It's almost 20 years old, but as relevant as ever.
"Mental transaction costs raise fundamental barriers to customer acceptance of fine-grained bundling and pricing." Lightning can be great for many things, but pay-per-click & similar are jumping off the same cliff as many prior micro/nano payment attempts. http://nakamotoinstitute.org/static/docs/micropayments-and-mental-transaction-costs.pdf …
-
-
-
Tweet unavailable
-
Yes. These aren't payments substantially smaller than traditional payments, which is what "micropayment" means if it means anything. If doesn't mean anything we need a new word to describe what lemmings keep trying and failing at without learning anything from the prior failures.
-
One makes $0.25 to $2 decisions frequently. Below $0.05 is waste, below negotiated limits. - Bitcoin is funny because Fees are in BTC which are in Dollars. At $5 Mil Valuation min fee is $0.05. At 1 Sat / Byte, $22,000 creates a $0.05 min fee increment - Only batching solves this
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Mental transaction cost:automobile lane change::pay-per-click:pay-per-stoplight -- from
@coindesk "A new patent awarded to Ford suggests the U.S. automaker is considering the use of cryptocurrency to let cars on the road communicate with each other and reduce traffic." -
Lemmings never learn. :-(
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The arguments may hold true when one of the parties involved in the transaction is a human, but may not hold true when there are automated systems transacting with each other on both ends; (api calls, paywalls, etc).
-
Working prices communicate demand (preferences) and supply. Automated systems need to know what their human master's preferences are or the exercise is pointless.
-
And most of that can be programmed in. After all bitcoin is 'programmable-money'. :-)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A lot of people I suspect would pay such costs if they never had to look at ads ever again.
-
I think the problem being expressed is that deciding how many pennies to pay for content is mentally exhausting. Is clicking the clickbait worth $0.03? Is that great-looking longform article worth $0.25? Is reading your latest tweet worth $0.001? I'm tired just writing this.
-
My negotiating agent decides for me! :-D
-
ERROR 402: Payment Required Sorry. We're unable to show
@hrdng's reply to your tweet because your negotiating agent refused to pay the $0.001 required fee. Click _here_ to overrule it and send the micropayment. -
NEG:ERROR 491:CONTRACT FAILURE:SUBCODE 29:ILLEGAL VARIANCE FROM PRENEG:COLLECTING PENALTY FEE
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Music is a good example of this - what’s easiest? Pay per song, per album, or just pay for a monthly subscription and get everything?
-
It's funny, but I'd rather pay more for unmetered and unlimited access to some resource, even if in the end, had I been pay-as-you-go, it would have been cheaper. Metering adds anxiety.
-
Exactly. And you’re way more likely to go deeper. You’ll explore/discover/fully use that service if you’re not thinking about small individual buys.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Transaction costs are the most ignored and least understood in Economics. The non-monetary transaction costs are not obvious but are significant such that all the gains from a transaction (utility) may be completely offset if one fails to account for them.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I agree. Payment models are subject to usability requirements as well. Who want to track all the phone calls you made and how long they lasted to verify if you have been overcharged. And if you can't verify you must trust.
#dilemmaThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.