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

Clubhouse Payments

joinclubhouse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 241 posts

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#181

Post by elietoubi »

mrtksn wrote: post #112
elietoubi wrote: post #105

Full disclosure: I work in the payment space. -> I really wish that they used crypto for this type of things. Crypto has some pretty massive advantages. 1) No cc fees if you have a wallet. 2) No risk of censorship 3) support in any country.

It’s also very hard to use, mistakes are permanent and a lot if not most people never hold any crypto outside of the exchanges. Transfers are also slow and too expensive for small amounts. Moving funds costs about 20$ at the moment for BTC.

Crytpo Bitcoin. You can get pretty cheap transactions on other network. Research Layer 2 Ethereum or blockchain like stellar are great for micro payments

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#182

Post by elietoubi »

btmiller wrote: post #110
elietoubi wrote: post #105

Full disclosure: I work in the payment space. -> I really wish that they used crypto for this type of things. Crypto has some pretty massive advantages. 1) No cc fees if you have a wallet. 2) No risk of censorship 3) support in any country.

Full disclosure: I’m being pedantic. Are you suggesting Clubhouse doesn’t use cryptography? More seriously: cryptocurrencies don’t need to be shoved into everything, and I’d like if HN cryptocurrency warriors would stop assuming that it’s the ultimate and stable solution for all payment problems today.

touché ;) Not really a crypto warrior but I think it makes a lot of sense for mass payments. I used to lead one of the payment team at Uber ... turns out sending money to people all over the world is a pretty hard problem in the traditional finance space.

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#183

Post by [deleted] »

alwillis wrote: post #180
rvz wrote: post #22

> 100% of the payment will go to the creator ... Clubhouse will take nothing. Well imagine if they had an Android app in the first place or earlier right before all the big players started copying them, then it would have been attractive to the users. Right now, what is the point if the invite system is still there. Another platform can just announce the same thing and they are back to square zero. > We are excited t…

There’s over 1 billion iOS devices out there; not having an Android version isn't a limiting factor. I’m aware of lots of Android users who have bought used iPhones or are using their kid’s iPod Touch to access Clubhouse.

[deleted]

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#184

Post by benhurmarcel »

azinman2 wrote: post #170
jsemrau wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why this is getting downvoted. The main success factor for Clubhouse is the social graph. It is entirely possible to have access to people like Paris Hilton, Anthony Scaramucci, or MC Hammer among other notable people.

It’s strange to me that both you and I are getting downvoted… probably from people who haven’t actually used it? If you do, then it’s obvious how it’s not a conference call at all. It’s a panel that you might be able to participate in, which isn’t the same thing at all. Anyone can talk whenever they want on a conference call. The moderator chooses who talks in clubhouse.

There is conference call software that only allows a panel to talk. It's used to give remote presentations to a large group of people.

For example Webex has a product for that, as well as Bluejeans.

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#185

Post by ec109685 »

mwilcox wrote: post #96
asimjalis wrote: post #93

I don’t understand why they are not keeping a larger percentage for themselves. 1/ This concerns me because I worry that clubhouse will not be sustainable. 2/ What is the incentive for them long-term to maintain this payment framework as well as to curate their network?

I think because then they have to give 30% to Apple

Yep: https://twitter.com/morqon/status/1379271413807390722?s=21

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#186

Post by ec109685 »

skinnymuch wrote: post #78
hbosch wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Very interesting that they chose to go with a tipping model vs letting creators set up "pay to enter" chat rooms. I believe the only way around Apple requesting a cut of the payment is to explicitly avoid any notion of "unlocking" extras or access within the app. The tipping method is just a way for users to send money to each other, no biggie... but "unlocking a room" is basically an IAP, or could be defined as one…

Patreon doesn’t give a cut to Apple. It isn’t that far from what is described.

It’s because it’s for a good or service outside the app and not a digital good.

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#187

Post by abdullahkhalids »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #131
azinman2 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a conference call. It's a moderated panel, and they have many famous / interesting people participating on their platform.

So it's an un-edited Podcast you can only listen to live? Or I guess if you're closer to my age, it's like a radio station you can't listen to without a password?

Indeed. Except, the value add is that anyone can run their own password-protected radio show, and the hope is "anyone" includes a lot of popular people.

It's audio snapchat, which everyone wants to join because all the cool people are also on it.

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#188

Post by caslon »

wpietri wrote: post #146
geerlingguy wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My prediction (based on little evidence, just gut feeling) is Clubhouse will go the way of Quora. It started out with a bang (fanfare and huge celebrity usage), ended (well I guess Quora still exists...) with a whimper.

As a former Quora Top Writer (2013 and 2014), that makes a lot of sense to me. And faster, I'd bet. What made Quora special in the early days was the high-quality community. Smart questions, smart writers answering them, even a reasonable proportion of smart comments. That seems to be the same sort of magic that Clubhouse has managed. It's not the technology, it's the community. But as Quora tried to scale, that got…

I don't have/don't want a Clubhouse account (it seems like a very cringe-inducing platform for people past their prime), but I actually think you're wrong.

Quora lends itself toward SEO spam. It's written word. Clubhouse currently isn't archived in a machine-readable format. This eliminates a decent 60% of the value for commercial purposes, and probably 30% will be taken care of by users having the common sense to avoid any overwhelmingly-obvious marketing.

Of course, it already is seemingly just a platform for aging capitalists and twitter users to "have discussions," which seems like shorthand for "advertise themselves." I couldn't call it good by any means. But that's more or less what every social media platform is, and not different than what you'd find anywhere else.

However, it seems unlikely it'll get much worse from here.

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#189

Post by k_bx »

manigandham wrote: post #94

What a strange app. Are people really that amazed by conference calls? It seems the entire play right now is exclusivity, not product.

Brought to you by the authors of “this Dropbox thing is basically rsync and a bunch of shell scripts”

Re: Clubhouse Payments

#190

Post by manigandham »

azinman2 wrote: post #171
manigandham wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't conference calls also moderated? Otherwise they would just be a broadcast.

No. A conference call allows anyone to talk whenever they want.

Conference calls also have hosts who can mute and manage the guests. We had conferencing 2.0 about 5 years ago with the likes of Uberconference, and now 3.0 with Zoom. What is actually new?
Post reply on HN