3 ms·
> My position is that payment processors should not be the arbiters of what is allowed to be paid for by humans. But should they have the choice of free associ
by zimpenfish 4y ago
> My position is that payment processors should not be the arbiters of what is allowed to be paid for by humans.
But should they have the choice of free association with whom they do business?
- ISO-morphism 4y agoNot if they are a utility (like water and electricity) which some can argue they should be.
- colpabar 4y agoI don't know. I am all for businesses having that freedom, but I don't really think banks are normal businesses because there are no other options. But I do lean towards "no" to your question, because if we say it's ok for them to choose who they associate with, we are implicitly saying it's ok for them to restrict any content they want. But ultimately, I don't know, and I just find it confusing that any regular person would argue for the rights of _banks_.
- bko 4y agoThe problem is they get influenced by the state. See Operation Choke Point that was an initiative started by Justice Department to help combat "fraud" and "money laundering" and ended up hitting a lot of adult entertainers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- RC_ITR 4y agoWe are in a weird point in history where for some reason a whole generation of people think “visa not processing porn payments” is some new free speech thing, despite the fact that they have historically never processed them. Idk what it says that there’s so many hammers looking for nails.