安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
此主题已被锁定 
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
I'm not sure how much you know about cryptocurrencies, but you're referring to a Proof of Work (PoW) consensus mechanism which involves mining which does indeed involve colossal electricity usage. This is what Bitcoin and Ethereum use, although Ethereum is making the move to Proof of Stake (PoS).
To reach consensus on the network, Nano uses Open Representative Voting (ORV), which is a form of Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS). ORV allows for incredible energy efficiency in reaching consensus.
What makes you think it's not? You can Google Nano, or read about it on the website or anywhere else.
The reason for Nano is mostly that it's borderless and feeless. So for example, there's a game I play (non-Steam) with international friends where we sometimes do purchases together. I can use Paypal, Western Union and such, or Nano. Well, turns out using Nano is cheaper because there are no fees, and exchanging it back into dollars/australian dollars/yen is very cheap. So I buy Nano on a crypto exchange here in Europe, send it to my Australian buddy, he converts it into Australian dollars on his exchange.
I think that's the main benefit.
Bitcoin has nothing to do with this - Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency, so is Nano. They do not interact in any way, I don't have any Bitcoin and never use Bitcoin.
User pays with Nano -> Company after getting Nano sends cash -> Valve gets cash
Cryptocurrency functions as a transfer of value. There are people who don't have access to banks and cryptocurrency allows them to participate in our system. You are referring to 1st and 2nd generation cryptocurrency, 3rd generation is vastly different than its predecessors. Nano cryptocurrency, for example, is feeless, instant, scalable and consumes 1/6,000,000th the electricity than BTC. I'm not sure what you mean by BTC funds Nano, they are completely unrelated.
Something to also consider is that all CC companies charge Steam fees. Those fees are past on to you and I in the form of higher price.
You are free to continue to use your countries currency and the existing payment methods . Adding a payment method does not change anything for you.
How do you figure? https://www.coindesk.com/price/nano
And these are financial institutions that are regulated and guarantee transactions? I mean I'm not an expert but it does seem like coin exchanges are the wild west and there's been many issues over the years.
You can put whatever positive spins you want on it. Maybe it's all better. But maybe folks without a pro crypto bias might have a different take away about the safety and reliability of those systems.
Well... except refunds aren't instant and if someone thinks they should have got a refund at X but for a refund at Y they're bound to be pissed and go off on a rant. It may not be worth the hassle.
Overwall you're talking about complex systems, and you can't claim it's simple to make the implementation happen. That might feel sufficient on a forum. But at some point you do actually have to address all the scenarios. Simple ideas get messy really quick when you have to implement them in reality and let those systems be used by millions of people.
Well except for the overhead of managing the currency and all the extra special systems you need to deal with things like volatility and customer service to support it.
Definite maybe. I'm a pessimist. And I want to say, "People have said that, and continue to say that about Bitcoin, or any other pet crypto currency."
And it's easy to claim the pros greatly outweigh the cons. Except they arguably don't, certainly a lot of businesses don't feel as enthusiastic about random crypto coins as their proponents do. You've thought a lot about the pros. You might take a hard look at what prevents everyone from jumping on board as enthusiastically as you'd like. It's not all ignorance or cowardice impeding progress... there might be legitimate issues you can't hand wave away with boundless optimism.
That part should be pretty simple, they could work together with Binance for this for example. They can instantly convert Nano into practically any currency in the world.
Because volatility does not matter much on a 3-second basis. Receive Nano, convert to USD if you do not want the Nano volatility.
Binance, Kraken and such are crypto exchanges and are regulated businesses, yes. I think Kraken has a banking license nowadays even. The Nano network itself is not a financial business, but can be audited by anyone by looking at the code and at the history. They've also been audited by Red4Sec, which concluded it was the most secure crypto they'd ever looked at. I'm pretty sure no payment processor can boast 70 million transactions without a single fault, right?
Refunds could be instant if you used Nano, haha. I think an easy solution here would be that if both parties agree to the refund, then there's an agreement that at X time it's sent at the current exchange rate. The person can then choose themselves whether to keep it in Nano or convert it themselves. Doesn't seem like such an issue to me, to be honest.
There are mom and pop stores that accept Nano, I hardly think the overhead of "managing it" would be very big. It's extremely simple to accept. The customer service is already here for regular payments, which seem to offer their own problems more often than the Nano network has ever had issues.
That's totally fair. I'm always open to discussion about it and who knows, there might be better options in time. I'm not claiming this randomly though, I've personally tested and looked into most cryptocurrencies and if there is one that I think stands a good chance to work as actual money, it's this one. There are always downsides - in Nano's case the biggest downside (in crypto terms) is that it's "only" a currency. Most try to do more than that. But as a currency, there is very little to fault Nano for.
Either way, thanks for discussing it. I appreciate the openness.
No, crypro is not returning as an option on Steam, it's too volatile with an unknown future, not to mention mining in general is becoming even more unrealistic for individuals to make any profitability.
Not to mention what you paid then, and people trying to refund-abuse to get more coinage back in anticipation of the value shortly changing is a perfect reason why not to allow it; they could lose more in people essentially "gaming the system" for their own profit.
It's not coming back, it's interesting you have nearly nothing on the account and this is your first post and thread combination, I'd say more than likely it would fit the predictions of attempting to game the system.
Let's stick with realistic currency.
Volatility - I tried to explain, but clearly haven't done so very well, that volatility doesn't matter because this specific cryptocurrency has sub-second transfers. On a second-basis, fluctuations in price really do not matter.
As for mining - Nano has no mining. This is mostly the reason it can be fast and feeless, and definitely the reason that it's so energy efficient.
Refunds could be on a dollar basis, that should be relatively simple.
And come on man, thinking I'm trying to game the system is a low blow. Just because I don't post here much and don't buy that many games because I enjoy the few I have doesn't mean I have any intention of gaming the system in any way. It should be made ungameable, based on Steam never having to repay more than they got.
That being said, I think I gave my reasons for why this would be positive for Steam and customers. It saves them on transaction costs from payment processors, which tend to be a few %, which is millions on a yearly basis. The same holds for refunds - this means a double fee. It's a cost-saving measure that I hope will also be passed on to us at least partly.
This isn't even remotely about mining... Nano doesn't get mined, nor would "steam profiting off mining" be the case even if it did.
100% agreed, this should not be a thing. If they decided to accept nano as a currency, they could simply make an agreement that you either receive the local currency amount you paid in NANO back at the time of refund, or you just get it back as Steam credit. This can be specified in the terms of use, it's not really an issue.
The dollar used to be linked to valuable commodities, such as gold or silver. This isn't the case anymore, the dollar is now Fiat, which essentially means it just comes down to government policies that determine how much or little should be printed. Just printing money when you need it doesn't seem particularly realistic to lots of people. Obviously, there's more too it, but there IS a reason why crypto is appealing to people.
You will not have new NANO printed or mined. The total supply is either already in circulation or burned. The volatility comes down to not being adopted and used enough, really. That's what these sorts of threads are trying to help move along.
The Nano community truly believes in its currency, which is why you'll see they're so passionate about it. Go try it for yourself, you can get some for free from a faucet to send around
Your OP post reads more like a sales pitch rather than a suggestion but I always found it is best to read before making claims.
Nano is not so great if you read this article as Nano is tied to the hip of Bitcoins price action. If Bitcoins price falls so does Nano.
https://captainaltcoin.com/nano-coin-price-prediction/
I own a computer repair shop, some would say "hey you guys should accept crypto as payment since you know, computers!" I say nope, why, might you ask, because any transaction I do, ANY, I have to have tied to a real person and real information, I see lots of crypto people wanting it to remain without a face or real information tied to it, I'm not willing to accept that risk for my company, valve might, but not myself, I already have to accept a minimum with credit card processors, paypal and a few other merchant services I use.
Well, suggestions are sort of pitches for your idea, aren't they?
Honestly, it's not about the price action to me. You might be right that the price action is tied to Bitcoin, and I do not in any way suggest Steam should invest in Nano or even hold Nano. I am merely suggesting it as a new payment method, because it would save Steam or us as customers money and make it easier for people all over the world to buy games on Steam. It's a cost-savings method, and a method to make purchasing easier, without Steam having any exposure to any crypto.
I'd say that's up to Steam, they can ask for personal information as they see fit. I'm not making this about some "let's be anonymous cypherpunks" or anything of the sort (not insinuation you are saying that), just saying this genuinely is a cheaper way to accept payments and that cost saving could be passed on to Steam or to us.
Such 'currency' lots of short term volatility. Meaning if you buy a game at time A, then refund it later, the price could have fluctated so much to the point where someone is losing lots of money.
The fact that the only people using nano are feeding it Bitcoin and not actual money is sort of an afterthought I guess? This is like saying that something is a Blood Diamond because you personally didn't kill people to mine it out of the ground. It was just 'given' to you so its definitely positively not a Blood Diamond right?
Why am I using yoru monopoly money if you're already telling me the USD is the fiat currency of your supposed bitcoin scam system?