3 ms·

Is this just spam? The linked article is only tangentially related to stripe, and makes no clear argument against anything in specific. It’s a handy wavy “they

Is this just spam? The linked article is only tangentially related to stripe, and makes no clear argument against anything in specific. It’s a handy wavy “they took our rights!” but never presents an example. The whole thing almost reads like a scam ad you see on Craigslist or in your spam folder

throwawaysea 6y ago
No it’s not spam. Stripe stopped payments to Gab, which is mentioned in the article in the greater context of Silicon Valley companies having too much power in our society, controlling our speech/thoughts/politics/values. We should not put trust in Stripe and give them the same undue power given to Visa and MasterCard over payments in our society, unless they refuse to abuse that power.
- rmorey 6y ago
  Cry me a river, Stripe isn’t the government. Gab is clearly a platform for hatred, and it was totally in their purview to drop them as a customer - and oh look: Gab’s still here anyway. Baloney.
  - itsoktocry 6y ago
    >Gab is clearly a platform for hatred It's an "also-ran" social network, nothing more. It has minimal influence. The fact that it's the place people end up when they're kicked off other platforms doesn't make it a "platform for hate", any more than Facebook.
    - judge2020 6y ago
      Does Gab not police neo-nazi content?
  - throwawaysea 6y ago
    Gab is not a platform for hatred. It is just a general social network. Much of what is said about it is exaggerated. But leaving that aside, a payment utility should not get into the business of dictating what customers can and can't say beyond the minimal legal requirements in that jurisdiction. This is how we get a monoculture where wrongspeak is not permitted. As for your "Gab's still here" comment. Clearly the lack of willing payment providers, hosts, registrars, etc. is a hindrance that costs them time and money, and prevents them from being as successful as they could be. The "still here" measure is not a valid measure of anything.
- andrewxdiamond 6y ago
  Stripe pulled out of Gab because they violated their policies on adult content. This has nothing to do with conservatives or hate speech. And even if it was to do with the hate speech, have you considered the rights of the companies providing these services? I am sure there are many Jewish people inside of Microsoft, and plenty on Azure. You would force those people to provide services to someone who actively calls for their humiliation or even death? The US has already had this discussion decades ago. Hate is not a protected class of citizen, you absolutely can push out people who deserve to be outcasts.
  - shivasword 6y ago
    Wouldn't it be easy to destroy a competitor or startup with racist bots? Anti-competitive behavior seems to be the modus operandi of west coast capital.
  - itsoktocry 6y ago
    >I am sure there are many Jewish people inside of Microsoft, and plenty on Azure. You would force those people to provide services to someone who actively calls for their humiliation or even death? Do no Jewish people work at Twitter? Ayatollah Khamenei still has an account. And I'd argue he has more power, influence, and potential to do damage to Jewish people than Richard Spencer.
  - throwawaysea 6y ago
    > have you considered the rights of the companies providing these services These big payment platforms (Paypal, Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, etc.) are not really private organizations. They are public utilities providing a fundamental service required to operate our society, especially when they are as ubiquitous as the big players like Stripe. They should either only police speech to the extent the law requires, or be regulated heavily so they don't enact their own speech stifling policies. The alternative is that we outsource all our fundamental rights bit by bit to private companies who then support just speech they align with. > Hate is not a protected class of citizen, you absolutely can push out people who deserve to be outcasts. I'm not commenting on the legality. I am commenting on the fact that it violates the fundamental principles of free speech, which are more basic than our laws.

throwawaysea 6y ago

No it’s not spam. Stripe stopped payments to Gab, which is mentioned in the article in the greater context of Silicon Valley companies having too much power in our society, controlling our speech/thoughts/politics/values. We should not put trust in Stripe and give them the same undue power given to Visa and MasterCard over payments in our society, unless they refuse to abuse that power.

rmorey 6y ago
Cry me a river, Stripe isn’t the government. Gab is clearly a platform for hatred, and it was totally in their purview to drop them as a customer - and oh look: Gab’s still here anyway. Baloney.
- itsoktocry 6y ago
  >Gab is clearly a platform for hatred It's an "also-ran" social network, nothing more. It has minimal influence. The fact that it's the place people end up when they're kicked off other platforms doesn't make it a "platform for hate", any more than Facebook.
  - judge2020 6y ago
    Does Gab not police neo-nazi content?
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  Gab is not a platform for hatred. It is just a general social network. Much of what is said about it is exaggerated. But leaving that aside, a payment utility should not get into the business of dictating what customers can and can't say beyond the minimal legal requirements in that jurisdiction. This is how we get a monoculture where wrongspeak is not permitted. As for your "Gab's still here" comment. Clearly the lack of willing payment providers, hosts, registrars, etc. is a hindrance that costs them time and money, and prevents them from being as successful as they could be. The "still here" measure is not a valid measure of anything.
andrewxdiamond 6y ago
Stripe pulled out of Gab because they violated their policies on adult content. This has nothing to do with conservatives or hate speech. And even if it was to do with the hate speech, have you considered the rights of the companies providing these services? I am sure there are many Jewish people inside of Microsoft, and plenty on Azure. You would force those people to provide services to someone who actively calls for their humiliation or even death? The US has already had this discussion decades ago. Hate is not a protected class of citizen, you absolutely can push out people who deserve to be outcasts.
- shivasword 6y ago
  Wouldn't it be easy to destroy a competitor or startup with racist bots? Anti-competitive behavior seems to be the modus operandi of west coast capital.
- itsoktocry 6y ago
  >I am sure there are many Jewish people inside of Microsoft, and plenty on Azure. You would force those people to provide services to someone who actively calls for their humiliation or even death? Do no Jewish people work at Twitter? Ayatollah Khamenei still has an account. And I'd argue he has more power, influence, and potential to do damage to Jewish people than Richard Spencer.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  > have you considered the rights of the companies providing these services These big payment platforms (Paypal, Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, etc.) are not really private organizations. They are public utilities providing a fundamental service required to operate our society, especially when they are as ubiquitous as the big players like Stripe. They should either only police speech to the extent the law requires, or be regulated heavily so they don't enact their own speech stifling policies. The alternative is that we outsource all our fundamental rights bit by bit to private companies who then support just speech they align with. > Hate is not a protected class of citizen, you absolutely can push out people who deserve to be outcasts. I'm not commenting on the legality. I am commenting on the fact that it violates the fundamental principles of free speech, which are more basic than our laws.