4 ms·

If you want to read my article, you can pay me 0.001 Nano (sub-second, 0 fee transaction), or you can pay me $0.001. Oh no wait, you can't pay me $0.001!

maccard 4y ago
And paying you 0.001 in ETH or BTC will cost many orders of magnitude more than that in payment fees alone, and take massive amounts of time to vetify. Meanwhile the actual solution to this problem is micropayments, which can (and allegedly are) better implemented using traditional texhnologies
- koonsolo 4y ago
  Why are you proposing solutions that work badly or might work in the future? I gave you a solution that works today. Like I said: sub-second, 0 fee transactions (using Nano). Would love to see any of your traditional systems do better. Can you name one?
  - hiq 4y ago
    > 0 fee transactions You'd have to check how sustainable this is, Uber was (is?) also very cheap in some areas, just because it's massively subsidized. A solution that works today but not tomorrow and burns cash in between is not necessarily something you want.
    - koonsolo 4y ago
      I get it that you are sceptical. But you probably haven't looked at how Nano works. It's 100% distributed and is battle tested in practice. The biggest challenge they had was protecting against spam. But a few releases back they solved this issue. Technically a very strong project.
      - hiq 4y ago
        > you probably haven't looked at how Nano works I have looked at the past n similar products and it was always the same story. At some point, you don't need to look at the implementation details anymore, you can take this from first principles: somebody somewhere is running a ledger. You have to pay this someone one way or another, unless they're just volunteering. > a few releases back they solved this issue How are they getting paid? Regarding the ledger operators, from https://nano.org/faq#nodes https://nano.org/faq#nodes: > Instead, participants on the nano network are driven by external incentives, such as helping maintain an instant payment network they can use without fees. So it does look like volunteering / donating computing resources, and the 0 transaction fee doesn't reflect the actual costs.
        koonsolo 4y ago
        Lots of Open Source projects rely on volunteering one way or another. I think projects where everything is publicly available, have the least risk to disappear. If you want it, you can just run it. There is of course always a cost for a transaction one way or another, but it still stands that you pay 0 for the transaction itself.
        hiq 4y ago
        > Lots of Open Source projects rely on volunteering one way or another. How many of them without any corporate backing have the same requirements as a payment processor? > There is of course always a cost for a transaction one way or another, but it still stands that you pay 0 for the transaction itself. Again that's not the full picture, just take the Uber example. If they had made rides free thanks to VC money, would you have said that they solved the taxi problem and made them free so it's a much better alternative? The problem with this kind of accounting is that you can't tell whether it's just running at a loss or whether the technology is actually better than the rest. Visa and others could make transactions free if they didn't care about losses. As a user, I'm also not interested in, say, getting a new credit card transacting in $crypto that will either not work anymore in a while once they've run out of money or start billing me fees when it's clear it's become unsustainable for them to have free transactions.
  - maccard 4y ago
    So I actually didn't know that nano was a specific currency. The problem is I now need to get nano which is yet another currency. I might as well pay you in yen, it's not something I have available by default. Why nano, and not Ethereum, or BTC, or USDC or litecoin? How many of these do I need? > Can you name one? A SQL database of a random custom currency like any video game made in the last decade, or Faster Payments, both of which offer more for both the seller and buyer. You're not paying tx fees for money transfers, you pay them for fraud, kyc, convenice of global networks. Those are features that are either hidden or not Present in cryptocurrencies
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> Oh no wait, you can't pay me $0.001! Plenty of settlement systems permit arbitrary precisions of dollars. It’s just useless for day to day purposes for most people, so a consumer version never took off.
- koonsolo 4y ago
  As stated by Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropayment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropayment): "One problem that has prevented the emergence of micropayment systems is a need to keep costs for individual transactions low,[2] which is impractical when transacting such small sums[3] even if the transaction fee is just a few cents." 0 fee solves this issue. I don't see any traditional system that does the same or better than Nano to be honest.
Nursie 4y ago
But to do that I have to buy nano, and then you need to cash out nano to do anything useful with it. Also frankly, if I'm paying as little as 0.001 Nano, then probably I don't actually care about your article and reading it is pure procrastination on my part, so I'm likely better off not doing so. Thanks for putting up your paywall :)
- dubswithus 4y ago
  It's better to pay on demand than subscribe to 10 publications that each charge $9.95 a month. This is why streaming is a bad solution for the average person.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    Is it? Have you surveyed the average person? I’m not sure it is. With a subscription I know what my monthly bill will be and can budget around it. I’m fine with streaming, and very rarely pay for an episode or series of something. Even if it was very small amounts, my watching habits would likely be curtailed if I knew everything I watch was going to cost me.

maccard 4y ago

And paying you 0.001 in ETH or BTC will cost many orders of magnitude more than that in payment fees alone, and take massive amounts of time to vetify. Meanwhile the actual solution to this problem is micropayments, which can (and allegedly are) better implemented using traditional texhnologies

koonsolo 4y ago
Why are you proposing solutions that work badly or might work in the future? I gave you a solution that works today. Like I said: sub-second, 0 fee transactions (using Nano). Would love to see any of your traditional systems do better. Can you name one?
- hiq 4y ago
  > 0 fee transactions You'd have to check how sustainable this is, Uber was (is?) also very cheap in some areas, just because it's massively subsidized. A solution that works today but not tomorrow and burns cash in between is not necessarily something you want.
  - koonsolo 4y ago
    I get it that you are sceptical. But you probably haven't looked at how Nano works. It's 100% distributed and is battle tested in practice. The biggest challenge they had was protecting against spam. But a few releases back they solved this issue. Technically a very strong project.
    - hiq 4y ago
      > you probably haven't looked at how Nano works I have looked at the past n similar products and it was always the same story. At some point, you don't need to look at the implementation details anymore, you can take this from first principles: somebody somewhere is running a ledger. You have to pay this someone one way or another, unless they're just volunteering. > a few releases back they solved this issue How are they getting paid? Regarding the ledger operators, from https://nano.org/faq#nodes https://nano.org/faq#nodes: > Instead, participants on the nano network are driven by external incentives, such as helping maintain an instant payment network they can use without fees. So it does look like volunteering / donating computing resources, and the 0 transaction fee doesn't reflect the actual costs.
      - koonsolo 4y ago
        Lots of Open Source projects rely on volunteering one way or another. I think projects where everything is publicly available, have the least risk to disappear. If you want it, you can just run it. There is of course always a cost for a transaction one way or another, but it still stands that you pay 0 for the transaction itself.
        hiq 4y ago
        > Lots of Open Source projects rely on volunteering one way or another. How many of them without any corporate backing have the same requirements as a payment processor? > There is of course always a cost for a transaction one way or another, but it still stands that you pay 0 for the transaction itself. Again that's not the full picture, just take the Uber example. If they had made rides free thanks to VC money, would you have said that they solved the taxi problem and made them free so it's a much better alternative? The problem with this kind of accounting is that you can't tell whether it's just running at a loss or whether the technology is actually better than the rest. Visa and others could make transactions free if they didn't care about losses. As a user, I'm also not interested in, say, getting a new credit card transacting in $crypto that will either not work anymore in a while once they've run out of money or start billing me fees when it's clear it's become unsustainable for them to have free transactions.
- maccard 4y ago
  So I actually didn't know that nano was a specific currency. The problem is I now need to get nano which is yet another currency. I might as well pay you in yen, it's not something I have available by default. Why nano, and not Ethereum, or BTC, or USDC or litecoin? How many of these do I need? > Can you name one? A SQL database of a random custom currency like any video game made in the last decade, or Faster Payments, both of which offer more for both the seller and buyer. You're not paying tx fees for money transfers, you pay them for fraud, kyc, convenice of global networks. Those are features that are either hidden or not Present in cryptocurrencies

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> Oh no wait, you can't pay me $0.001! Plenty of settlement systems permit arbitrary precisions of dollars. It’s just useless for day to day purposes for most people, so a consumer version never took off.

koonsolo 4y ago
As stated by Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropayment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropayment): "One problem that has prevented the emergence of micropayment systems is a need to keep costs for individual transactions low,[2] which is impractical when transacting such small sums[3] even if the transaction fee is just a few cents." 0 fee solves this issue. I don't see any traditional system that does the same or better than Nano to be honest.

Nursie 4y ago

But to do that I have to buy nano, and then you need to cash out nano to do anything useful with it. Also frankly, if I'm paying as little as 0.001 Nano, then probably I don't actually care about your article and reading it is pure procrastination on my part, so I'm likely better off not doing so. Thanks for putting up your paywall :)

dubswithus 4y ago
It's better to pay on demand than subscribe to 10 publications that each charge $9.95 a month. This is why streaming is a bad solution for the average person.
- Nursie 4y ago
  Is it? Have you surveyed the average person? I’m not sure it is. With a subscription I know what my monthly bill will be and can budget around it. I’m fine with streaming, and very rarely pay for an episode or series of something. Even if it was very small amounts, my watching habits would likely be curtailed if I knew everything I watch was going to cost me.