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

Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

polygon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 178 posts

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#141

Post by immibis »

kasey_junk wrote: post #96
ranger_danger wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is sending cash in the mail equivalent to the purchaser extending credit?

Cash has left their account but goods have not been received. Anytime there is a mismatch between those 2 there is credit risk.

By this reasoning every transaction involves credit, since there's a time period between me swiping my card for the apples, and me walking out of the store with the apples, during which time you could tackle me and take my apples. And if it's a word that applies to every transaction, then it's meaningless.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#142

Post by tstrimple »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #138
lupusreal wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GOG is great but I'd like them even more if they did some of the wine/proton work that Steam does for Linux users. For the dosbox games at least it's not much to do (for them nor for myself to be fair.) Steam is simultaneously hard to like, as a DRM service, but also hard to dislike as they put so much care into getting games running on Linux and have a very reasonable return policy, full refunds for the game not wor…

To be clear, there are many games on Steam without DRM. It's up to the publisher whether Steam DRM is used or not (or if any other 3rd party DRM is used, for that matter). I suspect almost all of the games on GoG, if they are also on Steam, also don't have DRM on Steam.

DRM and especially 3rd party launchers are both things that get me to skip games on Steam. I wish Steam made it simpler to just filter those games out of your store view.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#143

Post by kasey_junk »

immibis wrote: post #141
kasey_junk wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cash has left their account but goods have not been received. Anytime there is a mismatch between those 2 there is credit risk.

By this reasoning every transaction involves credit, since there's a time period between me swiping my card for the apples, and me walking out of the store with the apples, during which time you could tackle me and take my apples. And if it's a word that applies to every transaction, then it's meaningless.

Every transaction _does_ involve credit risk (specifically counter party or settlement risk) but the amount of it changes based on the difference in time between when payment happens and the transaction is completed. So for most purposes a cash transaction where I give you cash and you give me the goods is viewed as riskless (even though it's not as you point out).

But in your example, you don't need to invoke a security guard stealing your apples. There is a _ton_ of credit risk already just by the invocation of the electronic payment. Your funds will not hit the account of the merchant in question for _a long time_ (usually modeled as 1-3 days for risk purposes in the US). All kinds of things can happen in that time. The merchant has extended you credit and has taken on credit risk. They've done so because of the chain of credit and agreements that the banks, processors and networks have worked out.

If Mastercard gets a bunch of its transactions reversed because a Congressional panel gets huffy about pornography, that potentially blows up transactions for apples miles away. That's why this is mostly a conversation about risk management, not morals. To the apple vendor's bank, they largely don't care if you buy porn, they just don't want their settlements caught up in the blowback.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#144

Post by lesuorac »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #129
lesuorac wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yeah. It's a video game, nobody actually dies. If you show a nipple, somebody actually sees a nipple.

I genuinely can't tell if this is a joke. If this is not a joke, please elaborate on the difference between "seeing a murder" and "seeing a nipple".

half-joke.

The difference is that it's not "seeing" a murder. It's committing a murder vs watching pornography.

Killing somebody in a video game isn't real murder. Seeing a nude character is still pornography.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#145

Post by kasey_junk »

rictic wrote: post #103
kasey_junk wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are taking electronic payments you are extending credit. The rails (currently) require it. Cash by mail would be either the merchant extending credit to the purchaser if they allowed the game download before receipt or the purchaser extending credit if not.

You're speaking out of ignorance here. Steam has a long-term relationship with its customers. They can and will remove a title from a user's library if the payment is charged back, as well as placing restrictions on the account.

I'm a long term customer of Steam _and_ work in the payments industry. In the _easiest_ Steam payment there are 7 different parties extending or receiving credit from each other. Most of those counter parties have no relationship with each other at all (I certainly don't maintain close ties with the game publishers bank), do you?

The rules that are being invoked around porn exist to protect different parts of that chain, from each other.

The argument about Steams ability to revoke the good in question doesn't help with that. What it does is provide an alternate path if Steam wanted to extricate themselves from that chain of 7 counterparties. Steam could stop being involved with all those other players and become a payment network unto themselves. They could demand ach (or cash in the mail as the parent suggests). Give the game with the understanding they would rapidly revoke it for bad customers, and limit their exposure to the publisher by giving them very delayed payment terms. Of course, then the customer is taking on more risk and losing choice and Steam has to account for that in their sales numbers.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#146

Post by lenerdenator »

immibis wrote: post #41
lenerdenator wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Load-wallet would probably be better. Crypto is almost as bad as handing over your ID to see "adult" materials, because both require you to trust two parties (government ID stores and the general crypto community) that have shown themselves to not be trustworthy at all .

I'm not seeing how the "general crypto community" can be compared to a "government ID store".

I can count on people in the government to abuse having my ID linked to my online activity.

I can count on people in the crypto community to do unsavory things with my money to my financial detriment.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#147

Post by babypuncher »

pjmlp wrote: post #100
babypuncher wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Valve/Steam is the reason gaming on Linux is even viable today

Unfortunately by translating Windows games, Valve doesn't even manage to get game studios to port Android/Linux (NDK) into GNU/Linux, shows how much studios care. Better keep targeting Windows.

I think this is ultimately a benefit. I've had too many proprietary native Linux games that slowly broke overtime as libraries they depended on changed or became deprecated. Hosting unmaintained proprietary software like this has always been difficult with Linux.

With Proton we basically have a common stable runtime that handles all the platform specific needs of a video game. It just so happens that runtime is largely binary-compatible with Windows. It's easier for devs to support when all they have to do is stick to a Proton-compatible subset of the Win32 API. Users get way more games. And anecdotally my experience as a user is generally better than with true native ports. It's a big net win.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#148

Post by HDThoreaun »

devnullbrain wrote: post #47
kasey_junk wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 3 issues being commingled within this. First, the networks have brand protection stipulations for any partner that uses the network. None of them want to be known as the porn brand. Second, porn (and other similar categories) have a different risk profile than other charges. Specifically chargeback risk goes through the roof. None of the members of the network want to deal with sales of things that spike ch…

This is not true. Here's a page from Collective Shout, the group mentioned in the article: https://www.collectiveshout.org/steam_campaign_history

Collective shout isnt the one making decisions here, the payment processing companies are. Just because they came to the same conclusion doesnt mean it is for the same reasons.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#149

Post by persolb »

intalentive wrote: post #12

The monetary system is a public good and should be treated like one, with transparent upfront rules not arbitrary action that takes people by surprise.

I think the root of much of this are money laundering rules. The feds want to be able to punish bad guys without actually proving the crime they are suspected of. There are now a large set of rules which the government isn’t efficient enough to enforce, so it has actually become the banking industry’s legal responsibility. Once such things are normalized, they get stretched.

Re: Steam can't escape the fallout from its censorship controversy

#150

Post by nicce »

rxyz wrote: post #5
nimbius wrote: post #4

If valve can escape the Microsoft store, it can handle a few payment processors. what would happen if Valve accepted Cryptocurrency? in turn, what might happen if valve decided to become a cryptocurrency exchange exclusive to the gaming community? EDIT: another solution is to use a load-wallet based system to shroud transactions from your financial nanny. money in, money out, no explicit evidence of a purchase.

I think Valve will not accept crypto unless they run out of options. They don't accept any games that use NFT's on their platform and haven't added crypto top-ups to this day, even though it would be simple for them via providers like Stripe

It does not make sense to add crypto currencies unless there are official ones in the U.S/EU. Otherwise it is just asking more scamming/instability in the scale of Steam.
Post reply on HN