Avatar
Crusty πŸ‘¨β€πŸ’»
1928ee3558f54e3164d81d26c35e123c254bae128354d7617d7fd862d70d9a2b
πŸ‘¨β€πŸ’» Programmer β˜•οΈ Coffee lover πŸ”₯ Huge believer in fairness, hard work, nostr, bitcoin and in a better future that we build together

If you don't know, you would not understand why all thumbnails have open-mouthed people πŸ˜‚

βœ…οΈ Day 12 of #100pushups

Push ups: 7 sets of 15 (chair level)

Other: 4 sets of 30 sit ups

1 min break in between.

#postr (Push ups and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays)

#grownostr #plebchain #100aDayUntil100k

Visa, etc definitely, but payment processors at the end don't care. They can add a new method without a hassle.

This is only existential for credit card companies. So they definitely would do anything to survive. But the monopoly they have, and the high fees they charge are ridiculous. This should be challenged at least for fun.

But I see the need for an alternative from merchant side.

Lightning seems good alternative for them: instant, low fee, no chargebacks.

Vs credit cards: at least 3 days, high fees, costly chargebacks.

Also from payer sides, you don't know how much data credit card companies have on you, which is...

I believe in transparency.

If you want to accept credit / debit card payments, you have to pay 3 different type of fees. Plus you get your money late, and also the chargebacks. Kind of pain.

If you want to accept cash. It is free to accept.

Then if you want to accept credit cards, you have to increase your prices to include credit card accepting cost.

I think, it would be much more transparent and logical, that whoever uses a payment method it shall bear the cost of it.

This means, you can pay by cash paying no extra cost, or by card paying for comfort.

Then it is transparent, how much these cost. Plus too expensive payment methods would be driven out of markets by consumers.

Maybe I am wrong.

Payments are so backwards.

The seller, who cannot influence how the buyer pays, have to pay the payment handling fee.

This is unnatural. Nature strives to be sustainable. But if the person decides how to pay, who is not influenced by the payment method/costs, how will it every be efficient?

I think this is done for profit maximalization. People will pay with the most convenient method, until all methods cost the same for them. So if you make the most comfortable method the most expensive, you make huge profits.

But then, why would a payment alternative arise, if this method maximizes profit for payment handling?

Easy.

Market share.

If you make a payment method, that is cheaper, and people start to use it, you will drive them out from competition.

Then, why would people change to a different payment method, if for them it costs more?

I think this change has to be driven by merchants, because they are the "victims". They have to pay something they shouldn't have to otherwise.

And they could drive adoption, by giving a cashback for those who use their new favourite payment method. And if the new payment method is cheaper, they can still earn the same money, but drive adoption.

#grownostr #plebchain #idea

What do you mean under "necessary" information?

Because you can use e.g. Robosats to buy btc. There you don't have to share any personal information. Only seller shares their fiat payment address, and you send them the money. But the receiver will know your name.

But there you have to make trade off, as you can't sell any time, any size, and maybe your fee (premium) will be higher than compared to custodial such as strike. But you shared no personal information.

In this way, the necessary information can depend on the level of service you prefer.

> "Safety is purchasing power."

> -- #RayDalio

#quotes #grownostr #plebchain

βœ…οΈ Day 11 of #100pushups

Push ups: 10 sets of 10 (chair level)

Other: 4 sets of 30 sit ups

1 min break in between.

#postr (Push ups and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays)

#grownostr #plebchain #100aDayUntil100k

Me too!

I agree! So I also think it is not related to the problem of email itself, but then what really is the problem with email?

True, I was thinking more "pay as you go" structure.

But at the end, I could also argue, that starting with a custodial solution to get understanding, then moving to non-custodial is also a good path. Because maybe making such solutions might sacrifice something important.

Nothing new. Just got triggered πŸ˜‚

Many people does not like responsibility, and want others to solve problems for them. I think this is taught in school this way.

If we want to progress, we have to break out from this box.

But also, others have other agenda than we have, so chances are quite high, you will never get what you want if you don't act upon it. πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ