Which projects currently are ahead of the game as a simple day 2 day currency?

makeorbrake

As per the thread title....and I guess to elaborate a bit more on it - I'm thinking in terms of a crypto that you can use to pay for a coffee - and equally, from the point of view of vendors, one that works effectively.

So...I suppose, fast, cheap transactions with ease of use. If we are to exclude potential layer 2 solutions (they're not ready yet....not really....may take quite some time yet).


What would be on the shortlist that works right now?


I attended a Dash workshop last night and was impressed at the speed ( 1 second), the tx price ($0.01) and ease of use. But of course, I have not done a deep dive into it yet...so no doubt there are plenty of downsides I have not seen yet. I guess volatility is the first one that springs to mind (as opposed to the possibility of using something similar but in 'stablecoin' form).
They seem to be concentrating on a day to day transnational currency - nothing else (aside from the possibility to keep some transactions private).

grindle

If it was actually taken up by vendors then NANO would be great as a dumb transparent currency.

Shauny2010

There is no real uptake or use in this side of the world. Japan is a real hotspot now and is leading the way. I was there a few weeks ago and was surprised at how au fait everyone is with regard to Bitcoin and the dislike many have for Bitcoin core.
Bitcoin is accepted, Bitcoin cash seems to be the most used and is getting heavily promoted there so this could be why it has gained so much traction there.
I think we are lagging them by a couple of years as usual with all things technology. So whatever gets going on that side of the world will more than like go on to dominate in the future

makeorbrake

Shauny2010 wrote: »

There is no real uptake or use in this side of the world. Japan is a real hotspot now and is leading the way. I was there a few weeks ago and was surprised at how au fait everyone is with regard to Bitcoin and the dislike many have for Bitcoin core.
Bitcoin is accepted, Bitcoin cash seems to be the most used and is getting heavily promoted there so this could be why it has gained so much traction there.

It's a strange one though....if there's no use case here, how is there one in Japan?....I guess they've just got a bigger thirst for new tech?

Is the reason they're more inclined to use bitcoin cash to do with tx times as well as tx fees?

I recall an announcement ...must have been a year ago where a couple of very big chain stores were putting in facility to pay with btc. I wonder how the logistics of that are working out for small purchases...in terms of time and fees?

I'm in S.America these days and in Venezuela, that country has become Dash's biggest market. You can figure out what the use case is there pretty quickly!

Lets put the question a different way...if you were to a ssume you had no other means to pay and wanted to buy a sandwich or a cup of java, what coin would fit the bill best (for day to day purchases only...not for any other use)?

Shauny2010

It's really to do with their thirst for technology. I suspect Bitcoin Cash got more traction because it does not suffer from the hodl mentality of Bitcoin Core. Plus its robust Network and near zero transaction fees help too.
And Dash has gotten traction there too but not near as much but I do like the tech and it works well



I don't see any other cryptos fit for purpose at the moment. Yes they claim better tech and fairer distribution but at the end of the day most are severly untested, and often over complicated. The networks they run on are flimsey - to non existent in some cases.


So at the moment there really is only 2 cryptos that are up to the task and have robust networks


Bitcoin Cash

Dash

Whelo79

What about something like XLM? High speed and extremely low cost transactions.

SureRemit have just released their app based on the Stellar network aimed predominantly at people who send money back home to family in poor countries. Instead of sending the money through Western Union or Swift, being charged 7% and having to wait days, people can now buy their family airtime, pay their bills or buy them vouchers (Amazon, Google Play, Toys R Us, The Body Shop, Applebee's, Walmart) are just some of the options currently available to purchase through crypto. Or you can just cash out your own crypto and but the vouchers for yourself without having to cash out to fiat first.

The app is on Google play and the istore for anyone who wants to install it and look at all the current possibilities.

Dohnjoe

grindle wrote: »

If it was actually taken up by vendors then NANO would be great as a dumb transparent currency.

How though? I mean if a supermarket was taking payment in Nano, the prices displayed would have to be moving in real time, that's how quickly value is changing. I don't need to mention that the average customer will be severely put off by that.

In said supermarket we can still pay in seconds with chip&pin/tap&pay, how would Nano be better than that? surely it's a crowded enough space already, why would the public want to switch to Nano? no one is going to risk it's volatility to save a few pence a month on "fees"

Potentially it could operate as some sort of gateway from fiat - crypto - fiat, but that wouldn't qualify it as a "day-to-day" currency

I maintain that fixed supply cryptos have little place as a daily currency (have mentioned this several times before), however stable-coins, like the Circle project, DAI, and newer projects like Terra have a potential chance to at the very least provide a viable substitute to hyper-inflating currencies

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I maintain that fixed supply cryptos have little place as a daily currency (have mentioned this several times before), however stable-coins, like the Circle project, DAI, and newer projects like Terra have a potential chance to at the very least provide a viable substitute to hyper-inflating currencies

I think the logical starting point are the countries with hyper inflation. In any given year, there's always a short list. This year it's Venezuela at the top of the list (where the IMF forecast 1,000,000% inflation by years end unless measures are taken - and Maduro shaving off 3 zeros from the national currency and linking it with a centralised national crypto is not going to solve the underlying problem).

Those folks will take any working system that maintains their life savings. Furthermore, given the option, they'd be happier if a 2nd track emerged fully - i.e. Maduro can stick his monopoly money currency and people start trading in crypto.

I agree with your point re. stablecoins. However, there's also an element of a project needing to go out there and enable the option for the people that need it. The original crypto's were set up in a passive way. Some like dash have a budget that enables them to go out and pimp the currency. That's important too. No doubt they're overstating their successes in Venezuela by a long way - but probably making some in-roads....but more than others.

There's no point having a better option if it's simply not being made available to people so that they can use it.

Dohnjoe

Indeed, Dash pay merchants to take their tech, I'd really like to know how much Dash is actually spent per month at those terminals. we mysteriously haven't seen any stats on that yet

Ultimately they are attempting to provide an alternative to the world's most volatile fiat by using a volatile crypto, it's a stop-gap, not a solution

A well decentralized stable-coin ticks all the boxes as a solution but obviously development still has some way to go. Am on the fence with MakerDAO/DAI, need to do more reading on it. Circle's USDC is apparently out this summer

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Ultimately they are attempting to provide an alternative to the world's most volatile fiat by using a volatile crypto, it's a stop-gap, not a solution

I've no doubt that they're overstating things. They claimed to be signing up 200 vendors/month but that's not reflected on their vendor listings. I queried this with them and not a waffley answer. We have to be suspicious of media pieces in life generally - but crypto is completely bonkers with the partisanship - people believe their own BS!

That said, if I was Venezuelan I'd be happy to be presented with a solution like this. Stop gap - perhaps but it depends on how things play out. As wild as the volatility is right now, it used to be magnitudes worse. If it can settle a bit more in the medium term - and a crypto like dash or any other than is slick enough to do transactional payments competently/quickly/easily - then who knows...

Dohnjoe

Here's the Circle FAQ - transparency, in line with regulators and treasury, seems to work similar to Tether (but with actual auditors instead of some law firm), Circle itself is a strong company (valuation 3 bn), ERC-20
https://www.circle.com/en/usdc-faq

Seems to be the best stable-coin (potential) contender at the mo

MakerDAO is .. interesting, but relies on a complex mechanism that wouldn't be able to cope if there were extreme fluctuations in Ethereum

troyzer

There won't be a cryptocurrency fit for everyday use until it stops being so incredibly volatile.

Cryptos are investments at the moment. It can either be an investment or cash, it can't really be both.

smacl

troyzer wrote: »

Cryptos are investments at the moment. It can either be an investment or cash, it can't really be both.

That's true of any given crypto but not the case where you have multiple cryptos with varying levels of volatility. Volatility and stability in this instance are still with reference to fiat. If a stable coin makes crypto a mainstream alternative to fiat, it could well become preferable to fiat and disrupt fiat as a result.

makeorbrake

troyzer wrote: »

Cryptos are investments at the moment. It can either be an investment or cash, it can't really be both.

If you happen to have the misfortune of living in a country that's experiencing hyper inflation, they're very much in play.

That's not to say you're wrong about volatility - but I just see that angle as an opportunity for some crypto's to get their foot in the door.

grindle

People are getting very ahead of themselves talking about crypto volatility while shopping - if you have that much in crypto and not in your bank account you're either a diehard or a gambler or both so it won't matter. This is an infant tech in it's embryonic stages

Why NANO? https://redd.it/7x3qr1
If a merchant doesn't want to accept it, they don't have to.
If a consumer doesn't want to spend it they don't have to.
The logic in this thread is akin to JF and PPL's flights of fancy where they hypothesise that fiat dies overnight and we're stuck in some backwards crypto nightmare. I'd expect more foresight from others on this forum.

Dohnjoe

The tech is great, but if anyone bought a product with Nano at Headphones.com 2 weeks ago - well they just paid 4 times more than they should have for that item

grindle

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The tech is great, but if anyone bought a product with Nano at Headphones.com 2 weeks ago - well they just paid 4 times more than they should have for that item

And it was their choice to?
It was dispensable to them at that price. In a western society it seems like madness, in a deflating economy it could be the best choice? I still think we're years away from that on any real scale though.

makeorbrake

grindle wrote: »

It was dispensable to them at that price. In a western society it seems like madness, in a deflating economy it could be the best choice?

I've been travelling south/central america all year. If the venezuelans had an opportunity to use such a currency from the very beginning, I can tell you they would bite your hand off. Meet them every day regardless of where I am - a lesson that your government can leave you on your ass if they mismanage!

grindle wrote: »

The logic in this thread is akin to JF and PPL's flights of fancy where they hypothesise that fiat dies overnight

That's a hell of a void to fill...don't think there's enough methane knockin' about to do the job.

troyzer

smacl wrote: »

That's true of any given crypto but not the case where you have multiple cryptos with varying levels of volatility. Volatility and stability in this instance are still with reference to fiat. If a stable coin makes crypto a mainstream alternative to fiat, it could well become preferable to fiat and disrupt fiat as a result.

makeorbrake wrote: »

If you happen to have the misfortune of living in a country that's experiencing hyper inflation, they're very much in play.

That's not to say you're wrong about volatility - but I just see that angle as an opportunity for some crypto's to get their foot in the door.

To quote that most Laconic of phrases: "If".

Seriously, there are a lot of ifs there. There are only a handful of countries experiencing hyper inflation at the moment and of them, Venezuela is probably the only one you could say is a developed economy, for the most part.

Your response to my point that cryptos are too volatile was to say if a crypto that wasn't volatile came along, there'd be no problems (stable coin). And if my auntie had balls, she'd be my uncle.

grindle

troyzer wrote: »

To quote that most Laconic of phrases: "If"
...
Your response to my point that cryptos are too volatile was to say if a crypto that wasn't volatile came along, there'd be no problems (stable coin). And if my auntie had balls, she'd be my uncle.

Why is anybody expecting this NOT to be currently volatile? Or why do they have lack of volatility as a necessary expectation in these incredibly early days where the main barrier is appalling UX rather than volatility.
I'm very confused - people are hedging a bet, it may pay off or it may not but yet again somebody comes along and acts like crypto has to have the ability and liquidity to replace flat right this second.
Serious flaw in logic here, what's the spiel about?

troyzer

grindle wrote: »

Why is anybody expecting this NOT to be currently volatile? Or why do they have lack of volatility as a necessary expectation in these incredibly early days where the main barrier is appalling UX rather than volatility.
I'm very confused - people are hedging a bet, it may pay off or it may not but yet again somebody comes along and acts like crypto has to have the ability and liquidity to replace flat right this second.
Serious flaw in logic here, what's the spiel about?

I would expect it to be volatile because it's treated as a highly speculative investment. Volatility is definitely the main barrier to it being adopted as a day to day currency. Nobody wants to use a currency that could massively appreciate or depreciate before the transaction is even cleared. It's madness.

I never said crypto has to be able to replace fiat this second. I'm saying that it CAN'T replace fiat until it stops being treated as an investment. At least on such a massive scale. Of course there's a forex investment market but it's insignificant versus the day to day usage in the domestic economy. Forex also serves a trade purpose, there are economic underpinnings to the way the market moves unlike cryptos.

Dohnjoe

grindle wrote: »

And it was their choice to?

A Nano enthusiast who wanted to spend 4x the value of the headphones for the novelty of it, sure. But for the general public it's obviously illogical

As for the crypto "scramble for Venezuela", in order to get a foothold in such an imploding economy they would need huge resources for any chance of general adoption across the entire country, educate the public, run ads, etc - that's if the authorities allow it (unlikely on a large scale)

On top of that they would be replacing a hyper-inflating currency with a type of digital asset which is marginally less hyper inflating/deflating - a complete stop-gap

Also, what is their plan to compete with stable-coins when they come out? A volatile fixed asset trying to be a currency has no chance.

Digital currency for the real world? not a currency by any stretch, it's a type of money, different entirely
Ideal trading pair? possibly
Business to Customer? possibly, as long as they are not counting on customers paying in Nano
Peer to Peer? pointless
Micropayments? niche

I like the tech and do see fiat -> Nano -> fiat, but that has nothing to do with using Nano as a currency, not to mention that sphere is crowded

makeorbrake

troyzer wrote: »

To quote that most Laconic of phrases: "If".

Seriously, there are a lot of ifs there.

Eh, NO - one IF was presented. I don't see how that nullifies the point as that IF goes away for 32 million people in the case of Venezuela.

troyzer wrote: »

There are only a handful of countries experiencing hyper inflation at the moment and of them, Venezuela is probably the only one you could say is a developed economy, for the most part.

Developed economy or no - it doesn't matter. If the cash in your pocket (or bank account or mattress) is about to become zero because of the mismanagement of your government, that's a problem. It doesn't matter what socio-economic group you belong to.

Yes, Venezuela isn't important to you but it's important to 32 million people. And that's just one of a perennial list that exists every year. Doesnt matter what stage of development theyre at - if they use sovereign currency and are getting hammered, then crypto has the ability to provide a solution.
Then there are countries with currencies experiencing dramatic volatility eg. Russia, Turkey, Iran.

troyzer wrote: »

Your response to my point that cryptos are too volatile was to say if a crypto that wasn't volatile came along, there'd be no problems (stable coin). And if my auntie had balls, she'd be my uncle.

No. What my response was - is that it's entirely clear to me that a nascent technology and currency will have such volatility. That despite peoples shock/horror, volatility in the case of bitcoin has been demonstrating a pattern of reducing. And an acceptance on my part that this process is going to take a long time.
As regards stablecoins and yer granny, what's your point? Are you saying that stablecoins don't exist - because they do.

smacl

troyzer wrote: »

To quote that most Laconic of phrases: "If".

Seriously, there are a lot of ifs there. There are only a handful of countries experiencing hyper inflation at the moment and of them, Venezuela is probably the only one you could say is a developed economy, for the most part.

Your response to my point that cryptos are too volatile was to say if a crypto that wasn't volatile came along, there'd be no problems (stable coin). And if my auntie had balls, she'd be my uncle.

Actually, there's only two if's in what you quoted, one from each quote post. With respect to the 'if' in my own post, in terms of value, tether has been a stable crypto but the company and funding behind it are extremely suspect which is its source of volatility. This doesn't mean that a similar crypto can't be created on a more transparent and solid footing. Doesn't necessarily mean that it can either but time will tell. Seems rather more likely than your auntie growing balls

Dohnjoe

makeorbrake wrote: »

volatility in the case of bitcoin has been demonstrating a pattern of reducing

Reducing yes, that's because it was new and the infrastructure/market literally didn't exist before

The best case scenario for BTC (in my opinion) is that it eventually reaches the volatility of stocks (which are still too volatile compared to trad currencies like USD, GBP, etc)

It's volatility is inherent. If you literally wanted to create one of the most inherently volatile asset classes possible - you'd be hard-pressed to do better than cryptos

makeorbrake

smacl wrote: »

Seems rather more likely than your auntie growing balls

hmm...who knows - i'm not familiar with his auntie
However, I am aware that there are already a few stablecoins launched - and a few more that are about to be launched.
The FIAT backed ones are producing proper Audit reports and there are asset backed also - but these tend to be set up with institutional investors in mind. Circle are backing one of them. There's also basis - set up by a few ex-google heads that facilitates stability via an algorithm that adjusts supply in order to keep price in line.

makeorbrake

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's volatility is inherent. If you literally wanted to create one of the most inherently volatile asset classes possible - you'd be hard-pressed to do better than cryptos

I don't disagree....only to say that it can look a lot different but we're talking about a long time. In the meantime, a stablecoin would fit the bill.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

As for the crypto "scramble for Venezuela", in order to get a foothold in such an imploding economy they would need huge resources for any chance of general adoption across the entire country, educate the public, run ads, etc - that's if the authorities allow it (unlikely on a large scale)

And this is what I found intriguing about Dash (even though I've got plenty of other concerns about the project generally) - that they've built in a funding model to go out and do this unlike passive crypto currencies. Enough funds? Probably not - but it also seems like they've not made a great fist of maximising the return on the funds that they've had available for that purpose up until now.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

On top of that they would be replacing a hyper-inflating currency with a type of digital asset which is marginally less hyper inflating/deflating - a complete stop-gap

Point taken of course - but in a country that the IMF predict will see inflation of 1,000,000% this year, it's a stop gap that many would be happy with if they were enabled to use it (via education, merchant adoption, etc., etc).


What I also find interesting is how things pan out with these state backed cryptos. Iran are about to follow Venezuela very soon - they just released the final draft for their crypto. Of course, these are just mechanisms to evade sanctions and it looks like they will achieve that (and nothing else). However, I think it's not so unlikely that one of these states will just use an existing crypto one of these days. Sanctions simply don't work now because of crypto. With that, we're going to see some cyber attacks on their centralised coins. Maybe the PoW immutability of bitcoin will come in handy afterall...

Dohnjoe

For stablecoins, besides Circle and Terra, we have Havven, StrongHold (USD), TrueUSD, Stably, Basis, Carbon, loads of these things are popping up

grindle

Dohnjoe wrote: »

A Nano enthusiast who wanted to spend 4x the value of the headphones for the novelty of it, sure. But for the general public it's obviously illogical

I'm not seeing where this logic comes from, maybe a really dumb day for me or something. Anyone spending crypto should do "spend and replace", I'm not sure how the headphones would cost 4x more somehow. They'd cost the exact amount they normally do (unless the shop offers a discount, in which case you'll likely get 5-25% off the headphones and/or 5-25% more crypto out of the deal).
In your examples the user seems to have a set & limited amount of <AnyCrypto> which they bought for $X six months ago and then squander for a 75%% loss without replacing the crypto? I haven't met anybody who spends crypto who doesn't spend and replace.
It's the slow diversion of money from one system to another and I'm very curious where the idea comes from that volatility matters for spending in these very early days. The only time I can see volatility becoming a true worry in future is if some tipping point is met and the volatility of the base fiat currency starts getting wonky.
Incredibly far away, if ever. I'd be beyond impressed if it happened within the next three decades.
Plus the title of the thread is "Which projects currently are ahead of the game as a simple day 2 day currency?" rather than "Which projects are currently capable of fully replacing fiat as a simple day 2 day currency?" which is the minimum requirement naysayers are running with.

Dohnjoe

grindle wrote: »

Anyone spending crypto should do "spend and replace"

Which involves

1. Buying the item with crypto (Nano)
2. Sending fiat to exchange or keeping fiat on exchange (one takes time, the other involves risk)
3. Using the fiat to buy the crypto directly, or by buying Eth/BTC to buy the required crypto on another exchange (Nano) after the Nano purchase of the item

All of which involves: exchange risk, exchange value risk, time - basically a bunch of extra hurdles for no gain


As opposed to:

1. buying the item with fiat in the first place, usually takes seconds

grindle

Dohnjoe wrote: »

As opposed to:

1. buying the item with fiat in the first place, usually takes seconds

We're all well aware crypto's UX is abysmal and that fiat's has been streamlined and nearly perfected over a much lengthier period of time. The system "backing" fiat is what crypto enthusiasts are sceptical of, i.e "It is backed by the government" which is meaningless when a government fails.
Your argument (again) is that crypto isn't currently fit to completely erase fiat from the face of the planet by the end of the day. We'd agree on this point.

As for the "extra hurdles for no gain"
1. Many shops give decent discounts. I'd jump through crypto-UX hoops to save $20-$40 on headphones.
And
2. Crypto diehards are specifically trying to divert money from an irresponsibly-managed fiat currency.

Dohnjoe

grindle wrote: »

As for the "extra hurdles for no gain"
1. Many shops give decent discounts. I'd jump through crypto-UX hoops to save $20-$40 on headphones.

I haven't come across outlets offer 20% to 40% for buying with crypto over fiat - and if they do I strongly suspect their prices are at least that amount higher than Amazon

2. Crypto diehards are specifically trying to divert money from an irresponsibly-managed fiat currency.

If this is in the UK, US, Europe, then a low number of individual enthusiasts are shooting themselves in the foot to "spite the establishment", which is pretty idiotic

If it's in a country like Venezuela, then they are beating the hyper-inflation of their currency by going through hoops to use a slightly less volatile curr

Which makes sense, but as mentioned I believe its more of a temp stop-gap. Keep in mind this is an autocratic country where only 60% of the pop have access to the net. I very much doubt stop-gap cryptos will take off, not impossible, just highly unlikely

As for the public spending fixed-supply cryptos as currencies (like Nano, BTC) outside of novelty and black market use in "normal" countries - there's no logic to it

Even when stable-coins come in - they will have to compete with an evolving fiat, I still don't rate their chances high in "normal" countries

SteelyDanJalapeno

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The tech is great, but if anyone bought a product with Nano at Headphones.com 2 weeks ago - well they just paid 4 times more than they should have for that item

They also paid 32 times less than what they would have in January

Dohnjoe

SteelyDanJalapeno wrote: »

They also paid 32 times less than what they would have in January

Exactly, which adds heavy speculation to buying anything, which basically rules it out as an effective currency

grindle

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Exactly, which adds heavy speculation to buying anything, which basically rules it out as an effective currency

Why are you still ignoring spend-and-replace? Speculation has literally no impact unless some suicide-deathwish gambler has gone all-in and wants to buy a house in six months, hoping and praying the price doesn't drop.
Because it's too clunky for the end user? They can decide what's too clunky for themselves. Crypto is too clunky for the average person right now but in 10-20 years? Please, open your eyes.
I'm not bullish on any current single coin becoming some utopian default world currency but ignoring the inherent incentive to adopt a trusted and scarce asset early on is a bit naive.
I spend and replace a fair bit (albeit in Amsterdam, I do go over there a fair bit) and haven't been annoyed at all. No speculation to buying my beer or dinner and regularly get 10%+ off for using crypto & those businesses get a customer they likely never would have had before.

Dohnjoe

grindle wrote: »

Why are you still ignoring spend-and-replace?

It makes no sense as explained. There is little or no logic to the extra hurdles.

Speculation has literally no impact

Volatility makes it difficult to conduct sales and purchases. For example, someone decides to purchase a house using BTC. Buying an hour earlier the price might mean a 10% swing in favor of the purchaser, an hour later could be a 10% swing against the purchaser. It can paralyse purchases and sales

As mentioned Steam found this just during the purchase of games using BTC, the price could change too much during the purchase process. Likewise the volatility affected the refund of games

I spend and replace a fair bit

Like I said before, this makes no sense. Only enthusiasts or price speculators do this.