Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ending Bitcoin Support

stripe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 659 posts

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#161

Post by nicpottier »

nvk wrote: post #8

They should have replaced it with Lightning Network, is amazingly fast and cheap and works on top of Bitcoin. I'm running a test node, this stuff really works! > Lightning is a decentralized network using smart contract functionality in the blockchain to enable instant payments across a network of participants. In case you are curious https://lightning.network and another good resource here https://www.reddit.com/r/B…

I'm actually really curious about this as well, as Stripe becoming a lightning node would be huge for the network as they have so many connectors, both to payers and payees.

I kind of see the endgame of Bitcoin being this and I'm super bullish about BTC becoming viable as a payment platform again in a much more interesting way than the other competitors. BTC will have the best of all worlds if LTC actually ends up working on top of it.

For anybody familiar with BTC the LTC papers is pretty easy reading: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/paper

It is a super neat idea in all respects and could enable a whole new class of companies that provide these payment channels, all with very clear economic incentives not to suck while also requiring no trust on behalf of the users.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#162

Post by kss238 »

nebulous1 wrote: post #33
mankash666 wrote: post #5

Ethereum transaction fees are still in cents. They should start supporting it as a form of payment.

Actually it's pretty high too these days (not compared to Bitcoin of course) https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/ethereum-transactionfee...

Since many of ethereums transactions are from smart contract that use lots of gas, looking at the average transaction fee is misleading. Check ethgasstation.info for the transaction cost of a simple transaction. $0.08 will get you confirmed in the next block, and $0.02 will get you confirmed in 15 min.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#163

Post by nxsynonym »

paulddraper wrote: post #155
nxsynonym wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I hate the comparison of crypto to gold or any other "value asset'. Houses are lived in. Stocks act as a cashflow for companies. Even if the world economy collapses you can still use a solid gold bar as a blunt instrument to kill an animal and eat it. Cryptocurrencies have exactly 0 secondary uses.

Okay....livestock bludgeoning explains 0.001% of gold's value.

It's a ridiculous example, of course. But it's something. Not to mention the actual real applications that were mentioned above.

The point is - crypto-currencies are fairy dust. There is nothing real or tangible about them.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#164

Post by EnFinlay »

nulagrithom wrote: post #44
montrose wrote: post #15

This reads a bit like the sort of things people say when breaking up so as not to upset the other person too much. You're a great person, but you're just more of an asset than a medium of exchange, and what I need in my life right now is a medium of exchange. What future does an asset have if people don't actually buy stuff with it? That is not a purely rhetorical question; cryptocurrencies change things a lot. But t…

> What future does an asset have if people don't actually buy stuff with it? I look at it (maybe naively) like a solid gold bar. You're not going to walk in to a convenience store and pay with a bar of solid gold; you might flee the country with one though. Beyond that, I totally agree with your read on the post. Linking the pull request[0] was especially backhanded. It feels like there's some underlying frustration…

Reading your comment finally made it click to me why cryptocurrencies (specifically Bitcoin) are distinct from a gold bar or other non-currency stores of value. A gold bar is going to remain a gold bar forever, people's perception of its value will change even though the supply will remain mostly steady, but it will stay a gold bar no matter what.

Bitcoin may change in value based on perception, it's supply will remain constant after it has all been mined, but it's existence and integrity relies on a large network continuing to exist.

To put it differently, in 50 years a gold bar is a gold bar, but in 50 years a Bitcoin may have no value because everyone stopped mining and the blockchain was destroyed by 51% attacks.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#165

Post by exit »

underwires wrote: post #140
Klathmon wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A full-scale LN needs one transaction to get on the network, then loading and unloading can happen entirely on the network, as well as keeping the channel open indefinitely. Obviously getting to that point will take quite a lot of work, but there is no reason why you ever need to close a payment channel unless someone is trying to break the rules (and if that happens, you'll be happy, because you'll end up with all o…

But (correct me if I'm wrong) payment channels are connected to particular sets of recipients, but not necessarily any and all recipients. Your money is locked into that channel until you close it. You might need to open a different channel to reach your actual recipient.

payments can be routed to other recipients if there is a path to them in the network.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#166

Post by _pdp_ »

We have integrated Coinbase recently. Transactions take over a day to get verified. This is fine because the product is an annual subscription. That being said, except as an alternative to an international transfer, BTC has not much e-commerce value from our end.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#167

Post by rkuykendall-com »

rb808 wrote: post #120
nulagrithom wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What future does an asset have if people don't actually buy stuff with it? I look at it (maybe naively) like a solid gold bar. You're not going to walk in to a convenience store and pay with a bar of solid gold; you might flee the country with one though. Beyond that, I totally agree with your read on the post. Linking the pull request[0] was especially backhanded. It feels like there's some underlying frustration…

Who ever buys a solid gold bar? nobody. Even gold coins etc as an investment are very unusual.

Watch more Fox News and Info Wars. Somebody is paying for all those ads.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#168

Post by nxsynonym »

notatoad wrote: post #153
criddell wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the secondary use of all the shares of AMZN one might have in their eTrade account? That's also just data, right?

the value backing AMZN shares is the value of the utility that amazon, inc provides to society.

Exactly. The value of the shares are tied directly to the output and monetary value of the company they are backing - and not hype and word-of-mouth.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#169

Post by loeg »

walterbell wrote: post #133
marshray wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very little though. If the demand for gold were merely industrial it would not need to be mined in such quantities as it has throughout history. I would put jewelry in the 'sentimental' category as well. Not only is Bitcoin purely sentimental, it represents has huge costs in the form of raw energy. Bitcoin's only claim to value is that it is an artifact of an act of ritual sacrifice. One might imagine a precedent in…

Has the ritual sacrifice angle been explored elsewhere? Would make for good video.

In the TV show "Sherlock," the titular main character's self-deprecating videos for the "Everyone" collective (spoof on Anonymous) are a sort of ritual sacrifice as a medium of payment.

Re: Ending Bitcoin Support

#170

Post by Goladus »

moduspol wrote: post #46
montrose wrote: post #15

This reads a bit like the sort of things people say when breaking up so as not to upset the other person too much. You're a great person, but you're just more of an asset than a medium of exchange, and what I need in my life right now is a medium of exchange. What future does an asset have if people don't actually buy stuff with it? That is not a purely rhetorical question; cryptocurrencies change things a lot. But t…

> What future does an asset have if people don't actually buy stuff with it? Lots of assets have value without people buying things with them. Gold, houses, stocks, etc. The more interesting question is how long Bitcoin will remain top dog merely as a store of value if other cryptocurrencies solve this on-chain / off-chain scaling problem better / faster. There's definitely some amount of value in the name alone, and…

> Lots of assets have value without people buying things with them. Gold, houses, stocks, etc.

That value is predicated on the notion that they're worth something to the holder apart from their market price.

Gold can be used for jewelry and electronics manufacturing. In that sense it is a natural resource.

Stocks are shares in a company that runs a business or multiple businesses that could be profitable. Companies have financial obligations to their shareholders.

People live in houses.

Bitcoin's only function is to be exchanged. If no one is willing to give you anything for your bitcoin, it is completely worthless-- maybe even less than worthless when you factor transaction costs. The idea that it is a "store of value" is still predicated on bitcoin being a viable and accepted medium of exchange.

This is different from a house, which you can still use even if no one will buy it.

This is different from gold, as it is very hard to imagine a scenario where absolutely no one would buy your gold for at least for manufacturing.

This is different from stocks, where the financial obligations to you can only be cleared by legal proceedings such as Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

Post reply on HN