14 ms·

Visa Blacklisted My Business and My Family for Building Gab

52 points by Melchizedek 6y ago

draw_down 6y ago
Communists, right... I dunno what to say. There’s nothing good about this. Unfortunately people love the free market until market actors do market actor things, then all of a sudden it’s the Bolshevik terror. (Literally, in this case) Do you support Visa’s right to transact with, and not to transact with, whoever they like? Sure you do, till it bites you. No sides wish to confront their responsibility in forming the system we are in and heading toward. So it’s full steam ahead. Hold onto your butts!
- exolymph 6y ago
  Upvoted, but there's a significant, influential contingent of the social justice crowd that quite literally is communist and conceives of itself (not incorrectly) as effective vanguardism.
  - draw_down 6y ago
    They say that stuff, but the underlying politics is just neoliberalism. Same with Mr. Gab, here. Neither threatens anything.
- adontz 6y ago
  There is no free market when you have enormous monopolies like VISA. Fee market is when you have VISA, MasterCard and like ten other companies and still can process transaction of nine other companies. Card processing is not a free market.
  - jhanschoo 6y ago
    Do card processors have a monopoly in payment processing when gab is still able to receive payments via other (more inconvenient) options?
    - rbecker 6y ago
      Not a monopoly, but they have enormous market power, which used to be sufficient to get into anti-trust trouble.
- badrabbit 6y ago
  No, I do not accept that Visa has any rights at all. Visa is not a person, it is a public company. Individuals have a right to refuse to transact with whomever they choose but a business has no rights, not even the right to exist. A business only has privileges afforded to it by society. People have a right to form private associations and do whatever they want,but the moment that for-profit business opens doors to the public, the terms of it's operation must be according to local laws and restriction by local commerce associations. Many states allow businesses to refuse a customer , that should not be the case either. If a business has the public as customers then the terms if it's operation and existence must be determined by the public. That is of course assuming society is ruled by a government of the people,for the people and by the people. If corporations run society it is businesses that have rights and they decide who gets to have a payment processed, who gets to buy groceries and who is allowed a shelter above their heads and whose child is allowed at the good schools. That revolting idea of a society must be destroyed at all costs. I will oppose any society or government that supports it.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
exolymph 6y ago
> Gab is and always has been a legally operated business. We sell hats, shirts, and a software subscription service that unlocks new features on Gab. My personal credit score is in the 800’s. I pay my bills. I have a wife and daughter to provide for, yet we are all being punished and defamed because someone at Visa has it out for me. And why does Visa have it out for him? Operation Chokepoint only ended formally, that's why. Payment processing is used as an end-run around the First Amendment.
- bediger4000 6y ago
  > Payment processing is used as an end-run around the First Amendment. What ever happened to "nobody is required to fund your free speech, buddy"? Market forces led to TV, radio and newspaper consolidation in the late 80s-early 90s, and the FCC abandoned the "Fairness Doctrine", which was essentially anti-market. It's good that this fine fellow has funded his own press in Gab.com, there's also Parler for the less stout of heart, but if market forces cause him to go bankrupt, I'm sorry, that's personal responsibility for you!
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > > Payment processing is used as an end-run around the First Amendment. > What ever happened to "nobody is required to fund your free speech, buddy"? It's an end run when, as is not unheard of, it is government pressure on payment processors that underlies them cutting off services to unwelcome activities, if what makes the activity unwelcomenand a focus of the government pressure is an activity protected against government interference by the First Amendment. If it's purely the uninfluenced preference of the payment processors, sure, that's not an end-run around the First Amendment.
rvz 6y ago
> We were told this week that not only is Gab blacklisted by Visa as a business, but my personal name, phone number, address, and more are all also blacklisted by Visa. If I wanted to leave Gab tomorrow (something that isn’t going to happen) and start a lemonade stand I wouldn’t be able to obtain merchant processing for it. Horrific financial suffocation by VISA. This is why they are terrified by cryptocurrencies and will try to control that as well. If they can do this to him, they can essentially do it to anyone who they disagree with for any reason. That's not good. Perhaps we need to also boycott Mastercard, given that their name too is 'offensive' because it has the historical 'master' / 'slave' reference too, which must mean someone out there is offended by their name. /s
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  absolutely no fan of gab and I say good riddance. the cancel culture sure is annoying though. by their logic: we should not forget Blackberry. They should rename themselves to "berry-of-color" Also has anyone looked at all these racist packages in Debian yet? apt-cache search 'master|slave' |uniq|wc -l 332 ... maybe time to flood submit@bugs.debian.org with petitions to end racist Linux once and for all? ... all this is getting really stupid.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
tonetheman 6y ago
Mmmmmm. Gab is haven for hate speech and right wing conspiracy theories. I personally think it is good that Visa will not help them. But as a techie I would say to them use bitcoin?
- badrabbit 6y ago
  I never heard if them before but your rights depend on your ability to tolerate others' right. Today it's right wing conspiracy theories, tomorrow it's a left wing civil rights movement like BLM activism. Payment processors acting as henchmen for the ruling class to decide who should and should not be tolerated is as 1984 dystopian as it gets. I don't know about you but I never voted for visa to legislate, judge or enforce any laws. Rights mean nothing if arbitrary groups of people can collaboratr to prevent your free excercise of those rights. Visa itself has little to no rights, only privileges afforded to it by the public to operate a business.
  - tedivm 6y ago
    The slippery slope fallacy is exactly that- a fallacy. The idea that we have to tolerate intolerance is also one that's been explored and debunked quite a bit.
    - badrabbit 6y ago
      No, I did not say tolerate intolerance. You must tolerate intolerant free speech! Actions are a different ballgame,and even then democratically elected institutions not random corporations get to enforce that rule. And by tolerate I mean don't kill people or socially isolate them and their family from obtaining basic necessities of life. If you can't do that then I cannot support protection of any rights you have at all. I do not wish to live to see more world wars and genocides. Matter if fact, I am saying that your actions of supporting harmful retaliation against free speech is an intolerant action that shouldn't be tolerated, so you're sort of speaking against yourself except you don't see your actions as intolerant.
      - 6y ago
dna_polymerase 6y ago
Visa is a private business, they have the right to do business wi... yadda yadda yadda. But, in a world in which online payments are more important than ever, shouldn't the governments provide an alternative for businesses? Or at least have some kind of guarantee for business to be able to participate in online business?
- akvadrako 6y ago
  Most places do have alternatives payment methods which don't depend on visa or mastercard, though they are usually country-specific. We need an international protocol for sending payments via your own bank's app.
  - the8472 6y ago
    That already exists in europe through the SEPA, using standardized bank account numbers (IBAN).
    - akvadrako 6y ago
      SEPA is not what I’m talking about - there is no way for a store to have a “buy with SEPA” button at checkout which doesn’t require manually entering account numbers.
      - the8472 6y ago
        With a credit card you enter your own credit card number in the shop's site. With sepa direct debit you enter your account number in the shop's site. With instant transfer you enter someone else's account number in your banking app. The modality differences are minor, all of them are payment methods. Perhaps not the payment method you prefer, but still an alternative.
        akvadrako 6y ago
        I have never seen a website offer SEPA direct debit and for good reason - that would be ripe for fraud; they can usually be reversed. For manual transfers, not only would you need their account number, but you would need the amount and transaction code and to manually enter those in your bank's app. Then, you have to manually return to the store's website to see if it succeeded. So no, the differences are not minor.
kgraves 6y ago
"Build your own platform" they said...
jdkee 6y ago
Unleash anti-trust on the credit card processors and break them up.
badrabbit 6y ago
No business should be allowed to turn away a customer without a factually true reason that directly affects their revenue or profits. That aside , why isn't btc consumer ready yet? Or what are the stumbling blocks? Most major platforms won't allow crypto tradig without ID verificatiom so for most people the blacklisting problem remains. And make no mistake, I will still be against Visa whethet this was the new Nazi party collecting genocide funds or anarchists collecting riot funds. Legislators, judges,prosecutors and mayors are elected to implement rules that enforce how society feels about any person or group. No corporation or industry has my consent to enforce any law. They have the privilege, not right to engage in commerce. Society needs to revoke their privelege so they learn their place.
- throwawaycncltr 6y ago
  “ That aside , why isn't btc consumer ready yet? ” Because ppl don’t want an FBI profile.
- TylerE 6y ago
  Our other customers don't like it when we handle business for a site that enables neo-nazis isn't a valid "true" reason?
  - badrabbit 6y ago
    If they have verifiable proof of other customers complaining, sure it's valid. But even then, it does not give them the right to actively call other payment processors to stop them from doing business with gab. Persecution is no one's right.
  - Turing_Machine 6y ago
    What if the other customers don't like Democrats? Or leftists in general? That would be perfectly fine? I don't think this ends up you imagine that it does.
- bediger4000 6y ago
  yes, of course Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission says that!
ytNumbers 6y ago
> FTA: "Visa tells them that Gab has been flagged..." And also, flagged here on HN. I thought the folks here would turn out to be better than the folks at VISA. I guess I was wrong about that.
- haunter 6y ago
  >Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it. Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead. If you flag, please don't also comment that you did. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - ytNumbers 6y ago
    I didn't mean to imply that I flagged this. I think the story is relevant and not spam. It's just a shame to see people on HN trying to cancel the story of someone who got cancelled.
Ghjklov 6y ago
just build ur own social media platform bro just build ur own payment processing platform bro just build your own internet infrastructure bro just build your own computer components bro just build ur own electricity bro just build ur own food bro One day they will come for you too, whoever supports this.
- bradgranath 6y ago
  Which is why all of this should be nationalized.
imustbeevil 6y ago
> National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling 8-0 (Marshall did not participate in the decision) that although states have broad power to regulate economic activities, they cannot prohibit peaceful advocacy of a politically-motivated boycott. > In a decision by Justice Stevens, the Supreme Court reversed the Supreme Court of Mississippi's decision, holding that the nonviolent elements of the petitioners' activities were protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and holding that the petitioners were not liable in damages for the consequences of their nonviolent, protected activity. This decision means that "boycotts and related activities to bring about political, social and economic change are political speech, occupying “the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAACP_v._Claiborne_Hardware_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAACP_v._Claiborne_Hardware_Co.
- scarface74 6y ago
  Why is this so hard to understand? “that although states have broad power to regulate economic activities...” The first amendment is binding to the states and federal government not a private business.
  - imustbeevil 6y ago
    You are misunderstanding. The Supreme Court held that Visa boycotting Gab (or anyone associated with Gab) is protected Political Speech. I'm pointing out the contradiction of everyone in this thread only caring about Gab's rights and not Visa's rights.
    - scarface74 6y ago
      You are correct. I got triggered because the three things that a lot of people get wrong on HN are censorship, monopoly, and anti-trust.
- rbecker 6y ago
  So VISA's actions don't violate the 1st amendment. That doesn't answer if they violate anti-trust laws, nor does it answer the more important questions of is this behavior, even if legal, also moral, and should we be worried about how much power VISA has when they can so easily destroy a business.
sdinsn 6y ago
Gab is a racist cesspool. If I was Visa, I wouldn't want to be associated with them in any fashion either.
- rbecker 6y ago
  I, for one, welcome our payment processing overlords. I mean, they agree with me in this specific case, so what could go wrong!
  - loopz 6y ago
    Well, this is clearly a case where the Good Guys and Free Markets finally win, and ironically so to boot! ;)
zenhack 6y ago
To get it out of the way, because it does need to be said: fuck this guy. "Hate speech does not exist." It's not news that Gab is a platform for white supremacists. "Free speech" here is a dogwhistle; he's pushing an agenda that promotes actively violating the civil liberties (and basic physical safety) of others. The second his ideas get a foot in the door he'll swap sides and try to close it behind him. When neo-nazis and white supremacists talk about "free speech," they're straw-manning themselves, because for their actual position, straw is an upgrade. To be clear: there's no constitutional or other legal violation here; visa isn't the government, they're legally free to "vote with their wallet" like the rest of us. The problem of course is that their wallet is rather larger than most, and it is definitely the case that larger corporations have too much power over individuals and smaller businesses. Reminds me of this: https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/ ...so by all means let's push for policies that make for a more egalitarian playing field, for everyone. Some silly ideas of the top of my head: a wealth tax. use taxes as a smoothing function; I'd argue for the bottom segment of the population to actually receive money from the government. Change the FTC rules such that by default mergers of companies over a certain size are denied. Maybe make acquihires harder somehow. We can debate what should be done. Note that he doesn't actually make any suggestions in this vein, he just jumps from "enormous capitalist organization was mean to me" to "it's the commiees and they'll come for us all." He's not for free speech, he's just trying to sow hate without coming right out and saying it.
- adontz 6y ago
  Even if everybody here agrees with "fuck this guy" sentiment, I do not see VISA as an accountable institution which should regulate or enforce anything related to morals.
coopsmgoops 6y ago
I don't like that the author didn't bother to explain what it was Visa didn't like, I don't care enough to go digging and so I'm not inclined to take sides. Visa is well within its rights to blacklist your company, I don't know if they are in the right regarding your personal accounts. But it doesn't sound like you've been blacklisted for "building Gab" which to me made it sound like you were a competing platform it sounds like you ruffled some feathers and now you are trying to play the "but free speech" card which doesn't apply to corporations.
IdontRememberIt 6y ago
Electronic payment is taking a vital importance. In many countries, cash is no more an alternative as there are now limits on the amounts you are allowed to pay cash (usually to fight fiscal evasion, undeclared jobs, crime, money laundering, etc). I wonder if in the future, electronic payment will be considered like electricity (basic utility?). Only a juge would be allowed to ban someone using it. In the US, are electricity or water companies allowed to ban a customer if he is having criminal activities? How does it work?
- bediger4000 6y ago
  Visa and MasterCard in particular are hugely profitable businesses. There is no way that payment processing will be nationalized in the USA. Big corporations still prefer their customers pay with checks or ACH, because it costs about 1.25% minimum per transaction for Level 1 merchants. The US government clears checks, and it costs nothing per transaction.
  - IdontRememberIt 6y ago
    In many countries, utilities are not public companies but are obliged to offer a "universal service". When the service is considered as "universal", banning a customer is next to impossible. Today, electronic payment is practically considered as is but not legally. However I can imagine that cases will be raised and politician will change that.
kangnkodos 6y ago
The slippery slope argument is that first VISA is going after white supremacists. Next they will be refusing to work with any Republican fund raising efforts. It's a dubious argument, but even it were true that this is the direction that VISA is taking, where would this lead? I don't think VISA will choose to walk away from major customers in the future. More likely, they will continue to turn away the most extreme customers who are also very small. But if VISA did go down this road, it would open up an opportunity for a new Repulican-oriented credit card company. Or more likely, Republicans would turn more and more to their competitors, such as American Express.
lazylizard 6y ago
So. Capitalism and greed is the root of all evil but social credit score is eviler!
bradgranath 6y ago
Hate speech is not protected from private consequences, doofus. If you'd like to nationalize the credit card system, let's hear you say it. Private banks are not compelled to do business with you. Would you like a Central Bank, if so please say so, so we can get it done sooner, rather than later.

52 points by Melchizedek 6y ago

Communists, right... I dunno what to say. There’s nothing good about this. Unfortunately people love the free market until market actors do market actor things, then all of a sudden it’s the Bolshevik terror. (Literally, in this case) Do you support Visa’s right to transact with, and not to transact with, whoever they like? Sure you do, till it bites you. No sides wish to confront their responsibility in forming the system we are in and heading toward. So it’s full steam ahead. Hold onto your butts!

exolymph 6y ago
Upvoted, but there's a significant, influential contingent of the social justice crowd that quite literally is communist and conceives of itself (not incorrectly) as effective vanguardism.
- draw_down 6y ago
  They say that stuff, but the underlying politics is just neoliberalism. Same with Mr. Gab, here. Neither threatens anything.
adontz 6y ago
There is no free market when you have enormous monopolies like VISA. Fee market is when you have VISA, MasterCard and like ten other companies and still can process transaction of nine other companies. Card processing is not a free market.
- jhanschoo 6y ago
  Do card processors have a monopoly in payment processing when gab is still able to receive payments via other (more inconvenient) options?
  - rbecker 6y ago
    Not a monopoly, but they have enormous market power, which used to be sufficient to get into anti-trust trouble.
badrabbit 6y ago
No, I do not accept that Visa has any rights at all. Visa is not a person, it is a public company. Individuals have a right to refuse to transact with whomever they choose but a business has no rights, not even the right to exist. A business only has privileges afforded to it by society. People have a right to form private associations and do whatever they want,but the moment that for-profit business opens doors to the public, the terms of it's operation must be according to local laws and restriction by local commerce associations. Many states allow businesses to refuse a customer , that should not be the case either. If a business has the public as customers then the terms if it's operation and existence must be determined by the public. That is of course assuming society is ruled by a government of the people,for the people and by the people. If corporations run society it is businesses that have rights and they decide who gets to have a payment processed, who gets to buy groceries and who is allowed a shelter above their heads and whose child is allowed at the good schools. That revolting idea of a society must be destroyed at all costs. I will oppose any society or government that supports it.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

exolymph 6y ago

> Gab is and always has been a legally operated business. We sell hats, shirts, and a software subscription service that unlocks new features on Gab. My personal credit score is in the 800’s. I pay my bills. I have a wife and daughter to provide for, yet we are all being punished and defamed because someone at Visa has it out for me. And why does Visa have it out for him? Operation Chokepoint only ended formally, that's why. Payment processing is used as an end-run around the First Amendment.

bediger4000 6y ago
> Payment processing is used as an end-run around the First Amendment. What ever happened to "nobody is required to fund your free speech, buddy"? Market forces led to TV, radio and newspaper consolidation in the late 80s-early 90s, and the FCC abandoned the "Fairness Doctrine", which was essentially anti-market. It's good that this fine fellow has funded his own press in Gab.com, there's also Parler for the less stout of heart, but if market forces cause him to go bankrupt, I'm sorry, that's personal responsibility for you!
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > > Payment processing is used as an end-run around the First Amendment. > What ever happened to "nobody is required to fund your free speech, buddy"? It's an end run when, as is not unheard of, it is government pressure on payment processors that underlies them cutting off services to unwelcome activities, if what makes the activity unwelcomenand a focus of the government pressure is an activity protected against government interference by the First Amendment. If it's purely the uninfluenced preference of the payment processors, sure, that's not an end-run around the First Amendment.

rvz 6y ago

> We were told this week that not only is Gab blacklisted by Visa as a business, but my personal name, phone number, address, and more are all also blacklisted by Visa. If I wanted to leave Gab tomorrow (something that isn’t going to happen) and start a lemonade stand I wouldn’t be able to obtain merchant processing for it. Horrific financial suffocation by VISA. This is why they are terrified by cryptocurrencies and will try to control that as well. If they can do this to him, they can essentially do it to anyone who they disagree with for any reason. That's not good. Perhaps we need to also boycott Mastercard, given that their name too is 'offensive' because it has the historical 'master' / 'slave' reference too, which must mean someone out there is offended by their name. /s

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
absolutely no fan of gab and I say good riddance. the cancel culture sure is annoying though. by their logic: we should not forget Blackberry. They should rename themselves to "berry-of-color" Also has anyone looked at all these racist packages in Debian yet? apt-cache search 'master|slave' |uniq|wc -l 332 ... maybe time to flood submit@bugs.debian.org with petitions to end racist Linux once and for all? ... all this is getting really stupid.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

tonetheman 6y ago

Mmmmmm. Gab is haven for hate speech and right wing conspiracy theories. I personally think it is good that Visa will not help them. But as a techie I would say to them use bitcoin?

badrabbit 6y ago
I never heard if them before but your rights depend on your ability to tolerate others' right. Today it's right wing conspiracy theories, tomorrow it's a left wing civil rights movement like BLM activism. Payment processors acting as henchmen for the ruling class to decide who should and should not be tolerated is as 1984 dystopian as it gets. I don't know about you but I never voted for visa to legislate, judge or enforce any laws. Rights mean nothing if arbitrary groups of people can collaboratr to prevent your free excercise of those rights. Visa itself has little to no rights, only privileges afforded to it by the public to operate a business.
- tedivm 6y ago
  The slippery slope fallacy is exactly that- a fallacy. The idea that we have to tolerate intolerance is also one that's been explored and debunked quite a bit.
  - badrabbit 6y ago
    No, I did not say tolerate intolerance. You must tolerate intolerant free speech! Actions are a different ballgame,and even then democratically elected institutions not random corporations get to enforce that rule. And by tolerate I mean don't kill people or socially isolate them and their family from obtaining basic necessities of life. If you can't do that then I cannot support protection of any rights you have at all. I do not wish to live to see more world wars and genocides. Matter if fact, I am saying that your actions of supporting harmful retaliation against free speech is an intolerant action that shouldn't be tolerated, so you're sort of speaking against yourself except you don't see your actions as intolerant.
    - 6y ago

dna_polymerase 6y ago

Visa is a private business, they have the right to do business wi... yadda yadda yadda. But, in a world in which online payments are more important than ever, shouldn't the governments provide an alternative for businesses? Or at least have some kind of guarantee for business to be able to participate in online business?

akvadrako 6y ago
Most places do have alternatives payment methods which don't depend on visa or mastercard, though they are usually country-specific. We need an international protocol for sending payments via your own bank's app.
- the8472 6y ago
  That already exists in europe through the SEPA, using standardized bank account numbers (IBAN).
  - akvadrako 6y ago
    SEPA is not what I’m talking about - there is no way for a store to have a “buy with SEPA” button at checkout which doesn’t require manually entering account numbers.
    - the8472 6y ago
      With a credit card you enter your own credit card number in the shop's site. With sepa direct debit you enter your account number in the shop's site. With instant transfer you enter someone else's account number in your banking app. The modality differences are minor, all of them are payment methods. Perhaps not the payment method you prefer, but still an alternative.
      - akvadrako 6y ago
        I have never seen a website offer SEPA direct debit and for good reason - that would be ripe for fraud; they can usually be reversed. For manual transfers, not only would you need their account number, but you would need the amount and transaction code and to manually enter those in your bank's app. Then, you have to manually return to the store's website to see if it succeeded. So no, the differences are not minor.

kgraves 6y ago

"Build your own platform" they said...

jdkee 6y ago

Unleash anti-trust on the credit card processors and break them up.

badrabbit 6y ago

No business should be allowed to turn away a customer without a factually true reason that directly affects their revenue or profits. That aside , why isn't btc consumer ready yet? Or what are the stumbling blocks? Most major platforms won't allow crypto tradig without ID verificatiom so for most people the blacklisting problem remains. And make no mistake, I will still be against Visa whethet this was the new Nazi party collecting genocide funds or anarchists collecting riot funds. Legislators, judges,prosecutors and mayors are elected to implement rules that enforce how society feels about any person or group. No corporation or industry has my consent to enforce any law. They have the privilege, not right to engage in commerce. Society needs to revoke their privelege so they learn their place.

throwawaycncltr 6y ago
“ That aside , why isn't btc consumer ready yet? ” Because ppl don’t want an FBI profile.
TylerE 6y ago
Our other customers don't like it when we handle business for a site that enables neo-nazis isn't a valid "true" reason?
- badrabbit 6y ago
  If they have verifiable proof of other customers complaining, sure it's valid. But even then, it does not give them the right to actively call other payment processors to stop them from doing business with gab. Persecution is no one's right.
- Turing_Machine 6y ago
  What if the other customers don't like Democrats? Or leftists in general? That would be perfectly fine? I don't think this ends up you imagine that it does.
bediger4000 6y ago
yes, of course Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission says that!

ytNumbers 6y ago

> FTA: "Visa tells them that Gab has been flagged..." And also, flagged here on HN. I thought the folks here would turn out to be better than the folks at VISA. I guess I was wrong about that.

haunter 6y ago
>Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it. Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead. If you flag, please don't also comment that you did. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ytNumbers 6y ago
  I didn't mean to imply that I flagged this. I think the story is relevant and not spam. It's just a shame to see people on HN trying to cancel the story of someone who got cancelled.

Ghjklov 6y ago

just build ur own social media platform bro just build ur own payment processing platform bro just build your own internet infrastructure bro just build your own computer components bro just build ur own electricity bro just build ur own food bro One day they will come for you too, whoever supports this.

bradgranath 6y ago
Which is why all of this should be nationalized.

imustbeevil 6y ago

> National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling 8-0 (Marshall did not participate in the decision) that although states have broad power to regulate economic activities, they cannot prohibit peaceful advocacy of a politically-motivated boycott. > In a decision by Justice Stevens, the Supreme Court reversed the Supreme Court of Mississippi's decision, holding that the nonviolent elements of the petitioners' activities were protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and holding that the petitioners were not liable in damages for the consequences of their nonviolent, protected activity. This decision means that "boycotts and related activities to bring about political, social and economic change are political speech, occupying “the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAACP_v._Claiborne_Hardware_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAACP_v._Claiborne_Hardware_Co.

scarface74 6y ago
Why is this so hard to understand? “that although states have broad power to regulate economic activities...” The first amendment is binding to the states and federal government not a private business.
- imustbeevil 6y ago
  You are misunderstanding. The Supreme Court held that Visa boycotting Gab (or anyone associated with Gab) is protected Political Speech. I'm pointing out the contradiction of everyone in this thread only caring about Gab's rights and not Visa's rights.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    You are correct. I got triggered because the three things that a lot of people get wrong on HN are censorship, monopoly, and anti-trust.
rbecker 6y ago
So VISA's actions don't violate the 1st amendment. That doesn't answer if they violate anti-trust laws, nor does it answer the more important questions of is this behavior, even if legal, also moral, and should we be worried about how much power VISA has when they can so easily destroy a business.

sdinsn 6y ago

Gab is a racist cesspool. If I was Visa, I wouldn't want to be associated with them in any fashion either.

rbecker 6y ago
I, for one, welcome our payment processing overlords. I mean, they agree with me in this specific case, so what could go wrong!
- loopz 6y ago
  Well, this is clearly a case where the Good Guys and Free Markets finally win, and ironically so to boot! ;)

zenhack 6y ago

To get it out of the way, because it does need to be said: fuck this guy. "Hate speech does not exist." It's not news that Gab is a platform for white supremacists. "Free speech" here is a dogwhistle; he's pushing an agenda that promotes actively violating the civil liberties (and basic physical safety) of others. The second his ideas get a foot in the door he'll swap sides and try to close it behind him. When neo-nazis and white supremacists talk about "free speech," they're straw-manning themselves, because for their actual position, straw is an upgrade. To be clear: there's no constitutional or other legal violation here; visa isn't the government, they're legally free to "vote with their wallet" like the rest of us. The problem of course is that their wallet is rather larger than most, and it is definitely the case that larger corporations have too much power over individuals and smaller businesses. Reminds me of this: https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/ ...so by all means let's push for policies that make for a more egalitarian playing field, for everyone. Some silly ideas of the top of my head: a wealth tax. use taxes as a smoothing function; I'd argue for the bottom segment of the population to actually receive money from the government. Change the FTC rules such that by default mergers of companies over a certain size are denied. Maybe make acquihires harder somehow. We can debate what should be done. Note that he doesn't actually make any suggestions in this vein, he just jumps from "enormous capitalist organization was mean to me" to "it's the commiees and they'll come for us all." He's not for free speech, he's just trying to sow hate without coming right out and saying it.

adontz 6y ago
Even if everybody here agrees with "fuck this guy" sentiment, I do not see VISA as an accountable institution which should regulate or enforce anything related to morals.

coopsmgoops 6y ago

I don't like that the author didn't bother to explain what it was Visa didn't like, I don't care enough to go digging and so I'm not inclined to take sides. Visa is well within its rights to blacklist your company, I don't know if they are in the right regarding your personal accounts. But it doesn't sound like you've been blacklisted for "building Gab" which to me made it sound like you were a competing platform it sounds like you ruffled some feathers and now you are trying to play the "but free speech" card which doesn't apply to corporations.

IdontRememberIt 6y ago

Electronic payment is taking a vital importance. In many countries, cash is no more an alternative as there are now limits on the amounts you are allowed to pay cash (usually to fight fiscal evasion, undeclared jobs, crime, money laundering, etc). I wonder if in the future, electronic payment will be considered like electricity (basic utility?). Only a juge would be allowed to ban someone using it. In the US, are electricity or water companies allowed to ban a customer if he is having criminal activities? How does it work?

bediger4000 6y ago
Visa and MasterCard in particular are hugely profitable businesses. There is no way that payment processing will be nationalized in the USA. Big corporations still prefer their customers pay with checks or ACH, because it costs about 1.25% minimum per transaction for Level 1 merchants. The US government clears checks, and it costs nothing per transaction.
- IdontRememberIt 6y ago
  In many countries, utilities are not public companies but are obliged to offer a "universal service". When the service is considered as "universal", banning a customer is next to impossible. Today, electronic payment is practically considered as is but not legally. However I can imagine that cases will be raised and politician will change that.

kangnkodos 6y ago

The slippery slope argument is that first VISA is going after white supremacists. Next they will be refusing to work with any Republican fund raising efforts. It's a dubious argument, but even it were true that this is the direction that VISA is taking, where would this lead? I don't think VISA will choose to walk away from major customers in the future. More likely, they will continue to turn away the most extreme customers who are also very small. But if VISA did go down this road, it would open up an opportunity for a new Repulican-oriented credit card company. Or more likely, Republicans would turn more and more to their competitors, such as American Express.

lazylizard 6y ago

So. Capitalism and greed is the root of all evil but social credit score is eviler!

bradgranath 6y ago

Hate speech is not protected from private consequences, doofus. If you'd like to nationalize the credit card system, let's hear you say it. Private banks are not compelled to do business with you. Would you like a Central Bank, if so please say so, so we can get it done sooner, rather than later.