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

What happened with the Web Monetization API?

chriscoyier.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 271 posts

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#161

Post by acchow »

cchance wrote: post #153
stickfigure wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Realistically a 100mb block would be large enough to handle all transaction data our species currently generates. Nonsense. With the current block size and average transaction size, the bitcoin network processes ~7 transactions per second. A 100X increase in block size gets you to 700 transactions per second. A quick google says global credit card transactions currently average more than 21,000 per second. You're s…

Why are you comparing this to bitcoin, bitcoin was never meant to be a fast network lol it was to be a network for cash to sit in "digital gold"... Other networks were designed for speed and others are working on it (etherum with layer 2 networks, and more speed focused networks, for instance as was mentioned Nano was doing 1200-1500tps years ago, with plans for increases not sure if thtey eer went further. The probl…

> bitcoin was never meant to be a fast network lol it was to be a network for cash to sit in "digital gold"...

Your claim is opposed to the contents of the original Bitcoin whitepaper

https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#162

Post by itslennysfault »

seanwilson wrote: post #5

> It needs to be built into the browsers and web standards such that it’s incredibly smooth and fast. I wanna send $1 to a website, it happens instantly and anonymously, and the developer can do things around this. Like unlock features! For instance, stop showing ads, offer more complete downloads, unlock tutorial courses, etc. Make it easier and faster than using a credit card. Are there any promising avenues toward…

I think you need the browsers to act as a broker/escrow.

Brave tried to do this, but I'm not sure what ever happened to it. The way their system worked (as I understood it) is you deposited an amount in the browser each month and it was split between the sites you visited that month weighted by how much time you spent on each site, but it only worked for sites that signed up for the Brave reward program (or whatever they called it).

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#164

Post by tromp »

j0hnyl wrote: post #131
jjcm wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here (I've been out of the crypto game for a couple years), but I don't think crypto holds up here. The nature of transaction fees with crypto is they scale exponentially with demand. Monero fees are low because volume is low. Bitcoin fees are high ($9.97 was the average transaction fee yesterday!) because volume is high. Any fully decentralized crypto at the scale of use that the Web M…

It depends on the chain. Some chains can support high throughput at low fees.

Sure; they can. By sacrificing the very properties Bitcoin was designed for: decentralization and censorship resistance.

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#165

Post by wazzer »

ethbr1 wrote: post #98
uncletammy wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've just described the value proposition for bitcoin, a peer to peer electronic cash system. Sadly, bitcoin has been captured by banks and is now only useful for gambling and parasitic investment scams.

:/ Distributed ledger technology ever being a viable solution for small, high-frequency transactions seems like a pipe dream. I'm aware that tremendous effort has been and is being invested in that. But I have yet to be convinced efforts in that direction won't all boil down to "trading decentralization for efficiency." In which case, why not use a centralized, much more efficient solution?

say what you want, but iota, out of all of them, actually seems to bring a promising technical solution. @hus_ky on twitter, one of their main devs working on it is a good follow.

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#166

Post by jmercouris »

mhitza wrote: post #30
TotempaaltJ wrote: post #2

I think another interesting development related to this space is GNU Taler[0], which has gotten EU and NLnet grants, and could probably hook into these APIs. [0]: https://taler.net/en/index.html

I'm eager to see what the extra funding does for the project. UX, setup, and everything else that relates to integration wasn't something I wanted to work with last time I took a serious look at the project.

Unfortunately the UX does not appear to be a priority.

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#167

Post by chupchap »

I think the biggest challenge is the country specific regulation with regards to money and then there is tax regulations. Add to this the checks related to money laundering and we can forget such a simple thing from existing without a whole company working in the backend to make it work.

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#168

Post by PhilippGille »

jjcm wrote: post #113
CaptainFever wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is literally the use case for cryptocurrencies -- digital cash, not investments. In the more... questionably legal parts of the web, Monero is pretty common since you can't use regular banking anyway. The fees are pretty low, at around USD0.001 IIRC. There's also Nano (feeless) but it doesn't seem to be very popular, unfortunately.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here (I've been out of the crypto game for a couple years), but I don't think crypto holds up here. The nature of transaction fees with crypto is they scale exponentially with demand. Monero fees are low because volume is low. Bitcoin fees are high ($9.97 was the average transaction fee yesterday!) because volume is high. Any fully decentralized crypto at the scale of use that the Web M…

> There are ways to scale this, ie the lightning network, but those are essentially centralized solutions to scale.

Some nodes are more popular than others for open a channel to, but there are still several thousands, so calling it centralized is misleading.

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#169

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

j0hnyl wrote: post #132
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm grateful this hasn't been worked out yet. The magnitude of the shittification of the internet which will occur once this is a solved problem is almost too much to think about. If you are working on this, for the sake of humanity, please stop.

I actually think it will solve the enshitification problem, which is mostly ad driven.

The ads are never going away. We tried the 'pay your way' system with things like netflix and prime video, and guess what's on the way? Now you get to pay for it AND see ads.

Re: What happened with the Web Monetization API?

#170

Post by starttoaster »

acchow wrote: post #161
cchance wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you comparing this to bitcoin, bitcoin was never meant to be a fast network lol it was to be a network for cash to sit in "digital gold"... Other networks were designed for speed and others are working on it (etherum with layer 2 networks, and more speed focused networks, for instance as was mentioned Nano was doing 1200-1500tps years ago, with plans for increases not sure if thtey eer went further. The probl…

> bitcoin was never meant to be a fast network lol it was to be a network for cash to sit in "digital gold"... Your claim is opposed to the contents of the original Bitcoin whitepaper https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

That white paper was written when? 2008, give or take a couple years? "Speed," as we refer to it, is relative to the age. In 2008, the threshold for terms like "fast" was much lower than it is today.
Post reply on HN