3 ms·
>I see no good reason to do this. Secure communications and secure transactions can be separate apps, The reason is pretty clear. Transactions require two part
by syrrim 6y ago
>I see no good reason to do this. Secure communications and secure transactions can be separate apps,
The reason is pretty clear. Transactions require two parties to both be using the app. If you spin out a separate app, then most people won't have it installed nor be able to use it, and therefore won't be able to transact with it. This leads to a chicken and egg problem: if no one is using the app, then there's no point downloading and becoming familiar with it. By integrating with an existing, popular app in an adjacent space (messaging apps traditionally enable payments as well), they avoid this bootstrapping problem.
That said, it seems quite dumb to pick a premined currency to enable all this. That will inevitably raise questions about who stands to gain from the success of the system. Someone should come up with a way to make cryptocurrencies that are worthless for speculators, and only good for paying for things. Then, any new crypto project would have an easy way to avoid accusations of being a pump-and-dump.
- jerry1979 6y agoI imagine signal+mob will have an honest foundation-style grant system which will give tons of money to groups that did not get included in the first crypto wave.