[XC][XCurrency] Decentralised Trustless Privacy Platform / Encrypted XChat / Pos

[synechist]

[real world adoption]

You've basically summarised our whole outlook. Real-world adoption is the key to XC's success, and this comes down to quality marketing and to effortlessness of use.

At present our main thrust though is to make XC usable at any traditional point of sale system. That's pervasive real-world usability that will outdo Bitcoin's current penetration.

+1 thanks, arlyn. watching you guys operate on this forum for the past weeks, i really don't need a roadmap ...let alone an eta. i'm just happy to ride your shirtails  

Thank you! All I can say is:

The post-rev 3 era with mobile staking, interchains, and point-of-sale integration is gonna blow the scene apart.

[flashbit]

Holy sell order at 0025.. Apparently someone agrees with mike x 3 !

[adhitthana]

Thanks for the welcome's  

The only concern i have Teka is that i don't have enough XCurrency  .

I find when the price is going down I have too many and when it is going up I somehow don't have enough

Try not to look at the price too much  .
XCurrency is a long hold  

I agree. I was being a little "tongue in cheek".
As i said some pages ago, I've been looking for a better alt coin, but can't seem to find one, so I'm happy to hold and buy sometimes if it dips too much, but it is quite a stable coin.

[CryptoGretzky]

Given the price now, it would appear many are not happy with this update?

Perhaps dates tied to milestones would help boost confidence Arlyn.

In any business, a project with dates tied to milestones always ensures success. Estimate dates with contingency added should be doable in any project. I understand your opinion on this but you should admit a roadmap is not really a roadmap if you don't know how long it would take to get there and when you will arrive?

I would be interested to know if Dan shares your same sentiment on this as I understand you speak for him and the team?

btw: thank you for your great communication today its been helpful.

No, please don't. Release dates create speculation bubbles, this in turn creates volatility and ultimately discontent. Lets just enjoy the fact we have an excellent team working on an excellent project and enjoy the steady rise in value.

Anyways, Keep up the great work synechist. It was a great idea to employ you and your doing an excellent job, as are the rest of the team. Im really looking forward to Rev 2.5 and then Rev 3. Current belief is a value of $25 million to coincide with the latter and its subsequent PR, this doesn't include any potential bitcoin bubble either.

Really happy with everything that's going on here. Hopefully once I'm done on my travels I can come meet you guys in person at one of the conferences to express our gratitude.

Take care guys, hope you all have a splendid week.

Completely agreed.   No date until it's completely ready.   Why give trolls materials to FUD.   Long term holders don't care about short term delivery.  We are here for the post rev 3 rise.

[hoertest]

[real world adoption]

You've basically summarised our whole outlook. Real-world adoption is the key to XC's success, and this comes down to quality marketing and to effortlessness of use.

At present our main thrust though is to make XC usable at any traditional point of sale system. That's pervasive real-world usability that will outdo Bitcoin's current penetration.

+1 thanks, arlyn. watching you guys operate on this forum for the past weeks, i really don't need a roadmap ...let alone an eta. i'm just happy to ride your shirtails  

Thank you! All I can say is:

The post-rev 3 era with mobile staking, interchains, and point-of-sale integration is gonna blow the scene apart.

can someone explain me what these are, sounds yummie  

[flashbit]

I'm going to speculate and say given the rate of development we see Rev 2.5 in early to mid August and official launch of 3.0 in September when most people are back from vacation, etc.

[DFJ]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

[synechist]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC. 

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC. 

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

[synechist]

The post-rev 3 era with mobile staking, interchains, and point-of-sale integration is gonna blow the scene apart.

can someone explain me what these are, sounds yummie 

Let's just say that

- as networks are to the internet

- so are blockchains to interchains.

- This is full-on Web 3.0.

Interchains are Jasinlee's invention, currently being developed. It's my understanding that the concept is built upon PBoC.

[policymaker]

they are making a new secure feature for anon that's yet to be announced, if its a new key feature, another world first for example, a public bounty would have allot more impact alongside its release, as well as with a PR campaign.

Business wise it makes perfect sense.

On a side note, keep up the excellent work synechist.

Thanks Mwalshe. Yeah, there's some smart stuff in development. Obviously we can't reveal anything until it's actually done, but it's a clever one.

Also, for some perspective, Rev 3 is the foundation for XC. The stuff coming afterwards, like interchains, is much more significant. Web 3.0 significant.

Just want to reiterate this aspect of the updated timeline because people seem missed what's significant: NEW TECH.

I shall quote this baby all week long, I mean seriously, even if 10% is true and executed well, we are talking a huge deal. I have no problem trading my XC at current prices, trying to make more XC. Actually I WISH we don't take off for months to come.

[ForReal]

Given the price now, it would appear many are not happy with this update?

Perhaps dates tied to milestones would help boost confidence Arlyn.

In any business, a project with dates tied to milestones always ensures success. Estimate dates with contingency added should be doable in any project. I understand your opinion on this but you should admit a roadmap is not really a roadmap if you don't know how long it would take to get there and when you will arrive?

I would be interested to know if Dan shares your same sentiment on this as I understand you speak for him and the team?

btw: thank you for your great communication today its been helpful.

No, please don't. Release dates create speculation bubbles, this in turn creates volatility and ultimately discontent. Lets just enjoy the fact we have an excellent team working on an excellent project and enjoy the steady rise in value.

Anyways, Keep up the great work synechist. It was a great idea to employ you and your doing an excellent job, as are the rest of the team. Im really looking forward to Rev 2.5 and then Rev 3. Current belief is a value of $25 million to coincide with the latter and its subsequent PR, this doesn't include any potential bitcoin bubble either.

Really happy with everything that's going on here. Hopefully once I'm done on my travels I can come meet you guys in person at one of the conferences to express our gratitude.

Take care guys, hope you all have a splendid week.

Completely agreed.   No date until it's completely ready.   Why give trolls materials to FUD.   Long term holders don't care about short term delivery.  We are here for the post rev 3 rise.

We are here for the post rev 3 rise.
+1000

[Driv3n]

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

Exciting times ahead, those all sound amazing.

Arlyn thanks for everything, I know we ask a lot out of you (some more than others lol).

[Mwalshe89]

Given the price now, it would appear many are not happy with this update?

Perhaps dates tied to milestones would help boost confidence Arlyn.

In any business, a project with dates tied to milestones always ensures success. Estimate dates with contingency added should be doable in any project. I understand your opinion on this but you should admit a roadmap is not really a roadmap if you don't know how long it would take to get there and when you will arrive?

I would be interested to know if Dan shares your same sentiment on this as I understand you speak for him and the team?

btw: thank you for your great communication today its been helpful.

No, please don't. Release dates create speculation bubbles, this in turn creates volatility and ultimately discontent. Lets just enjoy the fact we have an excellent team working on an excellent project and enjoy the steady rise in value.

Anyways, Keep up the great work synechist. It was a great idea to employ you and your doing an excellent job, as are the rest of the team. Im really looking forward to Rev 2.5 and then Rev 3. Current belief is a value of $25 million to coincide with the latter and its subsequent PR, this doesn't include any potential bitcoin bubble either.

Really happy with everything that's going on here. Hopefully once I'm done on my travels I can come meet you guys in person at one of the conferences to express our gratitude.

Take care guys, hope you all have a splendid week.

Completely agreed.   No date until it's completely ready.   Why give trolls materials to FUD.   Long term holders don't care about short term delivery.  We are here for the post rev 3 rise.

We are here for the post rev 3 rise.
+1000

The rise will happen before the release IMO.

I even think we'll crack 0.003 again and stabilise once 2.5 is out. After that rev 3 will take us above and beyond the 0.01 range

[synechist]

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

Exciting times ahead, those all sound amazing.

Arlyn thanks for everything, I know we ask a lot out of you (some more than others lol).

Thanks Driv3n. Heh. People have such high hopes for XC, and such battered trust from other altcoins, that it's not always feasible to make everyone happy.

But hey, the future is bright. I've really got nothing to complain about. :-)

[BrewCrewFan]

Given the price now, it would appear many are not happy with this update?

Perhaps dates tied to milestones would help boost confidence Arlyn.

In any business, a project with dates tied to milestones always ensures success. Estimate dates with contingency added should be doable in any project. I understand your opinion on this but you should admit a roadmap is not really a roadmap if you don't know how long it would take to get there and when you will arrive?

I would be interested to know if Dan shares your same sentiment on this as I understand you speak for him and the team?

btw: thank you for your great communication today its been helpful.

No, please don't. Release dates create speculation bubbles, this in turn creates volatility and ultimately discontent. Lets just enjoy the fact we have an excellent team working on an excellent project and enjoy the steady rise in value.

Anyways, Keep up the great work synechist. It was a great idea to employ you and your doing an excellent job, as are the rest of the team. Im really looking forward to Rev 2.5 and then Rev 3. Current belief is a value of $25 million to coincide with the latter and its subsequent PR, this doesn't include any potential bitcoin bubble either.

Really happy with everything that's going on here. Hopefully once I'm done on my travels I can come meet you guys in person at one of the conferences to express our gratitude.

Take care guys, hope you all have a splendid week.

Completely agreed.   No date until it's completely ready.   Why give trolls materials to FUD.   Long term holders don't care about short term delivery.  We are here for the post rev 3 rise.

We are here for the post rev 3 rise.
+1000

The rise will happen before the release IMO.

I even think we'll crack 0.003 again and stabilise once 2.5 is out. After that rev 3 will take us above and beyond the 0.01 range

No we will be on NXT price levels. Being +.1 could become a reality. I think there was a investor who said he could see the cap of XC being was it 60 million or 600 million??.... but he pretty much said it would be close to NXT price levels.

[DFJ]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

[CryptoGretzky]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

Then you shouldn't touch cryptos especially cryptos with bulletproof privacy.   Stick with credit card where all of your purchasing behaviors are tracked so you can be marketed to....

[synechist]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC. 

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC. 

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it? 

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

All good points - and let me emphasise that we're certainly not going to ignore online marketplaces that accept cryptocurrencies. That idea is solid.

As for Mastercards and privacy, storing funds in XC is a great way to retain control over your privacy, and if you can then use it anywhere without disclosing your savings or accounts in general, it's a pretty good deal IMO. Surrendering some privacy in exchange for mainstream convenience is what will appeal to the average user.

Secondly, think about how this stuff comes together: mobile wallets + POS integration is what so many BTC users want but don't have. The "average" non-techie user isn't so fussed about privacy that (s)he won't use a mastercard. They just think Bitcoin is cool, interesting, cheap, and on the side of the individual vs. the authorities. With XC, this comes together even more powerfully. And if we're on mobile and are POS integrated then the value proposition seriously gets going.


P.S. Aha, I should've mentioned: privacy is not XC's mainstream marketing point. Useability, fast transaction times, mobile wallets, powerful apps, and real-world integration will be.

[DFJ]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

Then you shouldn't touch cryptos especially cryptos with bulletproof privacy.   Stick with credit card where all of your purchasing behaviors are tracked so you can be marketed to....

So your thesis is that XC will serve people who are so worried about being marketed to based on purchase history that using BTC is not private enough?  That they are so worried that Catalina Marketing is going to do blockchain analysis to figure out how to help P&G send them an ad for diapers that BTC doesn't cut it?

[DFJ]

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC.  I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time.  PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers.  It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.  

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency.  This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc.  Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC!  Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop.  The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.  

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like).  So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former?  The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?  

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf?  That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations.  Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera?  And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC.  So what is the value proposition of PoS?

All good points - and let me emphasise that we're certainly not going to ignore online marketplaces that accept cryptocurrencies. That idea is solid.

As for Mastercards and privacy, storing funds in XC is a great way to retain control over your privacy, and if you can then use it anywhere without disclosing your savings or accounts in general, it's a pretty good deal IMO. Surrendering some privacy in exchange for mainstream convenience is what will appeal to the average user.

Secondly, think about how this stuff comes together: mobile wallets + POS integration is what so many BTC users want but don't have. The "average" non-techie user isn't so fussed about privacy that (s)he won't use a mastercard. They just think Bitcoin is cool, interesting, cheap, and on the side of the individual vs. the authorities. With XC, this comes together even more powerfully. And if we're on mobile and are POS integrated then the value proposition seriously gets going.


P.S. Aha, I should've mentioned: privacy is not XC's mainstream marketing point. Useability, fast transaction times, mobile wallets, powerful apps, and real-world integration will be.

Edit: Having looked further into the issue, it looks like coinbase already offers PoS functionality for BTC.  Coinbase has $30mm+ in VC funding from A16Z.  I wouldn't want my differentiator to be that I can create a better app than them... I would want it to be that I have privacy features that they aren't even thinking about.  And to get back to the original point, I don't think you can achieve those features at the PoS level because you still have to integrate with the dollar payment network, which is regulated.  I also don't think PoS users have demand for better than BTC privacy, because after all I am in a store showing my face, but maybe we agree to disagree on that.