Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by 88913527 1629 days ago
I am curious how the 99.98% SLA compares to other payment networks (eg: Visa, etc). A bit apples to oranges, since the transaction volume is different.
2 comments

It's apples and oranges for a two reasons:

1. VASTLY different definitions of "uptime". A credit card POS terminal that required minutes or hours per transaction would be considered defective. If we measure Bitcoin's uptime by typical performance requirements for a CC processing system, Bitcoin has had 0.0 seconds of uptime since inception.

2. Bitcoin has no SLA. If it goes down you have no recourse. If your transaction does not post within N seconds, you have no recourse. If you transaction posts but is later not recognized by the network, you have no recourse.

You can buy goods and materials with visa though. Not sure people want to wait 30 minutes to buy a cup of coffee with bitcoin.
you can use Lighting Network which is a payment processor like VISA on top of Bitcoin
2016 called and wants its arguments back
Is the argument less valid because someone made it in 2016?
Its less valid because the state of the network has changed to make the argument irrelevant sometime over the last half decade
its not an argument against bitcoin at all.

go walk into a starbucks with a gold bar. it certainly has value. they certainly want to give you coffee for value. it's just not the write medium. bitcoin is gold bars. not ready for retail but certainly ready for a hold of value. nothing wrong with that.

the point is that the user experience is not accurate so no rationale for it is relevant either

many merchants take 0 confirmations with payment processors

or use lightning network

or use a faster blockchain

If you take 0 confirmations you will get what you deserve.

For the others I have no comment as they aren’t currently viable.

Yeah no different than a merchants other electronic payment solutions except maybe being cheaper for the merchant