641–650 of 953 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin does not require any payment processor. That's its whole point: censorship-resistant, permissionless, p2p payment system.
Bitcoin won't require a payment processor, but companies wanting to effectively handle Bitcoin will want a payment processor or else they will have to become one themselves. Even companies working in large amounts of cash end up hiring companies to handle the cash logistics and all the other complications in dealing with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Don't like porn? Don't buy it. Simple as that. The claim isn't "we don't like it", the claim is "this is damaging to society". I don't agree with such things in many cases (and many people disagree with me when I'm the one saying something is damaging to society), but it's important to note the difference or you will always be arguing against something other than their claim. > No one, including governments or paym…
> The claim isn't "we don't like it", the claim is "this is damaging to society" That's their framing , it's not what they actually do. If Collective Shout was a group that studied which things caused harm, and then campaigned against those things, then the point you're trying to make could stand. They're not. They've campaigned to ban rap artists, GTA 5, "50 Shades", lingerie ads, whatever random thing is around at…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. Proof-of-work is a feature. 2. Just do the conversion at the time of sale. 3. Government prohibition and restriction of our rights is a terrible problem and it's why Bitcoin was invented in the first place. It's a necessary fight if only to keep government power in check, unless one really believes the State is always right and always has our best interest in mind. I don't.
The colossal amount of energy burnt by proof-of-work is one of the reasons people who are not cryptobros loathe crypto.
What is wrong with these people who try to block certain content? Don't like porn? Don't buy it. Simple as that. No one, including governments or payment processors, should be in the position to decide whether a platform can sell something or not. I wish there was a payment processor who was brave enough to say a big fucking NO to censorship.
I don't really disagree with you, but to play devil's advocate - when you see something that you think is harmful to society, what determines whether or not it's moral and appropriate to advocate for and work towards its abolition in what you see as the best interest of everyone? Is "Don't like X? Don't buy it" as far as we should go with... AI-produced child porn? Rolling coal and other egregious pollution? Online g…
And in the case of addiction like drugs or gambling, instead of stigmatizing the victims, they should be there to support them.
Let people make their own decisions, not the government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you clarify how it “harmed” you? You didn’t quite answer that question.
https://xkcd.com/598/ (Except, remove the last panel)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty wild that people think that porn is more damaging to society than censorship.
In some ways, porn is more damaging, isn't it? For example, there's a lot of sex trafficking going on in the porn industry, but not so much in the censorship industry. I strongly oppose censorship and believe that payment processors and banks should be prohibited from engaging in it. Still, I have to admit that porn can be extremely destructive.
I question the bit about sex trafficking. From my perspective a lot of consenting adults are making a lot of money by willingly participating in the industry. If someone is abusing that and forcing someone to participate, that's already a crime that should be prosecuted. It's not an excuse to shut down commerce between consenting adults.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and I think they should be banned from doing so In general though outside protected classes business can, and should IMHO, have a lot of discretion over who they choose to do business with and how they do business. Unless we want a carve out for payment processors. Treat them as a utility of sorts? Sounds like an interesting idea TBH. To me it's critical though that society has room to moderate itself where the gov…
> Unless we want a carve out for payment processors. Treat them as a utility of sorts? Given that there are two payment processors that have about 90% global market share (excluding China) and your bank chooses the payment processor for the most part, yes we should regulate them and force them to process payment for any legal business. They have the ability to effectively determine what we can spend our money on when…
I like that idea. The USA actually used to trust bust :|
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Grocery stores absolutely sell sex toys now. Wal-Mart carries them as well. I'm no prude, but it's really weird to me.
Why? Those same stores have sold lube, condoms, and Trojan's vibrators since the 90's. Walmart has sold lingerie since they existed.
What is wrong with these people who try to block certain content? Don't like porn? Don't buy it. Simple as that. No one, including governments or payment processors, should be in the position to decide whether a platform can sell something or not. I wish there was a payment processor who was brave enough to say a big fucking NO to censorship.
Porn is just the thin end of the wedge (as was "violence in video games" a generation ago) - porn is something society considers as distasteful, so politicians are less likely to go on record as supporting porn. Once the porn bans go into effect, they'll move onto the next target in the conservative playbook: gay marriage, birth control/abortion access, etc.
Regulate Visa and MasterCard and the rest. As utility services, they should not have the ability to ban or deny service to any payment that is not clearly illegal. Or we should create a public alternative with private transactions.