3 ms·

Legacy payments network is a dumpster fire. It works but just barely. Crypto is much cleaner and will take it over eventually, give it time.

pavlov 7y ago
This is an example of what I meant by speculating on a growth story. 1994 Internet let you talk to people and exchange information around the world — things that you couldn’t do before. 2019 cryptocurrency lets you pay for something, sort of, not really, but will be very clean one day — never mind that millions are already paying for things and sending money because “it’s a dumpster fire”.
- mopsi 7y ago
  > 1994 Internet let you talk to people and exchange information around the world — things that you couldn’t do before. You could. There were phones and snail mail after all, weren't there? They were slow an expensive just like wire transfers between US and EU bank accounts are: 2-3 workdays and a $35-45 fee to move around a few bytes in existing financial messaging systems. Pure madness.
  - pavlov 7y ago
    Wire transfers between US and EU take a few hours to clear and cost $25. I send them all the time. In Europe, transfers between all banks are becoming instantaneous starting Jan 2020: https://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/what-we-do/sepa-instant-credit-transfer https://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/what-we-do/sepa-insta... The cost is pennies. No need for a crypto-anything solution.
    - noxer 7y ago
      US <-> EU is a corridor with huge volume the legacy systems are therefore very very optimized for this. Inside EU Tx are basically inside the same system which is centralized and updating balances is super simple cheap and fast. Try to send some USD to Mexico or something instead. Also a Tx taking hours and costing 25 bucks is absolutely not going to allow the Internet of Value to show it's possibilities. It may be acceptable to buy something and let it be ship to you. but what about services? instant services how could they be paid with such a system. Watch the youtube video linked above if you want to get an idea of the IoV. It's on a completely different scale. Value streaming a fraction of a cent at a time. Instant and basically free.
      - pavlov 7y ago
        Like millions of people, I buy instant services on the Internet all the time using those nasty legacy "dumpster fire" systems. They even provide a nice built-in feature called "chargeback" in case the service isn't what I expected. Cryptocurrencies don't seem to care about that part of customer experience at all. (Btw, when you say "just watch this YouTube video about an amazing business opportunity", what I hear is: "I believe you're a sucker".)
        noxer 7y ago
        If you don't want to watch the video I suggested but then argue with semi valid arguments because you have not seen the video, I kinda feel like I should just not reply anymore which is exactly what I will do after this post. >Cryptocurrencies don't seem to care about that part of customer experience at all. The idea which again is described in the video which you don't want to watch makes "chargebacks" something you do not need in many cases. The data/value streaming just stops if one side stops hence you don't need any agreement or contract. You pay for what you get and if you stop paying the other will stop as well. Some services obviously don't work that way and there will always be use for a third party middleman who takes the risk, guaranties service/money for both sides. The idea isn't to destroy all the business agreements that exists and then start them all again but use some fancy new way to pay each-other that does the exact same thing just differently. The idea is that a whole new sector of services will become possible because of that new tech. I don't feel the need to convince you into anything I just think you aren't aware of the fundamental changes the new tech can bring because all you saw is Bitcoin. I suggested the video purely because he explains the vision of the IoV very accurate. He's not gonna tell you to buy shitcoin XY or trow money into companies that try to build stuff with that new tech. If you watch it and think that this all will never happen, that's fine who knows. At least we talk about the same Idea then. Here is the link again https://youtu.be/Lxqz_NlX3GI https://youtu.be/Lxqz_NlX3GI Should be quite interesting for anyone in the tech/IT space even if one completely disagrees with his vision.
    - mopsi 7y ago
      > Wire transfers between US and EU take a few hours to clear and cost $25. I send them all the time. I receive a lot of payments from the US and I have never seen a wire transfer that takes less than a few days to arrive. This is consistent with the info given on Bank of America's website: the fee is $35 when sending foreign currency, $45 when sending USD, time 1-2 workdays. https://www.bankofamerica.com/foreign-exchange/wire-transfer.go https://www.bankofamerica.com/foreign-exchange/wire-transfer... Chase: fee $40, time 3-5 workdays. https://www.chase.com/digital/wire-transfer https://www.chase.com/digital/wire-transfer Even $25 for that is absolutely insane price, as instantaneous and free transfers within the European SEPA system demonstrate. Nothing comparable to SEPA exists for dealing with rest of the world. Express delivery services like Fedex deliver physical items faster from the US to Europe than payments move over digital channels. The situation is even worse for businesses that deal internationally with larger sums of money and may have to take significant hits from currency fluctuations during slow transactions. There are billions to be saved annually with systems like RippleNet (xRapid).
perl4ever 7y ago
Cryptocurrency seems like the inverse of the internet revolution to me. Internetworking realized the vast potential of all the computers in the world. They could do so much more if talking to each other. Crypto via "proof of work" takes all the unused computing capacity everywhere and creates an incentive to waste it. What it seems like to me is a hybrid virus that uses both human minds and machines to spread and suck up resources.
- noxer 7y ago
  BTC is 10 years old. Tech has come along way since then. Proof of work clearly isn't the revolution. There is no need to waist energy to make blockchains/DLT work. Just like light doesn't have to be produced by turning 95% of the energy into heat. Inventions never start with the final product. But there will always be people who prefer the first product.
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    I mean, if someone says that (a) proof of work is the only viable solution and all others have flaws you can't get around, (which I have noticed people claiming) and (b) BTC is still the most successful cryptocurrency, which people are not abandoning, what's your response? You just made a string of assertions without explanation, so why do you think these things?
    - noxer 7y ago
      Well (a) is simply wrong. Proof of works has flaws (energy wasting/tends to centralize) which can not be fixed. But others have fixed these flaws by not using PoW. Yes there are people telling that PoW and Bitcoin is the best and all other systems are flawed. They are called Bitcoin Maxis, their arguments usefully fall flat when you apply logic. They don't even agree with each other about which Bitcoin is the real Bitcoin. >BTC is still the most successful cryptocurrency How do you measure success of a cryptocurrency? Also being the first gives huge advantage for "success". Like Whatsapp which is probably the most successful instant messenger but does that mean it's the best? It takes time to dethrone something like Whatsapp or Bitcoin just having the better tech isn't enough to instantly make everyone switch. >You just made a string of assertions without explanation, so why do you think these things? You have any specific question? I don't really know what I should explain. If you are interested in alternatives to PoW you should lookup XRPL Consensus (Federated Byzantine agreement) a variant of this is also uses by the Stellar Consensus Protocol. Then there is PoS which is the most known alternative. DPoS is building on top of that idea. Then there is PoWeight, Tangle, Hashgraph and some other less popular and/or not (yet) working ideas/theories.

pavlov 7y ago

This is an example of what I meant by speculating on a growth story. 1994 Internet let you talk to people and exchange information around the world — things that you couldn’t do before. 2019 cryptocurrency lets you pay for something, sort of, not really, but will be very clean one day — never mind that millions are already paying for things and sending money because “it’s a dumpster fire”.

mopsi 7y ago
> 1994 Internet let you talk to people and exchange information around the world — things that you couldn’t do before. You could. There were phones and snail mail after all, weren't there? They were slow an expensive just like wire transfers between US and EU bank accounts are: 2-3 workdays and a $35-45 fee to move around a few bytes in existing financial messaging systems. Pure madness.
- pavlov 7y ago
  Wire transfers between US and EU take a few hours to clear and cost $25. I send them all the time. In Europe, transfers between all banks are becoming instantaneous starting Jan 2020: https://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/what-we-do/sepa-instant-credit-transfer https://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/what-we-do/sepa-insta... The cost is pennies. No need for a crypto-anything solution.
  - noxer 7y ago
    US <-> EU is a corridor with huge volume the legacy systems are therefore very very optimized for this. Inside EU Tx are basically inside the same system which is centralized and updating balances is super simple cheap and fast. Try to send some USD to Mexico or something instead. Also a Tx taking hours and costing 25 bucks is absolutely not going to allow the Internet of Value to show it's possibilities. It may be acceptable to buy something and let it be ship to you. but what about services? instant services how could they be paid with such a system. Watch the youtube video linked above if you want to get an idea of the IoV. It's on a completely different scale. Value streaming a fraction of a cent at a time. Instant and basically free.
    - pavlov 7y ago
      Like millions of people, I buy instant services on the Internet all the time using those nasty legacy "dumpster fire" systems. They even provide a nice built-in feature called "chargeback" in case the service isn't what I expected. Cryptocurrencies don't seem to care about that part of customer experience at all. (Btw, when you say "just watch this YouTube video about an amazing business opportunity", what I hear is: "I believe you're a sucker".)
      - noxer 7y ago
        If you don't want to watch the video I suggested but then argue with semi valid arguments because you have not seen the video, I kinda feel like I should just not reply anymore which is exactly what I will do after this post. >Cryptocurrencies don't seem to care about that part of customer experience at all. The idea which again is described in the video which you don't want to watch makes "chargebacks" something you do not need in many cases. The data/value streaming just stops if one side stops hence you don't need any agreement or contract. You pay for what you get and if you stop paying the other will stop as well. Some services obviously don't work that way and there will always be use for a third party middleman who takes the risk, guaranties service/money for both sides. The idea isn't to destroy all the business agreements that exists and then start them all again but use some fancy new way to pay each-other that does the exact same thing just differently. The idea is that a whole new sector of services will become possible because of that new tech. I don't feel the need to convince you into anything I just think you aren't aware of the fundamental changes the new tech can bring because all you saw is Bitcoin. I suggested the video purely because he explains the vision of the IoV very accurate. He's not gonna tell you to buy shitcoin XY or trow money into companies that try to build stuff with that new tech. If you watch it and think that this all will never happen, that's fine who knows. At least we talk about the same Idea then. Here is the link again https://youtu.be/Lxqz_NlX3GI https://youtu.be/Lxqz_NlX3GI Should be quite interesting for anyone in the tech/IT space even if one completely disagrees with his vision.
  - mopsi 7y ago
    > Wire transfers between US and EU take a few hours to clear and cost $25. I send them all the time. I receive a lot of payments from the US and I have never seen a wire transfer that takes less than a few days to arrive. This is consistent with the info given on Bank of America's website: the fee is $35 when sending foreign currency, $45 when sending USD, time 1-2 workdays. https://www.bankofamerica.com/foreign-exchange/wire-transfer.go https://www.bankofamerica.com/foreign-exchange/wire-transfer... Chase: fee $40, time 3-5 workdays. https://www.chase.com/digital/wire-transfer https://www.chase.com/digital/wire-transfer Even $25 for that is absolutely insane price, as instantaneous and free transfers within the European SEPA system demonstrate. Nothing comparable to SEPA exists for dealing with rest of the world. Express delivery services like Fedex deliver physical items faster from the US to Europe than payments move over digital channels. The situation is even worse for businesses that deal internationally with larger sums of money and may have to take significant hits from currency fluctuations during slow transactions. There are billions to be saved annually with systems like RippleNet (xRapid).

perl4ever 7y ago

Cryptocurrency seems like the inverse of the internet revolution to me. Internetworking realized the vast potential of all the computers in the world. They could do so much more if talking to each other. Crypto via "proof of work" takes all the unused computing capacity everywhere and creates an incentive to waste it. What it seems like to me is a hybrid virus that uses both human minds and machines to spread and suck up resources.

noxer 7y ago
BTC is 10 years old. Tech has come along way since then. Proof of work clearly isn't the revolution. There is no need to waist energy to make blockchains/DLT work. Just like light doesn't have to be produced by turning 95% of the energy into heat. Inventions never start with the final product. But there will always be people who prefer the first product.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  I mean, if someone says that (a) proof of work is the only viable solution and all others have flaws you can't get around, (which I have noticed people claiming) and (b) BTC is still the most successful cryptocurrency, which people are not abandoning, what's your response? You just made a string of assertions without explanation, so why do you think these things?
  - noxer 7y ago
    Well (a) is simply wrong. Proof of works has flaws (energy wasting/tends to centralize) which can not be fixed. But others have fixed these flaws by not using PoW. Yes there are people telling that PoW and Bitcoin is the best and all other systems are flawed. They are called Bitcoin Maxis, their arguments usefully fall flat when you apply logic. They don't even agree with each other about which Bitcoin is the real Bitcoin. >BTC is still the most successful cryptocurrency How do you measure success of a cryptocurrency? Also being the first gives huge advantage for "success". Like Whatsapp which is probably the most successful instant messenger but does that mean it's the best? It takes time to dethrone something like Whatsapp or Bitcoin just having the better tech isn't enough to instantly make everyone switch. >You just made a string of assertions without explanation, so why do you think these things? You have any specific question? I don't really know what I should explain. If you are interested in alternatives to PoW you should lookup XRPL Consensus (Federated Byzantine agreement) a variant of this is also uses by the Stellar Consensus Protocol. Then there is PoS which is the most known alternative. DPoS is building on top of that idea. Then there is PoWeight, Tangle, Hashgraph and some other less popular and/or not (yet) working ideas/theories.