6 ms·

This is an incredibly frustrating read. I know, I know there are far worse things in the world but fucking Wells Fargo dictating to people when they evict homeo

This is an incredibly frustrating read. I know, I know there are far worse things in the world but fucking Wells Fargo dictating to people when they evict homeowners who have no relationship with Wells Fargo, commit wholesale wire fraud, destroy people's credit and then turn around and lecture a honest business. This is why banking is a rent-seeking and though we need the financial industry they are ghoulish vampires sucking the lifeblood out of everything they touch. /rant

quickthrower2 6y ago
Where there is a lot of money on the table to be had, there will be psychopaths.
disillusioned 6y ago
This was my exact rant. Even more galling was that Wells Fargo was virtue signaling about something that... had no optics to them. Literally no one knows who our payment processor was, but if you even got as far as "Stripe," a _vanishingly small_ number of people know that Wells Fargo is their banking partner for US transactions. This isn't to suggest that WF should run their merchant processing business with no one watching for fraudulent or wantonly scam transactions, but to step in out of nowhere because the volume of actual real charges for real customers for real products was too high and you were busy clutching your pearls over what was being sold is just insane. As if it could somehow splash back on to Wells Fargo and, what, further sully their reputation? "Sure they may ruin people's lives and spawn fake accounts to hit numbers and silence anyone who speaks up and evict people incorrectly but at least they don't process transactions for flesh colored fantasy sex toys. That, sir, would be a bridge too far."
- Le0n_ 6y ago
  I think you're misinterpreting the scale of Wellsfargo. The CEO probably doesn't even know what onlyfans is, and they manage almost 2 trillion dollars.
  - thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
    The CEO knows their business model; it's to scratch out every last penny they can, however they can, just to fulfill some quarterly earnings report. Almost every public company is now a growth company, so it doesn't matter how much they already profit–what matters is that they profit more in the next 90 days. He/She doesn't need/care to know about onlyfans–they simply care about hitting their targets.
    - DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
      ...so why would they want to leave money on the table by forcing Stripe to ditch a clearly profitable client company?
      - jcranmer 6y ago
        Reputational risk. Some journalist gets wind of an ad on Youtube that's playing for a neo-Nazi video, it gets written up as "$COMPANY is supporting Nazis!" despite the fact that it's largely out of the control of $COMPANY, several companies collectively freak out and pull advertising money, and everyone goes hunting for where their pipelines might lead to similar pearl-clutching associations and PR disasters.
        DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
        But that doesn't explain the documented unethical - if not illegal - conduct of Wells Fargo overall. Otherwise they'd be more like the Disney Co.
  - sky_rw 6y ago
    I think you are underestimating the scale of operation choke point.
lukifer 6y ago
> we need the financial industry Do we, though? I don't know whether the answer is distributed blockchains, or the Department of the Treasury creating an API for USD, or both; but the current banking system seems to me like the legacy code of feudal landed aristocrats. (I will never stop being disappointed that we didn't let the financial system crash in 2009.)
- chrisco255 6y ago
  An API for USD centrally controlled by the Treasury? Kiss your financial freedom goodbye. You gotta demand it be distributed blockchains or you'll be living in chains.
  - ballenf 6y ago
    At least you'd have due process and couldn't be deplatformed for legal activity. Now you have neither. The current system has zero privacy, so no change there. Not seeing the downside. Federally illegal activity like marijuana wouldn't benefit, but most things would.
    - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
      Technically, any occurring "federally illegal" activity is just not successfully policed criminal activity. (States can't actually make something legal the federal government says is not legal. They can just decline to use their own resources to police it.) Generally speaking, most people would consider "not usable in crime" to be a feature rather than a bug. ;)
      - sneak 6y ago
        I don’t think there is as quite widespread consensus that all federal crimes are legitimately crime as you seem to think. Marijuana sales, for example, seem extremely popular. Just because there’s a law in place at some remote level of jurisdiction doesn’t mean it’s just, or has popular support.
xxpor 6y ago
Now this is actual cancel culture.
thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
This is what capitalism looks like. The ones with the capital are the ones with power. Housing, health care, and even small businesses all live and die by the decisions of the people/institutions with capital. The average American celebrates capitalism, while at the same being forced to slave away for basics of human life to just barely scrape by.

quickthrower2 6y ago

Where there is a lot of money on the table to be had, there will be psychopaths.

disillusioned 6y ago

This was my exact rant. Even more galling was that Wells Fargo was virtue signaling about something that... had no optics to them. Literally no one knows who our payment processor was, but if you even got as far as "Stripe," a _vanishingly small_ number of people know that Wells Fargo is their banking partner for US transactions. This isn't to suggest that WF should run their merchant processing business with no one watching for fraudulent or wantonly scam transactions, but to step in out of nowhere because the volume of actual real charges for real customers for real products was too high and you were busy clutching your pearls over what was being sold is just insane. As if it could somehow splash back on to Wells Fargo and, what, further sully their reputation? "Sure they may ruin people's lives and spawn fake accounts to hit numbers and silence anyone who speaks up and evict people incorrectly but at least they don't process transactions for flesh colored fantasy sex toys. That, sir, would be a bridge too far."

Le0n_ 6y ago
I think you're misinterpreting the scale of Wellsfargo. The CEO probably doesn't even know what onlyfans is, and they manage almost 2 trillion dollars.
- thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
  The CEO knows their business model; it's to scratch out every last penny they can, however they can, just to fulfill some quarterly earnings report. Almost every public company is now a growth company, so it doesn't matter how much they already profit–what matters is that they profit more in the next 90 days. He/She doesn't need/care to know about onlyfans–they simply care about hitting their targets.
  - DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
    ...so why would they want to leave money on the table by forcing Stripe to ditch a clearly profitable client company?
    - jcranmer 6y ago
      Reputational risk. Some journalist gets wind of an ad on Youtube that's playing for a neo-Nazi video, it gets written up as "$COMPANY is supporting Nazis!" despite the fact that it's largely out of the control of $COMPANY, several companies collectively freak out and pull advertising money, and everyone goes hunting for where their pipelines might lead to similar pearl-clutching associations and PR disasters.
      - DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
        But that doesn't explain the documented unethical - if not illegal - conduct of Wells Fargo overall. Otherwise they'd be more like the Disney Co.
- sky_rw 6y ago
  I think you are underestimating the scale of operation choke point.

lukifer 6y ago

> we need the financial industry Do we, though? I don't know whether the answer is distributed blockchains, or the Department of the Treasury creating an API for USD, or both; but the current banking system seems to me like the legacy code of feudal landed aristocrats. (I will never stop being disappointed that we didn't let the financial system crash in 2009.)

chrisco255 6y ago
An API for USD centrally controlled by the Treasury? Kiss your financial freedom goodbye. You gotta demand it be distributed blockchains or you'll be living in chains.
- ballenf 6y ago
  At least you'd have due process and couldn't be deplatformed for legal activity. Now you have neither. The current system has zero privacy, so no change there. Not seeing the downside. Federally illegal activity like marijuana wouldn't benefit, but most things would.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    Technically, any occurring "federally illegal" activity is just not successfully policed criminal activity. (States can't actually make something legal the federal government says is not legal. They can just decline to use their own resources to police it.) Generally speaking, most people would consider "not usable in crime" to be a feature rather than a bug. ;)
    - sneak 6y ago
      I don’t think there is as quite widespread consensus that all federal crimes are legitimately crime as you seem to think. Marijuana sales, for example, seem extremely popular. Just because there’s a law in place at some remote level of jurisdiction doesn’t mean it’s just, or has popular support.

xxpor 6y ago

Now this is actual cancel culture.

thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago

This is what capitalism looks like. The ones with the capital are the ones with power. Housing, health care, and even small businesses all live and die by the decisions of the people/institutions with capital. The average American celebrates capitalism, while at the same being forced to slave away for basics of human life to just barely scrape by.