github.com/wbobeirne/joule-extension Or even nanopayments for single API calls, between the browser and a server or between servers. Example pay-per-call web service / API: https://lightning.ws https://lightning.ws (disclaimer: my project, based on another project by me: https://github.com/philippgille/ln-paywall https://github.com/philippgille/ln-paywall)

mruts 8y ago
Seeing how slow and expensive both BTC and ETH are, micropayments aren’t really viable, tbh. The mining and gas fees for BTC and ETH respectively are going to be higher than the cut a payment processor would take. The one advantage that you might be alluding to is that bitcoins are divisible into satoshi’s, which are much more granular than cents.
- Semaphor 8y ago
  While I don't agree that crypto is currently generally usable for micropayments, I'm not sure the current ~$0.045/transfer fee for ETH is really more than a payment processor would take. And that's if you want really fast confirmations.
- PhilippGille 8y ago
  I was specifically talking about the Lightning Network, a second layer that facilitates Bitcoin's smart contract capabilities to enable off-chain payments via so called payment channels. There's no mining involved during transactions in the channel - only for opening and closing a channel, making the transactions almost instant. Thanks to proper routing you can reach most of the peers even with a single channel. It even adds some privacy because it uses onion routing, and the payments are not less secure because each off-chain transaction can be used as valid on-chain transaction should either party wish to do so, closing the channel. There's much more to it, many smart people have put a lot of thought into LN, so I recommend reading the whitepaper and other documentation about it.
  - arcticbull 8y ago
    Not enough thought. With 7tx/sec it will take 35 years to open a channel for everyone on earth and another 35 years to close it assuming nobody is born. I believe that's in the white paper, actually. Either way you'll be paying $1.26 to open a channel and another $1.26 to close it, so paying Stripe 2.9% + $0.30 makes the fee break-even point vs having a wallet on your micropayments server funding with $76, any less, Stripe wins.
    - PhilippGille 8y ago
      Search for "channel factories" - it allows multiple channels to be opened with a single on-chain tx. And looking at how many people use a custodial Bitcoin wallet today (e.g. Coinbase), many will probably use custodial LN wallets as well, with only the wallet service requiring a channel. Not recommending this of course. Also, my use case was regarding micropayments (e.g. for reading a news article) and nanopayments (e.g. for an API call). That's below $0.30. If you're now going to say that you could top up some balance (like $20) and just deduct a cent from that for every payment, that was exactly the other point of my use case: No accounts required, neither in the DB of the news or API service, nor in the DB of some payment processor that must keep your credit card data. So it's not just about fees, it's also about privacy.
      - arcticbull 8y ago
        To your point, micropayments aren't a limitation of the existing financial system. People just don't want them. The issue is that people have a limited capacity to make decisions [1], and having to decide if every single site they visit or article they want to read is "worth" the $0.005 just sucks. It's the reason that Netflix and Apple Music is so successful while buying individual songs and videos via the iTunes store is cheaper in the long run, and probably even in the short run. The real value is being able to roll up the content into a monthly pass model and handling the payouts not as micropayments but what they are -- accounting. Has there ever been a successful micropayments system? The reason we don't have micropayments isn't an accounting issue, fee-related or a technical issue -- or even a privacy issue -- it's a human biology issue. IMO hooking it up directly to a wallet without topping off isn't going to change that, especially since you still have to top off the BTC wallet regularly as you get paid in real currency. Boat-anchoring two things that are complex and people don't really want (crypto + micropayments) isn't going to make the two work all of a sudden. The only way to really solve the news business model with something other than ads is a Netflix-for-news. I hope that Apple News becomes that because newspapers deserve to exist. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_fatigue
- xtracto 8y ago
  That hasn't been my experience. I pay some services with BTC via CryptoPay and is really fast. What is the alternative? Card? 2% + .3 fee. That's expensive. ACH? takes 5 days to be processed. What is the fast, cheap digital alternative?
  - phamilton 8y ago
    Venmo and the like. Any ledger will work just fine if it's built for fast payments. That ledger doesn't need to be distributed and/or decentralized. Solving trust is an oversold benefit of BTC in my opinion.
    - gruez 8y ago
      >Venmo and the like. Works great if you're settling transferring between friends doesn't work for buying/selling goods[1], otherwise you get charged the same 3%. Also, the "free" transaction aspect is most likely a loss leader. [1] https://help.venmo.com/hc/en-us/articles/217532097-Can-I-use-Venmo-to-buy-or-sell-merchandise-goods-or-services- https://help.venmo.com/hc/en-us/articles/217532097-Can-I-use...
    - thinkmassive 8y ago
      Solving trust is the only benefit of Bitcoin, but I think you’re underestimating the importance of financial sovereignty.
      - arcticbull 8y ago
        Lack thereof is currently working for 7.5 billion people. Bitcoin works for basically nobody.
        thinkmassive 8y ago
        If you think present financial systems are working well for every inhabitant on the planet, you probably spend a lot of time in a very comfortable bubble. Besides, talking worked well for thousands of years, what use would humanity have for the Internet? /s
- gruez 8y ago
  With Bitcoin I recently sent a $30 transaction (non lightning) for around $0.05 in fees. That's 0.1%. It wasn't "low fee" either - it was confirmed within the next block. Bitcoin transactions are charged by the byte, so I could have sent a million dollars for $0.05 as well.
  - arcticbull 8y ago
    Fees are $1.26 right now, domestic ACHs are largely free. What was your FOREX risk? Did you figure in that you now have to report your transaction on Form 8949, can no longer use TurboTax and will have to spend hours figuring out your reporting obligations or paying an accountant? If you're just going to break the law the rest of the calculus probably doesn't matter as much.
    - russelldc 8y ago
      As of 2019, you can definitely use TurboTax to report Bitcoin transactions. And if you use Coinbase, there's deeper integration there, as well.
      - arcticbull 8y ago
        TurboTax Deluxe I assume? The up-sell cost does still have to be factored in, though it's good to know, thanks!

mruts 8y ago

Seeing how slow and expensive both BTC and ETH are, micropayments aren’t really viable, tbh. The mining and gas fees for BTC and ETH respectively are going to be higher than the cut a payment processor would take. The one advantage that you might be alluding to is that bitcoins are divisible into satoshi’s, which are much more granular than cents.

Semaphor 8y ago
While I don't agree that crypto is currently generally usable for micropayments, I'm not sure the current ~$0.045/transfer fee for ETH is really more than a payment processor would take. And that's if you want really fast confirmations.
PhilippGille 8y ago
I was specifically talking about the Lightning Network, a second layer that facilitates Bitcoin's smart contract capabilities to enable off-chain payments via so called payment channels. There's no mining involved during transactions in the channel - only for opening and closing a channel, making the transactions almost instant. Thanks to proper routing you can reach most of the peers even with a single channel. It even adds some privacy because it uses onion routing, and the payments are not less secure because each off-chain transaction can be used as valid on-chain transaction should either party wish to do so, closing the channel. There's much more to it, many smart people have put a lot of thought into LN, so I recommend reading the whitepaper and other documentation about it.
- arcticbull 8y ago
  Not enough thought. With 7tx/sec it will take 35 years to open a channel for everyone on earth and another 35 years to close it assuming nobody is born. I believe that's in the white paper, actually. Either way you'll be paying $1.26 to open a channel and another $1.26 to close it, so paying Stripe 2.9% + $0.30 makes the fee break-even point vs having a wallet on your micropayments server funding with $76, any less, Stripe wins.
  - PhilippGille 8y ago
    Search for "channel factories" - it allows multiple channels to be opened with a single on-chain tx. And looking at how many people use a custodial Bitcoin wallet today (e.g. Coinbase), many will probably use custodial LN wallets as well, with only the wallet service requiring a channel. Not recommending this of course. Also, my use case was regarding micropayments (e.g. for reading a news article) and nanopayments (e.g. for an API call). That's below $0.30. If you're now going to say that you could top up some balance (like $20) and just deduct a cent from that for every payment, that was exactly the other point of my use case: No accounts required, neither in the DB of the news or API service, nor in the DB of some payment processor that must keep your credit card data. So it's not just about fees, it's also about privacy.
    - arcticbull 8y ago
      To your point, micropayments aren't a limitation of the existing financial system. People just don't want them. The issue is that people have a limited capacity to make decisions [1], and having to decide if every single site they visit or article they want to read is "worth" the $0.005 just sucks. It's the reason that Netflix and Apple Music is so successful while buying individual songs and videos via the iTunes store is cheaper in the long run, and probably even in the short run. The real value is being able to roll up the content into a monthly pass model and handling the payouts not as micropayments but what they are -- accounting. Has there ever been a successful micropayments system? The reason we don't have micropayments isn't an accounting issue, fee-related or a technical issue -- or even a privacy issue -- it's a human biology issue. IMO hooking it up directly to a wallet without topping off isn't going to change that, especially since you still have to top off the BTC wallet regularly as you get paid in real currency. Boat-anchoring two things that are complex and people don't really want (crypto + micropayments) isn't going to make the two work all of a sudden. The only way to really solve the news business model with something other than ads is a Netflix-for-news. I hope that Apple News becomes that because newspapers deserve to exist. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_fatigue
xtracto 8y ago
That hasn't been my experience. I pay some services with BTC via CryptoPay and is really fast. What is the alternative? Card? 2% + .3 fee. That's expensive. ACH? takes 5 days to be processed. What is the fast, cheap digital alternative?
- phamilton 8y ago
  Venmo and the like. Any ledger will work just fine if it's built for fast payments. That ledger doesn't need to be distributed and/or decentralized. Solving trust is an oversold benefit of BTC in my opinion.
  - gruez 8y ago
    >Venmo and the like. Works great if you're settling transferring between friends doesn't work for buying/selling goods[1], otherwise you get charged the same 3%. Also, the "free" transaction aspect is most likely a loss leader. [1] https://help.venmo.com/hc/en-us/articles/217532097-Can-I-use-Venmo-to-buy-or-sell-merchandise-goods-or-services- https://help.venmo.com/hc/en-us/articles/217532097-Can-I-use...
  - thinkmassive 8y ago
    Solving trust is the only benefit of Bitcoin, but I think you’re underestimating the importance of financial sovereignty.
    - arcticbull 8y ago
      Lack thereof is currently working for 7.5 billion people. Bitcoin works for basically nobody.
      - thinkmassive 8y ago
        If you think present financial systems are working well for every inhabitant on the planet, you probably spend a lot of time in a very comfortable bubble. Besides, talking worked well for thousands of years, what use would humanity have for the Internet? /s
gruez 8y ago
With Bitcoin I recently sent a $30 transaction (non lightning) for around $0.05 in fees. That's 0.1%. It wasn't "low fee" either - it was confirmed within the next block. Bitcoin transactions are charged by the byte, so I could have sent a million dollars for $0.05 as well.
- arcticbull 8y ago
  Fees are $1.26 right now, domestic ACHs are largely free. What was your FOREX risk? Did you figure in that you now have to report your transaction on Form 8949, can no longer use TurboTax and will have to spend hours figuring out your reporting obligations or paying an accountant? If you're just going to break the law the rest of the calculus probably doesn't matter as much.
  - russelldc 8y ago
    As of 2019, you can definitely use TurboTax to report Bitcoin transactions. And if you use Coinbase, there's deeper integration there, as well.
    - arcticbull 8y ago
      TurboTax Deluxe I assume? The up-sell cost does still have to be factored in, though it's good to know, thanks!