Sure you aren't confusing debit cards with credit cards (there is a big difference)?


The current payment systems offer chargebacks which although *hated* by vendors are *loved* by customers (and so are not going to disappear).

I find it odd that Bitcoin supporters think it so great that they can end up sending funds that can never be returned to them as though that is actually of some major benefit to them (I simply don't think most people are ever going to see this benefit).

Actually the studies about UI complexity were not limited to US citizens (on average they aren't dumber than most other people despite what many people might think).


I am not sure why you'd say "better" or "safer" in fact - debit cards are actually generally the best method of payment you can use today (although I wouldn't recommend using PayPal as that just adds fees).

The studies are *conclusive* so indeed I am talking about "scientific fact" (not my opinion - these sorts of studies have been done many times and always produced roughly the same results).

Well I guess most of you are just too young to have actually read anything about all the studies into "options" that were done well before you were born.

Basically 3 options anyone can cope with, 5 options only those with above average intelligence can cope with and 7+ options will be too much for all but highly intelligent people to easily handle.

So when you design UI you use the 3 or 5 options "golden rule" (and avoid anything with more options unless it is for "experts only"). If you are thinking that the "file" menu in your browser has many more options then take a look again - is it divided into "menu sections"?

(and those "who doubt this" should bother to do some reading before doing their typing and take a closer look at how things they are presented with are typically divided up into groups of three or five items)

It is simple psychology - if you have 100 options for a meal then the average person is going to take a longer longer to decide then if you have say 2 options.

Each second of indecision is likely to be a "lost sale" (i.e. moved on to another website).

And again with Wikipedia it is simply not surprising - too many options don't look good and as probably only a very fraction of a percent of their donations would have come from Bitcoin there is no reason to have it cluttering up their main donation page.

The reason is that people over-hyped Bitcoin and haven't realised it is not very useful for payments at all (apart from transferring large sums of money between countries which is the one major area it actually hasn't even been commercially used for despite being most suitable for).

I recall back in 2012 (or maybe even late 2011) seeing Amir trying to say that it could be used for "micro-payments" with Gavin having to say "ahh - no" to that in the same interview (and of course it is totally useless for that purpose).

Also non-reversible payments might be a great thing for vendors but 99% of consumers are going to stick with reversible credit card payments (and don't see the costs anyway as they are generally hidden by the vendor).

It should also be noted that in China the credit card companies charge the vendors only 1% generally (much lower than in the US) so Bitcoin is *never* going to work as a payment system here (and they basically have pretty much irreversible payments via Alipay anyway).

Quite likely they have simply have had so little business from it that they have decided it just isn't worth having.  Every extra "option" (be it payment or otherwise) is something that makes your website just that little more confusing to the masses so if it isn't bringing in any real extra profit then it would be sensible to remove it in order to keep your UI as simple as possible (why do you think credit cards have basically just been reduced to the two options over the years).

Can we please just stay on topic and discuss the merits of adopting AT rather than speculating about motivations of core devs, etc.?

If AT were to ever appear on Bitcoin I'd expect that would only occur *years* after it has been already proven on other blockchains first (any thing else would be reckless IMO).

Although a lot more work needs to be done to the documentation (http://ciyam.org/at) I added the following brief description of what AT is (after being suggested that hardly anyone can understand it due to it not being clearly described):

Automated Transactions (AT) is a technology created by CIYAM Developers which provides "Turing complete smart contracts" for any blockchain that implements it.

I will send a PM to shorena and will lock this topic now (and the other one in a minute).

@Vrontis - PoS is a consensus method (like PoW) and has absolutely nothing to do with AT.

AT is a "smart contract" implementation (so your last point was correct) designed to operate on top of any existing blockchain (and as it has already been implemented in a working blockchain it is a bit more than just a "proposal").

Everyone has a "bad day/night" and last night was one such for me (this is what happens when you stay up until 4am 7 days per week for months working on projects).

I apologise for "going a bit crazy" and have sent @gmaxwell a PM requesting that the topic be unlocked and moved to Project Development (as another mod suggested that might be an appropriate section).

@theymos "Automated Transactions are a Turing complete smart contract implementation designed to work on any blockchain" (when I have enough spare time I'll add that to my website along with some more simple descriptions of various use cases).

I apologise for "going off" last night - staying up until 4am basically 7 days per week (for the last few months) is taking its toll on my ability to be calm (which normally I am if you look over my post history).

Anyway - if the topic could be moved into Project Development and "unlocked" then maybe I can try and "explain the technology" more (as seemingly that is the main problem here).

Whilst it is hidden under alts then no useful discussion is going to take place (all they care about there is pumping and dumping the latest rubbish coin).

I will send a PM to @gmaxwell to see if moving to Project Development is okay with him.

In regards to the "bounty" that was announced a long time ago and has its own topic and clearly the main focus of the topic in question was not the bounty (am pretty sure there was only one mention of it in that topic).

Regarding posts about alts I was actively deleting anything that wasn't discussing the technology itself (and was being harassed because of that by - you guessed it - ad sig posters).

In as far as explaining what Automated Transactions are @theymos how does "a Turing complete method of creating smart contracts on any blockchain" sound (unfortunately marketing is not one of my special skills)?

Thanks for recognising I am not some "alt coin snake oil salesman" (as that is what I am beginning to think others think of me).

Some people (such as myself) spend many hours trying to forward the technology of decentralisation (for no profit) but are constantly being *put down* by others that make money from posting with their "ad sigs".

Perhaps it is time for people to decide whether they think this is right?

Ha - I don't think they are on my side - do you?

I suggest that at a minimum ad sigs should be not allowed for "mods" at all.

(from what I understand the mods get paid by the forum anyway so they have no need to even do this)

If you are so desperate for money then you should not qualify to be a mod IMO (it is not difficult logic to understand that if you are *paid* you are going to be biased).

I complained about an Automated Transactions (AT) topic being moved into the alts section and I get told that that mod might have "gone on holidays" so I just have to wait until they decide to come back.

This is supported by hilariousandco (a new mod who - have a look - has an ad sig).

So now the mods are paid for their posts?

They go on "holiday" whenever they choose after moving your topic and "we should just wait patiently" until they decide what should happen.

Hmm....

(whether or not you care about my issue I think you should care about mods being part of ad sigs campaigns as any reasonable person would know that it is a "conflict of interest")

Sure - I am not trying to escalate this (I got a bit pissed off though I admit).

When you put in so many hours into a project that you hope can benefit everyone and end up being "relegated" to the alt-coin board it is a bit disheartening.

If "Project Development" makes more sense then I have no problem being moved to there (as most of my other stuff is there anyway).

Okay - I will be patient - and your point is noted (the only reason I got upset is that the mod who moved the topic did not respond when I challenged that almost immediately after it as moved - but hey maybe they moved the topic just as they were leaving their home for a holiday).