I disagree, there are many out there that are good at micro-transactions.

My personal favorite example is:

https://www.stellar.org/papers/stellar-consensus-protocol.pd...

Transactions take a few seconds, 10000 transactions per $.01 as well as no mining for coins so it is not a bad coin for climate change compared to say Bitcoin and the mining farms.

Just my $0.02

Perhaps what is meant by "don't work" relates more to the value/price/volatility vs actual transaction functionality.

What you describe above has to be weighed against loss of value for holding until accumulating enough to trade for $ no, as well as general fees associated with trading for $ generally?

Else what really is the point, if maintaining the value transferred isn't possible?

Stellar also supports the creation of stablecoins [1], which tend to have a consistent price relative to some other asset (Often USD).

The way stellar works is pretty smart, if I have some currency on the stellar network and you only accept some other currency, it automatically looks for people willing to exchange them to find you a good rate. So even if few people use your favorite stablecoin you can still accept payments in it.

[1]: https://cointelegraph.com/news/ibm-backs-new-us-dollar-pegge...

This only used to be true. The state of the art of Ethereum has very effective microtransactions. This will improve again by orders of magnitude within the next three years.

For example, see https://comingsoon.idex.io/ which is state of the art.

Not true.

The Lightning Network allows microtransactions on the bitcoin blockchain quickly and cheaply; since it went into production last year, over 10,000 nodes have joined and there's over $7 million in network liquidity: https://1ml.com

There are now three topics you can't discuss in polite company. Politics, Religion, and Blockchain. Just smile and change the subject.

> Politics, Religion, and Blockchain

but you repeat yourself?

I'm constantly shocked by how any mention of blockchains is enough make masses of HNers look like absolute luddites. It's just another datastructure that happens to have an above-average level of hype surrounding it.

Hi, I maintained code with a Merkle tree before Satoshi picked his pen name. I’m just not impressed by the consensus algorithm. It’s not that I’m a Luddite, it’s that I understand some things about it that others don’t and will be tricked by.

In short, I see you all as a little nefarious, with a heap of woo to rival some other boondoggles we’ve recently gotten over.

Blockchain is not just a data structure. It has an associated political philosophy (ancap) and get rich quick schemes (ICOs/currencies).

When NoSQL was big a decade ago nobody thought it would upend society or make everyone millionaires.

It’s also one of the dumbest consensus protocols in use. It’s a compromise to get what they wanted out of blockchain but nobody will admit it. Which makes me wonder about the rest of their claims. It’s intellectually dishonest and money is involved. No thank you.