4 ms·

Very impressed at net cost. I used to run a small ecom business targeting total prices in the range of $3-10. At $3, payment processing is nearly 11-12% of cost

by Hasz 3mo ago

Very impressed at net cost. I used to run a small ecom business targeting total prices in the range of $3-10. At $3, payment processing is nearly 11-12% of costs, which is absurd, more if you amortize the occasional chargeback/fraud. Lightning can do it for <<0.1% net cost even at the low end, which is incredible. There are plenty of these kinds of vendors on eBay, Aliexpress etc that would be willing to adopt with a bit of help. For whoever posted, your cost calculator should be first thing on the page, and you "How we calculated this number" link is broken

nohell 3mo ago
Monero is even cheaper and more useful as cadh because it's private. Anyone can see Bitcoin history and where the user got their coins.
- dfish 3mo ago
  They are both useful. Monero is a bit more tricky to use, there is no concept of Lightning network, you still have to wait around 7 minutes for the transaction to settle. It's not bad, but it is different. The transparency in Bitcoin is a feature not a bug.
  - nohell 3mo ago
    CIA uses Bitcoin for intelligence gathering: https://cryptobriefing.com/cia-bitcoin-intelligence-gathering-tool/ https://cryptobriefing.com/cia-bitcoin-intelligence-gatherin... Really? Did we IT people decide giving up privacy for security is a good idea?
    - grim_io 3mo ago
      The main grifters care for neither.
    - kube-system 3mo ago
      It's hardly just them. This tech has been commercialized for over a decade. https://www.chainalysis.com/blockchain-intelligence/ https://www.chainalysis.com/blockchain-intelligence/ They also do work to deanonymize other blockchains, including monero.
      - akimbostrawman 3mo ago
        >including monero which they still haven't actually broken despite empty marketing claims which in reality is busting people on KYC CEXs.
        kube-system 3mo ago
        I've also seen rumors suggesting they have attacked it via network traffic analysis, which also seems plausible Whether or not they've done it by breaking the protocol itself might be of academic concern but is irrelevant in practical terms.
        akimbostrawman 3mo ago
        >but is irrelevant in practical terms It very much is not. If I use cash to commit a crime but then deposit it into a KYC bank account which is then used as a side channel to get me caught does not mean its the cashes fault. XMR privacy and anonymity can not protect you from going out of your way to convert it into inferior surveillance currency which then gets you busted. That's basic logic and should be a obvious technical limitation.
        kube-system 3mo ago
        If they've attacked it via netflow analysis, then it doesn't matter to a criminal whether or not it's a problem in the protocol because how is a criminal supposed to use it if not on the internet? By "practical terms" I mean that a criminal sitting in prison isn't going to care whether the vulnerability that got them there was layer 7 or not. It doesn't fucking matter to them at that point. Everything on the internet is vulnerable to netflow traffic deanonymization; it is a fundamental limitation with the design of the internet. The only thing that stops these attacks from being more common is the relative difficulty of obtaining the required data.
    - winterrdog 3mo ago
      There are solutions to this as well e.g. CoinJoin and using Taproot or Musig to hide redeem scripts and probably more They make it incredibly hard to make sense of gathered intel
- agalush 3mo ago
  Lightning payments are not stored onchain and have already been proved more private than monero payments
  - akimbostrawman 3mo ago
    considering actual criminals do not use lightning but monero it should be obvious that is not the case.
    - Ferret7446 2mo ago
      That's more the fact that lightning is a bit of a pain to use. It has a chicken and egg network growth problem, which is doubled on top of the chicken and egg problem of its host crypto
      - akimbostrawman 2mo ago
        That does not make any sense. btc even lightning still has about 100 times the user and ecosystem. Nobody uses it because it obviously it is not secure.
Anon1096 3mo ago
I would guess the price for payment processing drops tremendously when you don't need to handle fraud or chargebacks at all. It's for sure worse for consumers but I do think it has its place (for example adult content that has huge chargeback risk or straight up blocked by other processors).
- AnthonyMouse 3mo ago
  > for example adult content that has huge chargeback risk or straight up blocked by other processors This has the default inverted. The best place for the traditional payments system is when you're making a large purchase from a questionable seller, and then you're willing to pay extra for the assurance that you can reverse the transaction. If you're making a small purchase or buying from someone you regularly do business with, why would you want the cost of other customers' chargeback fraud or use of stolen cards to be added to the price you pay?
- Ferret7446 2mo ago
  Or without a monopoly/mafia taking its protection fee cut
jcfrei 3mo ago
lightning is a pain to set up, you have to open a channel and keep funding it - so if we are talking about small amounts these costs should definitely be added to your calculation. or you use lightning via an exchange - but that again kinda defeats the purpose of bitcoin. in fact all of this could probably be achieved much simpler by just using a stablecoin on tron, solana or one of the ether chains and forget about the whole lightning sending and bitcoin hedging. I doubt you can get lower transaction costs end-to-end staying on btc.

by Hasz 3mo ago

nohell 3mo ago

Monero is even cheaper and more useful as cadh because it's private. Anyone can see Bitcoin history and where the user got their coins.

dfish 3mo ago
They are both useful. Monero is a bit more tricky to use, there is no concept of Lightning network, you still have to wait around 7 minutes for the transaction to settle. It's not bad, but it is different. The transparency in Bitcoin is a feature not a bug.
- nohell 3mo ago
  CIA uses Bitcoin for intelligence gathering: https://cryptobriefing.com/cia-bitcoin-intelligence-gathering-tool/ https://cryptobriefing.com/cia-bitcoin-intelligence-gatherin... Really? Did we IT people decide giving up privacy for security is a good idea?
  - grim_io 3mo ago
    The main grifters care for neither.
  - kube-system 3mo ago
    It's hardly just them. This tech has been commercialized for over a decade. https://www.chainalysis.com/blockchain-intelligence/ https://www.chainalysis.com/blockchain-intelligence/ They also do work to deanonymize other blockchains, including monero.
    - akimbostrawman 3mo ago
      >including monero which they still haven't actually broken despite empty marketing claims which in reality is busting people on KYC CEXs.
      - kube-system 3mo ago
        I've also seen rumors suggesting they have attacked it via network traffic analysis, which also seems plausible Whether or not they've done it by breaking the protocol itself might be of academic concern but is irrelevant in practical terms.
        akimbostrawman 3mo ago
        >but is irrelevant in practical terms It very much is not. If I use cash to commit a crime but then deposit it into a KYC bank account which is then used as a side channel to get me caught does not mean its the cashes fault. XMR privacy and anonymity can not protect you from going out of your way to convert it into inferior surveillance currency which then gets you busted. That's basic logic and should be a obvious technical limitation.
        kube-system 3mo ago
        If they've attacked it via netflow analysis, then it doesn't matter to a criminal whether or not it's a problem in the protocol because how is a criminal supposed to use it if not on the internet? By "practical terms" I mean that a criminal sitting in prison isn't going to care whether the vulnerability that got them there was layer 7 or not. It doesn't fucking matter to them at that point. Everything on the internet is vulnerable to netflow traffic deanonymization; it is a fundamental limitation with the design of the internet. The only thing that stops these attacks from being more common is the relative difficulty of obtaining the required data.
  - winterrdog 3mo ago
    There are solutions to this as well e.g. CoinJoin and using Taproot or Musig to hide redeem scripts and probably more They make it incredibly hard to make sense of gathered intel
agalush 3mo ago
Lightning payments are not stored onchain and have already been proved more private than monero payments
- akimbostrawman 3mo ago
  considering actual criminals do not use lightning but monero it should be obvious that is not the case.
  - Ferret7446 2mo ago
    That's more the fact that lightning is a bit of a pain to use. It has a chicken and egg network growth problem, which is doubled on top of the chicken and egg problem of its host crypto
    - akimbostrawman 2mo ago
      That does not make any sense. btc even lightning still has about 100 times the user and ecosystem. Nobody uses it because it obviously it is not secure.

Anon1096 3mo ago

I would guess the price for payment processing drops tremendously when you don't need to handle fraud or chargebacks at all. It's for sure worse for consumers but I do think it has its place (for example adult content that has huge chargeback risk or straight up blocked by other processors).

AnthonyMouse 3mo ago
> for example adult content that has huge chargeback risk or straight up blocked by other processors This has the default inverted. The best place for the traditional payments system is when you're making a large purchase from a questionable seller, and then you're willing to pay extra for the assurance that you can reverse the transaction. If you're making a small purchase or buying from someone you regularly do business with, why would you want the cost of other customers' chargeback fraud or use of stolen cards to be added to the price you pay?
Ferret7446 2mo ago
Or without a monopoly/mafia taking its protection fee cut

jcfrei 3mo ago

lightning is a pain to set up, you have to open a channel and keep funding it - so if we are talking about small amounts these costs should definitely be added to your calculation. or you use lightning via an exchange - but that again kinda defeats the purpose of bitcoin. in fact all of this could probably be achieved much simpler by just using a stablecoin on tron, solana or one of the ether chains and forget about the whole lightning sending and bitcoin hedging. I doubt you can get lower transaction costs end-to-end staying on btc.