[iMuzz]

> Obviously there is no benefit to having this on a blockchain here.

- Minuscule transaction fees as opposed to 3% banking fees.

- Less necessary server infrastructure to manage identity/payments

Would these not be benefits or am I missing something?

[jstanley]

Those are properties of using cryptocurrency for payment, they're not properties of putting car charging on a blockchain.

I think that's what this project does, and the headline is simply misleading. It's not really "blockchain-enabled", it just uses Ethereum for payment.

[laydn]

When I read the headline, I immediately thought that it meant I could pay for charging with Bitcoin and/or Ethereum.

What else can be inferred from the headline? What would it mean to "put car charging on a blockchain"? Can you explain for the rest of us ?

[IanCal]

The bit that might take it further is

> the blockchain verifies how much the driver owes

Maybe there's something here where it's pulling external data (e.g. set price/unit or a trusted source that says how much was taken) to decide the price?

[krschultz]

Think through the 3% bit a little bit. Do you think that the banks charge 3% because their settlement software is that much less efficient than a blockchain?

Of course not. You're paying for customer service, marketing, fraud protection & settlement, and a host of other things with that 3%. It's not 3% because that's what it costs to run a computer to figure out payment processing, it's 3% because that's what the banks can charge to run their business. In effect most people pay 2% or less because of credit card points, so really it's just a forced discount on retailers. Again, because the banks can.