tk
@tike
new primitives have unclear business outcomes the riff w micropayments is that they're notorious for having no practical business model at the atomic level charging fixed $ per txn (or) % of a txn (when the avg txn itself is $0.03-0.1) is tricky you find the right wedge, find the right use case, the right user -- and you may unlock a lot it requires iterations & a 10s if not 100s of people trying to embed microtxn's in unique usecases/industries so on so forth eitherway, we stand to a chance to do what UPI did for india, dramatically increase the velocity of crypto changing hands 100x the volume because it isn't just a buy/sell it's a transfer happening invisibly a billion times every day it becomes a public good & likely not a virtually obvious capitalistic endeavour and that's just how it seems like (as of today)
3 replies
1 recast
27 reactions
Lucas | POAP Studio
@gabo
Media consumption and paywalled access. The subscription model (alternative to ad model) for everything does not work and becomes the sub for 2 things and suck up Micropayments allows that (but also generates tons of new problems related to pricing)
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mayur
@mayuritself
team yaha tk aagayi hai aage tk bhi pahoch hi jaayegi dheere dheere road will get clear
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
xing2100
@xinxing
1. Charging a fixed fee for each transaction is contrary to reaching millions of users through distribution 2. The premise for micropayment to succeed is that millions of users use it, so users should not be charged 3. Consider charging the asset side (such as ZORA/USDC/ARB subsidies) Imagine TRON and USDT
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
