14 ms·

Last week I wanted to purchase a used item but discovered that, without warning or notification, Marketplace was deactivated from my Facebook account. My Facebo

by dpau 7y ago

Last week I wanted to purchase a used item but discovered that, without warning or notification, Marketplace was deactivated from my Facebook account. My Facebook account is quite active, with posts, discussion in multiple groups, and hundreds of friends. I still have no clue as to what rule I triggered and no recourse to reactivate it. Now imagine that's my digital Libra bank account? No thanks.

theturtletalks 7y ago
That's a good point, but other companies do this without recourse. Paypal is the classic example. They will literally ban you overnight and hold your funds for months. Oh and forget knowing the reason, because revealing why you got banned would reveal too much about their filter algorithm. The key is to diversify where you buy and how you buy it so you're not dependent on any one company.
- black_puppydog 7y ago
  Which is exactly why you can't risk to have anything even remotely approaching a monopoly in any part of the systems involved in making transactions. Which is why I (also as a German) am very happy that we have a competitive (read: better in literally every way) alternative to credit cards, plus a strong cash culture. Oh and for completeness' sake: if paypal (and libra for that matter) are not regulated according to all the rules that other financial services have to obey, something needs to change. But then I don't know enough about the specifics of that to say if that is a hypothetical or not.
  - auslander 7y ago
    > you can't risk to have anything even remotely approaching a monopoly in any part of the systems involved in making transactions. AFAIK US is a monopoly for international money transfer. You just cannot bypass a US intermediary bank and US Dollar conversion.
    - insulanus 7y ago
      And those intermediaries are very closely watched by entities with power to affect the system, not by powerless "consumers" who's only choice is to shrug and choose another provider (if available).
    - pvorb 7y ago
      Even between EU countries? I wouldn't think so, but I'm no expert.
      - auslander 7y ago
        EU internal ones are likely an exception. Not an expert myself, it just consolidated in my mind as a fact from all the books and articles over the years.
        wnkrshm 7y ago
        EU internal transfers are most likely made by SEPA (Single Euro Payments Area) infrastructure (with European clearing entities) or for large sums by direct communication/deals between the European banks. Why would any US entity be needed for this?
        pvorb 7y ago
        Exactly. And since most corporations I deal with have at least an office in a European country, I almost never have to deal with US banks.
    - drewm1980 7y ago
      International bank transfers within europe most certainly do not go through USD. If you want to send money to/from Europe to USA without a conversion, it is also possible, but you need a bank account in the currency you want to transfer on both sides.
    - htfu 7y ago
      You're likely thinking of the dollar being "unavoidable" as a unit of settlement due to its status as main world reserve currency, but even that's metaphorical and in any case a state & institutional level thing. Just think about it - how would that even work?
- flashyfaffe 7y ago
  Agree with you with the necessity of diversification. The issue is not Facebook issuing its own crypto but rather the potential control we let it take over. I believe that the same reason related to control that an entity can people on people (combined with the new technology) helped to originate bitcoin. The need to ensure no one ( including governments) deciding people's life by manipulating own belongings (by tax or rates manipulation). That's a the same anarcho- libertarian logic approach here. Anyone should be able to decide whether or not putting your eggs in the same basket.
  - thecrazyone 7y ago
    By your logic, banning it through regulation decreases options and hence diversification. Governments are not angels which seems to be an assumption in your and sibling replies. They're a bully who doesn't want someone else to get power. I'm not being extreme, humor me. If the govt didn't want a monopoly, isn't it a hypocrisy that they themselves are one? The proper thing to would've been to get closer to anarcho-capitalism, ie let there be govt currency and FB's libra. Let people decide what they want to use.
    - suthakamal 7y ago
      You speak as though corporations and democratic governments are the same thing. The government is (at least notionally) the will of the people. A corporation is unaccountable to anyone but it’s shareholders. It is folly to treat EU legislators the same as Zuck et al.
nugget 7y ago
Isn't the answer better consumer protections, though? Rather than a ban on new technology that threatens the status quo. If Facebook wants to be a bank, they should be subject to the banking regulators and there could be (should be) strong consumer protections preventing the type of corporate behavior you describe.
- adolph 7y ago
  Doesn’t that just shift the controls on corporate behavior and consolidate the controls into a political process? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point
  - tripzilch 7y ago
    which is where you want it, because FB doesn't exactly have a good track record when it comes to customer protection, compared to most EU countries. in fact their track record is both worse and laughably shorter.
- zaphirplane 7y ago
  I feel there is a conflation here. Facebook is free to apply for a banking license in countries they want to operate as a bank in. Facebook shouldn’t be able to circumvent banking over site and regulations by coming in as a technology company with fancy words. The conflation here is Facebook isn’t being blocked form becoming a licensed bank in Germany - correct me if I’m wrong
  - lacker 7y ago
    But they don’t want to become a bank. They want to build a cryptocurrency. There are already hundreds of cryptocurrencies that operate in France and Germany, and the developers do not have to have banking licenses.
    - torgian 7y ago
      The difference is that Facebook has millions to pour into resources, marketing, etc, while those other crypto currency companies do not. I would be very very wary of a social media giant issuing crypto. Lots of inherit dangers there.

by dpau 7y ago

theturtletalks 7y ago

That's a good point, but other companies do this without recourse. Paypal is the classic example. They will literally ban you overnight and hold your funds for months. Oh and forget knowing the reason, because revealing why you got banned would reveal too much about their filter algorithm. The key is to diversify where you buy and how you buy it so you're not dependent on any one company.

black_puppydog 7y ago
Which is exactly why you can't risk to have anything even remotely approaching a monopoly in any part of the systems involved in making transactions. Which is why I (also as a German) am very happy that we have a competitive (read: better in literally every way) alternative to credit cards, plus a strong cash culture. Oh and for completeness' sake: if paypal (and libra for that matter) are not regulated according to all the rules that other financial services have to obey, something needs to change. But then I don't know enough about the specifics of that to say if that is a hypothetical or not.
- auslander 7y ago
  > you can't risk to have anything even remotely approaching a monopoly in any part of the systems involved in making transactions. AFAIK US is a monopoly for international money transfer. You just cannot bypass a US intermediary bank and US Dollar conversion.
  - insulanus 7y ago
    And those intermediaries are very closely watched by entities with power to affect the system, not by powerless "consumers" who's only choice is to shrug and choose another provider (if available).
  - pvorb 7y ago
    Even between EU countries? I wouldn't think so, but I'm no expert.
    - auslander 7y ago
      EU internal ones are likely an exception. Not an expert myself, it just consolidated in my mind as a fact from all the books and articles over the years.
      - wnkrshm 7y ago
        EU internal transfers are most likely made by SEPA (Single Euro Payments Area) infrastructure (with European clearing entities) or for large sums by direct communication/deals between the European banks. Why would any US entity be needed for this?
        pvorb 7y ago
        Exactly. And since most corporations I deal with have at least an office in a European country, I almost never have to deal with US banks.
  - drewm1980 7y ago
    International bank transfers within europe most certainly do not go through USD. If you want to send money to/from Europe to USA without a conversion, it is also possible, but you need a bank account in the currency you want to transfer on both sides.
  - htfu 7y ago
    You're likely thinking of the dollar being "unavoidable" as a unit of settlement due to its status as main world reserve currency, but even that's metaphorical and in any case a state & institutional level thing. Just think about it - how would that even work?
flashyfaffe 7y ago
Agree with you with the necessity of diversification. The issue is not Facebook issuing its own crypto but rather the potential control we let it take over. I believe that the same reason related to control that an entity can people on people (combined with the new technology) helped to originate bitcoin. The need to ensure no one ( including governments) deciding people's life by manipulating own belongings (by tax or rates manipulation). That's a the same anarcho- libertarian logic approach here. Anyone should be able to decide whether or not putting your eggs in the same basket.
- thecrazyone 7y ago
  By your logic, banning it through regulation decreases options and hence diversification. Governments are not angels which seems to be an assumption in your and sibling replies. They're a bully who doesn't want someone else to get power. I'm not being extreme, humor me. If the govt didn't want a monopoly, isn't it a hypocrisy that they themselves are one? The proper thing to would've been to get closer to anarcho-capitalism, ie let there be govt currency and FB's libra. Let people decide what they want to use.
  - suthakamal 7y ago
    You speak as though corporations and democratic governments are the same thing. The government is (at least notionally) the will of the people. A corporation is unaccountable to anyone but it’s shareholders. It is folly to treat EU legislators the same as Zuck et al.

nugget 7y ago

Isn't the answer better consumer protections, though? Rather than a ban on new technology that threatens the status quo. If Facebook wants to be a bank, they should be subject to the banking regulators and there could be (should be) strong consumer protections preventing the type of corporate behavior you describe.

adolph 7y ago
Doesn’t that just shift the controls on corporate behavior and consolidate the controls into a political process? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point
- tripzilch 7y ago
  which is where you want it, because FB doesn't exactly have a good track record when it comes to customer protection, compared to most EU countries. in fact their track record is both worse and laughably shorter.
zaphirplane 7y ago
I feel there is a conflation here. Facebook is free to apply for a banking license in countries they want to operate as a bank in. Facebook shouldn’t be able to circumvent banking over site and regulations by coming in as a technology company with fancy words. The conflation here is Facebook isn’t being blocked form becoming a licensed bank in Germany - correct me if I’m wrong
- lacker 7y ago
  But they don’t want to become a bank. They want to build a cryptocurrency. There are already hundreds of cryptocurrencies that operate in France and Germany, and the developers do not have to have banking licenses.
  - torgian 7y ago
    The difference is that Facebook has millions to pour into resources, marketing, etc, while those other crypto currency companies do not. I would be very very wary of a social media giant issuing crypto. Lots of inherit dangers there.