4 ms·

The major problem is the payment processors though. Unless you defeat that duopoly or only accept cash how do you stop this exact situation? There are the FedN

The major problem is the payment processors though. Unless you defeat that duopoly or only accept cash how do you stop this exact situation? There are the FedNow tokens and ACH which could help but it still requires quite a bit of cost to begin even that route. My customers are going to want to use their cards to pay too.

badsectoracula 1y ago
Yeah and it isn't just you accepting cash. Let's say you decide to go with cash (or, more realistically, manual bank transfers) and even get some host like 1984 that'd go to the court for you, but what stops Visa/MC to go directly at your host and tell them to either drop your site or they'll drop them?
- gs17 1y ago
  In theory, if you went "full crypto", there's probably options like Filecoin and web3 domains (I'm not in that space enough to know what the current versions of these are) that could make something "uncensorable" by Visa/MC, but it also would limit its reach heavily.
magicmicah85 1y ago
Cryptocurrency is the only way I see this working.
- Night_Thastus 1y ago
  Adding a broken, inefficient system to a problem just makes 2 problems.
- righthand 1y ago
  Cryptocurrency is a nice idea but there are and have always been too many gas fees for anyone to sensibly use it. I want to buy something not support everyone that get their hands in my transaction chain. The US government can break up the duopoly and open up payments processing federally. That’s worth the investment than that pipe dream of a global, frictionless cryptocurrency.
  - fooqux 1y ago
    > The US government can break up the duopoly and open up payments processing federally. Between that and someone actually creating a viable Steam competitor, I will say the government breaking them up and rolling out their own solution would be even less likely. You'd have fights on both sides of the isle and from privacy groups. Not that we have much privacy now under the current scheme, but there's at least a tiny bit of separation between V/MC and the government. What should happen instead is regulation. They should be held to the same standards as legal tender since they're used in place as such. They shouldn't get to decide how it's used, and that should be enforced.
    - righthand 1y ago
      Isn’t regulation even less likely though than a split? You yourself acknowledge the times and the current admin is heavy anti-regulation.
      - fooqux 1y ago
        Perhaps. You're right that it's currently unlikely, but I still argue that it would be easier to legislate than split up. It's not like the financial industry doesn't already have an insane amount of rules and regulations at both the state and federal level preventing them from being too nefarious. Having a rule that states "You're not allowed to cut off vendor foo just because they sell bar" doesn't seem that much of a stretch, especially if you look at credit as basically another form of legal tender.
  - xur17 1y ago
    This has mostly been solved. Bitcoin's lightning network, ethereum layer 2 networks, etc all have sub-cent fees.
    - lynndotpy 1y ago
      Not sure about Ethereum's equivalent, but 'Lightning' just reintroduces the problem of having one person act like a payment processor.
- xxs 1y ago
  So, you don't see it working at all.
- logicchains 1y ago
  It already works; it's how people in China purchase adult content online, which is illegal there. Usually with USDT (which is also illegal there).
  - southernplaces7 1y ago
    They actually bother purchasing it? They don't simply pirate it rampantly to around access problems?
crooked-v 1y ago
There's the Fair Access to Banking Act (https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/401 https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/401), currently stuck in committee, which would make it illegal for various financial services, including payment processors, to deny service for mere reputational reasons.
- delecti 1y ago
  I wrongly assumed this was a D bill, and would die in committee. Turns out it's actually an R bill, with exclusively R sponsors, and now I'm wondering what awful shit is hiding in it. Though almost all of the sponsors are from almost 6 months ago, so it might die in committee anyway.
  - crooked-v 1y ago
    The text is on there and is very straightforward. As far as I can tell it's a basically good bill.
    - delecti 1y ago
      I agree that the text sounds good. I'm worried about the consequences I might not think of. What legal services are the Ds and Rs thinking of that currently have trouble with payment processors, and which are causing a lot of Rs to sponsor and no Ds? Because I'm sure it's not porn and video games.
      - _mlbt 1y ago
        Operation Choke Point is referenced by the proposed bill... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point > Operation Choke Point was an initiative of the United States Department of Justice beginning in 2013 which investigated banks in the United States and the business they did with firearm dealers, payday lenders, and other companies that, while operating legally, were said to be at a high risk for fraud and money laundering. There's a whole list on the Wikipedia article of the kinds of legal businesses that were targeted by this. Some of them make sense, but others look like very serious 1A and 2A violations.
kelseyfrog 1y ago
Is it not possible to jawbone them into favoring free speech? If they are easy to sway in one direction, why not the other? Simply do what Collective Shout did, but in the opposite direction?

badsectoracula 1y ago

Yeah and it isn't just you accepting cash. Let's say you decide to go with cash (or, more realistically, manual bank transfers) and even get some host like 1984 that'd go to the court for you, but what stops Visa/MC to go directly at your host and tell them to either drop your site or they'll drop them?

gs17 1y ago
In theory, if you went "full crypto", there's probably options like Filecoin and web3 domains (I'm not in that space enough to know what the current versions of these are) that could make something "uncensorable" by Visa/MC, but it also would limit its reach heavily.

magicmicah85 1y ago

Cryptocurrency is the only way I see this working.

Night_Thastus 1y ago
Adding a broken, inefficient system to a problem just makes 2 problems.
righthand 1y ago
Cryptocurrency is a nice idea but there are and have always been too many gas fees for anyone to sensibly use it. I want to buy something not support everyone that get their hands in my transaction chain. The US government can break up the duopoly and open up payments processing federally. That’s worth the investment than that pipe dream of a global, frictionless cryptocurrency.
- fooqux 1y ago
  > The US government can break up the duopoly and open up payments processing federally. Between that and someone actually creating a viable Steam competitor, I will say the government breaking them up and rolling out their own solution would be even less likely. You'd have fights on both sides of the isle and from privacy groups. Not that we have much privacy now under the current scheme, but there's at least a tiny bit of separation between V/MC and the government. What should happen instead is regulation. They should be held to the same standards as legal tender since they're used in place as such. They shouldn't get to decide how it's used, and that should be enforced.
  - righthand 1y ago
    Isn’t regulation even less likely though than a split? You yourself acknowledge the times and the current admin is heavy anti-regulation.
    - fooqux 1y ago
      Perhaps. You're right that it's currently unlikely, but I still argue that it would be easier to legislate than split up. It's not like the financial industry doesn't already have an insane amount of rules and regulations at both the state and federal level preventing them from being too nefarious. Having a rule that states "You're not allowed to cut off vendor foo just because they sell bar" doesn't seem that much of a stretch, especially if you look at credit as basically another form of legal tender.
- xur17 1y ago
  This has mostly been solved. Bitcoin's lightning network, ethereum layer 2 networks, etc all have sub-cent fees.
  - lynndotpy 1y ago
    Not sure about Ethereum's equivalent, but 'Lightning' just reintroduces the problem of having one person act like a payment processor.
xxs 1y ago
So, you don't see it working at all.
logicchains 1y ago
It already works; it's how people in China purchase adult content online, which is illegal there. Usually with USDT (which is also illegal there).
- southernplaces7 1y ago
  They actually bother purchasing it? They don't simply pirate it rampantly to around access problems?

crooked-v 1y ago

There's the Fair Access to Banking Act (https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/401 https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/401), currently stuck in committee, which would make it illegal for various financial services, including payment processors, to deny service for mere reputational reasons.

delecti 1y ago
I wrongly assumed this was a D bill, and would die in committee. Turns out it's actually an R bill, with exclusively R sponsors, and now I'm wondering what awful shit is hiding in it. Though almost all of the sponsors are from almost 6 months ago, so it might die in committee anyway.
- crooked-v 1y ago
  The text is on there and is very straightforward. As far as I can tell it's a basically good bill.
  - delecti 1y ago
    I agree that the text sounds good. I'm worried about the consequences I might not think of. What legal services are the Ds and Rs thinking of that currently have trouble with payment processors, and which are causing a lot of Rs to sponsor and no Ds? Because I'm sure it's not porn and video games.
    - _mlbt 1y ago
      Operation Choke Point is referenced by the proposed bill... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point > Operation Choke Point was an initiative of the United States Department of Justice beginning in 2013 which investigated banks in the United States and the business they did with firearm dealers, payday lenders, and other companies that, while operating legally, were said to be at a high risk for fraud and money laundering. There's a whole list on the Wikipedia article of the kinds of legal businesses that were targeted by this. Some of them make sense, but others look like very serious 1A and 2A violations.

kelseyfrog 1y ago

Is it not possible to jawbone them into favoring free speech? If they are easy to sway in one direction, why not the other? Simply do what Collective Shout did, but in the opposite direction?