Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FetLife Announcement

pastebin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 110 posts

Re: FetLife Announcement

#101

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #97
pzone wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Financial companies deal with far more complex risks than this every day. Making a fraud-heavy account profitable is as simple as demanding a surcharge. Maybe some of the smaller guys don't have the resources to manage an account with the extra complexity. But EVERY company giving up a juicy profit opportunity? No way. The answer they're giving is the correct one: they simply aren't allowed to process payments from a…

If this was true, why aren't all the other high-fraud services that get declined simply having a surcharge demanded? Does the moralism of credit card companies extend to horoscopes, debt consolidators, tour operators, and infomercial/information products? For this explanation to be compelling, it needs to capture the fact that porn sites aren't the only high-risk category for which vendors are routinely denied or evi…

[deleted]

Re: FetLife Announcement

#102

Post by lightedman »

pzone wrote: post #91
zakk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence that payment processing companies are dropping business customers because they fear lawsuits?

The main evidence is to take these companies at their word instead of assuming they're trying to cover something up. They're willing to allow payments for 90% of fetishes but exclude the other 10%. Are they really drawing the line based on the rates of fraud in each fetish? Cases like the FetLife are illustrative. You can also look into f-list, a furry website which ultimately had to decide not to take any payments w…

"You can also look into f-list, a furry website which ultimately had to decide not to take any payments when every major processor rejected them"

F-list/e621 was also a massive walking copyright violation (still is.)

Re: FetLife Announcement

#103

Post by zakk »

pjlegato wrote: post #99
zakk wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, I suppose that an active enforcement of free speech could be defined as a new right, maybe that wasn't clear.

Existing free speech rights restrict only the government itself from preventing free speech. They do not apply to private parties. For example, you have no obligation to permit religious or political proselytizing within your home or business. You are proposing not merely the active enforcement of free speech as such, but removing the existing longstanding right of private entities to determine what forms of speech t…

> How is your proposal to regulate what private sector social media companies are required to publish any different in substance than a (clearly unconstitutional) proposal to regulate what private sector newspapers can and cannot publish?

I am talking about service providers, not users.

Suppose there's only one printing house in town and within a 1000 km radius. This de facto monopoly means that if you are denied their services you cannot publish a book.

My proposal is: we should mandate that the service provider (i.e. the printing house) provides the same services for the same price to all customers.

Of course that would require a definition of who will be considered a service provider, but I think that the FetLife controversy clearly shows that some freedoms are being endangered: outside the Internet no monopoly/oligopoly is so strong that can send virtually anyone out of business in a matter of a week.

Re: FetLife Announcement

#104

Post by zakk »

pzone wrote: post #91
zakk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence that payment processing companies are dropping business customers because they fear lawsuits?

The main evidence is to take these companies at their word instead of assuming they're trying to cover something up. They're willing to allow payments for 90% of fetishes but exclude the other 10%. Are they really drawing the line based on the rates of fraud in each fetish? Cases like the FetLife are illustrative. You can also look into f-list, a furry website which ultimately had to decide not to take any payments w…

> The main evidence is to take these companies at their word instead of assuming they're trying to cover something up.

I'm not implying that the are trying to cover something up, but it just seems absurd to me that a payment company may be liable for what its customer are doing, and I would like some clear, circumstantial evidence of that.

The laws you are referring to prosecute whoever detains, distributes, sells, imports, mails, transfers obscene material.

However I cannot see how payments providers can be liable, can you produce some evidence in this direction?

I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the payment provider is no more guilty that the electric company powering the servers.

Re: FetLife Announcement

#105

Post by hollerith »

mcdoug wrote: post #69

I am a member of the FetLife community as well as an HN reader. First, let me clear up some misconceptions about FetLife that people on here may have. It's not a porn site, or at least not primarily a porn site. The UX is a lot closer to that of Facebook but specifically for kinky people. If you go to a kink conference and meet someone, they will likely ask for your FL name to connect with you (incidentally Twitter i…

>and even the EFL at one point was involved

I think you mean the EFF (the Electronic Frontier Foundation).

Re: FetLife Announcement

#106

Post by jonlucc »

mschuster91 wrote: post #27
jonlucc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Indiana, and I've been living under a Pence government with a Republican supermajority for the last 4 years. It's better than Trump. Yeah, Pence picks ridiculous fights that cost the state a lot of money and he's a socially regressive person who wants to impose his views on everyone, but he's not an unhinged, unstable narcissist. He doesn't make all of his policy within minutes of it being shown on a cable…

Trump isn't that unstable, I believe. He's just blindly following the call of profit (except the pussy-grabbing and sexual assault stuff). Most of the decisions of him and his team up to now can be classified as "will make Donald Trump or his team money in some weird way". And I believe that this will land him in jail or impeachment more sooner than later.

Trump responds to stories from cable news by making policy on the fly. Trump called the director of the National Parks system to tell him to produce pictures that show more people at the inauguration. Trump sent Sean Spicer out in front of the press to lie about the size of his inauguration crowd. None of these make him money, and they show instability at a level that makes me uncomfortable in the White House.

Re: FetLife Announcement

#107

Post by Senji »

FussyZeus wrote: post #11
Senji wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Step one: Start a political party Step two: Get in power Step three: Make refusing credit transactions to patrons on grounds of "morality" illegal.

What exactly is the difference between enforcing morality with law and enforcing no morality with law? Morality is an incredibly subjective thing between differing cultures, I don't think it has a place in the justice/civil law systems.

You don't have to write the word "morality" in the law itself. Just make it so they can't deny service to anyone ever.

Re: FetLife Announcement

#108

Post by Senji »

nerfhammer wrote: post #19
Senji wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Step one: Start a political party Step two: Get in power Step three: Make refusing credit transactions to patrons on grounds of "morality" illegal.

> Start a political party > Get in power Almost impossible in a FPTP voting system

You can take over an established party, eg: alt-right and the mainstream conservative right.

Re: FetLife Announcement

#109

Post by andreyf »

robhu wrote: post #90
problems wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can already proxy around the CC companies in all too many ways. Buy gift cards, cash cards, heck, prepaid VISA cards for example. They're not going to bother going after this kind of thing, they'd lose money over it. It doesn't make sense from a financial perspective.

Ah. It turns out FetLife were also banned from Coinbase because Coinbase doesn't want to be cut off as a result.

But that's the great thing about BTC... all you need to accept them is a computer, and all you need to know when you got some is an ISP.

Re: FetLife Announcement

#110

Post by mcdoug »

hollerith wrote: post #105
mcdoug wrote: post #69

I am a member of the FetLife community as well as an HN reader. First, let me clear up some misconceptions about FetLife that people on here may have. It's not a porn site, or at least not primarily a porn site. The UX is a lot closer to that of Facebook but specifically for kinky people. If you go to a kink conference and meet someone, they will likely ask for your FL name to connect with you (incidentally Twitter i…

>and even the EFL at one point was involved I think you mean the EFF (the Electronic Frontier Foundation).

Yes. Typo. Old thread now, but yes.
Post reply on HN