At least for me, the big selling point was being able to send money fast and relatively cheap. Back then you either had PayPal, or wire transfer. PP could easily freeze and hold your money over whatever issues, while bank transfer was slow.

And, mind you, I only purchased/sold legal stuff.

▲

bialpio 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

This is only a selling point in places like USA. Even before moving to the USA 13 years ago I was able to send money via wire transfer domestically for free, and it settled within 1 business day (to me that's fast enough). IIUC nowadays intra-EU wire transfers also are free (but I kinda view them as "domestic"), however I'm not sure how quickly they settle. The way how banking worked in the US was definitely one of the biggest culture shocks I've experienced when moving (and not in a positive way).

▲

Ekaros 2 days ago | parent [-]

Less than 10 seconds for SEPA Instant. Still some stragglers, but I have understood coverage starts to be pretty good.

	▲	KellyCriterion 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		....coverage is obliged by ECB since of 01.10.2025 :-) (for 100% implementation, some banks had earlier already the option to receive them but it was not widely used as nearly no one was able to send before the regulatory forces stepped up to enforce support for it)

▲

ikt 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yep, that's what I thought nano had done:

https://nano.org/en

instant, fee's a fraction of a cent, I thought this was it, international payments that don't rely on visa/mastercard!

and then it just went no where :\

▲

dimensional_dan 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Turns out nobody is actually interested in transacting with crypto otherwise Nano would have been a winner. I also love Banano, a Nano fork where you mine by folding proteins. Work that has actual value.

▲

Nextgrid 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because in practice services like TransferWise solved this problem using fiat currencies with fees low enough not to make it worth bothering with crypto.

▲

ikt 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I duno, I still can't make a payment on the net without Visa or Mastercard, still a problem to be solved to me

Looks like other people still trying to solve as well:

> Earlier this year, Coinbase changed online payments forever with a new protocol called x402. But could this technology really usher in a new age of 'machine to machine' payments? Let's run it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6wc6yvoZLY

	▲	lmm 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> I still can't make a payment on the net without Visa or Mastercard Let me introduce you to the wonders of Discover.

▲

nout 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For larger amounts it makes sense to use the bitcoin rails for international transfers. I'm doing bank to bank international transfers and using bitcoin saves around 3% compared to Wise and you get the money immediately (or within 1hr, depending on what you use).

▲

fpoling 2 days ago | parent [-]

Few years ago I needed to transfer a big sum from a Scandinavian country into Euro. The official bank exchange rate plus fees was worse than Wise’s. But I asked the bank and the bank gave me an exchange rate that was like 0.1% better than one from wise.

	▲	nout 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Depending on the direction, but there are ways to actually make a little extra on top of the middle exchange rate (e.g. on the USD to EUR path), since there are many people that want to buy no-KYC bitcoin in Europe and they are willing to pay a couple % extra.

▲

troyvit 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Man they don't solve it for me. They charge much more for using a credit card vs a checking account, especially when going across currencies, and I consider it pretty dumb to share my checking account information around when I can control things much more easily with a credit card. And literally any fee they charge is more than what nano charges. It's just that nobody takes nano :(

▲

rjdj377dhabsn 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Every time I try to use TramsferWise, I end up jumping through KYC hoops for hours - days. Sending crypto is much simpler and faster.

▲

immibis 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Almost every cryptocurrency starts out with low fees and then fees increase when it gets popular and runs into processing limits.

▲

Imustaskforhelp 2 days ago | parent [-]

Okay full disclosure, I believe in stablecoins only but what are your thoughts on nano. It has zero fees and I worked using its zero fees to store data/timestamps in it by nanotimestamps

Personally I prefer usdc on polygon

▲

immibis 2 days ago | parent [-]

> what are your thought on nano. It has zero fees

I repeat:

> Almost every cryptocurrency starts out with low fees and then fees increase when it gets popular and runs into processing limits.

▲

Imustaskforhelp 2 days ago | parent [-]

Once again, I have no skin in the game at all and I do not own any nano.

Nano uses proof of work to counter scam from both sending and receiving side and it uses open representative voting.

Basically nano works from my understanding as like hey, we will host the servers for nano since its kinda cheap to do so but also that we can promote our services via the voting model, mostly done by exchanges like binance,kraken for free.

The model of nano lacks the idea of payment in the first place, its whole model is built around send/recieve proof of works and representative voting

I created a tool which did literally 10s of transactions on nano tokens I got from a faucet and they had 0 fees so I stored data like "hello world" lets say on the chains without losing a single coin (I had like 0.000001) or something

They still are sustainable and without spam by that much partially because of their proof of works and from what I know, it can get really hard to spam if one tries to do so.

Personally there is nanusd but its highly unregulated, just created by one guy, I wish if something like nano can be created at a stablecoin level but yea.

What are your thoughts now, I wish to not sell on nano (the coin) but ORV (the technology), I find it more interested than blockchain essentially, there are some minor differences like nano uses lattice structure etc.

Also please dont buy nano reading this, I find the coin still speculative and I wish if someone can create a more regulated version of a stablecoin combined with running basically a nano node internally, its all open source I guess.

▲

immibis a day ago | parent [-]

> The model of nano lacks the idea of payment in the first place

oh well then I guess it's not a currency so why are we talking about it in the first place?

▲

Imustaskforhelp a day ago | parent [-]

I meant gas payments sorry, not payments itself...

Mistakes happen and I am human so sorry about the misclarifications I suppose.

But basically the coin's structure/data structure doesn't have a gas fees data in it and its always 0, the network might take some work function which can take some time to process and there have been some attempts at spamming it but the recent network from what I have heard is spam resistant and it can happen to any such coin but honestly I do like 0.0000001 faucet transactions and they happen for free and instantly the last time I tried it.

I am still not shilling nano coin, I think the technology is cool and something similar but with more stablecoin-esque asthetic could be built and I am kinda interested in building something like it just out of curiosity ngl and I am worried what can be the idea or is it even worth it but yea...

	▲	immibis 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		When throughput I create 9999999999 accounts each sending 99999999 transactions per second, something is going to prioritize which transactions to include in the chain. If you don't choose intentionally, you will choose unintentionally.

▲

BLKNSLVR 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Nano is pretty amazing, but, yeah, the interest is in profit not the technology, so it's fading into the background. Pity.