Hacker News Reader

Comment by jshaqaw | Hacker News Reader

What I still don’t see here is a compelling use case which would make a critical mass of users say “this is demonstrably better for me than the existing payments system.” All I see from my perspective as a potential user is I can do what I can already do with dollars except I lose the interest on the deposits I make to buy Libra.

View on HN

The value isn't for you; it's for Facebook and the participating financial institutions. They gain perfect visibility into your spending.

I guarantee you that this will not have the perceived level of anonymity that Bitcoin and other cryptos share. The publicly visible ledger may not reveal who you are, but Facebook and its partners will know.

It’s Facebook credits [1] rebooted. This time attached to a better adoption meme, cryptocurrency. Many will port their feelings around Bitcoin to Libra. That gives the latter a beachhead.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Credits

Yes but if we are honest 95% of the positive "feelings around Bitcoin" are for capital appreciation/speculation or at least a hedge against perceived government fiat dilution which are not relevant in a stable-coin context. The remaining 5% who value a decentralized system outside of anyone's control won't come to a corporate Facebook led system. I don't think many anarchist types wake up thinking "man do I distrust Jamie Dimon but that Zuckerberg fellow is the bee's knees."

Might be of interest in countries where people are right now using for example different mobile wallet solutions to make payments. So countries were credit cards are not common and people do not hold regular bank accounts.

Related to that above, maybe then also cross-border payments. For example migrant workers sending money back home.

Quick Googling shows a report from 2017 which says in summary "About 1.7 billion adults remain unbanked—without an account at a financial institution or through a mobile money provider. " https://globalfindex.worldbank.org/

This could introduce some more competition into cross border payments like remittances although by the time the regulatory overseers get comfortable that it won’t be used for money laundering/terrorist finance/etc... you will end up basically replicating the frictions and barriers of the existing payment system.

I can see a use case.

I'm Whatsapp-ing my son who is a student, and he tells me he needs money. A button pops up onto the screen saying "Give Michael $50".

I click the button and the transaction is done.

With our marketing hats on we like to talk about what we can do with "one click".

I've personally never seen a one click system in my life - this could actually be one, and for one of the most fundamental and valuable human activities - paying someone.

> A button pops up onto the screen saying "Give Michael $50".

You don't need a cryptocurrency for that...

Nope you don't, it's just a tool allowing the world's biggest Bank ever to open its doors.

Don’t we already have Venmo for this?

Yes - but as far as I know you would have to go into the Venmo app, and I think that's the difference.

Quick Edit - I think Apple Pay can function this way via FB messenger?

You can do this today in both messenger and messages yeah.

I'm sure there is a market for that functionality. But is it something you'd really want? Would there be limits on how much you could request from someone? Would bots spam everyone on earth requesting $50? Do you have to maintain a list of who can and cannot request money from you? It just seems like there would be a lot of headaches with that system.

> Would there be limits on how much you could request from someone?

Why? Are there limits on accessing your own bank accounts IRL?

> Would bots spam everyone on earth requesting $50?

No. Facebook would not allow that to happen. They control their user base with a tight fist when it affects their own revenue (user privacy less so).

> Do you have to maintain a list of who can and cannot request money from you? It just seems like there would be a lot of headaches with that system.

Why bother? Yes it could be uncool behaviour to request money from people, especially if the request had some social pressure around it.

But people can (and do) already behave in uncool ways on Facebook and the world goes on.

The potential revenue from being a money pipe would motivate Facebook to effectively deal with all of these problems.

I can send and receive money immediately abroad from clients, to friends and family, and to buy things. I can make more reliable, unhackable, contracts. I will potentially be able to do financial stuff with less bureaucracy and legal hurdles.

The point for Facebook is chiefly to compete with Apple Pay, along with capturing more user data.

The point for Visa et al. is to A) hedge their bets against possible long-term disruption from crypto in a safe, centralized manner, and B) to attack crypto head-on by satiating the curiosity of those who may want to dip their toes into the water, creating a walled garden that no one bothers to peek over.

The point for the user is to... umm...

What about countries where it’s not safe to carry dollars or there is minimal banking infrastructure? (eg see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-Pesa)

They often don't have a minimal internet infrastructure.

So purely virtual payment methods will be hard to use.

Often have SMS infrastructure which Libra supports

Reply on news.ycombinator.com