[HN Gopher] PayPal launches crypto checkout service ___________________________________________________________________ PayPal launches crypto checkout service Author : JulianRaphael Score : 302 points Date : 2021-03-30 12:15 UTC (10 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.reuters.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com) | cube00 wrote: | > The company will charge no transaction fee to checkout with | crypto | | Will this be like what they do when they offer "no transaction | fee" currency conversion but build it into the rate they use? | zozin wrote: | Obviously. Intermediators love volatility and big spreads! | Users will probably lose a few percentage points on every | transaction, so for PayPal this is basically a license to print | money. | buildbuildbuild wrote: | This is not a BitPay competitor until PayPal allows users to | deposit cryptocurrency. Until then it is a closed loop system, | users and merchants cannot yet deposit or withdraw crypto itself, | similar to Robinhood. | | Highly disappointed that Square (Cash) has not launched a BitPay | competitor and still only supports Bitcoin. They've allowed BTC | deposits and withdrawals for years (with great UX!) yet are | lagging far behind in release cadence. | | The biggest barrier to spending crypto is still finding merchants | that accept it, even through third parties. PayPal's huge | merchant userbase will allow dominance if/when they flip the | switch to an open loop, "deposit your crypto" approach. | | Only PayPal and Stripe can flip that switch at scale with a | hosted checkout experience. Merchants don't care how a user paid, | they want fiat. | ericcholis wrote: | I've found that OpenNode is a pretty reasonable hosted-checkout | bitcoin processor. They support Lightning, and BTC to Fiat at | time of purchase. | UShouldBWorking wrote: | The biggest barrier is Bitcoin Core's deliberately high fees. | | Who is going to pay a $10 fee to buy a cup of coffee. | | Of course Satoshi had the fee problem and scaling solved from | day one but when Blockstream hijacked the GitHub repo they | diverted BTC to have high fees in an attempt to push users to | their second layer products like Liquid and LN. | cactus2093 wrote: | > The biggest barrier to spending crypto is still finding | merchants that accept it | | I am a huge fan of BTC and have held some for many years. But | it seems to me the reason this hasn't really happened yet is | just that it's not really a big problem that needs solving. Why | do people need to spend crypto on online purchases, as opposed | to converting to fiat and spending that? | | I'm sure it'll happen eventually, it's not a bad thing to give | people more options of how to pay. It just doesn't seem like a | huge need for anybody in countries like the US, Canada, UK, | Europe, Australia, Japan (which are the vast majority of the | market for companies like Paypal, Stripe, and Square). | CryptoPunk wrote: | Being able to spend crypto at any merchant massively | increases the liquidity of crypto - it provides more places | where one can convert their crypto assets into goods and | services. Reducing dependence on a small number of | centralized crypto exchanges for liquidity provision is good | for the decentralization and robustness of the crypto market | as well. | | Also fiat networks can be censored by financial institutions | and government, as we saw with the financial blockade on | WikiLeaks a few years ago, and have seen happen against pro- | democracy protestors in Hong Kong recently. Direct merchant | acceptance of crypto provides an alternative when such | financial controls are put in place. | | Merchant adoption of crypto is an unmitigated good for | crypto, from any perspective you look at it from. It's | puzzling to me when some crypto enthusiasts see no point in | it, when it is really the entire point of cryptocurrency. | cactus2093 wrote: | I would certainly disagree that being able to online shop | using Paypal is the whole point of cryptocurrency. Having | the ability to easily and securely exchange with others is | the whole point, but doing it conveniently on a daily basis | over existing payment rails is not the whole point or even | that important. | | If a government decides to censor fiat networks to prevent | certain transactions, the fact that paypal accepts bitcoin | for those transactions is irrelevant. The company you're | buying from as well as Paypall will still need to follow | KYC laws and will be obligated not to transact with you. | | In that scenario you're already fully living outside the | law, you'll have to transact as anonymously as possible, | exchanging crypto in secret in person or over the dark web | or what have you. It doesn't matter whether major above | board institutions like Paypal or Stripe accept bitcoin or | not. | d--b wrote: | If paypal allows people to deposit their crypto and pay | merchants in fiat, you can be sure that they'll quickly become | the biggest seller of bitcoin out there. With the illiquidity | of the btc => usd conversion, they'll have to pay the merchant | before selling the btc, which means they'll have to take a huge | margin to cover potential slippage. | | No one wants to be the guy who sells bitcoin on a massive | scale. | stale2002 wrote: | The problem of slippage/margins is overstated. | | Other websites already support this. They just charge a 1% | fee and call it a day. | | Average credit card fees are already much larger than any fee | that would be required to cover price changes. | mlcrypto wrote: | They can hold the BTC forever and pay the merchant with their | massive cash reserve or 0% interest debt. Profit | oh_sigh wrote: | They could also accept pebbles and sand as payment, hold | them forever, and pay the merchant with their massive cash | reserve or 0% interest debt. Profit. | the_local_host wrote: | Pebbles and sand might be safer to hold if they are less | volatile than BTC. A company like Paypal needs stability, | not a directional bet on an asset. | tertius wrote: | The potential downside on this is 100%. The potential | upside on this is... Unknowable. | | They would never get away with this as a publicly traded | company. | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: | Why would they not? This is effectively buying Bitcoin, | slowly, at a discount (they'll surely slap hefty | fees/unfavorable exchange rates on it, because there are | many people who will happily pay extra for the privilege | of paying with crypto, just like people will pay a lot | more for anything slapped with an "organic" label). | | Tesla, a publicly traded company, got away with buying | $1.5 billion in Bitcoin just fine. | | PayPal can also sell that Bitcoin to customers who want | to buy Bitcoin. | tertius wrote: | Tesla is not a payment processor. Nor is it in the | business of profiting off of crypto as a fundamental | change in it's business model. | | I'm replying to a comment saying they should use their | cash reserve to buy bitcoin instead of | dividends/buybacks. | | And yes, they can sell it and have some level of "float" | to support crypto buy/sell exchange. But the comment was | a hodl comment to "make them more money." | [deleted] | ajkdhcb2 wrote: | There are always debit cards that let you 'spend' crypto, | paypal is obviously less useful than that. The volume would | also be nowhere near big exchangers since trading is by far | the biggest activity in crypto | runeks wrote: | > With the illiquidity of the btc => usd conversion, they'll | have to pay the merchant before selling the btc, which means | they'll have to take a huge margin to cover potential | slippage. | | Bitcoin sell liquidity is currently $162MM USD on Bitfinex at | 0.5% slippage. Buy liquidity is $543MM USD (at 0.5% | slippage). For comparison, the sell liquidity on Coinbase Pro | at the same slippage is only $4.5MM USD. | | My site https://cryptomarketdepth.com/ tracks the liquidity | of various cryptocurrencies over time (for the exchanges: | Binance, Bitfinex, Bitstamp, Bittrex, Coinbase Pro). | rocqua wrote: | Is that USD or USDT? | | The fiat on-ramp is probably a pretty big blocker for many | new adopters. If paypal fixes that, it could have a large | effect. | UncleMeat wrote: | The problem isn't volume, it is latency. It can take 30m | for a btc transaction to settle. That's a nontrivial amount | of volatility to exposure yourself to. | xur17 wrote: | Then use the lightning network, it's really what should | be used for smaller payments like this anyways. You don't | pay for coffee with a wire transfer, for the same reason | you shouldn't be using layer 1 for small everyday | purchases like this. | minsc__and__boo wrote: | Lightning requires the bitcoin network to verify the | transaction though. It's like using a personal check - | until the bank clears it you're at risk. | xur17 wrote: | That's not true at all. You can perform lots of | transactions over lightning, and settle with a single on | chain transaction. The money clears instantly, and is not | at risk, even if you keep the funds on layer 2. | jkepler wrote: | No, the previous comment was correct, in that an open | lightning channel balance is inherently at risk, if | you're wallet software isn't monitoring that the | lightning nodes you're dealing with follow the protocol. | If a node broadcasts an older HTLC transaction to | bitcoin's main chain and your software isn't watching, | you may loose some/all of your channel balance. | xur17 wrote: | That is correct, but the GP said: | | > It's like using a personal check - until the bank | clears it you're at risk. | | Which is 100% not true, it's not like a personal check. | You are only at risk if: | | * your counterparty decides to try and cheat you (despite | knowing they will lose even more money if they attempt to | screw you and you notice, so some game theory is | involved) | | * you are not watching onchain for a period longer than | the monitor period (typically several days) | | * you have not elected to have someone else monitor on | your behalf (in exchange for a small cut of the "profits" | if your counterparty tries to cheat you) | | My point being - it's nowhere near the same as a personal | check. | minsc__and__boo wrote: | That's just like a personal check. The same methods you | cheat someone with a scam check applies to the IOUs on | Lightning. | | * Bad actors exist and will do this with checks or | lightning, game theory applies to _both_ | | * It doesn't matter if you're watching the chain, you've | already transacted with the buyer | | * 3P Escrow is not unique to Lightning and is sometimes | used with checks too | UncleMeat wrote: | But you need dollars on the other side. For this to work | without PayPal hosting the BTC you need the following: | | 1. You send BTC to PayPal 2. PayPal sends equivalent | dollars to the merchant. | | But what is "equivalent"? What is the price of BTC at any | given moment? It fluctuates a lot and you can't "lock-in" | a price without waiting minutes (as opposed to | milliseconds in other financial systems). So between the | time that you sent dollars to the merchant and when you | sold the coins you are exposed to risk of holding BTC. | | Lightning does not help with this. | xur17 wrote: | That's a fair point. In order to use lightning, PayPal | would either need to hold some BTC in reserves on layer | 2, or work with an exchange that accepts lightning | transactions. | oconnor663 wrote: | Could PayPal make this the customer's problem, by only | allowing them to exchange or spend settled funds? | CryptoPunk wrote: | Can't they sell before confirmation? Probably on the | order of 99% of transactions that propagate to the whole | network with a sufficient fee end up being confirmed, and | that only takes a few seconds to happen. | sfjailbird wrote: | I would go further to say that for a large portion of | merchant transactions, confirmations are a non-issue. It | is not trivial to pull off a double spend and no one is | going to do it for a cup of coffee. The miniscule number | of times that it might happen could be written off as the | cost of doing business, the same way the big credit card | companies quietly eat all the credit card fraud that | happens. | joshstrange wrote: | Also, and I could be mistaken, my understanding is the | double spend can only happen when the person trying to | double spend controls the private/public key to the | coins. Normally when you deposit crypto in an exchange | (or this hypothetical Paypal wallet) you lose that access | and your balance is just a row in a database while "your" | coins are swept into a large hot/cold wallet run by the | service you are depositing into. | dillondoyle wrote: | I am probably way out of my depth here. But if Paypal or | Square have a large enough market/volume of transactions | couldn't they act as their own market maker, settle | immediately internally? Kind of like the whole storm over | Citadel GME. And then also not have to pay the BTC fees? | sireat wrote: | I am curious how in the world does Bitfinex offer USD | liquidity these days? | | I mean lets say you trade USD/USDT on Bitfinex. | | How do you get USD (not USDT) out of Bitfinex? | ipaddr wrote: | A Regular bank wire withdrawal is sent out from Bitfinex | within 5-10 business days and credited to your account | following processing by the receiving party. | | 2. An Express bank wire withdrawal is sent out from | Bitfinex within 1 business day and incurs a 1% processing | fee. | graeme wrote: | If I'm interpreting this right, it means the bitcoin market | on bitfinex is a bit over 3x more sensitive to sells than | to buys? And the possible sell volume on coinbase before | slippage is tiny. | runeks wrote: | That is correct. But this is only for March 30. On the | day before the buy/sell liquidity were roughly equal. | | You can click on a point in the time series graph to see | this. | miohtama wrote: | PayPal also does not need to hold the underlying assets. They | can buy Bitcoin derivates instead of spot Bitcoin to maintain | the reserves. Not sure if they are doing this, though, but it | could be more capital efficient. | d--b wrote: | At some point someone needs to sell the spot though... | dheera wrote: | > allows users to deposit | | And exchange crypto for fiat or at least USDT/USDC/some other | stablecoin. Without that nobody will use the platform. | downandout wrote: | _This is not a BitPay competitor until PayPal allows users to | deposit cryptocurrency._ | | Yes, I don't see much point to this service without the ability | to send crypto to your Paypal account. I don't buy crypto | through Paypal, and I suspect nobody else that knows what they | are doing does either. They've tiptoed around the idea of | allowing crypto deposits by allowing instant, free, fiat | withdrawals to Paypal from Coinbase (where it can then be | spent). But they absolutely refuse to allow it directly. | deweller wrote: | Can I actually send bitcoin to an address to pay? Or is this only | paying with my PayPal crypto balance - which has no blockchain | deposit or withdrawal capability? | StavrosK wrote: | Probably the latter, given the article. It just auto-exchanges | to fiat (knowing PayPal, for a big fee) so you can pay at | PayPal-accepting vendors. | pingec wrote: | _Can I transfer Cryptocurrency into and out of PayPal? | Currently, you can only hold the Cryptocurrency that you buy on | PayPal in your account. Additionally, the Cryptocurrency in | your account cannot be transferred to other accounts on or off | PayPal._ | | https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/cryptocurrency-o... | tsjq wrote: | Ray Dalio says US likely to ban crypto soon. OTOH, PayPal adding | support to crypto, Visa adding support to crypto. Are these being | accelerated by Wall St / hedge fund types who stand to lose many | Billions of US bans crypto | sakopov wrote: | It's easier to tax the hell out of it than ban it at this | point. | mrb wrote: | << _US likely to ban crypto soon_ >> | | I have been hearing that for 11 years. | Helloworldboy wrote: | I love reading about crypto on HN because everyone here knew | about it early enough to be a multimillionaire but thought they | were too smart for it. The salt in these threads is amazing | christiansakai wrote: | Paypal/Visa/Mastercard doing rent seeking again. Sign of old | guards trying to be relevant. | rawtxapp wrote: | They probably don't want to get their lunch eaten like news | publishers that didn't pay attention to the internet. | XorNot wrote: | Or it's a move to satisfy investors who want to know that | they've "got a strategy for crypto". | | The market of crypto being used to buy things is incredibly | small. | Geee wrote: | Actually they are pretty relevant, because they can provide | merchant protection, currency exchange, scalability and privacy | to cryptocurrencies. You don't need to use them, but they're | useful to many. | bluecalm wrote: | >>currency exchange | | If you mean at the worst possible price often forcing you | before you can cash it out or presenting you with misleading | choices so you are likely to stumble into their expensive | option then yeah - that offer that. | Geee wrote: | True, but it solves the problem of using cryptocurrency | with merchants who accept only fiat currencies. You might | want to pay for that convenience. | krageon wrote: | > merchant protection | | None of the listed agencies do this in practice. | | > privacy | | Now I'm starting to believe you may actually be joking. Is | that the case? | red_trumpet wrote: | If I pay with Visa, the seller is not able to see my | account balance. With bitcoin, the balance of every wallet | is publicly available. | CydeWeys wrote: | That's not how Bitcoin works. You're conflating receiving | addresses with wallets. | | And in the PayPal use case, you wouldn't even see a | single receiving address, as it's entirely opaque to that | and it'd all be handled in some internal PayPal ledger. | The receiver of the payment would only see a transfer to | them denominated in local fiat currency. They might not | even know the source of the funds was crypto at all. | herendin wrote: | Every address, not every 'wallet' - it's a big difference | lottin wrote: | What's the difference, exactly? | iso8859-1 wrote: | There are wallet like Wasabi and joinmarket-clientserver | with a single UI for managing coins and anonymize coins | that are then difficult for an outsider to connect to | each other. | | Even without these privacy-focused wallets, you can use | an HD wallet, where "child addresses" derived from a | never-directly-used root key cannot be connected by a | third party, unless you do something to connect them, by | e.g. transacting with coins from both wallets from the | same IP or in the same transaction. | lottin wrote: | Bitcoin avoids the double-spending problem by using a | public ledger. This means all bitcoin transactions are | known to any observer. There is no way round it. The best | you can hope for is some "anonymity through obscurity" | but this only gives a false sense of anonymity. | intotheabyss wrote: | On Ethereum you can break the chain by using Tornado Cash | which uses zero knowledge proofs with a secret, anonymity | sets and time to make it impossible to trace a link. | warkdarrior wrote: | See https://coinalytics.co/ | codehalo wrote: | A wallet can have multiple addresses. You can spend from | different addresses without mixing. | Geee wrote: | I have to correct myself. Bitcoin doesn't need merchant | protection, because transactions are irreversible. Paypal | can provide buyer protection, i.e. chargebacks. | uncletammy wrote: | > Bitcoin doesn't need merchant protection, because | transactions are irreversible. | | They first have to get confirmed and that can take a long | time on BTC. Replace By Fee offers another attack vector | on transaction finality. | | Other than those two very important points, I completely | agree with you. | Geee wrote: | Not the best privacy obviously. However, they hide | transactions from third parties. | Dirlewanger wrote: | Uh, why do you think after signing up for one credit | card, you magically start getting offers for other cards? | CC companies have been selling transaction data for | decades before FAANG made it trendy to do so. | [deleted] | backtoyoujim wrote: | I do not want to pay federal taxes on every purchase I make. | | Paypal's service won't change that. | srockets wrote: | No, for that you'll have to move to the Caymans. | brotherofsteel wrote: | No, they didn't. They launched a service where you can buy | certain cryptocurrencies from PayPal and then sell it back to | them at a later time, which may happen to be at the same time as | you are paying a merchant fiat money. You can't even transfer | your cryptocurrency to or from PayPal. | baby wrote: | so like Revolut | tootahe45 wrote: | So in addition to fleecing me on USD -> AUD with a rip-off | exchange rate, they're adding an extra step for users of their | fake BTC as well. But really multiple steps because you have to | actually buy the fake BTC through PP first. The funny part is | that no transaction take place on the blockchain, the BTC is | just held at a third-party custodian. This is what VISA is | planning too i think. | | ThIs iS AdOptIoN gUyS | Spivak wrote: | This is the only way to actually scale crypto to the | transaction volumes that PP and Visa actually deal with. You | hold stash of crypto and manage your own transactions in- | house and then do one actual on-chain transaction to settle | up with your peers. Anything else is wasting money on | transaction fees for no real benefit to you or your customer. | | Also I'm surprised that groups that are so freedom/privacy | oriented want literally every exchange of crypto to be on- | chain, public, and traceable without using a money laundering | service. Sure yes wallets are pseudoanonymous but if every | purchase you ever made was on-chain it would be super super | easy to de-anonymize you. | herendin wrote: | >ThIs iS AdOptIoN gUyS | | Please don't do this juvenile crap here. If you have an | argument to make, then make that argument. | fuzzer37 wrote: | Nothing wrong with poking a little fun at the buttcoin | people. | dencodev wrote: | He did, just because you don't like the way he did it | doesn't mean it isn't valid. Lighten up. | anddddd1 wrote: | One step at a time... | dwringer wrote: | It's been possible to buy and sell cryptocurrencies in one's | PayPal account for months (including right before buying | something with the resulting balance in fiat currency); what | seems to be new here is that one can have PayPal handle the | conversion at checkout without first having to click "sell" or | paying added transaction fees (simply selling would incur a | hefty 1 or 2% based on the amount sold). | | It is true that one cannot transfer cryptocurrency holdings | into or out of PayPal. | TacoToni wrote: | I wonder if they will allow transfers in the future. | tootahe45 wrote: | Transfers in and out would cause huge source-of-funds type | compliance issues and fraud problems, as well as support | tickets from users setting the wrong fees and getting | scammed. They would've bought something like Bitpay long | ago if people cared to transact in crypto. The reality is | 99% are happy just to store it on paypal,coinbase, etc and | be charged exorbitant fees and hope the price goes up. | spurdoman77 wrote: | The source-of-funds problem is solvable, otherwise | companies like coinbase wouldnt be allowed to exist. | Paypal just needs to buy some chain analysis service, and | implement SARs and other related AML stuff. | vmception wrote: | I'm fine with the option of that. | | I would like deposits, withdrawals and rotating private key | access, like Coinbase does. | | But sometimes I just want exposure and the ability to spend it | in the same service. This checks that box. | cstever wrote: | With "big" companies coming in on the Crypto bandwagon is Crypto | really worth anything? I don't understand (and maybe someone can | explain it to me) how Crypto is for "the little guy" when those | who started out at the beginning have "all" the crypto already. | There is no way I am going to be able to "mine" more crypto than | those who started years before me or those who have more | "traditional" money than me currently to buy crypto. It's still | money. It's still a bond, a promissory note; it's not real and is | only worth what the big guys (whether traditional or crytpo big | guys) say it is worth. But I am no economist or financial expert. | So why should I use crypto? I'm still at the bottom in that game. | vmception wrote: | That's a fascinating list full of conflicting ideas, is there | any circumstance where your first question is ever true? | | Go earn some crypto. People will pay you in it. If you want | goods and services, go get cash with it or.... deposit it in | Paypal as of today lol. | | What specific standard do you need crypto to meet? Answer that | for yourself. I'm fine with it. | cstever wrote: | That's the nature of my understanding of crypto and why I | asked the question. I don't know if Big Companies can dilute | the effectiveness of crytpo. It's why I asked. Maybe off | topic for this HN post. I don't know. Cryto intrigues me with | the thought of a decentralized currency, but does it level | the playing field? I don't know. | vmception wrote: | Which playing field? | | I really don't know which pitch you are latching on to. | | Crypto does not address the reality that people who have a | lot of resources can simply buy a lot of crypto. It doesn't | attempt to. There have been time periods, including now, | where people with a lot of resources are ignoring crypto | because the world is comfortable enough for them, and you | can buy before they or their heirs do. The entire decade | has been that way and it has been completely accurate, and | it is also accurate that this makes a lot of people | uncomfortable about the sustainability of the exchange | rates. | | Crypto addresses other playing fields. There are many | intermediary liquid systems (cryptocurerncies) that you can | use to send unlimited amounts to people anywhere in the | world, and they can cash out in their own local currency. | All the other systems had limits because governments | controlled the financial institution running the system. | This has nothing to do with you deciding to own a lot more | crypto than you need at that point in time, it is also | accurate that a lot of people do keep excess holdings | because they realize that they never have to go back to the | local currency, and realize that others will come to that | same conclusion too. | | There are many other areas that crypto does okay at, and is | working to get better at. | cstever wrote: | I appreciate the information. This is the kind of thing I | am needing to understand it better. I have a lot of | misconceptions about crypto, which is why I am asking the | questions. I do the same thing in other areas as well | (COVID/Vaccines, etc). So again, thanks for the info. | XorNot wrote: | This is what people are talking about when they note the | problems of deflationary currency. | code_duck wrote: | >There is no way I am going to be able to "mine" more crypto | than those who started years before me or those who have more | "traditional" money than me currently to buy crypto | | I have the same problem with US dollars, that some people have | more than I do, but I still use dollars often. | cstever wrote: | I just thought Crypto would level the playing field. that | seems to be a misconception on my part. Sounds like it's more | that I can have access to my money all the time because of a | centralized system. Although I am finding in research that | there are centralized Crypto exchanges. So I need to figure | out how that is different. | reedf1 wrote: | It allows you to be your own bank - you aren't depending on any | central authority to allow you access to your "cash". This | might be one of those things that is Not For You if you can't | think of a use for it, and that is Okay. | uberswe wrote: | So the difference is that there is no central authority that | can just print more crypto. It's decentralised which means you | don't need a bank, bank card or ATMs, you can store your crypto | on a piece of paper. So the big guys can own a lot of crypto or | a lot of dollars, with crypto there are no banks for them to | control and no government to print out new notes. | throwawayzRUU6f wrote: | Is there anything preventing large players like exchanges or | payment processors from adopting fractional reserves? That's | effectively printing more crypto by centralized authorities. | chii wrote: | But looking at this paypal payment, you cannot use your own | crypto from your own stick, but have to first sell that | crypto to USD, transfer that USD to paypal, then purchase | crypto back in paypal, in order to spend it. | tppiotrowski wrote: | I wonder what the dispute resolution mechanism will look like. | "Item not received" and "Unauthorised Transaction" complaints by | users are the ones mentioned by Paypal Seller Protection [1]. | | [1] https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/security/seller- | protec... | bitcoinmonger wrote: | How does this affect the environment? | uncletammy wrote: | Obvious troll is obvious | cybert00th wrote: | Ugh PayPal, haven't used them in ages, avoid them whenever I can | - nowadays they're good for one off donations and that's about | it. | | They take a fee here and a fee there, and before you know it | they've helped themselves to 4% of the takings. | | Sigh, and then there's the seemingly endless nagging about | verifying extra users | [deleted] | mamon wrote: | I'm not even sure what the use case for PayPal is - what can it | do that Visa or MasterCard cannot? | ipaddr wrote: | I use paypal. When I want to pay I click the paypal button | and the visa is charged. | | You can still use visa. | | What I get is a one button checkout on smaller sites I may | not feel safe giving my credit card number for them to store | and/or process. | tartoran wrote: | Same here. Not sure why I should avoid paypal, it seems | that it's a middleman but their cut is unnoticeable. I also | use paypal to pay for things on ebay as well as venmo for | other expenses. | analog31 wrote: | Like any other business service, PP works for some businesses | and maybe not for others. I'm in the category of a small home | business making a hardware product that only ships within the | US. PayPal has got me covered. They have the customer | protections that people seem to like when dealing with a nearly | unknown business. They let me run my business from a passive | web page and an e-mail address. They offer USPS first class | mail as a shipping option, which saves me a lot of money on | shipping. The USPS website forces you to use priority mail. | | Would I pay less for the same service? Sure. Am I aware of the | horror stories? You bet. Do I explore other services? Yes. | | On the other hand, a purely digital business that already has a | website, and is moving stuff internationally? Maybe there are | better options. | Abishek_Muthian wrote: | PayPal has some weird priorities, their existing checkout | doesn't support CSP and the bug issue remains open for over a | year without proper official updates on whether it will ever be | fixed. | | [1] https://github.com/paypal/paypal-checkout- | components/issues/... | bluecalm wrote: | It's more like 6%. Standard 2.9+% for transactions and then | forced 2.9+% for currency conversion unless you're lucky and | you accept transactions in your local currency. | ajkdhcb2 wrote: | What's the point if you cant even deposit crypto to paypal? Does | the crypto ever even exist? | dgellow wrote: | Just in case some of you try the service: don't forget to | consider capital gain tax in addition to PayPal fees/conversion | rate. | johnnymonster wrote: | Exactly my reservation with using something like this! the US | still classifies virtual currency as Property NOT currency! | This is a HUGE problem when trying to use crypto to buy things | where there will be a paper trail that the US govt can get | ahold of it. | freeone3000 wrote: | They can also just check your PayPal account balance. And | your blockchain. Every transaction using Bitcoin is public. | lottin wrote: | I guess PayPal will provide a tax report? Otherwise could be a | nightmare. | xiphias2 wrote: | In US I can imagine that the exported transactions can be | imported to a software that understands Bitcoin taxation. But | outside US? It's a crazy world....I rather stay with big | buys/sells/borrows until taxation is resolved. | frankbreetz wrote: | With this news and the Visa news yesterday Bitcoin still is not | at the ath. It seems mostly a very small group of people are | driving this bull cycle, Namely Musk(I am assuming he has some | influance over PayPal ), Saylor, Dorsey, but somehow that equals | "institutional investment". Everyone else involved seems to be | more selling "shovels and picks". | intotheabyss wrote: | The Visa news was not relevant to Bitcoin, as the news is about | Visa settling payments using USDC on Ethereum. | loceng wrote: | Or it's the investment firms/partners that still have BoD sway | or influence over? | frankbreetz wrote: | What is BoD? | Cypher wrote: | bearish... why sell the crypto | yalogin wrote: | Who pays at stores with PayPal? Is that a thing? | frankbreetz wrote: | They have a credit/debit card, so if you wanted to keep only | cyrpto seems like an okay option | Trias11 wrote: | Positive for crypto in general. | | However judging by PayPal track record and scary stories of | arbitrarily freezing accounts I'd advice all my friends to keep | their cryptos away from PayPal hands or any of their services. | | Not your keys - not your coins | NicoJuicy wrote: | On with the hype train. Just like in 2017 when they all announced | crypto support and then it silently got removed ( square, steam, | ... ) | seibelj wrote: | There is literally nothing positive that can happen in crypto | without the HN hate train arguing it's meaningless / "just use | mysql" / "am I the only one that thinks this?!?" | ketamine__ wrote: | Do you know anyone that pays in crypto? I don't. | StevePerkins wrote: | A few people that I work with order THC gummies from some | sketchy source, delivered via mail, that they pay for with | crypto. Pornhub still exists, despite having their credit | card processing de-platformed, so I guess _somebody_ is | paying them some crypto. | | But no. I've never met anyone in real life who uses crypto | for mundane transactions, where fiat currency is an option. | madamelic wrote: | >A few people that I work with order THC gummies from | some sketchy source | | I have heard from a friend that typically those 'sketchy | sources' are just buying gummies from stores in legal | states ( _cough_ California) and shipping them out. | | My friend would get the gummies in the bags ready for | retail sale. Same with other items like vape pods. | bluecalm wrote: | I am as much a crypto skeptic as you can find but even I | know people who could only pay in crypto and I lost | business by not being able to accept it. | | The financial regulations around the world are often very | strict. A lot of people need to go around them. Sure, a lot | of them are drug dealers, gambling operators etc. but there | are also people in China struggling with capital control | regulations as one example. | brotherofsteel wrote: | Hi there. I regularly pay for things with Bitcoin Cash. | Geee wrote: | Do you know any people who use the Internet? I don't. | Roark66 wrote: | I was actually paid in crypto for few days of some | programming work once. I wish I held to it all rather than | spending most of it. | | Personally I think the biggest issue with crypto now is, | one that it promotes huge value inflation and Ponzi-like | schemes (we are seeing it with BTC and ETH), two horrible | energy use inefficiency. From a bitcoin transaction that | requires orders of magnitude more energy to process than | any other transfer of value known to humanity to Ethereum | "virtual machine" for smart contracts that is most | inefficient way to execute arbitrary code ever invented... | | I used to be a big proponent of crypto overall. I still | have some holdings in it, but I can't unsee the idiocy in | PoW crypto once I saw and understood it clearly. | | I wondered for a while what is so specific to crypto that | it became today's tulips? (Rather than gold futures, | stocks, real estate etc) and then I understood all those | asset classes are already used like this. Every kind of | asset that can will eventually be used in some kind of | pyramid scheme. Just look at the price of gold compared to | few years ago, real estate in many large cities, stocks | etc. It was absolutely inevitable that crypto as it became | a trusted store of value would become a vehicle for | speculative bubbles/pyramid schemes. | | So then the question is, can crypto fulfill the role of a | currency (requiring some level of value stability) and be a | vehicle for speculative pyramids at the same time? I don't | think so. | | Proof of Work is one problem with crypto that perhaps Proof | of Stake will resolve. | | The other problem is much more fundamental. How do we | create crypto that maintains stability without having to | resort to typical "stable coin" strategies like holding | other currencies and selling/buying them to artificially | adjust the value. Is it possible to create crypto that | would maintain its value in the long term in distributed - | no central authority manner while discouraging pyramid | investment schemes. | | And finally, once someone invents such crypto would anyone | actually hear about it as most promotion of crypto seems to | be done by people who got in early and hope for their | holdings to increase in value. | boc wrote: | Agreed. It's the difference between deflationary assets | and inflationary currency. Bitcoin's core, fundamental | problem is that it's deflationary. Therefore it will | never be useful for economic transactions, because any | society which fully commits to bitcoin as their currency | will have their economy grind to a halt. Why would I buy | a new car today when it's going to be cheaper tomorrow? | | There's a reason why the Fed targets a ~2% inflation rate | for the USD. | Geee wrote: | Think again. You have been brainwashed. You buy a car so | that you can go to work. You know that the car produces | more value than 2% deflation. You don't buy the car if | you don't have a job. | | What happens to economy if people buy only things that | last a very long time or things that increase their | productivity? What happens to economy when companies are | forced to produce those things? | | Inflationary economy is a total disaster. We produce | things that don't last to consume things that don't last. | Insane amount of human work output is wasted. | | If you measure economic growth by amount of pointlessly | running in circles, then yeah inflation is good for | economy. | stormbeta wrote: | That and the energy cost, both direct as well | environmental. | | It always surprises me how little cryptocurrency | advocates seem to understand basic macroeconomics and | unintended consequences, especially on sites like this. | s7atic wrote: | > The other problem is much more fundamental. How do we | create crypto that maintains stability without having to | resort to typical "stable coin" strategies like holding | other currencies and selling/buying them to artificially | adjust the value. Is it possible to create crypto that | would maintain its value in the long term in distributed | - no central authority manner while discouraging pyramid | investment schemes. | | The value of a cryptocurrency is mostly tied to its | adoption. Future adoption is uncertain, so there is | naturally a lot of volatility right now. If adoption | stabilizes, the volatility will likely decrease markedly. | In fact, since many cryptocurrencies have a fixed supply | (or the supply follows a predetermined set of rules), one | could argue that they could end up less prone to | speculative pricing than fiat. | NicoJuicy wrote: | It's not hate. I don't want to pay 22$ for a 1$ product with | bitcoin, when it gets popular. | | I'm also not going to put my money in a joke coin like | dogecoin. | | I like the blockchain, but crypto is just an implementation | of it and without a use-case currently ( blockchain has | multiple use-cases though). | | Instead of trying to go on the emotional side with "hate- | train"? | | Try to convince me with facts. | | Ps. I owned crypto until 2017 and then sold it then, because | i didn't see a valid use-case ( and 20 k was high enough for | me) | rawtxapp wrote: | > Ps. I owned crypto until 2017 and then sold it because i | didn't see a valid use-case. | | Do you think maybe you have some biases against it now, | because it would have made you a lot of money if you held | on to it? | | Nobody is paying 22$ for a 1$ product, I'm not sure how you | can even remotely come to that while ignoring all the layer | 2 developments. | | There's a ton of really useful projects happening on DeFi, | you can see the blockchain data for yourself and see that a | lot of people are using it, maybe _you_ don 't see the use | case, but that doesn't mean there isn't any. | NicoJuicy wrote: | I actually made a lot of money with it. So I don't think | I'm biased because of that. It dropped to 4k afterwards ( | I could have purchased again, but if something falls from | my watchlist, i don't care about it anymore). | | What is probably biasing me, is that I had a digital | magazine and the #1 hit was for "how to recover Bitcoin | password". | | Which also leads me to my conclusion: "There's currently | no replacement for a official and trusted centralized | authority in Crypto". | tomiplaz wrote: | I presume you are not familiar with the Lightning Network? | I suggest reading https://github.com/lnbook/lnbook | NicoJuicy wrote: | Yes I am, but not in specifics. It's already been | mentioned since 2017... | | Fee's are still high. Crypto still can't handle a lot of | traffic as far as i'm aware today. | brotherofsteel wrote: | Who doesn't love worrying about "watchtowers" and | "inbound liquidity"? | gruez wrote: | Are those hard concepts to grasp? | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: | Compared to cash in my wallet, a credit card, or | cryptocoins held on chain? Yes. | krageon wrote: | Given how breathtakingly simple the space actually is, | inventing big words and forcing other people to learn | them really only serves to stroke an ego. | gruez wrote: | "watchtowers" is a big word now? as for "inbound | liquidity", I guess you can argue it's big because it's a | compound word, but it's relatively easy to understand | ("liquidity" is a standard term in finance, for instance) | and I can't think of how you can shorten it further | without reducing comprehension. | throwaway10110 wrote: | Ive been using bitcoin since 2011ish i think, one of the | first few people on bitcoin-otc first trade was $40 for 10 | bitcoins (paid with paypal transfer funily enough) i must | have bought and sold hundreds over years, still have few | dozen | | In some cases yeh bitcoin has not lived up to initial | promises, literally first line of satoshis paper is no | longer valid, but it could yet be like early internet and | take off (or something similar) | | i wouldnt write it off but yeh you are also right its not | what we thought it be, the whole store of value thing these | days instead of currency | brotherofsteel wrote: | You should try Bitcoin Cash (BCH), the version of Bitcoin | that actually works as it was meant to. It has subcent fees | by design. | NicoJuicy wrote: | You mean it's not controlled by those who mine the most? | Which would be miners in CH that could execute a 51% | attack? :) | | And what about the whole tether scam? | | There are more problems to crypto currency than that any | crypto solves now. | weego wrote: | Let's see what they peg their exchange rate to | nimbius wrote: | or just, you know...pay the vendor directly. capitalism cannot | abide a market that exists unexploited it seels. | | traditional rent-seeking high fee payment processing services are | going to inject themselves into cryptocurrency at all cost. At | this point the efforts is getting a little comical. | loceng wrote: | Pay vendor directly while not also paying a fraction to all | other Bitcoin holders at the same time by not using Bitcoin. | tsjq wrote: | >pay the vendor directly | | That's exactly what India's UPI payment transfer does. Instant, | Direct, Secure, no fee | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: | Except that most vendors would rather pay the fee than | implement crypto payment processing themselves. | throwaway10110 wrote: | Businesses might want to be settled in the currency of their | home country for ease of accounting/taxes and not be subjected | to high volatility | SketchySeaBeast wrote: | > and not be subjected to high volatility | | So they choose bitcoin? | mcintyre1994 wrote: | > PayPal hopes its service can change that, as by settling | the transaction in fiat currency, merchants will not take | on the volatility risk/upside. | | The whole point is that PayPal shields the business from | the volatility risk. Buyer buys in Bitcoin, seller receives | local fiat currency. | SketchySeaBeast wrote: | Ah, I read that as the opposite way around - wanting to | avoid their own currency because of volatility. My bad. | EveYoung wrote: | Those companies only want to offer BTC as a payment option | but don't want to hold crypto themselves. So they didn't | really choose BTC to start with. Which makes sense since | most companies need to pay their costs in fiat money. | jypepin wrote: | It's the same thing as a US company wanting to sell to | Europe but not wanting Euros, because they pay their | costs in USD. | | I think the point here is probably that Paypal is | noticing that an increasing amount of consumers have | crypto and would like to pay with them, so they offer | this possibility. | | Bitcoin is just another currency, and indeed most | businesses don't want to hold them because they need to | hold their local fiat. That doesn't mean consumers don't | want to use Bitcoin tho. | Geee wrote: | Decentralized L2 solutions are not ready yet. | bouncycastle wrote: | They are, google loopring or zksync | throwaway10110 wrote: | This basically kills BitPay who recently made all transactions | (of any value) in crypto require KYC registration. | vmception wrote: | BitPay killed themselves when their invoicing UI stopped | working over Tor | ajkdhcb2 wrote: | It killed itself. I stopped using several services because they | want me to send fucking passport info to make a $10 | transaction, so unsafe. | jypepin wrote: | I never used bitpay but I don't think it's their fault to | have to request passport verification. As a money transmitter | they are required to answer to KYC rules, which includes | passport or other docs verification to ensure you are who you | are. | | If you are wondering why Paypal never asked for your | passport, it's probably because you eventually linked Paypal | to another KYC-compatible entity, such as your bank (by | linking your bank, sending money with your credit card, etc). | | I assume in the case of bitpay you would only link your btc | wallet which in itself doesn't offer KYC verifications. | ajkdhcb2 wrote: | Seems untrue to me. | | Lots of other services continue to function with no such | requirements. Bitpay only did it recently after many years | of business and there was no regulatory change | | I also don't understand how it is logically any different | from the merchant accepting btc themselves and choosing to | do the conversion themselves | | There are many cases where businesses go beyond the legal | requirements for whatever reason. Coinbase for example has | explained that they make shady backdoor deals with | regulators. | [deleted] | dgellow wrote: | It's not like they have a choice. KYC is a standard | requirements when dealing with money transfers. | ajkdhcb2 wrote: | Not for such small transactions | pingec wrote: | Are there any alternatives to bitpay? | space_rock wrote: | * Bitcoin merchant payments * Fiat conversion options | | https://www.coinpayments.net/ | brotherofsteel wrote: | What PayPal is offering is not even close to what BitPay is | doing. On PayPal you will only be able to use cryptocurrency | that you bought from PayPal, you cannot transfer cryptocurrency | in or out of your account. All you can do is buy cryptocurrency | from PayPal and then sell it back to them at a later time. | throwaway10110 wrote: | I see, wow, then this sucks | sschueller wrote: | Imagine if PayPal was handling your cash transaction when your | are at a store instead of you paying the store directly. | | We don't need PayPal or Visa to pay with crypto. These are | desperate attempts for these middleman to keep the control they | have. In fact this way they can make the crypto experience worse | than regular payments with hight fees etc. Pushing people away | and thinking crypto doesn't work. | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: | Yes. Full agreement here. That said, for better or worse, | Paypal's move effectively makes crypto into currency. Up until | now, it was not exactly a mainstream option. | tartoran wrote: | I feel in this case they feel that they'd soon become | irrelevant if they don't handle crypto. But as a customer I'd | rather use fiat for day to day bills and replenish that fiat | account whenever I want from crypto - with low fees, security | and ease of access. | Trias11 wrote: | " The company will charge no transaction fee to checkout with | crypto and only one type of coin can be used for each purchase, | it said..." | | PayPal will likely compensate "no transaction fee" with draconian | exchange rate or bid/ask spread. | CynicusRex wrote: | PayPal launches pyramid scheme checkout service. | tfang17 wrote: | PayPal did a complete 180 from their stance on crypto just 2 | years ago. | | I worked at Coinbase on the Payments team ~2018. Working to | integrate PayPal was a nightmare - so much opposition to the | integration from PayPal execs and compliance team. Even when we | did manage to finally integrate, PayPal was only enabled for | crypto sells. | | Change in direction at PayPal must have come straight from the | top. | anddddd1 wrote: | They saw the light. Surprised so many commenters here still | don't see it. | | In the words of the late great Steve Jobs: "are you getting it | yet!??" | hahahahe wrote: | @ what fees? and why? | | Perhaps Paypal should focus on hiring more customer service | agents instead of going a full year without a direct line in the | US? Paypal is one of the most egregious fintech companies in | existence. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-03-30 23:01 UTC)