7 ms·

(I work for Stripe, and since many of my colleagues are currently sleeping, taking the liberty of saying this on their behalf.) We are looking into things. As

(I work for Stripe, and since many of my colleagues are currently sleeping, taking the liberty of saying this on their behalf.) We are looking into things. As someone who ran businesses for a long time myself, it would be very alarming to me if customers felt they were being ignored while repeatedly talking to people who work for us. If that ever happens, please bring in literally anyone at Stripe, inclusive of other Patrick. Our email addresses are often available through a quick search of HN; mine is (predictably) patio11@stripe.com if you need it. We don't comment publicly on individual customers. This is an important part of customer privacy and we're serious about it. Sometimes situations which result in external complaints are the result of a process failure, and in those cases we try to fix the instant case and improve processes in the future. Sometimes they are the result of a process operating correctly but coming to a result which someone did not enjoy. The record available to the process is often more detailed than the record available to the public Internet, and may include extremely relevant context.

TekMol 4y ago
- Crosseye_Jack 4y ago
  What percentage of people who walk into a business or go online to complete a transaction are able to send their payment via the lightning network compared to the percentage of people who walk in to do a transaction via Visa/Mastercard/Etc? The issue is Card payments and the networks they use. Doesn't matter if lightning settles transactions instantly if the customer wants to pay with Visa and Visa allows funds claw back for ~180 days. Normally a stores merchant account is kept open, so if a transaction is charged back a month later (and the bank and visa aggree with the chargeback) the money can be recovered from future sales. If the stores merchant account is closed because of "reasons" the payment provider can either use the funds the store has yet to cash out from the the payment provider as "insurance" against chargebacks until the deadline passes (at which case its safe to cash out) or start invoicing the store you just told to GTFO as a merchant to try and get the money back and then go recovery paths which is much more a nightmare for payment providers. I'm not saying I agree with the polices, just that I understand why they are in place, the payment providers are just covering their own asses at the end of the day.
  - TekMol 4y ago
    At the moment, pretty much nobody is able to send payments via the lightning network. My question is about "what if". Would there be downsides? If the upsides outweigh the downsides, LN could slowly find its way into retail. Maybe by starting with some special use cases where speed, low fees, privacy or immutability are especially important.
    - Crosseye_Jack 4y ago
      Customers like the ability to charge back if the product is faulty, not as advertised, or the retailer goes under. Heck its one of the advertised bonuses of using a credit card for purchases, You are spending the banks money so you are better protected against fraud/retailer bankruptcy. Customers with outstanding orders are often on the bottom of the list of creditors who get paid back when a company goes bust and even the companies themselves will often say in their final messages to customers to speak to their card company and issue a charge back for outstanding orders.
      - TekMol 4y ago
        They like it, but are they willing to pay for it? The vendor needs to factor in the costs induced by Stripe. That's 3% fee plus the danger of your account being frozen. How much is that? Maybe another 1%? So if the "price" to use Stripe is 4%, the vendor could offer their customers the same products for 2% less if they pay via lightning - and share the savings with their customers. Sounds like a good deal. I have bought something with my CC hundreds of times and never ever did a chargeback. On top of it, as a customer, I find credit cards annoying and scary. To get one, I have to get it physically delivered to my snail mail box. And everytime I pull that thing out, someone could photograph or memorize the numbers on it and cause me trouble.
        Crosseye_Jack 4y ago
        I too found credit cards scary to begin with, but that was down to my own youthful idiocy. But these days not so much (As I would like to believe I am now more responsible with money than I was at 18). > I have to get it physically delivered to my snail mail box. Same here in the UK, however the cards are not delievered "activated", so you have to verify account details to enable to the card so prevents against thieft of the card in the mail (as even if it was stolen from the mail and activated, you will quickly contact the card issuer to say "Hey, where my card?" at which point the issuer will cancel the card and cancel any trasactions made on the card) > everytime I pull that thing out, someone could photograph or memorize the numbers on it and cause me trouble. Same could happen with Debit cards too, however the card number alone is useless without the EMV chip for in store transactions here in the UK (Mastercard are even phasing out the magnetic stripe completely[0] - My accounts are set to refuse magnetic stripe transactions unless I enable them via the banks app) and online transactions offer lower fee's if you validate the 3 digits on the back of the card and the address of the card holder, so most online stores will have for all 3 pieces of info (card number, the CVV, and the card holders address) before accepting the transaction. Making it harder to commit the fraud. My cards (which I recently had replaced as I misplaced my wallet, guess i'm not as responsible as I thought I was) all now have the card number on the back of the card (makes it hard to photograph the card number as the chip and number are onn opposite sides, so when you insert/tap the card into a reader the number is not facing you or anyone standing next to/behind you. Most of my cards support Apple Pay (The exception is my PayPal Business card which doesn't whoever I don't carry that card with me anyway) So most of the time I'm not getting my cards out of my wallet when I'm purchasing items in store (Prob the reason I misplaced my wallet, Its prob in the house SOMEWHERE...). But granted Apple Pay/Google Pay are not as widely used as the plastic cards shipped from the card issuers are. Replacing my cards was a piece of cake for me, granted I use more "modern banks" than the high street banks of old, so when I reported my cards as lost my bank issued me a temporary card to my phone so I could still do purchases while I waited for my new card to arrive (Not all banks do this, and the temp card had a max spend limit on it until my new card arrived). And on top of that the credit card has greater consumer protections than debit cards anyway if something were to happen. [0]: https://www.mastercard.com/news/perspectives/2021/magnetic-stripe/ https://www.mastercard.com/news/perspectives/2021/magnetic-s... EDIT: I forgot to say. Just because Credit cards have greater protections than Debit cards, that doesn't mean that debits cards have no protection at all.
- politician 4y ago
  Payments over FedNow are required to settle within 8 seconds of the receiving FI being notified of the transaction. Launching next year, FedNow is positioned to replace ACH and wires and do most of the things that folks want lightning network / L2 / Zelle / Ripple and other RTP solutions to do, but for the entire USD-denominated market. FedNow also replaces ACH debit origination and its Good Funds Period with a Request to Pay architecture that IMO is far safer and has fewer edge cases and lacks the hilarious infinite loop in ACH debit exception handling. So, yeah, good question, sorry you're being downvoted.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- anonymouse008 4y ago
  If you're 'on the inside' then you know much of the consumer benefit is the silent 'redistribution of wealth' in 'points.' Since there are 'fewer fees to the right people' in the lightning network, points probably don't make as much sense - so it's a non-starter to your primary customer. Also, disputing charges is a whole separate protocol for lightning that hasn't yet been considered. Or more accurately, is railed against as 'code is law' and 'not your keys not your crypto' So for all the fees you 'save,' lightning nets a significantly below 0. [Edit] Upwork is big enough to make their own gateway - the idea that they haven't is negligent.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  /u/patio11 is publicly very skeptical of cryptocurrency. https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1536687513204625409 https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1536687513204625409
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
civilized 4y ago
Corporate process improvement is not an excuse for treating people badly. An individual human who treats people badly is not allowed to say "well I deal with a lot of people and I need algorithms and sometimes my algorithms don't work so I'm doing my best to improve them". Corporations should not get a pass because they need cheap processes that "scale" to maintain their profit margins. This is the perpetual moral hazard that we constantly see at all big tech firms. These firms promised fantastical profit margins, but only on the condition of scaling at very low cost. What doesn't scale at very low cost? Customer service. That's why you're all so awful at it. And don't come back with your satisfaction metrics from customers you haven't screwed. Your job is to do right by the customers who aren't convenient for you. Just like it's an insurance company's job to pay out to the tiny minority of claimants. It doesn't matter one bit if the company has a great web site or API that everyone loves. The true moral nature of your company is revealed by how you treat the customers who need you to do right by them.
- hassancf 4y ago
  Perfect
- boringg 4y ago
  Disagree but a morally commendable position.
- simplMath10 4y ago
  [flagged]
- jjoonathan 4y ago
  Also: Stripe publicly emphasized the possibility that their customer might be a dirty rotten liar. I feel it is only fair to point out that Stripe might be a dirty rotten liar, too.
  - graeme 4y ago
    It turns out the poster did, in fact, omit extremely material info from their original post. They sold a used company van via credit card via their stripe account: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32264886 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32264886 This is not something the business sells, and a huge chargeback risk
baggachipz 4y ago
Maybe if the company had some way, any way at all, to reach an actual human being, this wouldn't be a constantly repeated problem on HN and elsewhere.
- patio11 4y ago
  As I have observed in other contexts ( https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1463749947858165761 https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1463749947858165761 ), many people who say "Ugh, I cannot reach a real human" have in fact spoken to several humans, repeatedly and at length, and are imprecisely stating their desire to speak to a person who would agree with their view of the facts and swiftly enact the resolution that they prefer. We offer (human-powered, somewhat obviously?) support via a variety of methods 24/7; time for us to reply to email is generally a few minutes. Could we do this better? Yes, and I hope we continue doing it better; if anyone ever has an interaction where we don't meet the bar please flag to us.
  - ziddoap 4y ago
    In this specific case, the OP claims that the call and chat options are greyed out, leaving only e-mail and social media. E-mail, they claim, is bot responses only. While I understand you can't comment on the specifics of this case, can you speak generally about whether or not disabling the phone/chat support buttons is a part of some standard process?
    - patio11 4y ago
      Speaking generally, chat and phone support are designed to provide immediate round-the-clock service to a wide range of issues but not literally every type of issue that a financial institution has to be able to deal with. Sometimes, a financial institution might only be able, due to staffing or other considerations, to deal with you asynchronously in writing, perhaps from e.g. a group of professionals who are not as numerous as front-line user operations.
      - sph 4y ago
aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
> I work for Stripe Bit of an understatement, right?
- sulam 4y ago
  He is not Patrick Collison. https://www.kalzumeus.com/ https://www.kalzumeus.com/
  - talideon 4y ago
    Wrong Patrick: kalzumeus is Patrick McKenzie. Patrick Collison's site is patrickcollison.com, and he's 'pc' on Hacker News.
    - jdamon96 4y ago
      thats why he shared mckenzie's website; he's the commenter
rtlfe 4y ago
> Our email addresses are often available through a quick search of HN Your customer service strategy is really "go to a small internet forum that only some startup nerds know about and find my email address"?
- civilized 4y ago
  Makes you wonder who the audience for the original comment really is.
- unsupp0rted 4y ago
  Yes, in Stripe’s case. That’s the only way I’ve ever had a big issue successfully resolved. They empower their customer service team with over a dozen ways to say “sorry the system won’t let me solve this” or “Your issue may be unique to you, but since my solution for somebody else’s different issue wouldn’t work for you, I have no power to do anything”.
- tyrust 4y ago
  I doubt it's the general strategy. Patrick might be assuming that frequenters of HN are less likely to be bad actors and people that legitimately are slipping through the cracks.
- slugiscool99 4y ago
  Customers shouldn't have to bother random employees to get support on critical issues. In general I think Stripe does a pretty good job with support compared to other big tech firms - the inability to reach humans is problem endemic throughout the industry. It's a shame because a good customer support interaction can create a serious evangelist (hard to quantify but extremely valuable). Maybe Stripe knows this because they put a lot of effort into appeasing the HN community (many developers/entrepreneurs who make processor purchasing decisions). I wish they'd apply this attitude to all their customers.
balentio 4y ago
Don't worry. I made your correspondence public concerning my account from last year so people can see how you handle complaints.
antman 4y ago
Customers are publicly asking for your answers for your what in their opinion is an ill conceived and/or villainous process. Not answering claiming that it violates your privacy process from which they specifically exempted themselves could also be considered even more ill conceived/villainous. They are waiting for your answers, it is a public matter as per your clients repeated requests, it affects more people, money is involved, we are all waiting for your resolution and future mitigation actions. Or rebuttal ofcourse.
- kalkin 4y ago
  If I was a customer and Stripe (or any other company) started releasing private correspondence and financial details publicly because someone on the internet claiming to be me complained about the company, and the company took that as implicitly waiving any privacy obligations, I'd be pretty upset. If they said that the prurient interest of their other customers in the details was part of their decision I'd be even more upset!
newfonewhodis 4y ago
> Sometimes they are the result of a process operating correctly but coming to a result which someone did not enjoy So much to unpack here but this is extremely patronizing ("we're not wrong, you just didn't like what we did). "process operating correctly" refers to holding a merchant's money with no reason communicated, and no way for them to get in touch with the company?
dazbradbury 4y ago
I only have one recurring bug bear that seems trivial for Stripe to solve: Is there a reason you can't get ARN/STAN refund codes via the Stripe API? I have never been able to get an answer to that.
mkmk3 4y ago
A business is a structure of people, and my intuition is to achieve healthy dynamics, people should treat it like this kind of parasocial relationship. If you fuck up, I should forgive you as long as you're not an asshole about it. However, it seems like a recurring theme, that modern tech companies don't actually provide support. If that's not in line with the economics of the situation, maybe I'm wrong to hold it against the company itself. But maybe the cost of this model is hidden from the consumer, and I'd rather pay a bit to have reliability and fairness. I don't know how much I'd have to pay, but I'm willing to guess it's palatable, or at least in the neighbourhood. If we are being tricked by these hidden costs, it's better (if you can) to move on, there are people trying to compete even if it's a difficult industry to break into. Try not to get locked in. If I were running a small business, I'd definitely be discounting crypto payments and putting the extra work into handling whatever regulatory complications arise, vs yelling at the walls that are the infinitely scaling tech companies
mdoms 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

TekMol 4y ago

Crosseye_Jack 4y ago
What percentage of people who walk into a business or go online to complete a transaction are able to send their payment via the lightning network compared to the percentage of people who walk in to do a transaction via Visa/Mastercard/Etc? The issue is Card payments and the networks they use. Doesn't matter if lightning settles transactions instantly if the customer wants to pay with Visa and Visa allows funds claw back for ~180 days. Normally a stores merchant account is kept open, so if a transaction is charged back a month later (and the bank and visa aggree with the chargeback) the money can be recovered from future sales. If the stores merchant account is closed because of "reasons" the payment provider can either use the funds the store has yet to cash out from the the payment provider as "insurance" against chargebacks until the deadline passes (at which case its safe to cash out) or start invoicing the store you just told to GTFO as a merchant to try and get the money back and then go recovery paths which is much more a nightmare for payment providers. I'm not saying I agree with the polices, just that I understand why they are in place, the payment providers are just covering their own asses at the end of the day.
- TekMol 4y ago
  At the moment, pretty much nobody is able to send payments via the lightning network. My question is about "what if". Would there be downsides? If the upsides outweigh the downsides, LN could slowly find its way into retail. Maybe by starting with some special use cases where speed, low fees, privacy or immutability are especially important.
  - Crosseye_Jack 4y ago
    Customers like the ability to charge back if the product is faulty, not as advertised, or the retailer goes under. Heck its one of the advertised bonuses of using a credit card for purchases, You are spending the banks money so you are better protected against fraud/retailer bankruptcy. Customers with outstanding orders are often on the bottom of the list of creditors who get paid back when a company goes bust and even the companies themselves will often say in their final messages to customers to speak to their card company and issue a charge back for outstanding orders.
    - TekMol 4y ago
      They like it, but are they willing to pay for it? The vendor needs to factor in the costs induced by Stripe. That's 3% fee plus the danger of your account being frozen. How much is that? Maybe another 1%? So if the "price" to use Stripe is 4%, the vendor could offer their customers the same products for 2% less if they pay via lightning - and share the savings with their customers. Sounds like a good deal. I have bought something with my CC hundreds of times and never ever did a chargeback. On top of it, as a customer, I find credit cards annoying and scary. To get one, I have to get it physically delivered to my snail mail box. And everytime I pull that thing out, someone could photograph or memorize the numbers on it and cause me trouble.
      - Crosseye_Jack 4y ago
        I too found credit cards scary to begin with, but that was down to my own youthful idiocy. But these days not so much (As I would like to believe I am now more responsible with money than I was at 18). > I have to get it physically delivered to my snail mail box. Same here in the UK, however the cards are not delievered "activated", so you have to verify account details to enable to the card so prevents against thieft of the card in the mail (as even if it was stolen from the mail and activated, you will quickly contact the card issuer to say "Hey, where my card?" at which point the issuer will cancel the card and cancel any trasactions made on the card) > everytime I pull that thing out, someone could photograph or memorize the numbers on it and cause me trouble. Same could happen with Debit cards too, however the card number alone is useless without the EMV chip for in store transactions here in the UK (Mastercard are even phasing out the magnetic stripe completely[0] - My accounts are set to refuse magnetic stripe transactions unless I enable them via the banks app) and online transactions offer lower fee's if you validate the 3 digits on the back of the card and the address of the card holder, so most online stores will have for all 3 pieces of info (card number, the CVV, and the card holders address) before accepting the transaction. Making it harder to commit the fraud. My cards (which I recently had replaced as I misplaced my wallet, guess i'm not as responsible as I thought I was) all now have the card number on the back of the card (makes it hard to photograph the card number as the chip and number are onn opposite sides, so when you insert/tap the card into a reader the number is not facing you or anyone standing next to/behind you. Most of my cards support Apple Pay (The exception is my PayPal Business card which doesn't whoever I don't carry that card with me anyway) So most of the time I'm not getting my cards out of my wallet when I'm purchasing items in store (Prob the reason I misplaced my wallet, Its prob in the house SOMEWHERE...). But granted Apple Pay/Google Pay are not as widely used as the plastic cards shipped from the card issuers are. Replacing my cards was a piece of cake for me, granted I use more "modern banks" than the high street banks of old, so when I reported my cards as lost my bank issued me a temporary card to my phone so I could still do purchases while I waited for my new card to arrive (Not all banks do this, and the temp card had a max spend limit on it until my new card arrived). And on top of that the credit card has greater consumer protections than debit cards anyway if something were to happen. [0]: https://www.mastercard.com/news/perspectives/2021/magnetic-stripe/ https://www.mastercard.com/news/perspectives/2021/magnetic-s... EDIT: I forgot to say. Just because Credit cards have greater protections than Debit cards, that doesn't mean that debits cards have no protection at all.
politician 4y ago
Payments over FedNow are required to settle within 8 seconds of the receiving FI being notified of the transaction. Launching next year, FedNow is positioned to replace ACH and wires and do most of the things that folks want lightning network / L2 / Zelle / Ripple and other RTP solutions to do, but for the entire USD-denominated market. FedNow also replaces ACH debit origination and its Good Funds Period with a Request to Pay architecture that IMO is far safer and has fewer edge cases and lacks the hilarious infinite loop in ACH debit exception handling. So, yeah, good question, sorry you're being downvoted.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
anonymouse008 4y ago
If you're 'on the inside' then you know much of the consumer benefit is the silent 'redistribution of wealth' in 'points.' Since there are 'fewer fees to the right people' in the lightning network, points probably don't make as much sense - so it's a non-starter to your primary customer. Also, disputing charges is a whole separate protocol for lightning that hasn't yet been considered. Or more accurately, is railed against as 'code is law' and 'not your keys not your crypto' So for all the fees you 'save,' lightning nets a significantly below 0. [Edit] Upwork is big enough to make their own gateway - the idea that they haven't is negligent.
ceejayoz 4y ago
/u/patio11 is publicly very skeptical of cryptocurrency. https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1536687513204625409 https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1536687513204625409
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

civilized 4y ago

Corporate process improvement is not an excuse for treating people badly. An individual human who treats people badly is not allowed to say "well I deal with a lot of people and I need algorithms and sometimes my algorithms don't work so I'm doing my best to improve them". Corporations should not get a pass because they need cheap processes that "scale" to maintain their profit margins. This is the perpetual moral hazard that we constantly see at all big tech firms. These firms promised fantastical profit margins, but only on the condition of scaling at very low cost. What doesn't scale at very low cost? Customer service. That's why you're all so awful at it. And don't come back with your satisfaction metrics from customers you haven't screwed. Your job is to do right by the customers who aren't convenient for you. Just like it's an insurance company's job to pay out to the tiny minority of claimants. It doesn't matter one bit if the company has a great web site or API that everyone loves. The true moral nature of your company is revealed by how you treat the customers who need you to do right by them.

hassancf 4y ago
Perfect
boringg 4y ago
Disagree but a morally commendable position.
simplMath10 4y ago
[flagged]
jjoonathan 4y ago
Also: Stripe publicly emphasized the possibility that their customer might be a dirty rotten liar. I feel it is only fair to point out that Stripe might be a dirty rotten liar, too.
- graeme 4y ago
  It turns out the poster did, in fact, omit extremely material info from their original post. They sold a used company van via credit card via their stripe account: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32264886 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32264886 This is not something the business sells, and a huge chargeback risk

baggachipz 4y ago

Maybe if the company had some way, any way at all, to reach an actual human being, this wouldn't be a constantly repeated problem on HN and elsewhere.

patio11 4y ago
As I have observed in other contexts ( https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1463749947858165761 https://twitter.com/patio11/status/1463749947858165761 ), many people who say "Ugh, I cannot reach a real human" have in fact spoken to several humans, repeatedly and at length, and are imprecisely stating their desire to speak to a person who would agree with their view of the facts and swiftly enact the resolution that they prefer. We offer (human-powered, somewhat obviously?) support via a variety of methods 24/7; time for us to reply to email is generally a few minutes. Could we do this better? Yes, and I hope we continue doing it better; if anyone ever has an interaction where we don't meet the bar please flag to us.
- ziddoap 4y ago
  In this specific case, the OP claims that the call and chat options are greyed out, leaving only e-mail and social media. E-mail, they claim, is bot responses only. While I understand you can't comment on the specifics of this case, can you speak generally about whether or not disabling the phone/chat support buttons is a part of some standard process?
  - patio11 4y ago
    Speaking generally, chat and phone support are designed to provide immediate round-the-clock service to a wide range of issues but not literally every type of issue that a financial institution has to be able to deal with. Sometimes, a financial institution might only be able, due to staffing or other considerations, to deal with you asynchronously in writing, perhaps from e.g. a group of professionals who are not as numerous as front-line user operations.
    - sph 4y ago

aaaaaaaaata 4y ago

> I work for Stripe Bit of an understatement, right?

sulam 4y ago
He is not Patrick Collison. https://www.kalzumeus.com/ https://www.kalzumeus.com/
- talideon 4y ago
  Wrong Patrick: kalzumeus is Patrick McKenzie. Patrick Collison's site is patrickcollison.com, and he's 'pc' on Hacker News.
  - jdamon96 4y ago
    thats why he shared mckenzie's website; he's the commenter

rtlfe 4y ago

> Our email addresses are often available through a quick search of HN Your customer service strategy is really "go to a small internet forum that only some startup nerds know about and find my email address"?

civilized 4y ago
Makes you wonder who the audience for the original comment really is.
unsupp0rted 4y ago
Yes, in Stripe’s case. That’s the only way I’ve ever had a big issue successfully resolved. They empower their customer service team with over a dozen ways to say “sorry the system won’t let me solve this” or “Your issue may be unique to you, but since my solution for somebody else’s different issue wouldn’t work for you, I have no power to do anything”.
tyrust 4y ago
I doubt it's the general strategy. Patrick might be assuming that frequenters of HN are less likely to be bad actors and people that legitimately are slipping through the cracks.
slugiscool99 4y ago
Customers shouldn't have to bother random employees to get support on critical issues. In general I think Stripe does a pretty good job with support compared to other big tech firms - the inability to reach humans is problem endemic throughout the industry. It's a shame because a good customer support interaction can create a serious evangelist (hard to quantify but extremely valuable). Maybe Stripe knows this because they put a lot of effort into appeasing the HN community (many developers/entrepreneurs who make processor purchasing decisions). I wish they'd apply this attitude to all their customers.

balentio 4y ago

Don't worry. I made your correspondence public concerning my account from last year so people can see how you handle complaints.

antman 4y ago

Customers are publicly asking for your answers for your what in their opinion is an ill conceived and/or villainous process. Not answering claiming that it violates your privacy process from which they specifically exempted themselves could also be considered even more ill conceived/villainous. They are waiting for your answers, it is a public matter as per your clients repeated requests, it affects more people, money is involved, we are all waiting for your resolution and future mitigation actions. Or rebuttal ofcourse.

kalkin 4y ago
If I was a customer and Stripe (or any other company) started releasing private correspondence and financial details publicly because someone on the internet claiming to be me complained about the company, and the company took that as implicitly waiving any privacy obligations, I'd be pretty upset. If they said that the prurient interest of their other customers in the details was part of their decision I'd be even more upset!

newfonewhodis 4y ago

> Sometimes they are the result of a process operating correctly but coming to a result which someone did not enjoy So much to unpack here but this is extremely patronizing ("we're not wrong, you just didn't like what we did). "process operating correctly" refers to holding a merchant's money with no reason communicated, and no way for them to get in touch with the company?

dazbradbury 4y ago

I only have one recurring bug bear that seems trivial for Stripe to solve: Is there a reason you can't get ARN/STAN refund codes via the Stripe API? I have never been able to get an answer to that.

mkmk3 4y ago

A business is a structure of people, and my intuition is to achieve healthy dynamics, people should treat it like this kind of parasocial relationship. If you fuck up, I should forgive you as long as you're not an asshole about it. However, it seems like a recurring theme, that modern tech companies don't actually provide support. If that's not in line with the economics of the situation, maybe I'm wrong to hold it against the company itself. But maybe the cost of this model is hidden from the consumer, and I'd rather pay a bit to have reliability and fairness. I don't know how much I'd have to pay, but I'm willing to guess it's palatable, or at least in the neighbourhood. If we are being tricked by these hidden costs, it's better (if you can) to move on, there are people trying to compete even if it's a difficult industry to break into. Try not to get locked in. If I were running a small business, I'd definitely be discounting crypto payments and putting the extra work into handling whatever regulatory complications arise, vs yelling at the walls that are the infinitely scaling tech companies

mdoms 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]