4 ms·

> Anyone who has an issue with this must also take issue with the others. Yeah .... no. For a variety of reasons. But for one, it's impossible to do business o

by elric 6y ago

> Anyone who has an issue with this must also take issue with the others. Yeah .... no. For a variety of reasons. But for one, it's impossible to do business online if you're not in the good graces of major payment providers (assuming you want to get paid). It might be hard(er) to advertise your business if Twitter bans you, but that's in no way comparable to how essential Visa/MC are to any business. Providers of critical infrastructure (payments, search, appstores, probably a few other things), when they're big enough to be a monopoly/duopoly, could really use more oversight. If you piss off Google/Apple, your business can be ruined, and you'll have virtually no recourse -- as evidenced by the frequent "google/apple killed my app" threads on HN.

manigandham 6y ago
None of this is considered critical infrastructure today, that's the point. What's important to you is entirely subjective and these are private companies that can apply their terms however they see fit. Visa/MC can easily say that ACH and cash payments exist as an alternative. If you feel that monopolistic powers by major tech companies need more oversight then that should apply equally. I don't see why communications networks are any less important than payment networks.
- adrian_b 6y ago
  Visa/MC are really critical infrastructure, because for many people they are the main means of payment or even the only one. In most cases they are the only existing means for making remote payments. I would have much preferred a world in which the remote payments would not have been done by credit cards, but by wire transfers (with much lower fees than the current fees for wire transfers), but we do not live in such a world. I am not sure about what weird conditions might be written in the small print of the contracts for credit cards, but certainly when Visa/MC advertise their services, they claim that you should pay for their cards in order to buy anything that you want, they do not invite you to pay them in order to let you buy only what they like. So I do not believe that it is correct to say that VISA/MC are private companies that can do anything they like. They have also obligations towards the customers who use their cards and they cannot decide unilaterally to ban some sellers, unless those are selling something illegal, which is not the case with Pornhub (after they took down what was said to be illegal content). I do not think that making a referendum among Visa/MC customers about whether to ban some vendor or another would be the most appropriate solution, but certainly unilateral decisions taken just by the Visa/MC management are an abuse. While I have never used Pornhub, so I have no opinion about how correct were their actions, I have paid in the past for a few other sites with erotic content and I would not like to discover one day that Visa or MC has again decided to block such a site without any valid reason.
  - Dma54rhs 6y ago
    There are plenty of alternatives though, they don't own anything to porn industry. They just don't want to associate themselves with these people and it's their right to do so.

by elric 6y ago

manigandham 6y ago

None of this is considered critical infrastructure today, that's the point. What's important to you is entirely subjective and these are private companies that can apply their terms however they see fit. Visa/MC can easily say that ACH and cash payments exist as an alternative. If you feel that monopolistic powers by major tech companies need more oversight then that should apply equally. I don't see why communications networks are any less important than payment networks.

adrian_b 6y ago
Visa/MC are really critical infrastructure, because for many people they are the main means of payment or even the only one. In most cases they are the only existing means for making remote payments. I would have much preferred a world in which the remote payments would not have been done by credit cards, but by wire transfers (with much lower fees than the current fees for wire transfers), but we do not live in such a world. I am not sure about what weird conditions might be written in the small print of the contracts for credit cards, but certainly when Visa/MC advertise their services, they claim that you should pay for their cards in order to buy anything that you want, they do not invite you to pay them in order to let you buy only what they like. So I do not believe that it is correct to say that VISA/MC are private companies that can do anything they like. They have also obligations towards the customers who use their cards and they cannot decide unilaterally to ban some sellers, unless those are selling something illegal, which is not the case with Pornhub (after they took down what was said to be illegal content). I do not think that making a referendum among Visa/MC customers about whether to ban some vendor or another would be the most appropriate solution, but certainly unilateral decisions taken just by the Visa/MC management are an abuse. While I have never used Pornhub, so I have no opinion about how correct were their actions, I have paid in the past for a few other sites with erotic content and I would not like to discover one day that Visa or MC has again decided to block such a site without any valid reason.
- Dma54rhs 6y ago
  There are plenty of alternatives though, they don't own anything to porn industry. They just don't want to associate themselves with these people and it's their right to do so.