This infrastructure is very useful, but the only thing preventing micropayments are the fees.
More precisely, the only thing preventing micropayments is the cost of the payment network, which is probably higher than the fees you can collect for micropayments.
This is exactly why I wrote this in the Policies & Procedures index:
Now that I think about it, who has a handle on the pulse of the BitShares ecosystem? I mean, BM has used the comparative metaphor of a DAC or "company" to describe how PoW mining is far less efficient than DPoS, and often states ecosystems must be profitable to be self sustaining. Few here would disagree, but why has nobody asked to see "our books"? What are our actual costs? What are our expenses, both short term and long term?
Until these questions are answered we can't possibly determine if micropayments in BitShares is economically cost effective. It makes little sense to charge a $0.10 fee for an item that costs 25 cents. That's the same situation as the credit card processors face, which is why merchants have a minimum charge amount.
nonetheless, regardless of what i, or any of us, want, the market will figure out the best use for the network.
This is also very true, but why would we even propose something that's not economically close to viable, and how could we possibly determine that without accurate cost data, or, market analysis of the target audience and use cases?
TBH, I am very surprised whenever I hear someone propose a new DPoS chain, b/c of the "overhead" that implies. You need witnesses, VPS servers, coders, marketing etc. etc. just like BitShares has. How will all that be established? How long to get all that "alternate chain" infrastructure in place and functional?
Whenever such suggestions are made they never provide analysis of any of those important considerations.