Quote from: synechist on July 21, 2014, 12:51:37 AM

Quote from: DFJ on July 21, 2014, 12:29:04 AM

Quote from: synechist on July 20, 2014, 11:51:43 PM

Quote from: DFJ on July 20, 2014, 11:46:44 PM

Re: PoS

I don't know what Dan's opinion is, but if a service is not interested in adopting BTC, they are almost certainly not going to use XC. I appreciate you agreeing with my post (and relatedly appreciate the work you do), but I'm not sure you read my post carefully as a central point is that PoS is a (nearly) complete waste of time. PoS is offered by large, slow moving corps to boring retailers and used by clueless consumers. It's pretty much the worst channel to target with a cutting edge CC.

Good targets are channels and services that have adopted BTC but would be significantly better off with an anonymous currency. This is dark markets, internet payment platforms, etc. Decision makers at these services get CCs, and are the most likely to be receptive to XC's value proposition.

By contrast, the brick and mortar world is filled with decision makers that aren't even interested in BTC! Anyone not interested in BTC is not interested in XC, full stop. The advantages of XC (anonymity, potentially other features) do not COME CLOSE to overshadowing the advantages of BTC (massive existing adoption and ecosystem, name recognition, higher price stability, etc.) such that if I am not interested in BTC I might be interested in XC.

The areas to target are areas where BTC is understood and adopted, and XC offers clear advantages or at least is an easy to offer alternative. I.e. existing internet payment platforms and any ecommerce services used by highly privacy focused users.

Yes, you're right about the cluelessness of traditional POS markets.

The thing is, this only matters if you have to integrate new tech into the POS platform.

With NFC payments, an XC mastercard, and in-app XC purchases with fiat, there'll be no need for any backend integration. So it's an incredibly efficient way to get massive market penetration, and it'll lower the barrier to entry for normal non-techie people right down to the floor.

But to my broader point about the issues with PoS, that functionality doesn't have market demand and piggy-backing on existing payment networks doesn't solve the issue (and by the way, any piggy-backing service is centralized, which we are not supposed to like). So for example, if I am choosing between swiping my XC (mastercard) card and my normal mastercard at Target, what do I get out of using the former? The XC mastercard service presumably debits some XC account I have to fund the dollar payment it makes, which is fine, but why is that better than just debiting an account with dollars in it?

Is it because the XC mastercard service does not bother to confirm my identity before making dollar payments on my behalf? That seems like it would run afoul of anti-money laundering regulations. Even ignoring that (probably dealbreaker) issue, if I am so privacy conscious that I won't use BTC or Visa, why am I comfortable making purchases in XC in person at Target in front of a security camera? And shouldn't I just be using actual cash at this point?

I just can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't be comfortable using BTC or Visa on a PoS terminal but WOULD be comfortable using XC. So what is the value proposition of PoS?

All good points - and let me emphasise that we're certainly not going to ignore online marketplaces that accept cryptocurrencies. That idea is solid.

As for Mastercards and privacy, storing funds in XC is a great way to retain control over your privacy, and if you can then use it anywhere without disclosing your savings or accounts in general, it's a pretty good deal IMO. Surrendering some privacy in exchange for mainstream convenience is what will appeal to the average user.

Secondly, think about how this stuff comes together: mobile wallets + POS integration is what so many BTC users want but don't have. The "average" non-techie user isn't so fussed about privacy that (s)he won't use a mastercard. They just think Bitcoin is cool, interesting, cheap, and on the side of the individual vs. the authorities. With XC, this comes together even more powerfully. And if we're on mobile and are POS integrated then the value proposition seriously gets going.

P.S. Aha, I should've mentioned: privacy is not XC's mainstream marketing point. Useability, fast transaction times, mobile wallets, powerful apps, and real-world integration will be.

Edit: Having looked further into the issue, it looks like coinbase already offers PoS functionality for BTC. Coinbase has $30mm+ in VC funding from A16Z. I wouldn't want my differentiator to be that I can create a better app than them... I would want it to be that I have privacy features that they aren't even thinking about. And to get back to the original point, I don't think you can achieve those features at the PoS level because you still have to integrate with the dollar payment network, which is regulated. I also don't think PoS users have demand for better than BTC privacy, because after all I am in a store showing my face, but maybe we agree to disagree on that.