Re: Seeing the forrest from the BTCs

Daniel, Below I'm adding some elements to your list that I'm working on for
a client, 100% free/libre/open. (Writing this email I've not yet checked
these items against the current list of use cases.)

Consumer
  +   Show me a simple informative pre-payment invoice separating out all
fees and taxes
  +   Make it easy for me to find out about those fees and taxes
  +   Give me full confidence that what I see on the pre-payment invoice is
what I'll actually pay once I click "pay"
  +   Give me a "preferences" interface to my digital wallet that lets me
set all legally-sound payment attribute defaults and choice prioirities

Retailer
  +   The solution should be able to automatically locate and pull in
trusted context-sensitive tax/excise rules for the pre-payment invoice and
for the payment
  +   The solution should guarantee that the pre-payment invoice shown to
the customer is what actually gets paid once the payer clicks "pay"
  +   The solution should provide a "preferences" interface that lets the
payee set all legally-sound payment attribute defaults and choice
prioirities

CG/IG/WG Members
  +   Provide a structured way for the spec to be extensible (i.e. helpful
guidelines and criteria for extensions)
  +   Platform-independence calls for seamless pluralism, not unification

A few other comments...

RE: "1. Completely separate development of solution meant to unite legacy
payment systems from an unencumbered, future-forward solution based on a
completely open payment network; 2. Fundamentally modify how we view
Bitcoin as that latter solution"

I'm not sure those are necessarily separate trajectories, except in the
N.American payments environment which has its incumbent payments media
stuck. The rest of the world seems to be advancing more pluralistically.

RE: what if we used Bitcoin for the thing it has done well since day 1:
transport value across an open network.

In my assessment that's exactly what it is. I've considered the Bitcoin
unit and it's supposed unit "value" to be a profound and very unfortunate
distraction from its genuine systemic value as a special-purpose
communications system. I expressed a similar view of Ripple & XRP at the
April '24 workshop, and previously on this list.

RE: "what if users held local fiat currency in a provider's wallet and
could purchase anything through one simple, unified flow without ever
knowing the system performs on-the-fly conversion between Bitcoin ...I'm
advocating Bitcoin as the rail, not the currency."

Agreed. Bitcoin's strength is on the back-end. By analogy, the buyer &
seller may care about which courier service is delivering the goods, but
not about whether the delivery truck's power system was gasoline, diesel,
electric or NH3. In both cases specialists care. But the general buyer and
seller don't.

RE: Bitreserve already does this

I reckon that everything Bitreserve, Coinapult etc. do can be moved to "the
wallet", with no need for any intermediary fees at all beyond fees for
basic Internet connectivity. There can still be a lucrative market for
wallets provided by 3rd parties. Banks are just third-part bulk providers
of trusted cloud-based wallet services, usually bundled with other services
(customer support, insurance, overdraft credit, etc.). When I "get some
cash out of the bank", the cash is a temporary messaging medium between the
official record of account, which is the digital wallet (aka the bank
account).

Joseph Potvin
Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
jpotvin@opman.ca
Mobile: 819-593-5983

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Daniel.Buchner <Daniel.Buchner@target.com>
wrote:

> No, I'm advocating Bitcoin as the rail, not the currency.
>
> Users would never hold Bitcoin prior to a purchase (unless they wanted to
> for some reason), and right when they initiate a buy, the USD/Euro/fiat
> wallet provider they choose would instantly convert to BTC JIT under the
> covers solely to use the Bitcoin network as the transmission rail for the
> value, and enable a simple, universal, payment UX flow. On the other end
> the BTC would be instantly converted back to the local fiat and neither
> party would have held Bitcoin at any point.
>
> This does a few things:
>
> - Eliminates the volatility issues (users never hold Bitcoin)
> - Allows all UAs to implement against Bitcoin's open APIs and do amazing
> things that are nearly impossible with a standard that just slaps an
> intermediate layer between the user and legacy payment mechanisms
> - Doesn't exclude banks and other legacy monetary institutions (your bank
> could be a wallet provider)
> - Standardizes the value transfer mechanism by default
> - Inherently simplifies payment flows - the flow of a BTC transfer is
> already 1 or 0 click
>
> Bitreserve already does this: http://vimeo.com/104126081
>
> - Daniel
> ________________________________________
> From: Anders Rundgren [anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 10:31 PM
> To: Daniel.Buchner; "Web Payments CG ‎[public-webpayments@w3.org]‎"
> Subject: Re: Seeing the forrest from the BTCs
>
> Hi Daniel,
> I have no problems understanding and agreeing with what you write with one
> exception:
> The mixing of BTC and "Ordinary Money".
>
> Is it correct that you advocate using BTC as a universal currency/value
> which could be automatically exchanged during transactions?
> I.e. BTC would be like the dollar has (effectively) been?
>
> Anders
>
> On 2015-01-20 05:01, Daniel.Buchner wrote:
>
> Hey Folks,
>
> I've been thinking a lot about payments the last few weeks from the
> perspective of a consumer, retailer, and CG/IG/WG member. In doing so I
> came up with a few important concerns/requirements for each
> stakeholder-type:
>
> Consumer
>
>   *   Let me pay easily with a single simplified solution, and let the
> mechanism, medium, and flow be ubiquitous.
>   *   Let me pay securely without the inherent susceptibility to ID theft,
> fraud, and malicious activity that is common with current mediums (ex:
> credit cards)
>
> Retailer
>
>   *   The solution should be easy to integrate
>   *   The solution needs to be more secure than the status quo
>   *   The solution should lower/eliminate fees and costs, if possible
>   *   The solution should allow us to easily account for our unique
> business logic (different consumer interfaces and internal processing
> requirements)
>
> CG/IG/WG Members
>
>   *   Don't force numerous, hefty specs on implementers that try to do it
> all
>   *   Make sure user stories are priority #1
>   *   Don't pit forward-looking solutions against legacy ones in the name
> of unifying all current mechanisms/mediums of payment
>
> What in the world fulfills all of these points that we can shape into
> something actionable? There is an option, but it requires two things:
>
>   1.  Completely separate development of solution meant to unite legacy
> payment systems from an unencumbered, future-forward solution based on a
> completely open payment network
>   2.  Fundamentally modify how we view Bitcoin as that latter solution
>
> Most Bitcoin proponents pour the majority of their effort into pushing
> Bitcoin as a currency (it could be at some point in the future), but what
> if that's not the right way to think about the opportunity Bitcoin presents
> us as a payment standards-based group? Instead, what if we used Bitcoin for
> the thing it has done well since day 1: transport value across an open
> network.
>
> In the coming months you will see Bitcoin companies move to offer USD
> wallets (some already are - Coinbase, Bitreserve, etc.). This raises an
> interesting question: what if users held local fiat currency in a
> provider's wallet and could purchase anything through one simple, unified
> flow without ever knowing the system performs on-the-fly conversion between
> Bitcoin and back to transfer funds? Here's what this would mean:
>
>   *   Any company/actor could leverage this simple, unified payment
> rail/solution (Coinbase, traditional bank, browser, app, etc.)
>   *   Users would realize all the benefits of a simple, universal payment
> system without needing to understand, care about, or ever even hear about
> the nerdy Bitcoin tech that acts as the rail
>   *   The scope and effort required on the part of UAs shrinks dramatically
>   *   Site/app integration is also radically simplified (for some
> sites/apps it can be as easy as adding a link to their pages/views)
>   *   Business costs drop for every party involved
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
>
> - Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


--