982800+ entries in 0.73s
mircea_popescu: just as it was best for mpex
that all
the glbse idjits hated it
Namworld: Ah. I merely wanted
that misconception be cleared so
there's less opposition. Better public view/demand for something increase
the chance
the people
that matter will hear about, either
through family or other connections.
mircea_popescu: people don't know
the people
they should be
talking
to, don't know how
to find
them, don't dare approach
them
mircea_popescu: but for now
the focus on small busionesses is simply
the
tell-talle effect of incompetence and impotence in
the bitcoin camp.
mircea_popescu: obviously once we build scale and capital and knowhow we'll be able
to dislodge larger and larger chunks
Namworld: I'm just saying misconception and bad press hinders bitcoins adoption and
that
they would prove useful given
the right
tools.
Namworld: I don't believe we're anywhere near
that level.
mircea_popescu: once it becomes
the standard
there it will
trickle down
Namworld: Well agreed
that as a vehicle for
transfer of value for large
transactions, bitcoins would be ideal.
mircea_popescu: bitcoin exists so a guy in china can be paid for 10 containers of
tvs
mircea_popescu: bitcoin has not
the subsidy of
the state, and can't offer either safety for
the merchant or reversibility for
the customer.
mircea_popescu: cc companies offer all
these, and rely on
the state
to police it all.
mircea_popescu: merchant wants ensured funds, customer wants reversible
transaction and balance protection
Namworld: I say
they would in lieu of credit card for small
transaction in shops.
mircea_popescu: the most expensive customer in
the world is
the guy buying a 3-9 dollar
trinket over
the internet.
Namworld: They already cater
to
the most "expensive" customers.
Namworld: Well if it hasn't sunk small convenience stores and shops/restaurants, and still don't, I don't see why
that would change anything.
Namworld: Bitcoins could help by making small
transactions more accessible at lower costs.
Namworld: That
this percentage is quite low matters not. It remains an incentive
to exploit any opportunity.
Namworld: It is folly, maybe. Many fails on
that path. Most small businesses go bankrupt indeed. But some succeed.
mircea_popescu: but
to go into
this when
they hold
the upper hand is folly.
mircea_popescu: they might destroy you even if you have 10x
their margins
Namworld: The owners just has
to work for it. But I
think
that's a work/reward ratio
that's still attractive.
Namworld: That you have a 20% margin and your large competitor has 30% matters not if you get enough sales at 20%
that you get a nice yearly earning.
mircea_popescu: in general it's irrational
to expend your resources at a comparative disadvantage.
Namworld: Well
there's incentive as
to create and keep
the small business running as long as
that advantage for
the owner exists.
Namworld: Your margins are lower for
the business, but
the profit is better for
the owner. As for employees,
they're probably paid a similar pay.
Namworld: Because if you work for
the corporation, you get paid even less.
Namworld: It's harder and
there's less margins. It's just not impossible.
mircea_popescu: small businesses are either a) going bankrupt (happens
to 90% ish of
them) or else in a new niche.
Namworld: Just as I see small providers competing with larger corps with better services.
They still
turn a profit and stick around.
kakobrekla: small businesses are small businesses cause
they arent large businesses
mircea_popescu: and even
those have been
taking a beating of horror past 10-20 years.
mircea_popescu: go
try and complain
to your phone company, as a fuine example.
Namworld: but
those costs are very close for a chain convenience store or a personally owned one, for example...
there's plenty of non-affiliated small businesses handling small
transactions left.
mircea_popescu: under
the crushing pressure of
the huge costs of
the 3-9 dollars
transaction.
mircea_popescu: no namworld.
the reason is
that people can't afford
to stay in business
Namworld: The reason is
that it's more cost effective and branding brings clients.
mircea_popescu: think in
terms of girl looking for a husband. does she care if he;'s lucky or smart ?
mircea_popescu: kakobrekla
the problem with macroeconomy is
that
those
terms aren't distinct.
kakobrekla: mircea_popescu are
those chaps unfortunate or stupid?
Namworld: Yes. But as far as I know most most brick and mortar business have
to do
that bitcoin or not and while not all manage
to succeed at it, many remain in business, wether small or large.
Bugpowder: was from one guy starting with a 0.01BTC bet on less
than 16000, and doubling it every loss
kakobrekla: >>See
that picture ?
The poor schmucks in
that picture are likely more intelligent, more dilligent and generally better human beings
than Gobry. Unfortunately for
them,
they didn’t have
the obscene good fortune of being born in
this part of
the world. As a result,
they’re dicking around packing mud while
this worthless fuckwit goes about farting self-delusions of “strategic global
mircea_popescu: this feat costs exponentially more
the dumber
they are.
mircea_popescu: such as, for instance, explaining
to
those idiots on
that article quoted why
they're wrong
mircea_popescu: that further means you will be spending your
time doing
the impossible.
Namworld: Dealing with someone who enters and at
the register pays for something is fast and inexpensive...
mircea_popescu: it doesn't matter what
the payment "costs" in your estimation.
Namworld: Agreed
that it's not currently feasible.
Namworld: Which would allow even small shop
to process smaller
transactions with more profitability.
Namworld: using phones
to pay in bitcoins wuld be feasible for a much lower fee
than
the credit card conglomerate/payment processors are
trying
to offer.
mircea_popescu: JohnGalt it has been proven not
to work > 20
times so far.
Namworld: But
that's exactly
the problem
that would get solved without such opposition. Bitcoin could get lower
transaction costs with easier availability
through more demand/offer.
mircea_popescu: no gambler can pick up
the phone and complain about damaged deliveries.
JohnGalt: 3-9$
transactions would work fine for small
takeaway or coffee shops
mircea_popescu: and s.dice
takes small gamblers because it's very easy
to provide
the service
to
them.
Bugpowder: and incremental
transaction costs are near zero
mircea_popescu: Namworld
the hosting industry may be
the one single place where my above judgements may be shown mistaken
Namworld: Well
then we also don't need small gamblers on SatoshiDice or BitVPS is not profitable with it's sub 10 dollar plans. So are small sellers accepting bitcoins and etc, online or not.
mircea_popescu: this obviously is unavoidable, seeing how
they couldn't afford
to hire me
to
tell
them
this, and wouldn't have made sense of it anyway.
mircea_popescu: 90%+ of all small businesses
that
tried bitcoin discovered
this on
their own
timeand dime
mircea_popescu: all im saying is
that
the average small biz does not find itself in a position
to do
this.
mircea_popescu: note, im not saying
that by 2050 or w/e all
these fabulous economies of scale baked in by design won't be working full bore
mircea_popescu: you need
to be a multi-billion corp
to process sub 10 dollar
transactions effectually.
mircea_popescu: in principle, for every degree of magnitude
the
transaction goes down, your fixed costs go up one and a half.
mircea_popescu: the fact
that asic fab plants are designed
to make custom chips
kakobrekla: why are
the margins like
they are,
thats another question
Namworld: For which
transaction fees would be
too large for 1-5$
transactions.
kakobrekla: that is
true, yet i have seen bitcoin margins so ridiculusly high, you dont need volume
mircea_popescu: the fact
that it is designed
to do it does not mean you are
the one
to do it.
Namworld: and Bitcoin is designed
to further help
the profit margin.
The bitcoin is designed
to facilitate micro-transactions.
mircea_popescu: but you lack all
the many
tools
that
the banks use
to
turn
this green.
mircea_popescu: if you aggregate one billion of
them you can squeeze a little profit
mircea_popescu: the 3-9
transactions work on an economy of scale model
Namworld: That bottle of Coke
that costs 10 cent
to make is not profitable
to sell under 1$ and Coke doesn't earn any revenue.
Namworld: Well
than all consumerism in america is unprofitable if
the 3-9 dollar
transaction exceeds profits.
Namworld: But it does not exceed
the costs... otherwise capitalism wouldn't work because pretty much nothing brings any profit?