5 ms·

> Users who are paid this way receive USDP, which can be withdrawn to a bank account in its equivalent value in US dollars. I feel like I’m missing something.

> Users who are paid this way receive USDP, which can be withdrawn to a bank account in its equivalent value in US dollars. I feel like I’m missing something. How is this system any different than a centralized system like PayPal or any other traditional payment system, where users have a USD balance and can withdraw it to their bank accounts? If the company secretly removed the cryptocurrency backend and replaced it with a centralized database, would anything at all change for the users? Or would it be functionally identical?

throw8932894 5y ago
Paypal charges 3% and randomly bans accounts.
- bierjunge 5y ago
  Whatsapp sells my data for profit and allows ME to ban innocent accounts for 24 hours.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  PayPal fees are zero when money is sent as a “gift” and isn’t coming from a credit card. That seems to be equivalent to this model. WhatsApp has to play by the same banking rules as PayPal, so they’re not automatically exempted from the same regulations around prohibited transactions. These rules are still enforced at the bank layer.
johanneskanybal 5y ago
Pick your middleman. Using a crypto layer internally means you can circumvent traditional payment rails which means if you're in American growth-tech where revenue isn't a thing you can just remove all fee's for a while. Paypal could do the same for sure but chose not to. Disagree with the notion they won't be shutting people out of the network when needed, that's not grounded in reality.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  > which means if you're in American growth-tech where revenue isn't a thing you can just remove all fee's for a while. Paypal could do the same for sure but chose not to. PayPal doesn’t have any fees if you send money as a “gift” (that is, forgo any fraud protections) and you don’t use a credit card.
- throwoutway 5y ago
  > Disagree with the notion they won't be shutting people out of the network when needed, that's not grounded in reality Facebook is the only one with access to write to this chain correct? If so, they can shut people out of their chain by just disabling their Facebook, WhatsApp, or meta accounts. That’s grounded in reality
- panarky 5y ago
  Why did you put an apostrophe in "fee's" but not in "rails"? This isn't a grammar-nazi criticism because I frequently make similar mistakes with pluralization. It strikes me that there must be some cognitive explanation for why some plurals seem to need an apostrophe when other plurals don't.
  - toast0 5y ago
    Style rules used to suggest an apostrophe for initialized items such as C.D.'s for sale. Of course, modern style rules suggest CDs for sale (but don't tell the New York Times).
    - leephillips 5y ago
      The Times’ style guide would render more than one compact disc as C.D.s (no apostrophe, but with periods in intialisms). Do you have a link to any authoritative style guide that suggested “C.D.’s”? The Times' guide (2015) demands apostrophes to pluralize single letters: “the word has two t’s”. I think that’s silly, just as their use of quotation marks rather than italics for book titles. Here is a quote from the 2015 edition of the Style Guide: “G.I. The colloquial term, derived from government issue, for American soldiers. The plural is G.I.s”
jd115 5y ago
The timing of this is not accidental and Facebook is not acting on its own accord here. This is a move by the Russian mafia/state to make it easier to evade the imminent cut-off from SWIFT and global financial networks.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- soco 5y ago
  Why imminent cut-off? I mean, maybe Putin decides to invade Ukraine and maybe Biden decides to push for the promised cut-off, but why would Meta help them, and how would Meta be exempted from said cut-off?
- panarky 5y ago
  Just because Russia is a mafia state doesn't mean they're behind Facebook's payments initiatives. To make this sound a bit less like mad conspiratorial ravings, could you flesh out how Whatsapp would allow Russian banks, government agencies, companies and oligarchs to move large quantities of money if they're disconnected from SWIFT? For example, how would Russia get around the fact that Whatsapp is only offering this in the United States? How would Russians get fiat currency in and out? How would Russians circumvent the very low transaction limits?
  - jd115 5y ago
    Oh, but this isn't for the Russian people! It's for the so called "oligarchs" and their families who - surprise - don't actually live in Russia! They like America and western Europe much better. And if you don't realise that Russian government / KGB is VERY MUCH behind Facebook and its initiatives, I'm afraid you have quite a bit of catching up to do.
    - qeternity 5y ago
      > And if you don't realise that Russian government / KGB is VERY MUCH behind Facebook and its initiatives, I'm afraid you have quite a bit of catching up to do. Uh, I have to say, this is a new one for me. What's the theory here?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

throw8932894 5y ago

Paypal charges 3% and randomly bans accounts.

bierjunge 5y ago
Whatsapp sells my data for profit and allows ME to ban innocent accounts for 24 hours.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
PayPal fees are zero when money is sent as a “gift” and isn’t coming from a credit card. That seems to be equivalent to this model. WhatsApp has to play by the same banking rules as PayPal, so they’re not automatically exempted from the same regulations around prohibited transactions. These rules are still enforced at the bank layer.

johanneskanybal 5y ago

Pick your middleman. Using a crypto layer internally means you can circumvent traditional payment rails which means if you're in American growth-tech where revenue isn't a thing you can just remove all fee's for a while. Paypal could do the same for sure but chose not to. Disagree with the notion they won't be shutting people out of the network when needed, that's not grounded in reality.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> which means if you're in American growth-tech where revenue isn't a thing you can just remove all fee's for a while. Paypal could do the same for sure but chose not to. PayPal doesn’t have any fees if you send money as a “gift” (that is, forgo any fraud protections) and you don’t use a credit card.
throwoutway 5y ago
> Disagree with the notion they won't be shutting people out of the network when needed, that's not grounded in reality Facebook is the only one with access to write to this chain correct? If so, they can shut people out of their chain by just disabling their Facebook, WhatsApp, or meta accounts. That’s grounded in reality
panarky 5y ago
Why did you put an apostrophe in "fee's" but not in "rails"? This isn't a grammar-nazi criticism because I frequently make similar mistakes with pluralization. It strikes me that there must be some cognitive explanation for why some plurals seem to need an apostrophe when other plurals don't.
- toast0 5y ago
  Style rules used to suggest an apostrophe for initialized items such as C.D.'s for sale. Of course, modern style rules suggest CDs for sale (but don't tell the New York Times).
  - leephillips 5y ago
    The Times’ style guide would render more than one compact disc as C.D.s (no apostrophe, but with periods in intialisms). Do you have a link to any authoritative style guide that suggested “C.D.’s”? The Times' guide (2015) demands apostrophes to pluralize single letters: “the word has two t’s”. I think that’s silly, just as their use of quotation marks rather than italics for book titles. Here is a quote from the 2015 edition of the Style Guide: “G.I. The colloquial term, derived from government issue, for American soldiers. The plural is G.I.s”

jd115 5y ago

The timing of this is not accidental and Facebook is not acting on its own accord here. This is a move by the Russian mafia/state to make it easier to evade the imminent cut-off from SWIFT and global financial networks.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
soco 5y ago
Why imminent cut-off? I mean, maybe Putin decides to invade Ukraine and maybe Biden decides to push for the promised cut-off, but why would Meta help them, and how would Meta be exempted from said cut-off?
panarky 5y ago
Just because Russia is a mafia state doesn't mean they're behind Facebook's payments initiatives. To make this sound a bit less like mad conspiratorial ravings, could you flesh out how Whatsapp would allow Russian banks, government agencies, companies and oligarchs to move large quantities of money if they're disconnected from SWIFT? For example, how would Russia get around the fact that Whatsapp is only offering this in the United States? How would Russians get fiat currency in and out? How would Russians circumvent the very low transaction limits?
- jd115 5y ago
  Oh, but this isn't for the Russian people! It's for the so called "oligarchs" and their families who - surprise - don't actually live in Russia! They like America and western Europe much better. And if you don't realise that Russian government / KGB is VERY MUCH behind Facebook and its initiatives, I'm afraid you have quite a bit of catching up to do.
  - qeternity 5y ago
    > And if you don't realise that Russian government / KGB is VERY MUCH behind Facebook and its initiatives, I'm afraid you have quite a bit of catching up to do. Uh, I have to say, this is a new one for me. What's the theory here?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]