6 ms·
It's not just games. Payment processors ban many things that are completely legal, even foods and dietary supplements. It's ridiculous. They have too much powe
by markdown 1y ago
It's not just games.
Payment processors ban many things that are completely legal, even foods and dietary supplements. It's ridiculous. They have too much power.
- tptacek 1y agoI have no trouble seeing why a payment processor would want to avoid doing business with dietary supplement companies.
- maxbond 1y agoI mean I wouldn't do business with them, I think the supplements industry is infrastructure for grifters, quacks, and pyramid schemes to fleece the desperate, but what's the problem for Visa? Is it a brand safety thing? My presumption would be that payment processors are amoral and have no problem processing payments for Consolidated Baby Kickers if it were legal to do so, is that a misconception?
- cperciva 1y ago"Not as advertised" chargebacks. That industry is also full of subscription scams (e.g. someone thinks they're ordering a supplement for $5.99, but they're actually getting signed up for $39.99/month...).
- tptacek 1y agoAlso the products don't work!
- SXX 1y ago> That industry is also full of subscription scams Visa / MC are the ones who enable subscription scams and benefit from them. They implemented "convinience" option of "updating" your credit card data with replacement card. So even if you cancel and replace card charges continue to pass. They also totally able to see all the places where your card been tokenised, but they dont push banks to expose this to you.
- cperciva 1y agoIn Canada at least, you can opt out of having your new card number shared when you replace a card.
- kjkjadksj 1y agoNo issues buying Marlboro reds with the credit card of course.
- akerl_ 1y agoCigarette purchasers aren’t filing chargebacks when their partner checks the billing history, claiming their card got stolen.
- FireBeyond 1y agoAre dietary supplement purchasers doing so?
- tptacek 1y agoExtremely, infamously, yes.
- tptacek 1y agoHave you ever returned a pack of cigarettes? They basically do what you expect them to do.
- kjkjadksj 1y agoI figured the reason was not wanting to support something harmful to the customer like a fake diet pill. Call me naive for letting that assumption of even a glimmer of empathy affect my guestimation. I should have known it was pure greed all the way down and due to something like this instead.
- spauldo 1y agoI would take pure greed over a company imposing its morals on me.
- markdown 1y agoLike I said above, they are banning foods, not companies. Foods that do exactly what the vendors claim they do. Foods that are regulated by he FDA as foods. Foods that are listed in the Codex Alimentarius.
- markdown 1y agoI get the well-founded distrust of dietary supplement companies (the OG snake oil salesmen), but they've started banning kava, a completely legal food. So... not dietary supplement companies, but a particular food that is completely legal and regulated as a food by the FDA. You have a business selling food? Are you a bar? A restaurant? Well if you start selling this particular food we don't like, you will be debanked.
- tptacek 1y agoIt has nothing to do with legality.
- markdown 1y agoThat's the point. In a world in which citizens are finding it harder and harder to engage in commerce without the use of these payment processors, we need to make it harder for them to deny service without just cause. You argued that it was due to the prevalence of chargebacks but they already have a fair solution for that (banning vendors or simply requiring vendors to secure their accounts with collateral to manage that risk).
- herbst 1y agoThere are or have been rules about which colours a dildo can have. It definitely sounds like Christian morals being forced on us.