4 ms·

Oh it worse, it’s an erc20 on eth. GG, I’m sure those $1 a day people are prepared to pay $10/tx to spend it. Clueless. Stick to Bitcoin folks.

sparksparkapach 4y ago
Damn when did hacker news readers end up not reading the article. It literally says at the end it will be a token on Polygon, 1 cent fees for doing token related activity
- randomhodler84 4y ago
  The white paper said “ERC20 on eth”. The article said polygon. Regardless, I do like polygon for its cheap fees (today); it is practically better than eth in most ways. However, it is just an eth side chain, and the whole “don’t need to commit tx for all eternity for all every purchases” applies here. I don’t believe it is possible to scale this anywhere where it needs to be. For this, we need Lightning network style constructions.
  - glocoin 4y ago
    Global Income Coin is an economic model carrying a monetary policy (i.e. the bottom-up distribution of newly created money), not a technology. We do not inherently care on what platform we implement it, and will try to use existing technologies rather than developing our own. We do want to get started, so we're choosing technology that works today over technology that works tomorrow. Lightning is promising. The first tether transaction on lightning was only a month ago, however [1]. So that's not yet a boring enough solution. Ethereum and Polygon won't (today) scale worldwide, but if we're able to gain traction we'll (a) branch out to every other network if necessary (b) contribute to networks so they can start to get to global scale [1] https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/tether-sent-using-the-lightning-network https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/tether-sent-using-the-...
rvz 4y ago
> Stick to Bitcoin folks. No. Here's why: 'Bitcoin' cannot be used as a form of on-chain payments system and as peer-to-peer electronic cash system as defined in its whitepaper and it is beyond useless as a currency. Henceforth, Since it has completely failed in El Salvador, why would it succeed anywhere else due to all of the above?

sparksparkapach 4y ago

Damn when did hacker news readers end up not reading the article. It literally says at the end it will be a token on Polygon, 1 cent fees for doing token related activity

randomhodler84 4y ago
The white paper said “ERC20 on eth”. The article said polygon. Regardless, I do like polygon for its cheap fees (today); it is practically better than eth in most ways. However, it is just an eth side chain, and the whole “don’t need to commit tx for all eternity for all every purchases” applies here. I don’t believe it is possible to scale this anywhere where it needs to be. For this, we need Lightning network style constructions.
- glocoin 4y ago
  Global Income Coin is an economic model carrying a monetary policy (i.e. the bottom-up distribution of newly created money), not a technology. We do not inherently care on what platform we implement it, and will try to use existing technologies rather than developing our own. We do want to get started, so we're choosing technology that works today over technology that works tomorrow. Lightning is promising. The first tether transaction on lightning was only a month ago, however [1]. So that's not yet a boring enough solution. Ethereum and Polygon won't (today) scale worldwide, but if we're able to gain traction we'll (a) branch out to every other network if necessary (b) contribute to networks so they can start to get to global scale [1] https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/tether-sent-using-the-lightning-network https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/tether-sent-using-the-...

rvz 4y ago

> Stick to Bitcoin folks. No. Here's why: 'Bitcoin' cannot be used as a form of on-chain payments system and as peer-to-peer electronic cash system as defined in its whitepaper and it is beyond useless as a currency. Henceforth, Since it has completely failed in El Salvador, why would it succeed anywhere else due to all of the above?