W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments@w3.org > April 2015

Re: W3C Web Payments Use Cases 1.0 first public draft

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:13:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhJZp8zuyxy8s3zav96n8YP9yid1=7bAP6Q+VhuJoByN0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tony Camero <tonycamerobiz@gmail.com>
Cc: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>, "public-webpayments@w3.org" <public-webpayments@w3.org>
On 18 April 2015 at 16:54, Tony Camero <tonycamerobiz@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Adrian,
> I'm interested, but I'm not clear whether I can easily make a
> contribution. I have rewards and gamification platform under development
> for small communities that would involve the accumulation of points for
> value given online and/or offline.  We have a working model on the bench
> that may warrant some dusting off. it's intended that these points can then
> be distributed in private transactions (at will) ... P2p c2b et al.
>

Im also interested in any payments work best based on web standards
(particularly linked data).

By coincidence my motivation is also a gasification system that involves
the accumulation of points.

Tony, if you're interested in comparing notes, perhaps we could continue
this conversation off-list.


>
> Would this qualify as "Value Web"?
>
> Would it be an interesting laboratory/case for this TF ?
>
> The front end native app needs to be rewritten but the back end tables for
> all the different actors in the system and back end admin is
> essentially all in place. I'd need to get it staged to be useful to the TF,
> if you think there is value.
>
>
>
>
> On Saturday, April 18, 2015, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Melvin, Steven, (CC: Web payments IG)
>>
>> Ripple Labs are co-ordinating the formation of a Web Settlement Task
>> Force as part of the Web Payments IG. The purpose of this task force is to
>> identify a way to realise what we are calling, the Value Web or Internet of
>> Value. We want to ultimately get to a place were we are not simply
>> exchanging messages and promises online but exchanging real value.
>> Obviously value can't be digitised and sent across the wire so what this
>> really translates to is immediate, final and irrevocable settlement as a
>> final step in the payments process.
>>
>> In parallel to the other work being done in the IG, which is mostly
>> focused on using Web technology to integrate existing legacy payments
>> systems and making it easy for payments to be done on the Web, I'd like the
>> Settlement TF to be thinking about how we can build standards around
>> immediate settlement systems (of which I'd consider the Bitcoin ledger
>> one). This means getting a wider variety of contributors and voices than
>> just Ripple Lab's as part of the TF. I'd certainly value your contributions
>> and ideas.
>>
>> The plan is to spend the build-up to the Web Payments IG F2F in June to
>> recruit contributors and agree on a plan of actions for the F2F itself and
>> some sort of roadmap for the months ahead.
>>
>> I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this initiative and hear from
>> anyone that would like to be involved.
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>> On 18 April 2015 at 12:55, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18 April 2015 at 06:16, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 04/16/2015 08:21 PM, Steven Rowat wrote:
>>>> > I admit my reasoning there seems a bit speculative (in fact,
>>>> > hot-headed), and towards the conspiracy theory end of the continuum
>>>> > -- but, now Melvin's come back with some data that supports it; thank
>>>> > you. ;-)
>>>> >
>>>> > And even having calmed down, I'm still thinking that shunting off
>>>> > the simplest A->B payments between two people as 'Future Work' is a
>>>> > mistake (and a slightly suspicious one).
>>>>
>>>> Let me try and explain why those of us that are involved in this work
>>>> are nervous about working on peer-to-peer payments.
>>>>
>>>> The Web Payments IG is still working through the person-to-person
>>>> payments scenarios. The technology for p2p payments is incredibly
>>>> simple, but the regulation around it is fantastically complex and
>>>> expensive to comply with. The price for misreading the regulation is
>>>> extremely steep. You can read more about it here:
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_transmitter
>>>>
>>>> Here's why work in the area is going slowly:
>>>>
>>>> It is a felony to engage in money transmission without a license in any
>>>> state that requires a license to operate.
>>>>
>>>> I remember being a speaker at a conference with Charlie Shrem keynoting
>>>> a few years ago. A year later, Charlie was in jail. Granted, he also did
>>>> some other shady stuff, but one of the charges filed against him was
>>>> operating without a money transmission license (aka doing peer-to-peer
>>>> payments w/o being licensed to do so).
>>>>
>>>> There are really no other technologies that W3C is working on where a
>>>> mistake can land you in jail. Accidentally inject a bug in HTML5 -
>>>> people get angry. Badly designed feature for CSS3? Developers are
>>>> annoyed. Botch a crypto implementation - millions of dollars in damages,
>>>> but not much else. Screw up the deployment of peer-to-peer payments at
>>>> your organization? *Felony and jail time*.
>>>>
>>>> When you say you're going to work on "peer-to-peer payments", what
>>>> you're really saying is: "I'm going to try and work on this problem
>>>> knowing that there is a possibility of someone I'm working with (or me)
>>>> ending up in jail."
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I imagine being ripped away from my wife and two young kids
>>>> for writing a spec, a couple hundred lines of code, and deploying it
>>>> into production... and all the program did was move a virtual thing from
>>>> one ledger to another.
>>>>
>>>> So, that's what's in the back of some of our minds while working on the
>>>> peer-to-peer payments stuff... and that's why it's going slowly. We
>>>> don't want to make a mistake.
>>>>
>>>> That said, many in the group want to see peer-to-peer payments succeed.
>>>> The Use Cases document has clearly put Bitcoin (a peer-to-peer payment
>>>> mechanism) in there as something that we want to support:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-web-payments-use-cases-20150416/#cryptocurrency-payment-bitcoin-ripple
>>>>
>>>> So, it's in scope and we're trying to move on it as fast as we can. The
>>>> problem is in deploying it into production. In order to do that at any
>>>> kind of significant level, you need a heavily capitalized organization
>>>> (like a bank) that's willing to deploy a new payment system and take the
>>>> regulatory heat (tens of millions of dollars in fines) when things go
>>>> wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Purchases are far less heavily regulated and much easier to standardize
>>>> and put into production without risking jail time or stratospheric
>>>> fines. That's one of the reasons the group is gravitating towards those.
>>>> The other reason is that purchases constitute far more economic activity
>>>> than peer-to-peer payments do.
>>>>
>>>> Steven, I suggest you tell the Web Payments IG that you think that the
>>>> group is making a mistake by not taking peer-to-peer payments more
>>>> seriously. It'll be a review comment, and per W3C process, we're very
>>>> strongly urged to respond to you. That will force the Web Payments IG to
>>>> have a discussion about it, on the record, and get back to you.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#wide-review
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#formal-address
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the perspective, Manu.  I suspect satoshi had similar
>>> concerns with bitcoin.  But we've seen bitcoin get more mainstream
>>> acceptance, with even the NYSE making it's first investment in over 100
>>> years in that space.  A quote from Harvard professor and former chief
>>> economist of the world bank, Larry summers:
>>>
>>> “The price of handling bits [of data]has come down by a factor of 10,000
>>> fold over the last generation; it’s high time that the costs of payments
>>> processing fall by a factor of even two,” says former U.S. Treasury
>>> Secretary Lawrence H. Summers. “Bitcoin offers the prospect of necessary
>>> and important disruption in finance for the benefit of buyers and sellers
>>> rather than financiers and middlemen.”
>>>
>>> I would argue that the web offers the same potential.  It's possible to
>>> misuse, for example, blogging software, which uses specs such as HTTP, but
>>> the authors of the blogging software, or specs should not be liable.
>>>
>>> Regarding regulators, those I have spoken to, want to see innovation
>>> driving down costs, particularly in areas such as remittance which has
>>> average 9% transaction fees.  This would help some of the poorest people in
>>> the world.  When sending money home to help your family (perhaps even in a
>>> life saving way) you're not purchasing anything.
>>>
>>> If regulation is an issue, or causing a chilling effect, I would suggest
>>> working with bitcoin testnet coins, which are designed to be worthless, but
>>> have all the technical properties of crypto currencies, and none of the
>>> risks.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> HTH,
>>>>
>>>> -- manu
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
>>>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>>>> blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments
>>>> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Received on Saturday, 18 April 2015 15:13:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:07:39 UTC