top 43 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 106 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Did they even have the option not to go nuclear? From the sounds of their blog post, they would have spent the proper amount of time to do what they were being "asked" (threatened) to do, if they were even given time to do so. They said their preferred decision would have been to ask every NSFW dev if they complied with the payment processors they accept, but the time they were expected to implement all that was so short that they couldn't do that fairly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 163 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    This is the start. Mastercard and Visa will soon block you from other content like movies and music (if it’s explicit) and books.

    They are at the whims of religious extremists.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 75 points 1 year ago (26 children)

    I'll do direct bank transfers if it means no censorship.

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (23 children)

    The issue I have with non-credit card purchases is who owns the fraud transactions. For that reason alone, I don't like the idea of giving any site full banking information, especially given the sheer amount of data exfiltration that takes place on a regular basis.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    We really need a push based payment system. It's absurd someone can take money from you simply by knowing your credit card or bank numbers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Wait, where in the world does that happen?

    ..don't tell me that in the US if someone has your banking details they can do literally anything they want, and just empty your account

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Yes. Every purchase I do has two-factor authentication

    If I do automatic payment, I need to set it up manually and also set a custom limit of how much is allowed to be pulled. I also typically get a notification every time an automatic transaction is planned to occur

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    CVV is printed on the same side as the CC these days. It's literally as if your CC was 19 numbers long instead of 16. If you still have a card where it's printed on the back then yeah, it's sort of a "I have physical access to the card to flip it" factor of authentication.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    this. it sorta annoys me putting in the payee endpoint as well. You should be able to get a number or code or whatnot from the place wanting payment and it will setup the payee endpoint and give you a code. You should then be able to purchase something and give the payee the code which they can do to send a bill to whats setup at your bank. then you go and authorize the payment and of course someone could set it to always accept payments from the payee if they are lazy. It also super annoys me that there is not more options on bank accounts. I want my savings to only allow transfers out to specific accounts I setup. Like my checking. Not allowing any transfers from other institutions. The checking can then be open and I can trasfer there before doing something else with it. Any type of transfer should always do a balance check and not go if insufficient balance is available with no fee.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago* (9 children)

    A lot of European countries have direct bank transactions streamlined, you scan a QR code and fraud is owned by the bank.

    It's ecen more secure than cards, since you can't get double charged by the vendor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    What Americans tend to refer to as "fraud protection" is charge back policies, where the payment processor acts as Content Police and revert transactions if they hear the vendor was unfair to their customer (and they usually are on the side of the customer).

    My EU bank won't do that even on my credit card, because it's insane that one would expect a financial institution to be judge, jury, and executioner in the case of a disagreement over legal services rendered.

    Americans have to own up to the uncomfortable fact that dependence on these policies is what keeps the big credit cars companies in power, on top of severely driving up consumer prices (unfairly weighted towards the rich of course who get cashbacks thanks to the obscene money Visa makes on their enormous transaction fees) and being incredibly unfair to small vendors who don't have the means to meaningfully dispute fraudulent chargebacks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Banks can and absolutely do honor chargeback requests, though the terminology is usually different, even in the EU. But these are usually always honored (eg SDD Reversal or MOIs).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    "Regular" SDDs can only be done within 5 business days apparently. Not that I would know, my bank certainly doesn't offer a magic money back button to their private customers, and as I remember it my contract only allows transaction reversal in case of identity fraud, basically.

    As far as I can tell, SDDs are a B2B-oriented tool that can only be initiated in particular circumstances such as a merchant being unable to fulfill an order altogether – i.e. when the legal case for a breach of contract is so unambiguous that it isn't worth either party's time to go to court. That's very different from the American thinking of "my hotel room wasn't as clean as I like it so I'm going to do a chargeback because that's my Visa-given right".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    5 days is the period for a no-questions-asked reversal. It's a consumer right, SDD isn't just B2B. Banks do in fact offer a "magic money back" button for SDDs.

    SDDs are what happens when you for example purchase an item (regular SDD) or a subscription (recurring SDD) online and provide your IBAN to the company providing it. The company then taking funds from your account with nothing but that IBAN is done through SDD. And yes, your bank will let you reverse that within 5 days, no questions asked (precisely because only an IBAN is required).

    After 5 days, it's still possible (eg through MOI) but that's not guaranteed. I know this stuff because I deal with it professionally on a daily basis.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    My country has our own government operated, fast, simple and cheap payment method so now visa and mastercard are making the US government pressure us to destroy it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Rule of acquisition #85: Never let the competition know what you're thinking

    In this case I interpret the competition to be the various payment processors that might be willing to serve for additional fees

  • source
  • [+] -13 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Good luck finding anything that works globally. Crypto payments are only alternative - Thankfully PayPal seems to be planning going crypto processor itself

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    ...just use USDC or Tether?

    Stable to the dollar, no need to alter prices, quick, cheap to send, on multiple chains for more options.

    Yeah, so it'll never happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -73 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    22 comments in c/gaming@lemmy.zip view that post
    [–] 66 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    The problem with pro-censorship activism is that pro-censorship activists will find out where something they want to censor is now hosted and then go after that with the same methods they used for the place it was previously hosted on.

    This wasn't about gaming, but explains the methods: https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/02/22/rip-culture-war-thread/

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Personally, I think these sites should do a thing with cryptocurrency so that you buy crypto with your card and then use that to buy the games. So that way the payment processor can't get mad at you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    What's stoping a group like Collective Shout from then forcing the payment processors to go after whatever web domain registrar they get their name from? Or, assuming they don't use their own hardware, which is extremely likely, that they go after whoever they go through for hosting their website?

    As great of an idea as just switching payment processors is, that won't stop those puritanical pricks because they'll just switch targets and get the whole website/service taken down if it means fulfilling their Satan guided goals being done in the name of Jesus.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Yeah but those services tend to care a lot less then the payment processors but the I do see your point.

    For instance, it's not as easy as you think to get a website pulled down, or to get a domain name restricted, mostly because they're not paid for on a monthly basis, they're paid for on a yearly basis, and sometimes they even have contracts for multi years.

    Different clouds support different things, that's why sites like Parlour still exist despite the massive amount of animosity the administrators of that site face.

    Getting a hold of a global register to get them to do something about a domain name on their register, while possible, is not nearly as easy as getting hold of the payment processor.

    It seems to me that if payment processing was made to be less effective by this tactic, they would have to choose less effective tactics that sites could choose to ignore. You're right that they don't own the hardware, but for big companies like Valve, it would be a pretty trivial setup for them especially with companies out there like open cloud.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I would argue that the next most vulnerable part of the chain after payment processors is not the domain registrar, but the actual web host because that’s where the “offensive” content is actually possessed and stored. At least that’s been my anecdotal observation of the last few decades of internet crusades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    It's great if you can convince all of your customers to use a new payment service. Most businesses are not gonna go anywhere near that. They don't care.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Yeah, but having a Visa/Mastercard duopoly is already a precarious position before they even decide what to censor. This is just the canary in the coalmine, need to diversify, in different countries if possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The canary was when the exact same thing happened (with much greater impact) to pornhub.

    Nobody cared. and Pornhub Corp STILL can't use credit cards and are dependent on bank orders and cryptocurrency.

    And I can't see a lot of developers going out of their way to prioritize this. Because it is easy to say you are sex positive. It is another thing to actually stand with smut and risk getting attacked by all the same groups.

    Also, you know what else is a de facto monopoly? Steam! (cue all the usual suspects). You know what people will never stop whining about? Games not having Steam versions.

    So yeah. Gamers Rise Up?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Pornhub had a shitload of other issues that weren't payment processor related.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Curious what you are referring to.

    Because I am referring to when this exact same thing happened to them. Christofacists went after the payment processors who cut off business with Pornhub over claims of CSAM and revenge porn with lots of fabricated victim stories to get the public on their side. Most studies showed that Pornhub had considerably less of both than facebook or twitter (and this was like early 2020s so not even the current hellscape of musknet). But Pornhub did comply and actually instituted REALLY good checks and rules regarding uploads (basically consent forms for ALL participants in a video) and... still can't accept credit cards.

    Did I miss something else regarding why they now only accept bank orders and cryptocurrency?

  • source
  • parent
  • It's important to know that it may not be visa and MasterCard directly, but rather Stripe, a popular middleware that provides an easy API for developers to access the card networks. To a user it'd be more or less transparent if they're just swapping them out

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Are there any which interface with different national banking systems and allow payment from those without going through the credit card payment infrastructure, which has become a universal choke point? Or are they talking about accepting Monero or something?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I hate to say it, but this would be one use case where crypto currencies would be ideal. Or any other decentralized solution.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    First I’m hearing of this. I don’t really understand how it works? From what I’ve read it says it’ll take your money to some exchange and then give you an anonymous digital version in the app/account. I’m assuming it’s not as simple as putting a card in and being able to buy something like on Amazon or something. Both the seller and buyer need to use it right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 16 comments in c/gaming@beehaw.org view that post
    [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Would GNU Taler be useful in this situation?

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    These Christian groups love guns though. I bet you can still buy guns with visa/mastercard. Go buy guns.

    Then go show off your guns to these Christians.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This group in particular (Collective Shout) is Australian, and they're anti-gun, it's just not a key part of their advocacy. They have claimed that GTA is responsible for mass shootings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Good. I hope they succeed!

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

    Implement a system similar to a Steam wallet.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Unless they make that completely seamless behind the scenes, I can't see that working. Most people don't use crypto and don't want to learn how. It also requires users to sign up for a crypto exchange, which requires people to register with a photo ID. Additionally, it is difficult to exchange exactly the amount you need to purchase something, because of how volatile the currencies are. You end up spending more than the cost of the thing you are buying, just to be sure that you have enough. And then you're in the digital currency problem of "I want the $3 skin but the smallest package I can buy is $5 worth of V Bucks", which always feels like a ripoff.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I've seen this a lot, and there are problems with it. People are not going to want to go through setting up a crypto wallet just to buy a game. People are not going to be happy with Itch.io doing it transparently behind the scenes (who knows where they are sending it to). Creators are not going to be happy with having to pay higher transaction fees. And all this would apply to all games sold on Itch, not just the spicy ones, since Mastercard and Visa would absolutely block them if they tried it.

    Why not just use something like Wero (or a hypothetical global equivalent) and use direct bank to bank transfers with no payment processor acting as an intermediary?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    since Mastercard and Visa would absolutely block them if they tried it.

    They didn't block Steam back when it accepted Bitcoin, or even complain afaik

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Steam wasn't using it to bypass their policies and demands.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Yeah, but it wouldn't be realistic to say "we accept crypto now and also are refusing to comply with credit card content policies" right away anyways, because that would just lose them all their business. The better plan would be to do what they seem to be doing; comply in the short term as best they can, while simultaneously looking to branch out with the payment options they accept, so that at some point in the future credit card companies might have less leverage.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I don't think that someone is talking about using BTC or ETH. They're literally unusable to make purchases (multiple minute settling times and the high costs you mentioned) but any other functional L1 would work. Algorand for examply has ~3second block times with instant finality and costs a fraction of a fraction of a cent to use the network. Those fees couple be subsidised they're so low. They're significantly lower than a rail like Visa or MasterCard. But you're right, implementing it so anyone can easily use and access it is key.

    Edited bad autocorrect

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    On the one hand, yes, it's a solid alternative because it's decentralized and can even be untraceable (see Monero), but on the other hand, it's been under attack for the past years. I would disagree it's censorship-resistant, because if you make it illegal or hard to buy and sell crypto, few would be dedicated enough to go around that. Moreover, your proposed solution would still rely on some gateway between crypto and fiat, which would be vulnerable to pressure.

  • source
  • parent