[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Taler] Taler roll out

From: nana karlstetter
Subject: Re: [Taler] Taler roll out
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:00:02 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0

Hi all,
Christian and me will have a mumble next week. I am happy to take this
issue up from there.
Apart from that I agree with Hartmut.

Am 08.01.2016 um 11:24 schrieb Christian Grothoff:
> On 01/08/2016 10:15 AM, Klaus Schleisiek wrote:
>> Am 07.01.2016 um 21:02 schrieb Florian Dold:
>>>> What is the harm in having the fulfillment signature right now, which
>>>> might be ignored by current wallets, but that might be used by future
>>>> wallets that provide merchant PKI support?
>> I think that we have very different problems at present. We are talking 
>> about a
>> piece of software that nobody uses. Why should we optimize it if it works 
>> good
>> enough to be rolled out. Rolling out is the real problem.
> Hi Klaus,
> While I agree with you that rollout is the main problem, we should not
> stifle discussion of technical issues -- be it features, minor bugs, or
> even major design choices -- just because the business issues are
> "larger".  As far as I see it, those are two totally orthogonal
> questions, and pursuing technical excellence does not impede the
> business development side at all, especially as (except for me)
> different people are involved.
> As for your suggestions, I agree with your assessment of the issues
> around (1), but I think financing (1b) is not unrealistic, and (1a) does
> not matter as long as this is to demonstrate the viability of the
> concept. If we can make (2) or (3) happen without (1), great, but I
> think it is makes sense to technically work towards making option (1)
> work ASAP. For (2) and (3) we can talk to people (and we have had some
> talks already on (2)), but it simply takes time to develop those
> relationships, and having (1) would IMO help here.
> As for (3), we should consider that the existing CC system is beneficial
> to very big merchants (need to trust merchant with personal information
> = preference for big players), and that huge ones (like Amazon, Samsung,
> Apple, Google) will try to push their in-house "trust us" solutions
> (i.e. ApplePay).
> Now, it is conceivable that Otto Versand is too small to realistically
> push their own and thus at that size Taler becomes a compelling business
> case just to stop the payment system monopolies from the biggest
> players. But I'm not sure how big they are exactly, and if their
> management understands this ;-).
> Finally, we probably want to somehow coordinate who approaches which
> potential partner(s) when with what, to make sure this is done in a
> professional manner. So while I'm currently happy with any help we can
> get, it might still be a good idea to first create proper marketing
> materials (presentations, etc.) and an overall strategy before community
> members approach potential partners more or less at random.
> That said, I certainly agree with that (3) needs to happen eventually
> and should be part of the plan. Maybe you can work with Nana to plan
> this properly?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]