BitWall Allows Publishers To Make Money Through Bitcoin Micropayments

I really wish articles would stop repeating the blanket claim that Bitcoin payments have lower fees than traditional transactions. While true in many cases, it is definitely not true with regard to micropayments. At the protocol level, Bitcoin is <i>horrible</i> for micropayments.<p>Don&#x27;t get me wrong, Bitcoin is great for some things like moderately-sized international payments, but is not designed for frequent small payments. The recommended fees are already too high for this to be practical. And if such small payments become common, they would flood the blockchain, driving fees up further as a result. If you want to see how this has played out before, look at Satoshi Dice.<p>How does BitWall address this problem?

The law requires the first HN comment to be negative. Here goes.<p>BitWall is on my radar because my long-term startup project is, indirectly, a competitor.<p>Paywalls are tricky because they only work for a handful of sites. My expectation is that they don&#x27;t work for the long tail; but it&#x27;s the long tail where almost every website lives. In practice, use of paywalls shapes up to be a niche business model.<p>So when you multiply one niche (paywalls) by another niche (bitcoin), I can only suspect that they will be in for a hard ride. Especially since nothing stops the other white-label paywall platforms from adding bitcoin to their currency roster.