[emodendroket]

> It very much seems like charity is one of bitcoin's biggest usecases at the moment. Not saying it's the best thing ever, but we shouldn't discount it as there being no interest and no charitable bitcoin users.

But that's not really the question; the question is if there are enough to justify the development effort and, especially, to justify prioritizing that over other options like PayPal.

[IkmoIkmo]

There's no real development effort. Multiple companies have code snippets and tens of plugins available for most popular CMS/Ecommerce/Webplatforms that you just throw on your website, add your unique id and tell the company your bank account. It doesn't get much more complex than that.

Regardless, the point is fair. You could probably raise a few dollars by selling hugs in the streets, doesn't mean it's the best way to spend your time. Whether bitcoin is, it's hard to say. It's definitely small and nascent, no doubt about that, but it also means its users are more eager, more engaged, on average. As in, if you take a million average bitcoin users and a million non-bitcoin users, the former I believe will raise a ton more money. But given there are only a few million, it's inevitably going to be small in absolute terms. In any case I was just replying to someone saying non-profits have near-zero interest and I disagreed.

[jafaku]

The development effort of integrating Bitcoin is nearly zero with payment processors like Bitpay/Coinbase.

[emodendroket]

Maybe so, but near-zero is not zero, especially when you have to offer support for a commercial product.