WhatsApp Launches Instant Cryptocurrency Payments in the US

Post by fragmede » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 6:19 PM UTC

RL_Quine wrote: post #68

fragmede wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> zero expectation that this is something users want, or will use. Facebook Messenger already has this feature using fiat, Apple lets you send money via iMessage, Telegram already has this feature. Seems like adding payments is staying competitive with features other messaging utilities has. It might also be a money grab, but something can be two things at once.

Payments in yet another currency is not useful. Apple letting you send payments in iMessage makes sense, MobileCoin in signal absolutely does not. What do you do with them once you have MobileCoins? You have to exchange them, potentially at some wildly varying exchange rate, rather than what Apple is offering which is just USD. Apple's solution not something I would use but it makes some sense given the relative diff…

Post by RL_Quine » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 6:21 PM UTC

fragmede wrote: post #81

RL_Quine wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Payments in yet another currency is not useful. Apple letting you send payments in iMessage makes sense, MobileCoin in signal absolutely does not. What do you do with them once you have MobileCoins? You have to exchange them, potentially at some wildly varying exchange rate, rather than what Apple is offering which is just USD. Apple's solution not something I would use but it makes some sense given the relative diff…

The various cryptocurrencies may all look fairly similar from the outside but there are, actual, material differences between them. Whether or not there was an existing cryptocurrency that met Signal's needs requires more in-depth knowledge of the world of cryptocurrency than I have. Their whitepaper lays some of this out. If your other complaint is that Signal tried to make money, I hate to break it to you, but that…

Post by fragmede » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 6:27 PM UTC

thehappypm wrote: post #80

fragmede wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a individual perspective, if you are in the US and all of your friends are in the US and are able to get PayPal accounts, and you don't personally use WhatsApp and see it as just another messaging service, the practical answer to your question, for you, personally, is no. However, thinking of this only in terms of this this will affect you is short-sighted, and apes other hot takes that went down in Internet his…

You’re missing my point. PayPal doesn’t use crypto and it’s easy to use to send money around. WhatsApp, just like PayPal, requires a user to onboard. What makes PayPal complex is the international law around sending money, not the tech stack.

Post by oblio » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 6:43 PM UTC

tmalsburg2 wrote: post #75

codethief wrote: post #40

When Signal integrated MobileCoin last year (in the UK), there was a lot of uproar here on HN – some well-founded ("Why equip a slick and lightweight standalone app for privacy-preserving messaging with payments, a feature that adds bloat and will likely attract government regulation and oversight?"), some less so ("The Signal developers are just scamming everyone"). Given WhatsApp's move toward a WeChat-like app now…

You’re sneaking in the presupposition that the market dictates support for crypto payments. But isn’t that a complete fantasy?

Post by johanneskanybal » Thu, Dec 09, 2021, 6:47 PM UTC

panarky wrote: post #25

johanneskanybal wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pick your middleman. Using a crypto layer internally means you can circumvent traditional payment rails which means if you're in American growth-tech where revenue isn't a thing you can just remove all fee's for a while. Paypal could do the same for sure but chose not to. Disagree with the notion they won't be shutting people out of the network when needed, that's not grounded in reality.

Why did you put an apostrophe in "fee's" but not in "rails"? This isn't a grammar-nazi criticism because I frequently make similar mistakes with pluralization. It strikes me that there must be some cognitive explanation for why some plurals seem to need an apostrophe when other plurals don't.