Replying to Avatar waxwing

It's a common perception that the problem with things like Bisq (P2P trade) is UI, but it's not.

First, it's crucial to distinguish between P2P trade of fiat for bitcoin and P2P trade of 2 different cryptocurrencies, because they're entirely different animals. I'm only going to talk about the former, because that's the one that really matters, and that's the hard one.

Problem 1: because of the ethically odious AML policies there is substantial real risk from counterparties. If you are receiving dollars/euros into your bank account without first doing a full scale police level investigation into your counterparty you are potentially violating AML and this could impact *your* bank account. Even if you did such investigations, if you start doing multiple such trades your account can easily get flagged and frozen. Nothing I'm saying here is theoretical, it really does happen, a lot.

Problem 2: The process of P2P fiat trade is *intrinsically* not convenient and doesn't give *traders* what they want, which is why it doesn't tend to have volume, and volume is a necessary component for convenience (low spreads, quick matching), to the extent that ordinary users just give up (when you see 15-25% spreads you tend to give up, that is not because you're a lazy user who needs good UI). It's true that e.g. in Europe you have SEPA and very quick bank-to-bank is possible, but it's very precarious and ironically, when problem 2 is solved, problem 1 just reappears quickly anyway.

Problem 1 is mostly solved by avoiding banks and using cash or cash substitutes in *small* amounts only. Localbitcoins had this perfect in the early days, but they got "done" at some point, and sold out to KYC only. I would even argue that a cash-only localbitcoins substitute that's Tor-only might be the best we could do ... if things get tough enough for people I could see them putting up with this inconvenience, but of course this is a world away from the volume you get from degen traders sitting in their bedrooms, who just want braindead point and click. But old localbitcoins for cash *did* work, though it is subject to stings by LEA, you only have to exercise minimal common sense to avoid the law coming for you. This is not a "solution" for 6 figure trades though ...

Problem 2, I don't think it really gets solved, if anything it'll get worse over time, as banks for the last decade have only moved in the direction of making conversion of fiat to bitcoin more and more absurdly difficult.

I was chatting a lot with Manfred Karrer right at the time he invented Bitsquare, I even managed to convince him not to use MAD 2 of 2 multisig, so you can blame me on that, and I tried it in the early days. It was honestly decent in UI even then (yes I know it *looks* complicated, but I mean, try using Interactive Brokers interface to trade stocks, it just takes a little time), and I'm sure it's way better now. IMHO, The problem is not UI.

I fundamentally disagree with this for several reasons.

First, re counterparty risk, this is what reputation scores are for, and in my experience they work fairly well. Second, I think we are speaking from extremely different perspectives here. When I dont have a means of payment (say bc my bank blocked my account), I really dont care weather I'll pay a premium on my tx because my plan is not do engange in degen trading but to have money to live. Comparing a P2P marketplace necessary for people to transact in private (or even at all) to broker interfaces is not the right approach here imoo.

The point is also not that people are 'lazy users' – of course its nice for stuff to work at the click of a button, but the point is that people can easily be overwhelmed when facing complex systems, keeping them from using them at all – not because they are lazy, but because they dont understand them, which then also speaks to the liquidity issue.

Lastly, and again speaking to perspective, Im not talking about people doing six figure trades here. Im talking about people who earn their income in bitcoin or have no other means of payment and need to pay their bills, who will be facing complete financial exclusion unless they are willing to submit themselves to full surveillance tyranny.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.