PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like

Post by MarcoZavala » Thu, Oct 27, 2022, 7:39 PM UTC

WWLink wrote: post #44

anonym29 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. Un…

> The problem is theft of your funds without your consent over your unpopular political speech. As much as I want to roll my eyes at this, it's important no matter what your political opinion is! For now we might be talking "unpopular" but what if you have political speech that is popular but opposes what the people in charge at the time think?

Post by anonym29 » Thu, Oct 27, 2022, 8:02 PM UTC

8note wrote: post #45

anonym29 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legally, no, which is why I don't use PayPal and never will again, but to the layperson, who almost invariably does not read those contracts, and might be incapable of understanding the contract even if they chose to read it, I suspect it would look, sound, and feel a lot like theft. But again, that's the beauty of Bitcoin. There is no dense legalese with sneaky technicalities that allow other parties to seize your f…

Isn't that the beauty of PayPal too? As long as I follow certain tricky practices including self censorship, my money is safe. Swapping out dense legalese with sneaky technicalities for dense technical requirements with sneaky technicalities isn't particularly different. Even then, you still aren't protected from signing bad contracts, either smart or regular

Post by rglover » Thu, Oct 27, 2022, 8:28 PM UTC

qubex wrote: post #15

rglover wrote: post #8

Earlier 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?

Post by rglover » Thu, Oct 27, 2022, 8:33 PM UTC

judge2020 wrote: post #23

qubex wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

And yet when you send via Bitcoin, you're putting 100% trust in them following through on fulfilling their end of the deal. Only NFTs/smart contracts fix this, but for them to affect things in the real world you either need society or some oracle to use that smart contract as a source of truth.

Post by rglover » Thu, Oct 27, 2022, 8:35 PM UTC

horsawlarway wrote: post #25

rglover wrote: post #8

Earlier 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.

New flash - you're always going to be trusting humans. The blockchain is a great ledger, but the ledger is worthless if it does not match reality. What reality is (especially with regards to money exchange) is a complicated and turbulent topic. How does bitcoin handle any form of fraud, misrepresentation, or contract dispute? It does not. At all. You have to go right back to trusting humans to solve those problems. E…