asdfasdghasdf

5 ms·

1.
by asdfasdghasdf 14y ago
I think I knew that, but forgot. I have no real direct experience with this other than once signing up to be a merchant, but my girlfriend once worked for a processing company. Visa still has incentive to prevent fraud, though, right? Even
2.
by asdfasdghasdf 14y ago
This is a pretty poor article, unsurprising coming from an arm of the Russian government that employs Julian Assange. Here's a summary without any politics or conspiracy theories. So, each payment that Visa or Mastercard process comes with
3.
by asdfasdghasdf 14y ago
This article will be useful for the zero people who think Facebook killed Digg.
4.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
"Their bills have had mixed success and usually die before being brought to a vote, but SOPA and PIPA came frighteningly close to becoming law. The internet-wide protest this week seems to have stalled their progress and probably killed the
5.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
Not only have I heard of PACs, but I've given to my employer's PAC, which than donated money to the campaigns of 50+ candidates. I don't know if you've participated in the system, but it's not fair to equate that with a corporation donating
6.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
If you can produce evidence that a corporation has donated to even one candidate, much less 50, the FEC would love to speak to you; it's illegal for corporations to donate to candidates.
7.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
While this has been true for the past year, the linked page gets its data from OpenSecrets which tracks only hard money donations to campaigns. It's tracking almost entirely donations from people who work in the given industries, so I think
8.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
When they say "Time Warner gave $50,0000 to Senator So-and-So," that actually means "People who work for Time Warner gave a total of $50,000 to Senator So-and-So's campaign in donations of no more than $5000 each." It's illegal for a compan
9.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
Just wait until they find "Sal Bass"
10.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
As they mention on their Banking Blockade site, the Treasury found no reason to put them on their blacklist, and nobody has frozen their bank accounts. I agree they're a 'journalistic entity' -- whatever that means. I was only rebuffing whe
11.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
You're obviously exaggerating what I said for effect, but that's the gist of it, yeah. I didn't mention his sex crime accusations, and I only said that there's no actual evidence that the US government directly influenced Visa and Mastercar
12.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
I don't think we have established such a precedent. Wikileaks is still up. You can still donate to them. Visa and Mastercard have decided not to allow them as a customer, but I know of no evidence that says it was ordered by the US governme
13.
by asdfasdghasdf 15y ago
Because Visa and Mastercard are private companies that can decide whom they want or don't want as customers. They'll deny you from being a merchant if you have poor credit, too. They take on risk with every new merchant they accept, and I c