 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]
|
|
1. EBay isn't seeing sufficient demand to justify adding it as an officially supported payment method
2. Ebay will need to implement escrow services around Bitcoin to make it fit their business model, which they won't invest in until they see sufficient demand.
|
|
|
|
|
Just more bad press for Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
there are shops, bars and restaurants who accept your bitcoin payment without a single confirmation. but that's probably up to 50. not sure if they also accept it without confirmations above that amount.
This is exactly the situation I see as ripe for scammers. 3 people in different shops using the same bitcoin wallet. they coordinate via whatsapp to make the payment at approximately the same time. 3 transactions appear on the network but 2 are rejected as a double-spend. That is 3 50 dresses for just 50. What is the solution? Wait ~10 minutes for 1 confirmation? I see a business model here for multisig wallet providers that focus on shopping hot wallets for smartphones. With a trusted counter-party to guarantee no double-spend the merchant lets you walk out the door immediately. Yes we don't like centralization and counter-parties, but this just a niche, you put spending btc into your shopping wallet for the convenience of instant payments. 3 people coordinating to steal 50...or, one person just steals 50 worth of stuff and runs out. Especially in bars, and restaurants you are usually there for a few minutes anyway. And just about every place I have paid in person has used a third party service like BitPay or another local processor. So more than likely the three shops in your scenario will use the same processor. They see 3 payments coming through from the same address and drop the second 2. If you want to get elaborate with stealing 50 with 3 people, one guy pays with his credit card, another guy climbs on the roof to block the satellite connection of the payment and the third guy for lookout. Most people who complain about the long transaction times for in person payment have never paid in person. Try it. You'll see how simple it is. Your scenario is based on using a bitcoin payment processor, this is very common currently because most merchants want to convert instantly to fiat. even the bitcoin price is dynamically adjusted by the payment processor because the merchant has based his prices in fiat. Under this scenario sure the payment processor would likely pick up on a double-spend attack. However the scenario I am painting is based in the future when the merchant denominates prices and pays suppliers in btc. In this scenario he just needs a wallet. He sees the unconfirmed transaction show up in his wallet and lets the customer go. but the customer has colluded with customers in other stores to spend the full amount of the wallet balance at the same time... only one merchant will have his transaction confirmed. |
|
|
|
This used to be all theoretical and we would discuss it over and over much like we are in this thread. But you can already use bitcoins in stores and restaurants. It happens all the time. No need to theorize.  I am only theorizing attack vectors. For the general use case I am happy to analyze the empirical evidence from actual scenarios. |
|
|
|
there are shops, bars and restaurants who accept your bitcoin payment without a single confirmation. but that's probably up to 50. not sure if they also accept it without confirmations above that amount.
This is exactly the situation I see as ripe for scammers. 3 people in different shops using the same bitcoin wallet. they coordinate via whatsapp to make the payment at approximately the same time. 3 transactions appear on the network but 2 are rejected as a double-spend. That is 3 50 dresses for just 50. What is the solution? Wait ~10 minutes for 1 confirmation? I see a business model here for multisig wallet providers that focus on shopping hot wallets for smartphones. With a trusted counter-party to guarantee no double-spend the merchant lets you walk out the door immediately. Yes we don't like centralization and counter-parties, but this just a niche, you put spending btc into your shopping wallet for the convenience of instant payments. |
|
|
|
credit cards do not confirm ins econd, they have a charge back up to 180 days for visa and 120 for mastercards, american express is 90, still none compare with bitcoin , where is zero
for small payments merchants should accept zero confirmations without problem, and usually none buy expensive stuff on phisical shop anymore, if you want to buy a vehicles, than i'm sure you can wait one hour for six confirmations...
credit cards do confirm in seconds, but they have a charge back option... charge back is an interesting topic discussion in itself. |
|
|
|
I never quite understood threads such as this bragging about how many BTC you have.
I would change it to something like "How did you get your first bitcoin". Then it is a interesting story not just yea I have X BTC.
I think people find it reassuring to know that the majority have modest amounts. The real swinging dicks are wise enough to keep their mouths shut. laugh yep the real "swinging dicks" would be chuckling at the discussion of putting 1 BTC in cold storage. I hope one day it is worth that effort for just one bitclam |
|
|
|
|
For a standard BTC transaction the fastest confirmation time is likely to be > 3 minutes, average 10 minutes. I can't see how this can compete with a credit card payment that confirms in seconds.
How do people envisage the payment use case scenario working? I can only imagine sitting in a shop for 30 minutes while the merchant waits for 3 confirmations before letting me walk out the door. Am I missing something?
To me the confirmation time seems suitable for remittances, but not for shopping payments.
|
|
|
|
The point of this thread is rendered moot when you consider that Western Union is trial testing blockchain technology with various fintech companies including Ripple Labs. Remittance companies will have adopt some form of blockchain technology if they want to compete.
exactly. The blockchain is open source. it is not unexpected that companies like Western Union leverages blockchain technology to streamline its own operations thereby bringing down its costs. Cost savings can be passed on as lower prices to customers as the market heats up. so in the end it is likely to be Blockchain vs Blockchain. the point is how will Bitcoin fare in this market? |
|
|
|
|
Interestingly 6 sequential blocks in 4 minutes is fast enough that it would surely lead to propagation issues, whereby on the other side of the world there were invalid blocks created and subsequently discarded. Does anyone know on average how long it takes for a new block to propagate completely through the network? ie how many seconds/minutes does the last node waste on solving a block that has already been created?
|
|
|
|
Looks interesting. You need to create a snapcard wallet to receive the converted bitcoins, then withdrawal to your own wallet at a 0.25% fee. I found out I have 20 rewards points already  |
|
|
|
|
Someone holding 100 bitcoins now is not Bitcoin Rich (today) because the value in fiat is still too low.
Another problem is that bitcoins can't easily generate income yet. So you can't easily earn interest on your stash of BTC to live off. You have not choice but to slowly sell them to fund your wealthy lifestyle, not a good option.
Bitcoin Rich (today) would need at least a couple of million USD in bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
I remember reading that a lot of useful web innovation starts in the online pornography industry. think of them as early adopters. bigger mainstream sites then take up these innovations when they can see how well the use case applies to themselves as well. I think of backpage.com as another early adopter proving the success of the use case. http://www.businessinsider.com/how-porn-drives-innovation-in-tech-2013-7Who associates online subscription services (think cloud services) with the online pornography industry? This is just a phase, and most importantly all the signs are that we are moving in the right direction! Keep hodling. |
|
|
|
fully agree with OP. the heading is a little bit confusing, hence the debate. the point is if (when) BTC goes up in value then at the same time it is more likely to become a common payment method. So no don't sell BTC for fiat, use BTC directly to buy goods |
|
|
|
it is a fact that ATM operators seem to get the best business with ATMs in these locations. it is an unfortunate fact that this fact gets such publicity still. We need new use cases |
|
|
|
|
lending your BTC to gaming sites you are at risk of losing your entire capital. also for the returns you are at the mercy of the site operator.
BTCJAM allows you to lend to many different borrowers under conditions and rates that you set. So you avoid putting all your eggs in one basket. You may lose a bit of capital on a bad deal, but you can minimize risks by lending small amounts across many lenders, and do your due diligence.
The downside of BTCJAM is that it just seems like a lot of work.
Honestly BTCJAM is not ideal, but there is nothing better just yet. I think there is a huge biz opportunity to fill this market gap to provide reasonable returns on BTC investments (while protecting capital).
|
|
|
|
Why would you bother wasting time on faucets? You can double your Bitcoins in just 100 hours with BitcoinDuplex.com it is an investment with a very high risk, there is no one who believes in this, they all have lost a lot to invest guise HYIP and ponzi scheme and funny enough its offline already... |
|
|
|
100% positive it belongs to BitFinex.
Why would it belong to BitFinex...? I find no relation to all the micro-transactions going in day after day? Apparently the people behind the spam attack were sending the dust transactions to many publicly known addresses. One such is this one. Wiki Leaks and many others have also been receiving those transactions as well as known brainwallet ones. As for why, I don't know. So the logic is that the dust transactions are being sent to many publicly available addresses as well as this one, believed to belong to Bitfinex. The question is why were the large deposits for this Bitfinex address filled from an address allegedly associated with mtgox? |
|
|
|
|
