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

Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

tempo.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#531

Post by cycomanic »

consp wrote: post #465
skritched wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other countries are you comparing to? I did a multi year assignment in Germany and holy fucking hell does their banking system suck. It took weeks for my checks to be deposited and reconciliation times were longer. Not defending the US here by my only non-US banking experience was atrocious.

You take a bad example and compare it to another bad example. Germany is well known to be behind the curve like the US. It's the only western European country I still bring a healthy amount cash when I go there. Wouldn't be the first time I had to pay parking with cash in recent times. Every where else this is a non issue. It's rapidly changing though, but I don't like the common in use PIN terminals as they have no…

Now I'm not generally a big defender of Germany, but the reason for much more prevalent use of cash is largely privacy in Germany. And I sort of agree that handing all monetary transactions to the mastercard/visa duopoly is a terrible idea.

We are essentially trading the convinience of a tap for increased prices and unelected gatekeepers that can (and will) easily push sectors out of business, because they don't like what they do.

Regarding the parking, I much rather would be able to pay with cash than the $2 parking plus 50 cents cc transaction fee that you have to pay in many places in NZ.

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#532

Post by DennisP »

wredcoll wrote: post #373
SR2Z wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At that point, a shared ledger implemented with traditional databases / protocols would be faster, easier, and more transparent. Except they are frequently _not_. I dislike crypto on principle, but you can't look at the exorbitant transfer fees and latency that a lot of banks charge for common transactions (Visa/MasterCard are especially bad) and say that crypto has no potential. Yes, it would be easier if we could…

> Why not have a central bank currency that can be traded on the blockchain, especially since converting it to real money will still entail KYC? Because literally the only point is to avoid the existing banking system and you can do that with a postures database with much less cpu involved.

There's not that much CPU involved. Most of the stablecoins are on Ethereum, and I think the rest are on other proof-of-stake platforms, not Bitcoin.

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#533

Post by hitradostava »

pc wrote: post #46

There are lots of crypto skeptics on HN (and we ourselves were disappointed with crypto's payments utility for much of the past decade), so it might be interesting to share what changed our mind over the past couple of years: we started to notice a lot of real-world businesses finding utility in stablecoins. For example, Bridge (a stablecoin orchestration platform that Stripe acquired) is used by SpaceX for managing…

Patrick, the problems you describe (speed, cost, cross-border friction) already have solutions. SEPA Instant, FedNow, PIX, and providers like Wise move money in seconds, at negligible cost, inside regulated systems. Tempo doesn’t solve payments; it sidesteps oversight.

By shifting flows onto a private stablecoin ledger, Stripe isn’t fixing inefficiency; it’s making it easier to route money in ways regulators and tax authorities can’t easily monitor. That’s not innovation, it’s the oldest trick in the crypto playbook: pretend you’re improving payments, when what you’re really selling is a way around the rules.

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#534

Post by insane_dreamer »

j2kun wrote: post #294
insane_dreamer wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect; it's to bypass the middlemen that create the links of trust between two parties exchanging money. That was the point of Bitcoin from the start. (The many other crypto coins since then are mostly BS freud.)

In this case, Stripe is adding themselves as a middleman. Whether or not it was the point of Bitcoin from the start, "removing the middlemen" is bullshit because you still need exchanges, wallet providers, people running nodes, etc. Cryptocurrency in practice just transfers power from traditional middlemen to new technically-advantaged middlemen.

> you still need exchanges, wallet providers, people running nodes, etc

you don't need exchanges or wallet providers, or any other intermediary, to exchange Bitcoin -- those add layers of convenience (conversion, storage), but they do _not_ strengthen the web of trust and do not provide the same function as intermediary banks and clearing houses do

yes, you do need people running nodes, but they're not intermediate layers, and you can run a node yourself to benefit from the system (though in practice it's no longer profitable due to bitcoin farms)

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#535

Post by graeme »

narrator wrote: post #527
raincole wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a shared ledger implemented with traditional databases / protocols would be faster, easier, and more transparent. Stablecoin is not a technology. It's an excuse. An excuse to do what banks do while not being regulated like a bank or using the infrastructure banks use. Similar to how Airbnb is not a technology but an excuse to do what hotels do without hotel's license. So it makes no sense to compare it to database,…

Can you do fractional reserve banking with stablecoins where you lend out the underlying dollars to people and don't have full reserves? That's what makes banking tricky. When there are a surge of loan defaults across the banking system the money supply shrinks rapidly unless the government bails them out. Thus, the need for regulation. One reason the U.S government has to like stablecoins is because Tether is one of…

Yes, you can absolutely do that with stablecoins. Why couldn't you?

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#536

Post by knorker »

apinstein wrote: post #151

Here's the play. It's very simple, and it's quite good. Stripe processes a LOT of money. The customers that get that money need to move it around. Often to banks. Stripe makes no money on that. Over the last few years, stablecoins have become a preferred means to hold and move money (for convenience, etc). Stablecoin providers make money on their float -- selling stablecoins means you get free deposits, and risk-free…

> Over the last few years, stablecoins have become a preferred means to hold and move money (for convenience, etc).

Huh?

In the western world this is nonsense. I move 6-7 digits regularly, internationally, even between continents, for free. Convenience of cryptocurrency? Lol. Maybe if I want to send money to Nigeria or North Korea.

Cryptocurrency was never more convenient. It's cheaper than Western Union when that's the only alternative, but boy is that a low bar and an edge case.

Traditional banking is getting faster and cheaper by the year, so your claim is getting less true every day, not more,

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#537

Post by richardwhiuk »

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #459
Liron wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's entirely at the whim of the US government whether they allow non-KYC foreign people to have USDC accounts. Right now they say USDC:Yes and USD:No. They could easily say yes or no to either one at any time. Blockchain as technology is irrelevant.

Technology is relevant because it is the very reason they have to say yes to USDC and try to at least partially regulate it. If they could, they would say no and even ban it completely, but they can’t.

They can, it’s just this administration isn’t interested in doing so.

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#538

Post by wiredpancake »

throw0101d wrote: post #14

NIST's Blockchain Overview , IR 8202, document often comes top of mind when "blockchain" is mentioned: * https://www.nist.gov/blockchain Specifically the yes/no flowchart on whether "you may have a useful blockchain use case" (Figure 6 - DHS Science & Technology Directorate Flowchart): * https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Projects/enhanced-distribut...

Oh wow, the flowchart made by the Government. The government has a registered interest in preventing blockchains for anonymization and decentralization.

Who would of thought?

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#539

Post by matthewmueller »

simonw wrote: post #197
pc wrote: post #46

There are lots of crypto skeptics on HN (and we ourselves were disappointed with crypto's payments utility for much of the past decade), so it might be interesting to share what changed our mind over the past couple of years: we started to notice a lot of real-world businesses finding utility in stablecoins. For example, Bridge (a stablecoin orchestration platform that Stripe acquired) is used by SpaceX for managing…

Can you say more about the SpaceX use-case? Are they paying for rocket parts from some of their vendors using crypto?

https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/31/stablecoins-are-finding-pr...

Re: Stripe Launches L1 Blockchain: Tempo

#540

Post by DennisP »

wredcoll wrote: post #385
SkidanovAlex wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most important aspect of blockchain that is relevant here is that your counterparty half a world away and you both agree that you trust the state of this blockchain, and thus can transact on it. For business running the same code on their 1 node instead of N is not a replacement, because their counterparty has no reason to trust whatever is running on that 1 node. Your reasoning re: N nodes are expensive is also…

> For business running the same code on their 1 node instead of N is not a replacement, because their counterparty has no reason to trust whatever is running on that 1 node I mean, why are you doing this kind of business with someone where you can't even trust that? Aside from that, block chains only provide trust if they're meaningfully decentralized. These hyper specific b2b ones seem unlikely to pass that test. Ex…

Businesses do lots of transactions without trusting anyone else's records. Then they do lots of slow, expensive mutual auditing.
Post reply on HN