4 ms·
I prefer to pay in cash when I can do so. I think payment by cash and by barter will be better, in situations where that works. However, for computer payment,
by zzo38computer 1y ago
I prefer to pay in cash when I can do so. I think payment by cash and by barter will be better, in situations where that works.
However, for computer payment, I had another idea is to make a "computer payment file" that contains the order division and payment division, and with encryption and signature, and send that to them. You will first receive the file telling what payments are acceptable and can use that to make the file to send to them. Stallman mentioned the possibility of payment by cash by pay phones (or with a prepaid phone card), so that might be one way to do it, too; after you figure out the price, you can receive the payment code and include that in the payment file. Other methods of payment would be possible (e.g. store credit), so the payment file can work independently of what kind of payment.
- KetoManx64 1y agoOvercomplicated and unnecessary considering that Bitcoin and lightning exist and are growing exponentially every month. Square is currently rolling out the ability for merchants to accept Bitcoin on their terminals.
- yieldcrv 1y agoIt’s funny because lightning recreates this article’s problem
- jgilias 1y agoGenuinely curious, how so?
- yieldcrv 1y agoLightning channels are centralized entities with their own fee structures They can be opened peer to peer, or hop between other channels, similar to dns routing They are prefunded with a certain quantity of bitcoin that dictates the size of bitcoin that can move in that route at once - although smaller denominations can go through in rapid succession this just means more fees levied All of this incentivizes a larger channel to be created by a well funded party, which can be coaxed into censoring transactions because they are a payment processor or institutional service. Likely an incumbent such as Visa joining the lightning network as a victim of LN’s own success. There are some mitigations built in and actively developed. We are 8 years deep into Lightning.
- Ferret7446 1y agoThe difference is that becoming a larger channel is not gatekept by regulation, and not at all necessary. Creating small channels between two parties, e.g. for subscriptions, is viable. Though not as convenient, it is at least more convenient than getting blacklisted by Visa.
- yieldcrv 1y agoyes, but this circumvents the egalitarian nature lighting channels are expensive to open and close as it stands, there already isn't enough block space for “mass adoption” users to all have their own single lightning channel let alone several lightning in its ultimate form will always be a hosted solution and those with the acumen and willingness to pay to open and close channels (or perhaps use the L1 bitcoin) will be a separate class of people
- jgilias 1y agoRight, yeah, but isn’t the network large enough by now where a transaction would be routed around the censoring nodes regardless? Much like how there are censoring miners on the mainnet, but the censored transactions still go through due to not everyone doing the censoring?
- yieldcrv 1y agoYes, they can route around. I think the number of people needing to open channels to deal with this, undermines the utility and scaling point of the Lightning network if it ever takes off. L1 will be so bogged down with channels opening and closing.
- jgilias 1y agoIt’s telling you’re being downvoted. But yeah, for one, Bitcoin does actually fix this.
- JohnFen 1y agoSure, but it also brings a whole lot of other problems along with it. Personally, cryptocurrencies are a nonstarter for me because of them, but if it's an acceptable solution for others, then more power to them.
- jgilias 1y agoWhat problems does Bitcoin bring along? (Because this is a textual medium, I need to state explicitly that I don’t ask that in an adversial way, just want to have a conversation!)
- lovich 1y agoNon reversibility of transactions by an outside arbiter in the event you get scammed. This is a feature for most crypto enthusiasts and a nightmare for anyone who is not capable of properly maintaining software systems or basic security
- jgilias 1y agoThe trade-off is different, sure. Much like the trade-offs between using a gasoline vs an electric car are different. But it doesn’t mean it’s not a solution to sidestep private corporations needing to serve as global content gatekeepers.
- lovich 1y agoYour question was > What problems does Bitcoin bring along? Not “is this tradeoff worth it?” For a class of non technical people having the bank or credit card company in this case help them reverse charges when they’ve been scammed, and they are at risk of being scammed for a significant chunk of their resources. I get why crypto enthusiasts like the irreversibility but the inability to understand why someone would want a protected system with an arbiter over it feels like the same energy I get from engineers who can’t fathom why anyone would choose the walled garden that comes with Apple products despite ample evidence for their popularity with the average joe
- DrillShopper 1y agoToo bad Bitcoin is a piss poor medium of exchange unless you're ransoming personal data or stealing pensions from old ladies.
- Yeul 1y agoSteam tried BTC and it didn't work. Hell the whole reason why Steam got big is how FRICTIONLESS it made buying videogames. Still people will go a long way for their porn fix so who knows?
- viraptor 1y agoIt didn't work at the time at the time before the bans and before many improvements in crypto. It's a different landscape today. Maybe they'll retry.
- zzo38computer 1y agoOne problem with bitcoin is requiring too much energy use, but anyways it is independent from the "computer payment file" which can be used with multiple methods of payment. (Computer payment file is also intended to solve some other problems involved with computer payment, including various types of cheating that the merchant might do.)
- mistercheph 1y agoHow much energy is consumed to back the value of USD?
- KetoManx64 1y agoOn top of that, how many people die each year due to the American War Machine that can only exist due to the US Dollar and the Fed's ability to print money and pass off the debt to the future generations?
- adolph 1y ago> problem with bitcoin is requiring too much energy use How much energy is the "right" amount? How does that compare to the amount of energy used for paper and coin? Can any amount be more than the "right" amount as long as the cost of the energy is willing borne by the entities conducting the transaction?
- viraptor 1y agoETH (for example) at least sets a reasonable lower level of what's possible. BTC is just wasteful by comparison.
- KetoManx64 1y agoThere's a reason that ETH is barely hanging in there and will never catch up to Bitcoin. I doubt it will survive the next decade.
- 1y ago
- quantified 1y agoPorn has driven improvements in a bunch of tech: adoption of higher-speed broadband and payment systems being two of them. If paid sites started accepting bitcoin, it would definitely spur wider adoption.
- lawlessone 1y ago>Stallman mentioned the possibility of payment by cash by pay phones (or with a prepaid phone card), so that might be one way to do it I haven't seen a working payphone since the 90s lol.
- quantummagic 1y agoHere, it's not just about poor maintenance. Every single payphone in my city has been removed. They just don't even exist any more.
- ekaryotic 1y agomost commerce sites allow you to buy a product and ship it to a different address than the billing. it's an ok way to buy stuff if they agree to barter.