Is Facebook About To Integrate Litecoin As A Payment System...?

[roastedparsnip]

This is a very speculative article but the argument does make sense. There's also some good commentary in the Reddit thread.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-21/why-charlie-lee-sold-his-litecoin

https://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin/comments/7l9ebm/rumor_zerohedge_is_calling_the_surprise_facebook/

Firstly, we all know that Litecoin is a much better option for fast, cheap, everyday transactions when compared to BTC.

Secondly, crypto is becoming too big to ignore and at some point one of the biggest companies on the planet will make the first move and offer some form of crypto integration into their products and services.

The ZeroHedge article suggests that Charlie Lee cashing out his LTC holdings would be a pre-requisite to Facebook partnering with them and this also makes perfect sense.

Also, as one Redditor points out, FB could save a huge amount on transaction fees by using LTC as opposed to USD.

Either way, it's never been a better time to be an LTC hodler!

[itsmeram]

Mark, the owner of facebook has said a lot of times that he doesn't like anything who is related to cryptocurrencies, so i really doubt that he would really integrate litecoin as a payment system in there.

They are only accepting credit cards and paypal if i am not wrong, and yes, bankwire transfers too.

[roastedparsnip]

Mark, the owner of facebook has said a lot of times that he doesn't like anything who is related to cryptocurrencies, so i really doubt that he would really integrate litecoin as a payment system in there.

They are only accepting credit cards and paypal if i am not wrong, and yes, bankwire transfers too.

Maybe Zuckerberg has been reading into Amazon's interest in cryptos and doesn't want to be outmanoeuvred by a rival tech company. It just takes one of them to blink first and then the others will be forced to look at how it can improve their businesses. Even if this Litecoin story isn't true the issue is still relevant and will be one to watch in 2018.

[cryptopan]

I am using facebook for a long time ago as a blogger using social media platforms to drive traffics from my blogs/website and i think this isnt a good idea,facebook should pay in fiat currency because what if the income is worth 10k usd,and they used cryptocurrency? then after an hour the value of the coin would drop to $7k? the facebook employees will lose.

[Coinster]

Firstly, we all know that Litecoin is a much better option for fast, cheap, everyday transactions when compared to BTC.

If that's the case they should just go with BCH. Litecoin is cheap, but transaction cost will rise similar to Bitcoin as it gains popularity. Bitcoin Cash is specifically focused on keeping transactions cheap.

[leea-1334]

Firstly, we all know that Litecoin is a much better option for fast, cheap, everyday transactions when compared to BTC.

If that's the case they should just go with BCH. Litecoin is cheap, but transaction cost will rise similar to Bitcoin as it gains popularity. Bitcoin Cash is specifically focused on keeping transactions cheap.

That's the same argument for any alt - hence the argument on comparison of simple tx cost and time is bound to fail, as it is slowly failing ETH. You are sorely mistaken to think BCH is immune to this. Have you checked median, mean and average transaction costs for BCH since it launched in August? Do yourself a favor and look it up. In fact, check your fees today. And check it again a year from now. Do not think Bitcoin Cash can forever expand the block size and keep tx fees down. What happens when they get the use (if) they are demanding and desire so much?

[Coinster]

Firstly, we all know that Litecoin is a much better option for fast, cheap, everyday transactions when compared to BTC.

If that's the case they should just go with BCH. Litecoin is cheap, but transaction cost will rise similar to Bitcoin as it gains popularity. Bitcoin Cash is specifically focused on keeping transactions cheap.

That's the same argument for any alt - hence the argument on comparison of simple tx cost and time is bound to fail, as it is slowly failing ETH. You are sorely mistaken to think BCH is immune to this. Have you checked median, mean and average transaction costs for BCH since it launched in August? Do yourself a favor and look it up. In fact, check your fees today. And check it again a year from now. Do not think Bitcoin Cash can forever expand the block size and keep tx fees down. What happens when they get the use (if) they are demanding and desire so much?

I understand what you're saying. You're definitely right that all these coins have challenges and trade-offs. My point was more about the leadership's vision to solve the challenges. The huge Bitcoin scaling debate between big-blockers and small-blockers happened because the groups couldn't see eye to eye on how to prioritize their concerns. For big-blockers the bigger concern was on keeping users/customers happy and fees down. For small-blockers the bigger concern was on keeping the block size small enough that everybody could participate with average computers on the network.

What I'm saying is now that the groups have officially split the big-blockers will be doing everything they can to keep fees down, as that's always been their key concern. Litecoin leadership doesn't have such a high priority on this. I believe the minimum tx fee for Litecoin is .001 regardless of the coin's price which means if the price goes 10 times higher transactions are 10 times more expensive even if blocks are not full, because Charlie Lee wants to protect miner fee security. Bitcoin Cash would never do that.

As for Ethereum they are having problems because they're working on a different problem. They're not primarily just processing transactions, they're processing programs which requires even more resources!