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

More than you want to know about gift cards

bam.kalzumeus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 180 posts

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#71

Post by throwaway413 »

mattnewton wrote: post #69
throwaway413 wrote: post #41

Idea: “unlocked” public bitcoin wallets with autogenerated key pairs that can be given to someone without them needing a pre-existing wallet. 1) transactions are instant and free, ie giving over physical ownership of a pub/private key pair (this could be done via scan of a QR code) 2) no prior onboarding necessary (avoids the repeated question “do you have this wallet/app?”) Before, if I didn’t have cash, to tip a va…

Wouldn't your valet example be even easier with venmo? Or is it because the money has a QR code instead of the account - that could easily be done with venmo, but isn't, it's true. With crypto I worry about the transaction costs dwarfing the utility of something like this. Without a central exchange avoiding fees for the tiny movement of crypto, you'd lose too much in transaction costs when setting up a new wallet to…

With Venmo, I still need to ask for their username. A two way transfer of information still has to occur. Same with current wallet-to-wallet transactions. Even if we are in the same app, I need to know your wallet username or address to send you money.

With cash, you can leave a tip in a tip jar, with no “end destination wallet” if you will.

This would aim to solve that issue. The key pair would be contained in whatever the handoff mechanism is (QR code?) so that only a one-way information transfer needs to occur, ie giving someone the QR code or handing them a gift card representation of it. The funds would be locked up in this handoff state until that person were to transfer the funds off or claim ownership another way.

As for the fees, I covered this in my other comment, but basically there would be no on-chain transaction. The funds would never switch wallets.

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#72

Post by svachalek »

cmckn wrote: post #31
winternett wrote: post #10

I still don't understand why it faux-pas to just put cash in a nice card... I just do it anyway. It's a more universal gift card without fees and expiration dates... Anyone who tries to put me down for doing so will simply not be receiving a gift from me next year... Screw stressful stores. plastic cards, and standing in line, my method is much more "green"... :P

I don’t think it is, at least not in my family. Cash is no more of a faux pas than a gift card, at least. I happen to think either is a pretty lame gift. Instead of a gift card to LUSH, for example, just buy me a bath bomb or whatever. Maybe I won’t like the scent you choose, maybe I’ll love it—that’s the nature of receiving a gift. Besides, gift cards are rarely enough to cover an actual purchase with taxes and etc…

I'm not great at gifts but the thing I've learned is, consumables. Chocolate, wine, your bath bomb, fancy cookies, etc. They're fairly universal, won't run into the "already have it" problem, and don't leave the recipient feeling like they now need to hold onto something forever or risk offending you. You may not score a direct hit but generally if you know people at all you can't go too far wrong.

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#73

Post by mattnewton »

throwaway413 wrote: post #71
mattnewton wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't your valet example be even easier with venmo? Or is it because the money has a QR code instead of the account - that could easily be done with venmo, but isn't, it's true. With crypto I worry about the transaction costs dwarfing the utility of something like this. Without a central exchange avoiding fees for the tiny movement of crypto, you'd lose too much in transaction costs when setting up a new wallet to…

With Venmo, I still need to ask for their username. A two way transfer of information still has to occur. Same with current wallet-to-wallet transactions. Even if we are in the same app, I need to know your wallet username or address to send you money. With cash, you can leave a tip in a tip jar, with no “end destination wallet” if you will. This would aim to solve that issue. The key pair would be contained in whate…

With venmo you can just scan their account QR code to send them money, which is easily accessible in the app. I even have a card from them with my qr code printed on it. It requires them to have an account, but this seems no more onerous than understanding how to spend the new wallet you just got the keys to.

When you create the wallet, and put money in it however, there have to be fees right? I understand transferring the wallet is not going to cost anything because you are just sharing a private key, but you still have to fill the wallet. And now the recipient also has to move the money out of the wallet on the blockchain to use it, paying transaction fees. (Worse, they have to do so before you do, since you made the wallet you still have the private key! This needs another centralized service to prevent you from spending money you tipped)

I think the crypto angle is a red herring, what is really important to your idea is the QR-code flow that doesn't require the recipient to have done any setup. That's a good idea.

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#74

Post by gbaygon »

throwaway413 wrote: post #41

Idea: “unlocked” public bitcoin wallets with autogenerated key pairs that can be given to someone without them needing a pre-existing wallet. 1) transactions are instant and free, ie giving over physical ownership of a pub/private key pair (this could be done via scan of a QR code) 2) no prior onboarding necessary (avoids the repeated question “do you have this wallet/app?”) Before, if I didn’t have cash, to tip a va…

check opendime: https://opendime.com

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#75

Post by ska »

Symbiote wrote: post #51
lmkg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, it's all cultural. But the idea is that a gift is personal , and that cash is impersonal . The universality is exactly what makes it impersonal. The ideal gift (again, in US cultural context) is one that reflects something unique about the giver, or recipient, or the relationship between them. An exchange of cash is something that happens between strangers on a regular basis.

This is generally solved with a note alongside the cash. "Please treat yourself to a meal at my favourite restaurant, X." "I think you can buy some plants for the garden."

> This is generally solved with a note alongside the cash.

I think "solved" here should be "mitigated". Certainly culturally it seems lots of people don't consider this equivalent although logically it could be seen as "better".

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#76

Post by handrous »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7
mc32 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one advantage of cash and cash equivalents (open loop) over closed loop is that the recipient can decide what they want to spend their money on. Maybe I have enough books for now but do need a pair of shoes.

Or maybe your niece is boycotting B&N for some reason, or knows a much better, cheaper bookstore to shop at.

One thing that drives me nuts, when I give in and produce a list of stuff I'd kinda sorta like for the various relatives requesting such and, inevitably, most of it's just books, is that no one will buy them used. I tell them to, over and over, but they won't do it. I'd rather receive the same number of books and know they spent less on them. Or 3x as many books for the same money. But no. They just won't do it.

Then again, I think toys should be removed from their store packaging before being wrapped, but I always lose that struggle, too. People seem really stuck on only giving visibly-new things. I suspect there's some Fussellian class-analysis to be done on that behavior.

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#77

Post by throwaway413 »

mattnewton wrote: post #73
throwaway413 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With Venmo, I still need to ask for their username. A two way transfer of information still has to occur. Same with current wallet-to-wallet transactions. Even if we are in the same app, I need to know your wallet username or address to send you money. With cash, you can leave a tip in a tip jar, with no “end destination wallet” if you will. This would aim to solve that issue. The key pair would be contained in whate…

With venmo you can just scan their account QR code to send them money, which is easily accessible in the app. I even have a card from them with my qr code printed on it. It requires them to have an account, but this seems no more onerous than understanding how to spend the new wallet you just got the keys to. When you create the wallet, and put money in it however, there have to be fees right? I understand transferri…

> you can just scan their QR code

You still have to ask them if they have Venmo, ask them for their QR code, scan it, create the transaction, and then send it, and then make sure you sent it to the right person.

The loading wallet/unloading wallet concern is definitely warranted. I’d imagine that this would have to become a new special type of wallet, that the private keys are never accessible to the end-user. You could verify funds in the wallet per the blockchain as normal etc but the administrative account permissions would have to be abstracted to a more centralized system of control unfortunately.

If you spent the funds directly from these temp/“cash” wallets, you wouldn’t need to pay fees on the way out either, right. Furthermore, if you could pay directly with these types of cash wallets, businesses could just utilize the direct transfer themselves and never cash them out when customers use them to purchase from them.

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#78

Post by airstrike »

jldugger wrote: post #42
airstrike wrote: post #24

Conversely, here's really "All you need to know about gift cards": think about the interest being generated from all that cash sitting idle on some issuer's account while the recipient of your gift card decides how to spend their money. > Most retailers do not have sufficient gift card liabilities and do not have sufficiently sophisticated treasury teams to make a meaningful amount of income off an investment portfol…

> it would be much better for it to be either me or my recipient who benefits Better for whom?

Better for me or my recipient...?

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#79

Post by throwaway413 »

gbaygon wrote: post #74
throwaway413 wrote: post #41

Idea: “unlocked” public bitcoin wallets with autogenerated key pairs that can be given to someone without them needing a pre-existing wallet. 1) transactions are instant and free, ie giving over physical ownership of a pub/private key pair (this could be done via scan of a QR code) 2) no prior onboarding necessary (avoids the repeated question “do you have this wallet/app?”) Before, if I didn’t have cash, to tip a va…

check opendime: https://opendime.com

Bingo! Thanks for sharing

Re: More than you want to know about gift cards

#80

Post by mattnewton »

throwaway413 wrote: post #77
mattnewton wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With venmo you can just scan their account QR code to send them money, which is easily accessible in the app. I even have a card from them with my qr code printed on it. It requires them to have an account, but this seems no more onerous than understanding how to spend the new wallet you just got the keys to. When you create the wallet, and put money in it however, there have to be fees right? I understand transferri…

> you can just scan their QR code You still have to ask them if they have Venmo, ask them for their QR code, scan it, create the transaction, and then send it, and then make sure you sent it to the right person. The loading wallet/unloading wallet concern is definitely warranted. I’d imagine that this would have to become a new special type of wallet, that the private keys are never accessible to the end-user. You co…

Right, what you have described requires a central authority to 1) manage access to the funds (instead of trusting the tipper not to spend the funds he gave the tippee), and 2) avoid blockchain overhead by spending from accounts directly. Double spending then is prevented by trust in the central authority in both cases. The only useful part of the crypto currency left is the account-less nature of it, which can be done off the blockchain (has to be really here per number 2).

It's a UX problem in the payments space, which is not really a problem crypto helps with is my point. Definitely see the problem, just don't see the crypto angle.

Post reply on HN