This is how to compete with credit cards

[MrJeans]

I would like some feedback from devs on this.

What incentives do I have to use bitUSD over my credit card.

Currently, and most likely for the next 5 years, my credit card is more convenient and I pay no charges.

I pay no fees to my credit card either. That is because it is from the bank which my company deposits my salary to. Now, only if I got payed with bitUSD....

Still. If you got paid in bitUSD, you will still be paying transaction fees when making purchases.
With my credit card I pay no transactions fees for making purchases!
All libertarian stuff aside, my credit card is better.

It must be possible to enable a feature to select between receiver pays for transaction/user pays or a mixture. Most payment processors provide this service. Why shouldnt we, its such a simple thing, right?

[lakerta06]

I would like some feedback from devs on this.

What incentives do I have to use bitUSD over my credit card.

Currently, and most likely for the next 5 years, my credit card is more convenient and I pay no charges.

I pay no fees to my credit card either. That is because it is from the bank which my company deposits my salary to. Now, only if I got payed with bitUSD....

[MrJeans]

I would like some feedback from devs on this.

What incentives do I have to use bitUSD over my credit card.

Currently, and most likely for the next 5 years, my credit card is more convenient and I pay no charges.

[MrJeans]

If and when Bitshares 2.0 comes out with the promised improvements I don't think worrying about compliance and the authorities will be an issue unless interaction with traditional banking was desired.

Anyone can just create a web app that interacts with the BTS blockchain to transfer bitUSD between accts.  They'll make money from the transactions fees from any users they onboard.  I think there's huge potential and lots of pent up demand for this in the un-banked cash economy as long as the price pegging works as advertised.  If the creator of said app took the proper steps, they could stay out of the reach of authorities who want to shut it down.

When Venmo started at Upenn and a user wanted to cash out, someone would show up on their bike with cash and hand it to you.  With BTS, everyone who uses it could be an ATM if they wanted to be.

In my mind, once there is a functioning backbone, it really just comes down to who creates a nice UI experience for the users, marketing, faith in the system, and user adoption.   

If a particular domain were to be shut down, you could just create another one. All transaction fees being sent back to same person. all user info is stored in the blockchain.  No one loses anything. Just log in from a different on-ramp and everything should still be there.

Am I wrong on this?

That is the full meaning of a decentralized exchange isnt it?

If anyone would start acting as gateways all around the world...we could have task team roaming countries in crisis and sell on the streets.

Mind blown...

You guys are 100% right. But those are ideal outcomes.
And how long will it take to see that kind of liquidity globally. Bitcoin has hardly taken off in South Africa.
However, a service called SnapScan. Which links your credit card to a mobile payments app has exploded in just under a year after launch.

I am proposing for a more stream lined, cheaper SnapScan which will take off in a country like South Africa years before Bitshares becomes integrated.

[rgcrypto]

If and when Bitshares 2.0 comes out with the promised improvements I don't think worrying about compliance and the authorities will be an issue unless interaction with traditional banking was desired.

Anyone can just create a web app that interacts with the BTS blockchain to transfer bitUSD between accts.  They'll make money from the transactions fees from any users they onboard.  I think there's huge potential and lots of pent up demand for this in the un-banked cash economy as long as the price pegging works as advertised.  If the creator of said app took the proper steps, they could stay out of the reach of authorities who want to shut it down.

When Venmo started at Upenn and a user wanted to cash out, someone would show up on their bike with cash and hand it to you.  With BTS, everyone who uses it could be an ATM if they wanted to be.

In my mind, once there is a functioning backbone, it really just comes down to who creates a nice UI experience for the users, marketing, faith in the system, and user adoption.   

If a particular domain were to be shut down, you could just create another one. All transaction fees being sent back to same person. all user info is stored in the blockchain.  No one loses anything. Just log in from a different on-ramp and everything should still be there.

Am I wrong on this?

That is the full meaning of a decentralized exchange isnt it?

If anyone would start acting as gateways all around the world...we could have task team roaming countries in crisis and sell on the streets.

Mind blown...

[jayzio]

If and when Bitshares 2.0 comes out with the promised improvements I don't think worrying about compliance and the authorities will be an issue unless interaction with traditional banking was desired.

Anyone can just create a web app that interacts with the BTS blockchain to transfer bitUSD between accts.  They'll make money from the transactions fees from any users they onboard.  I think there's huge potential and lots of pent up demand for this in the un-banked cash economy as long as the price pegging works as advertised.  If the creator of said app took the proper steps, they could stay out of the reach of authorities who want to shut it down.

When Venmo started at Upenn and a user wanted to cash out, someone would show up on their bike with cash and hand it to you.  With BTS, everyone who uses it could be an ATM if they wanted to be.

In my mind, once there is a functioning backbone, it really just comes down to who creates a nice UI experience for the users, marketing, faith in the system, and user adoption.   

If a particular domain were to be shut down, you could just create another one. All transaction fees being sent back to same person. all user info is stored in the blockchain.  No one loses anything. Just log in from a different on-ramp and everything should still be there.

Am I wrong on this?

[Permie]

Can you afford the liability, banking relationships and risk of imprisonment for 1%?

If you trade in an authoritarian market you'll also have to pay for the privilege, either in capital or in data-farming your users

If that were the case I suspect it would have been done a while ago

This is just a theoretical idea where I am trying to think of features that could be added to allow for many different business scenarios.

All users would be white-listed and can only trade with each other. So all transactions can be monitored. AML and KYC can be complied with. There shouldnt be any legal issues there.

The idea would be to just be a slightly more efficient version of paypal because you are not worrying about processing transactions.

That's true, I suppose it could work

But if you can only send user-user who both have to sign up, you may as well sign them up to BitShares and take the referral income, no?

Thats true, but then they would need on/off ramps, bitAsset may not always peg exactly and is unregulated.
There also may not be a bitAsset for the local currency.

I am in South Africa, where crypto trades at a premium and is not at all liquid, thus any user would have to pay 1.15USD for one bitUSD. And they wont be able to trade bitZAR.

Would it not then be more profitable to just set up a bitshares gateway in such a jurisdiction?

What is easier/better about a bts-paypal than 'just' opening a gateway?

[MrJeans]

Can you afford the liability, banking relationships and risk of imprisonment for 1%?

If you trade in an authoritarian market you'll also have to pay for the privilege, either in capital or in data-farming your users

If that were the case I suspect it would have been done a while ago

This is just a theoretical idea where I am trying to think of features that could be added to allow for many different business scenarios.

All users would be white-listed and can only trade with each other. So all transactions can be monitored. AML and KYC can be complied with. There shouldnt be any legal issues there.

The idea would be to just be a slightly more efficient version of paypal because you are not worrying about processing transactions.

That's true, I suppose it could work

But if you can only send user-user who both have to sign up, you may as well sign them up to BitShares and take the referral income, no?

Thats true, but then they would need on/off ramps, bitAsset may not always peg exactly and is unregulated.
There also may not be a bitAsset for the local currency.

I am in South Africa, where crypto trades at a premium and is not at all liquid, thus any user would have to pay 1.15USD for one bitUSD. And they wont be able to trade bitZAR.

[Permie]

Can you afford the liability, banking relationships and risk of imprisonment for 1%?

If you trade in an authoritarian market you'll also have to pay for the privilege, either in capital or in data-farming your users

If that were the case I suspect it would have been done a while ago

This is just a theoretical idea where I am trying to think of features that could be added to allow for many different business scenarios.

All users would be white-listed and can only trade with each other. So all transactions can be monitored. AML and KYC can be complied with. There shouldnt be any legal issues there.

The idea would be to just be a slightly more efficient version of paypal because you are not worrying about processing transactions.

That's true, I suppose it could work

But if you can only send user-user who both have to sign up, you may as well sign them up to BitShares and take the referral income, no?

[MrJeans]

Can you afford the liability, banking relationships and risk of imprisonment for 1%?

If you trade in an authoritarian market you'll also have to pay for the privilege, either in capital or in data-farming your users

If that were the case I suspect it would have been done a while ago

This is just a theoretical idea where I am trying to think of features that could be added to allow for many different business scenarios.

All users would be white-listed and can only trade with each other. So all transactions can be monitored. AML and KYC can be complied with. There shouldnt be any legal issues there.

The idea would be to just be a slightly more efficient version of paypal because you are not worrying about processing transactions.

[Permie]

Can you afford the liability, banking relationships and risk of imprisonment for 1%?

If you trade in an authoritarian market you'll also have to pay for the privilege, either in capital or in data-farming your users

If that were the case I suspect it would have been done a while ago

[MrJeans]

1. I start up a service where I issue a UIA for dollar deposits 

2. I set up a transaction fee of 1% 

3. People can now make transfers to each other using the UIA (just like paypal) 

However, no one users my service because users have to pay 1% whereas if they pay via credit card they pay often pay 0% (the merchant pays 3%) 

Bitshares offers a feature where you can allow the receiver (the merchant) to pay the transaction fee 

Now merchant pays 1% instead of 3% and users have a cool payment app (which merchants would inventive users to use)