Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Huge companies with massive legal departments don't accept bitcoin. They contract with smaller VC-funded startups to accept it and assume the risk and pay the large retailer in cash at sale time. The large retailers neither accept nor hold bitcoin directly, nor should they (as a merchant, you don't want to be holding something that loses 10% of its value during your business hours as bitcoin did today). The large retailers merely get to enjoy capitalizing on bitcoin as a purchase method.


That seems like a non-standard usage of "accept". Does everyone who accepts a payment method while hedging it also not count as another vendor who accepts it?

If someone accepts PayPal while insuring against the possibility of not being paid "not accept PayPal"?

If a non-US vendor uses forward/option contracts to maintain cash flow in the local currency, do they "not accept" USD?


This doesn't count as insurance, though, because no risk is ever actually held, it's farmed out. The most anti-bitcoin person in the world will accept USD that has been converted from bitcoin by an entity that is actually taking the risk, because by necessity it needs to hold lots of bitcoin reserves just to do business.


Just like how "The most anti-USD person in the world will accept Yen that has been converted from USD..."


If a company keeps most of its money in a bank, do they "not accept" USD?


Yeah and the internet was just a temporary trend.

People always overestimate the short term consequences and underestimate the long term consequences of such technologies.

Currency is only one way to express the protocol.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: