The U.S. dollar in a competitive, fair, and efficient market cannot be tied to the services of a few companies. Individuals must have the right to spend money independently. People have a right to participate in markets. Theres a few options - force all online sales to also accept bank transfers. Create a gov owned company that competes with these services (like USPS). Or regulate payment services on what can be cons…
I think governments should create a digital cash equivalent. One that cannot be tracked any more than regular cash can (at least legally). With all the benefits and downsides, because that's the only way it would be trusted enough to work. I think this would be a major boon to any economy that implements it well. People have no problem paying for small services in real life, because paying 30 cents is easy. Online th…
PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
31–40 of 66 posts
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#32God I hate to say it, but Bitcoin fixes this (with the Lightning Network). https://lightning.network/ I am not a Maxi, but Jesus what other options are there?
How will Bitcoin fix it? If I buy a video card with bitcoin, but get sent a brick instead, how does "Blockchain as Arbiter" get my bitcoins back?
>How will Bitcoin fix it?
The problem is theft of your funds without your consent over your unpopular political speech. Bitcoin cannot be taken from you by any third party, provided you self-custody and adequately protect your keys.
>If I buy a video card with bitcoin, but get sent a brick instead, how does "Blockchain as Arbiter" get my bitcoins back?
Unrelated to the problem being discussed, but still a problem. Unfortunately, this is not a problem unique to Bitcoin, nor a problem adequately solved by PayPal, as explained in other comments, so it's hardly a robust criticism against BTC.
Full dislcosure: I own BTC, but less than 0.5% of my net worth, I do not own it for speculative reasons, and I do not view it as an investment or store of value, only as an alternative payment network.
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#33The U.S. dollar in a competitive, fair, and efficient market cannot be tied to the services of a few companies. Individuals must have the right to spend money independently. People have a right to participate in markets. Theres a few options - force all online sales to also accept bank transfers. Create a gov owned company that competes with these services (like USPS). Or regulate payment services on what can be cons…
I think governments should create a digital cash equivalent. One that cannot be tracked any more than regular cash can (at least legally). With all the benefits and downsides, because that's the only way it would be trusted enough to work. I think this would be a major boon to any economy that implements it well. People have no problem paying for small services in real life, because paying 30 cents is easy. Online th…
[deleted]
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
How will Bitcoin fix it? If I buy a video card with bitcoin, but get sent a brick instead, how does "Blockchain as Arbiter" get my bitcoins back?
Bitcoin fixes it by reducing the number of scammers in the chain. if you deal with a seller and paypal, either the paypal or the seller can scam you. paypal is immune to bad press because their reputation is already rock bottom, so they don't even lose any reputation anymore by rampantly thieving and scamming. At least if, with a cryptocurrency, the seller scams you, you can voice it somewhere their reputation will b…
Who do I complain to to get the BTC back from Celsius?
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#35The article is saying that PayPal could "presumably" charge your linked bank account. If you read their actual user agreement it's clear that this is not the case - which makes sense, because that would open them up to a world of lawsuits. Speaking from experience, the reality is that when you owe PayPal money and they will try to withdraw it from your PayPal balance and then go to collections like any other business would.
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
None. Bitcoin is the only way to solve this problem, 100% outright. As long as trusting other humans is a part of the equation, problems of corruption, censorship, etc. will always be a problem.
You do realise that money was created to deal with a lack of trust, and that every time you ‘transact’ in money you’re actually expressing your lack of trust in your counterpart’s ability to “make good” on a barter?
That's not really accurate; favors aren't fungible. I can't give you potatoes, and then use that favor to take a cow from your neighbor. You have to keep track of the balance somehow.
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#37The U.S. dollar in a competitive, fair, and efficient market cannot be tied to the services of a few companies. Individuals must have the right to spend money independently. People have a right to participate in markets. Theres a few options - force all online sales to also accept bank transfers. Create a gov owned company that competes with these services (like USPS). Or regulate payment services on what can be cons…
I think governments should create a digital cash equivalent. One that cannot be tracked any more than regular cash can (at least legally). With all the benefits and downsides, because that's the only way it would be trusted enough to work. I think this would be a major boon to any economy that implements it well. People have no problem paying for small services in real life, because paying 30 cents is easy. Online th…
they'd much rather kill regular cash instead - and they will
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cash, checks, Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover, barter.
> Cash Slowly being phased out. > checks Already spotty usage. > Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover Censorship possible. > barter Viable, but foolish considering it's cumbersome and we live in an age where perfectly viable technological solutions exist. It's like having an iron but pressing your shirts between books out in the sun.
Where can't you use cash?
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#39I don't understand why most journalist/users don't spend https://web.archive.org/web/20210922061858/https://www.paypa...
The passage even exists in the snapshot of 2013
https://web.archive.org/web/20131114024812/https://www.paypa...
Re: PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
None. Bitcoin is the only way to solve this problem, 100% outright. As long as trusting other humans is a part of the equation, problems of corruption, censorship, etc. will always be a problem.
You do realise that money was created to deal with a lack of trust, and that every time you ‘transact’ in money you’re actually expressing your lack of trust in your counterpart’s ability to “make good” on a barter?
>You do realise that money was created to deal with a lack of trust
I disagree. I posit that money was created to establish a fungible, divisble, common store of value for the purpose of facilitating exchange of goods and services of dissimilar value that are not always needed by the counterparty. Without money, the barber would need to pay for his groceries with haircuts. This poses problems if the grocer or farmer does not want or need a haircut. No trust violations needed here - barter is simply more difficult without money, even if there is absolute trust in your counterparty's promise to deliver the goods or services they offer as described.