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

Gab.com banned from PayPal

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 203 posts

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#191

Post by splintercell »

matt4077 wrote: post #151
splintercell wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How, I would love to hear solutions. People like asparagirl will not join a free speech platform because her speech isn't really restricted from the non-free speech platforms. The people who have the biggest incentive to join these platforms are the one which are kicked out from all the other networks.

The ACLU seems like a worthwhile cause for actual advocates of free speech. And no, they don't only advocate for liberal causes. Campaign finance laws would be one area of policy where they have starkly different ideas than the political left. As to these platforms: the whole argument is essentially build on this slippery-slope fallacy that banning vile racism, anti-semitism, etc. inexorably leads more restrictions o…

I am very confused by your response, it seems like you're responding to what you think I said rather than what I actually said.

I am saying that if you create a product NEW, and hope to lure away people from product OLD, the only people who will migrate to the new platform are the people who have problem with product OLD which product NEW solves for them.

In case of the 'free speech' platforms, the group which has the problem and need of 'free speech' are the ones which are restricted in their speech.

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#192

Post by hakfoo »

stickfigure wrote: post #160
dmartinez wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting thoughts. It could be that PayPal has over extended certain models for far longer than they should have. Some forms of tech debt should be resolved sooner, rather than later. It would be fascinating to know the real reasons behind the fall from grace. Is it really the employees, or the managers? There could be dilapidated business processes still in place that even prevent the company from healing itself.…

It's hard to be certain from the outside, but my impression is: - Fractured product line; they have a bunch of products that are similar but different and they themselves are confused about which is which. Product management is in chaos. - Tech debt from the 90s that has never been paid off. - Acquisitions that were poorly integrated. - Some weird attempt to mash their platform together with ebay that never quite ful…

From my perspective, PayPal was always distracted by what it wanted to sell to consumers, which impacted what it offered to retailers.

All most merchants wanted was "let me accept credit cards with quick and easy setup, even if it's expensive." (Hence the success of Square, Stripe, etc.). All they needed to do was to offer a few APIs that acted like every other credit card gateway, and they'd be fine.

But instead, they went whole hog on telling consumers "you never need to give the retailer a card number." Now, I'm skeptical this was ever a huge selling point, but it means that any API they can ever offer will always be a nonstandard mess to work with because it means you're going to have to bounce users off your site to finish checkout.

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#193

Post by Khaine »

zorpner wrote: post #167
Khaine wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FFS the government has already forced people to do business with those they don't like. You do remember the raison etre of the Civil Rights Act don't you? I'm pretty sure companies in the 1960s South didn't want to serve black Americans. In fact, many want the Government to go further and force bakers to make cakes for gay weddings when the owners don't support gay marriage [1] [1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06…

You have completely failed to understand the jurisprudence surrounding the idea of a protected class.

The fact that the Government created protected classes is the entire point. Government's already have forced businesses to do business with people. That is a fact. This argument has nothing to do with what is and isn't a protected class.

What is a protected class could be expanded and the Government can force everyone to do business with unsavoury types.

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#194

Post by someguydave »

Asparagirl wrote: post #26

Good. Now for Stripe. I already called their customer support this morning and told them I'd pull my organization's account unless they dropped Gab. I'm sure I'm not the only customer who has. They enable payments processing for Gab, which means that they also profit from Gab. They make money off the alt-right. They choose to make money off the alt-right. You want protests in front of your office, Stripe, raising hel…

What if someone from the "alt-right" donated to your organization? You should probably start screening donors.

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#195

Post by someguydave »

vfclists wrote: post #171
Asparagirl wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the members of our board of directors was almost killed there this morning, but she overslept and missed shul, and so was saved. We’ll stick with our virtue.

You may view one of my other responses on the matter - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18318492 People like you support freedom of speech or expression only for your views. Democracy is underpinned by the principle, by the faith, that if people are given the right information they will make the right choices, no matter or learned or ignorant they are. This the reason why the votes of people who in less politcall…

You make perfect sense but you are probably wasting your time on these folks, unfortunately.

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#196

Post by smsm42 »

fzeroracer wrote: post #23

It should honestly come as no surprise considering Gab, much like Voat, is a website filled with some of the most vitriolic and racist garbage I've ever seen. No company wants to be associated with a walking PR disaster. Most of the time however they're more than happy to take money from said places as long as people don't make it into a big PR problem.

I can see "some of the most vitriolic and racist garbage I've ever seen" on Twitter any day I want. Granted, I don't want to go on Twitter that often, but finding garbage there is not a problem. I mean, https://twitter.com/louisfarrakhan exists and this is the person who literally talks about "Satanic Jews". Why it isn't a walking PR disaster I wonder?

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#197

Post by [deleted] »

someguydave wrote: post #194
Asparagirl wrote: post #26

Good. Now for Stripe. I already called their customer support this morning and told them I'd pull my organization's account unless they dropped Gab. I'm sure I'm not the only customer who has. They enable payments processing for Gab, which means that they also profit from Gab. They make money off the alt-right. They choose to make money off the alt-right. You want protests in front of your office, Stripe, raising hel…

What if someone from the "alt-right" donated to your organization? You should probably start screening donors.

[deleted]

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#198

Post by someguydave »

vfclists wrote: post #170
zorpner wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the fight you should be having -- the government should be a universal payment processor. I agree wholeheartedly. I am arguing again the people who state that a corporation should be obligated to serve a non-protected class. if private processors can deny service for no reason Ah yes, the "no reason" of being violence-inciting Nazis. What a reasonless judgement.

If you agree that the government should be a universal payment processor, then you must agree that the government should set itself as a universal payment processor "first", before granting the oligopolies they have licensed the right to deny service for no legal reason.

It’s hard to see how the payment processors (operating under government license) are not violating the first amendment when they ban users. Perhaps someone will try that case one day.

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#199

Post by sneak »

mikeash wrote: post #156
sneak wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you may be confusing “government infringement upon free speech rights” and the much wider concept of “free speech” in general, which is the ability, provided by common spaces and a soap box, or printing presses, and now by the internet, that permits someone with something to say to reach their audience who wishes to hear them. There are a lot more people who have the ability to shut down a website, regardless…

It’s an interesting question. Speech on the internet does seem to depend on the cooperation of big companies in a way that isn’t seen in other realms. However, this seems to be drifting off topic. Gab’s web site didn’t get shut down, they just got cut off by a payment processor.

Their web site is indeed being shut down. :/ I hate Gab and all the nazis they host, but I am troubled about the difficulty in hosting the wider category of unpopular speech.

Re: Gab.com banned from PayPal

#200

Post by nkkollaw »

tptacek wrote: post #185
nkkollaw wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, I see. It's also possible that they cleaned up the "popular" section specifically after the events.

That's been reported, yes, but really the thing to know about Gab in 2018 is that it seems to be like 80% bots and 20% white supremacist UGC, which is what really makes it look more normal than it is.

Proof..?
Post reply on HN