[ike0790]

bitcoin should be seen in the mainstream as a universal payment network. I believe its best use case for the average(non-cypherpunk libertarian) person/company is to accept it by using a service that automatic exchanges it for dollars on their end.

For example, someone in africa could pay .001 BTC($40 currently) for a game and all steam would see on their end is a debit transaction for $40(cash not bitcoin) in their account. It allows for bitcoin to be held by those who don't mind the volatile nature of its market value, AND allows for those wanting to accept without holding it in the short term. Win Win for both parties :)

[PragmaticPulp]

> For example, someone in africa could pay .001 BTC($40 currently) for a game and all steam would see on their end is a debit transaction for $40(cash not bitcoin) in their account.

Transaction fees and exchange fees will diminish that received value and force the customer to pay a fee to pay for something.

The net cost of Bitcoin transaction fees and exchange fees is higher than just using a random, common credit card processing company. It’s also slower for users.

Let’s be real: Gamers don’t really want to pay extra transaction fees for the privilege of sending Bitcoin and waiting as much as an hour or more for the transaction (my latest Bitcoin payment took longer than an hour) before they can play their game. Not when they can type in a credit number and get it done right away for 0 fees (or negative fees with reward cards)

[jayd16]

You're forgetting the tax implications here. Steam is still on the hook for sales(and other) taxes. The problem was never just picking an exchange currency. It was the legal hurdles that made this complicated. Those hurdles are still there. They apply to everyone but especially in Valve's case as they are not under the radar.