5 ms·

USDC != USD. Pegged to it doesn't mean it's the same. While USDC is backed by Coinbase and more trustworthy than Tether. A lot of it is still going to unchart

USDC != USD. Pegged to it doesn't mean it's the same. While USDC is backed by Coinbase and more trustworthy than Tether. A lot of it is still going to uncharted territory.

rvz 5y ago
> USDC != USD Never said that. I'm only saying businesses can use it. This is you from [0]: > That's not doable in practise. So a business cannot use USDC on some cryptocurrency like Stellar today then? [1] So the concerns of high transaction fees, unstable price fluctuations and slow transfers which are all the properties of using payments with Bitcoin are somehow not solved because of USDC and it being built on cryptocurrencies like Stellar? are you sure? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980 [1] https://ir.moneygram.com/news-releases/news-release-details/moneygram-announces-innovative-partnership-stellar-development https://ir.moneygram.com/news-releases/news-release-details/...
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  Will this fare better than their ripple partnership where the SEC intervened? Still, this doesn't address the fact that the op will lose a lot of business with solely crypto. Therefore, it isn't an answer to his question. So it's not doable in practise. Except if you want to lose a lot of money if you solely accept crypto. This has all happened before in 2017. And shortly after crypto was removed as payment option almost everywhere. Nothing fundamentally has changed since 2017. If so, what?
  - rvz 5y ago
    > Will this fare better than their ripple partnership where the SEC intervened? Why not ask MoneyGram? Maybe they can give you a better answer than I or anyone else here could. > Still, this doesn't address the fact that the op will lose a lot of business with solely crypto. Solely? I don't think that is what you said originally, was it? [0] From [0] > That's not doable in practise. > - You would immediately take a hit, because crypto payments are not popular. > - Currency/btc conversion fees are more expensive than any transaction fee. > Many ecoms added support in 2017 and removed that functionality again. > There's no interest for buying things that isn't part of the "pump and dump" scheme. NFT's are probably the only thing, since they hope to resell it for more money. It seems that you have decided to change your argument to 'solely' as soon as you saw my comment disproving your nonsense (with examples) and now you have started splitting hairs to present an illusion that businesses cannot use or accept cryptocurrencies. (and survive) So OpenSea / Rarible / Dent Wireless are not businesses only accepting cryptocurrencies then? > This has all happened before in 2017. And shortly after crypto was removed add payment option almost everywhere. > Nothing fundamentally has changed since 2017. If so, what? Right so it will happen again in 2021, 2022 then? So in 2021, MoonPay, BitPay, Coinbase Commerce and Circle.com enabled businesses do not allow their customers like VISA, AMC and Shopify to accept cryptocurrencies and stablecoins like USDC? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980
    - NicoJuicy 5y ago
      OpenSea is not products. Buyers think they will earn money from it and are prepared to put their HODL coin in it to earn more. It's one big piramid scheme. Rarible is similar. It's not comparable to e-commerce. NFT's in it's current state is literally the perfect product for HOLD'ers if you think about it. As said before, this all happened in the past. Woocommerce, Steam, Amazon, Stripe, ... All added it and removed it. Only square kept it. The current hype is just the same that started with failing business trying to jump in it ( eg. Kodak and KodakCoin). Visa and others do want to protect themselves. But even Stripe currently started again a team for crypto with 5 person while they anandoned it in the past. Nothing says it will be important, it's a matter of "what if", just like in 2017. Either way, this topic is about lowering transaction fees. Changing to crypto would lose a lot of business. As such, the "patent answer" here is not doable for a business. What's so hard to understand? You're not going to switch a business to a payment option that only represents 2% of possible transactions. There's currently a lot of FUD. But it's all going away when BTC drops again. It only took a pandemic previous time to reverse Bitcoin from a multi-year decline.
      - rvz 5y ago
        > OpenSea is not products... Rarible is similar. It's not comparable to e-commerce. So OpenSea and Rarible don't qualify as 'e-commerce' because they sell 'NFTs' and domain-names are not products bought and sold on online marketplaces? You are splitting hairs once again. > As said before, this all happened in the past. Woocommerce, Steam, Amazon, Stripe, ... All added it and removed it. Only square kept it. First of all, we are in late-2021. Before I ask you to find citations for the reasons behind those removals, all these cases have cited towards the properties of Bitcoin payments and its unsuitability for that purpose, which is my whole point for businesses to use USDC on other cryptocurrencies like Stellar if they were to accept cryptocurrency payments; hence MoneyGram. We are not stuck in 2017 or whatever year you are trapped in. > Either way, this topic is about lowering transaction fees. So from "lowering transaction fees" to someone saying "Take payment in crypto" to you saying "That's not doable in practise" and me replying "USDC stablecoin sitting on cryptocurrencies like Stellar" and it ends up with you in denial, moving goal posts, splitting hairs until you now want to go back to "lowering transaction fees" which I already answered? Where did I mention in my original comment to use Bitcoin for payments? It seems that it is only you having a very hard time ignoring Bitcoin, Look at this constant rambling from you: > There's currently a lot of FUD. But it's all going away when BTC drops again. > It only took a pandemic previous time to reverse Bitcoin from a multi-year decline. What has Bitcoin got to do with USDC on many other cryptocurrencies as a suitable payment option with less fees? Your rambling here is completely irrelevant to that, regardless if Bitcoin goes up or down. Either way, my answer already has addressed the topic and your previous 'claims' regardless of you being unable to cite your claims or stay on topic. Your whole comment sounds more of a complaint about cryptocurrencies and NFTs than a substantiative argument at this point. Maybe that is what has changed here. When are you going to realise that your complaint is going round in circles?

USDC != USD. Pegged to it doesn't mean it's the same. While USDC is backed by Coinbase and more trustworthy than Tether. A lot of it is still going to uncharted territory.

rvz 5y ago

> USDC != USD Never said that. I'm only saying businesses can use it. This is you from [0]: > That's not doable in practise. So a business cannot use USDC on some cryptocurrency like Stellar today then? [1] So the concerns of high transaction fees, unstable price fluctuations and slow transfers which are all the properties of using payments with Bitcoin are somehow not solved because of USDC and it being built on cryptocurrencies like Stellar? are you sure? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980 [1] https://ir.moneygram.com/news-releases/news-release-details/moneygram-announces-innovative-partnership-stellar-development https://ir.moneygram.com/news-releases/news-release-details/...

NicoJuicy 5y ago
Will this fare better than their ripple partnership where the SEC intervened? Still, this doesn't address the fact that the op will lose a lot of business with solely crypto. Therefore, it isn't an answer to his question. So it's not doable in practise. Except if you want to lose a lot of money if you solely accept crypto. This has all happened before in 2017. And shortly after crypto was removed as payment option almost everywhere. Nothing fundamentally has changed since 2017. If so, what?
- rvz 5y ago
  > Will this fare better than their ripple partnership where the SEC intervened? Why not ask MoneyGram? Maybe they can give you a better answer than I or anyone else here could. > Still, this doesn't address the fact that the op will lose a lot of business with solely crypto. Solely? I don't think that is what you said originally, was it? [0] From [0] > That's not doable in practise. > - You would immediately take a hit, because crypto payments are not popular. > - Currency/btc conversion fees are more expensive than any transaction fee. > Many ecoms added support in 2017 and removed that functionality again. > There's no interest for buying things that isn't part of the "pump and dump" scheme. NFT's are probably the only thing, since they hope to resell it for more money. It seems that you have decided to change your argument to 'solely' as soon as you saw my comment disproving your nonsense (with examples) and now you have started splitting hairs to present an illusion that businesses cannot use or accept cryptocurrencies. (and survive) So OpenSea / Rarible / Dent Wireless are not businesses only accepting cryptocurrencies then? > This has all happened before in 2017. And shortly after crypto was removed add payment option almost everywhere. > Nothing fundamentally has changed since 2017. If so, what? Right so it will happen again in 2021, 2022 then? So in 2021, MoonPay, BitPay, Coinbase Commerce and Circle.com enabled businesses do not allow their customers like VISA, AMC and Shopify to accept cryptocurrencies and stablecoins like USDC? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29735980
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    OpenSea is not products. Buyers think they will earn money from it and are prepared to put their HODL coin in it to earn more. It's one big piramid scheme. Rarible is similar. It's not comparable to e-commerce. NFT's in it's current state is literally the perfect product for HOLD'ers if you think about it. As said before, this all happened in the past. Woocommerce, Steam, Amazon, Stripe, ... All added it and removed it. Only square kept it. The current hype is just the same that started with failing business trying to jump in it ( eg. Kodak and KodakCoin). Visa and others do want to protect themselves. But even Stripe currently started again a team for crypto with 5 person while they anandoned it in the past. Nothing says it will be important, it's a matter of "what if", just like in 2017. Either way, this topic is about lowering transaction fees. Changing to crypto would lose a lot of business. As such, the "patent answer" here is not doable for a business. What's so hard to understand? You're not going to switch a business to a payment option that only represents 2% of possible transactions. There's currently a lot of FUD. But it's all going away when BTC drops again. It only took a pandemic previous time to reverse Bitcoin from a multi-year decline.
    - rvz 5y ago
      > OpenSea is not products... Rarible is similar. It's not comparable to e-commerce. So OpenSea and Rarible don't qualify as 'e-commerce' because they sell 'NFTs' and domain-names are not products bought and sold on online marketplaces? You are splitting hairs once again. > As said before, this all happened in the past. Woocommerce, Steam, Amazon, Stripe, ... All added it and removed it. Only square kept it. First of all, we are in late-2021. Before I ask you to find citations for the reasons behind those removals, all these cases have cited towards the properties of Bitcoin payments and its unsuitability for that purpose, which is my whole point for businesses to use USDC on other cryptocurrencies like Stellar if they were to accept cryptocurrency payments; hence MoneyGram. We are not stuck in 2017 or whatever year you are trapped in. > Either way, this topic is about lowering transaction fees. So from "lowering transaction fees" to someone saying "Take payment in crypto" to you saying "That's not doable in practise" and me replying "USDC stablecoin sitting on cryptocurrencies like Stellar" and it ends up with you in denial, moving goal posts, splitting hairs until you now want to go back to "lowering transaction fees" which I already answered? Where did I mention in my original comment to use Bitcoin for payments? It seems that it is only you having a very hard time ignoring Bitcoin, Look at this constant rambling from you: > There's currently a lot of FUD. But it's all going away when BTC drops again. > It only took a pandemic previous time to reverse Bitcoin from a multi-year decline. What has Bitcoin got to do with USDC on many other cryptocurrencies as a suitable payment option with less fees? Your rambling here is completely irrelevant to that, regardless if Bitcoin goes up or down. Either way, my answer already has addressed the topic and your previous 'claims' regardless of you being unable to cite your claims or stay on topic. Your whole comment sounds more of a complaint about cryptocurrencies and NFTs than a substantiative argument at this point. Maybe that is what has changed here. When are you going to realise that your complaint is going round in circles?