[everly]

OP addresses this directly, if you bothered to read the whole thing:

"The stakes should be low. Whatever you’re selling, it’s gotta be cheap. And if things go awry? No one’s going to launch a chargeback crusade. Just like a reliable vending machine, if it jams, it’ll return your coins."

[stevoski]

I read it all. No need for snark.

Not sure which one of my points you are refuting with that quote.

[everly]

If you introduce a process susceptible to credit card fraud then you're not keeping it low stakes.

[stevoski]

I see.

I was commenting on the reality of his current site. He has a purchase form, where you purchase for $5, connected to Stripe.

In more detail:

A bad actor with a large quantity of stolen credit card info who finds this site (and eventually, someone always does) will use it to test whether each card works. Small-dollar-amount payment forms accessible without going through a sign-up-and-verify process attract these bad actors.

The point I was trying to make is that this won’t be the low-hassle, easy-to-run product that OP wants it to be.

Which sucks. It really does. The bad actors ruin this stuff.

(I write from the experience of running a pay-once B2C desktop app for 10 years and a B2B SaaS for 8 years.)

[karamanolev]

> test stolen credit card numbers

The stakes don't matter if you're testing credit card number. Just that the service tells you if it works or not. And low amounts are good, since you're not wasting the card's limit.