|
|
|
|
|
by jsunderland323
86 days ago
|
|
The settlement happening whenever is a problem. Instant authorization is very different from a practical settlement model. At least with card networks, there are layers of liability if solvency issues occur. There’s merchant protections from the acquiring bank and if for some reason the acquiring bank fails there is the guarantee of the card network. On the issuing side there are chargebacks. I hate chargebacks as much as the next startup bro but consumer protections are a necessary aspect of a functioning payment rail. There are reasons we don’t use ACH for everything. I think hand waving the pesky settlement details is absurd. The settlement process is the payment rail. If you do want those protections you end up back with a custodial wallet, which brings us back to a centralized model. I’m not arguing crypto doesn’t have its place in the universe, I am arguing it’s a very bad payments product. |
|
Maybe we don’t need an alternative when Visa handles everything, but it might be nice to not pay a 3% markup on everything. Alternatively, we could try to be more like India and Brazil, which each built instant bank to bank transfer setups you can use at the grocery store, without the risks that come with losing debit/credit cards. Convenient without poor people with no rewards cards subsidizing everyone else to cover Visa’s take.