311–320 of 409 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, my orders never exceed 100 bucks, and I have an automatic sweep into my bank account when it exceeds X dollars.
Might not be enough. PayPal is notorious for draining connected bank accounts in some cases.
Is this a legitimate alternative domain name for PayPal, or is it a parody or phishing site? It's not paypal.com. Apparently it's legit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45250319
Nice of them to cause confusion to make phoning easier. No, corp.paypal.com/news or PayPal.com/corp/newsroom etc weren’t a good idea. I’d love to hear how decisions like this get made.
It's decently common for websites to do this-- this is the same reason why Github Pages is hosted at github.io rather than github.com, and why static blobs are at githubusercontent.com. Those have a somewhat different threat model than PayPal's news site (hopefully PayPal isn't letting any random person add news stories...), but the premise is the same: if the thing does not need authentication tokens for the main service, make it so that it's impossible for it to get them.
(You could get some of the same effect by scoping your cookies to a specific subdomain rather than allowing them to apply to all subdomains, but (1) that's not always how you want to structure your site, and (2) it's really easy to mess up and inadvertently scope a cookie too broadly (or for the browser to misbehave and send to subdomains anyways, which was the default behavior of one very prominent browser for a really long time). Using a different domain entirely sidesteps all of this completely.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For people who won't setup any wallet this can be useful. Self custody wallets are scary for some users.
What's the intersection of people who are afraid to set up their own wallet, want to use Ethereum and Bitcoin, and are happy to have PayPal as the one performing their transactions for them? Any of those might be reasonable independently, but it's hard to imagine someone fitting all three.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every bank in Germany allows you to dispute transactions done with Debits.
And they make it as difficult and hidden as possible. At the same time they advertise to "support sepa now" as if it's something new while by law they have to process such transactions within two hours for over 10 years now.
The whole purpose of crypto is to exchange money online like we exchange cash in person, so who wants PayPal as a middleman on a tech designed not to have a middleman? Who will use that
Just look at Tether, the darling of the stablecoin world, which is minted by a handful of institutional clients. If you squint hard enough, you can see the banks.
The whole purpose of crypto is to exchange money online like we exchange cash in person, so who wants PayPal as a middleman on a tech designed not to have a middleman? Who will use that
That's the purpose of crypto, yes. As it turns out people like having trusted authority in their money movements, and so now we're watching the crypto world just re-invent the financial industry basically as a digital twin. Just look at Tether, the darling of the stablecoin world, which is minted by a handful of institutional clients. If you squint hard enough, you can see the banks.
As a naive consumer you might not see all the gears but the layers of complexity in traditional finance are vast compared to the bitcoin whitepaper.
I'm still amazed at how deeply this forum of supposed compsci gurus is hoodwinked by groupthink and a few "scam" headlines from info brokers.
Paypals reputation in the FinTech space is that of creating a service that restricts as much as possible what can be done with your own money. All in the name of "security." Even though they seem to offer the worst security of any platform, coupled with the now infamous risk of having your funds "frozen" for any arbitrary reason. In short: I literally cannot think of a company I would trust less with digital currencies than Paypal. And seeing them support any of them just makes me think "wow, you fucking phonies."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think that the rich dipshits that Zelle enables are significantly better? They're just responsible for an older slower form of the same abuse. We desperately need a ethical alternative, buy I think were going to have to build it ourselves.
They're not as openly shitty at least. Crypto was supposed to be an alternative to all this but, well, look how that worked out.
Crypto was supposed to be an alternative to all this but, well, look how that worked out.