PayPal stops payouts to models on Pornhub

Post by dingo_bat » Fri, Nov 15, 2019, 5:54 AM UTC

devit wrote: post #224

zamadatix wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water/power are utilities and are regulated differently than other industries. But your general question is an open debate. If you run a hosting company do you have to host things you disagree with? If you run a transaction company doy you have to exchange with parties you disagree with? What if a certain type of transaction is too high risk, do they have to do it anyways? Personally I'd like to see things lean more…

I think the test should be whether another company could offer a service giving the same result. So for instance this would be fine: - A web hosting company refusing clients, because you can use another one - Amazon refusing to sell the item themselves, because other companies can sell on the Amazon marketplace - A bank refusing a client, since you can just use another bank This would not be fine: - Apple refusing to…

Post by lawn » Fri, Nov 15, 2019, 5:57 AM UTC

simion314 wrote: post #137

rvz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cryptocoins aren't practical enough (yet?) to rely on completely for stuff like this. Really? I can understand "Bitcoin" as one of many cryptocurrencies that are unstable and very slow for these payments, but some cryptocurrencies are faster and cheaper than others and are suitable for this use-case. There are many ways to pay nowadays: 1. Scan a QR Code to send cryptocurrencies to the payee. 2. Type the address of…

I do not know that much about blockchain, so can you tell me if I am wrong, so if I use bitcoin to pay my rent and use bitcoin to buy something from PornHub now anybody can link this 2 payments and as the number of payments to different things increases I can be publicly identified. I read that some people would say don't use bgitoin use X or use process Y but then it is more convoluted then you would suggest initial…

Post by um_ya » Fri, Nov 15, 2019, 6:12 AM UTC

NullPrefix wrote: post #454

LanceH wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be better to have them in the regular financial systems subject to the "know your customer" laws, so the money and customer can be more easily tracked? If it's about all sorts of illegal activities, shouldn't law enforcement use these things as a resource, rather than driving it underground?

It is not law enforcement that is driving them underground. That is private corporations, who decide to rather not know those customers.

Post by um_ya » Fri, Nov 15, 2019, 6:15 AM UTC

jeltz wrote: post #357

x0x0 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it's moral choices and more fraud and dispute levels, ie the cost to service a customer.

I am not convinced it is just that. PayPal also refuses to do business with online gambling which is an industry with low fraud levels (in the early poker days they were high, but that was a long time ago). Thankfully there are a bunch pf credit card processors who know how good customers online casinos are and most banks are fine too, so that industry is not deplatformed.

Post by vanniv » Fri, Nov 15, 2019, 6:20 AM UTC

im3w1l wrote: post #298

m-p-3 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That fintech will get blacklisted by the other, bigger players. Not sure what else can be done to disrupt fintech to that point.

In the worst case, you could set up brick and mortar shops for getting dollar bills in and out.