top 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 92 points 1 year ago (17 children)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    Asking as an ignorant person, what's wrong with PayPal?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago

    All the authority of a bank.

    None of the responsibility.

    Plus Peter Thiel and Elon Musk had a hand in it, and made their fortunes. It's right up there with Hitler and Reagan in the "reasons to invent a time machine and go back and destroy something".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Their policies, verification systems, KYC/AML processes, risk aversion, and customer support leave many PayPal users with unmet expectations, especially when there is an issue with the transaction and PayPal is asked to assist.

    The company has found ways to avoid some of the regulations that banks are held to which is partly the reason for the issues.

    If you search the web for PayPal experiences, you'll find concerns such as their 1.3 star rating with almost 35,000 reviews on Trustpilot.

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

    It's also ridiculously difficult if not impossible to process a legal name change on your account, unlike a real bank. This means that married women, people who changed their name to avoid unsafe family members, and trans people are basically just not able to have accounts under their new legal names unless they're willing to just make a new account if they can't get anywhere with support. Supposedly, all you need is your legal documents, but I've heard a lot of horror stories about how convoluted they make it in practice.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    A few matters - About 5-6 years ago - PayPal was going to make telemarketing your phone number a requirement in order to have an account - If you had an account, they were going to FORCE you to allow their 3rd party marketing calls. No opt-out available whatsoever.

    PayPal is also an owner of the extension Honey - an extension that promoted they would try every online coupon code to see if you could save money on a deal. Recently (within the last year) it was discovered that even if they didn't provide you with any discount at all - they were still hijacking the referral links that brought you to the shop site in the first place. They were also striking deals to those same vendors about kickbacks to NOT keep the best coupons in their system. Essentially they were taking money from three sides, promoters, vendors, and the purchasers - all while NOT providing the best possible coupon codes - which was the whole advertised point of their service. Lawsuits on this are pending.

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

    A non exhaustive list of what makes them awful: https://expertbeacon.com/why-is-paypal-so-bad/

    Afaik, the issue that was making the most victims, was that they were facilitating scammers that targeted sellers:
    5. Good Luck Recouping Losses as a Seller in Disputes.
    89% of sellers experienced dispute resolution problems with PayPal in 2021 surveys. Despite providing evidence the item shipped or service rendered, they lost cases and sums averaging $622.
    This is driven by PayPal‘s buyer-favored review round taking 1-2 weeks. This favors scamming buyers at the expense of legitimate businesses.

    Iirc, there was a time when Paypal always sided with the buyer, irregardless of evidence or past track record, the review process was useless. Once scammers picked up on this and began scamming sellers en masse, Paypal still kept their policy unchanged for years and sellers started to raise their prices on platforms that forced them to accept Paypal (ebay used to do this). Ebay has since tossed Paypal off their platform. I don't know if Paypal ever improved.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's pretty easy for a scammer to get your money from you via paypal with no recourse. Person claiming to be selling an item for x dollars. You purchase item. They get money. They disappear. No item. Paypal: "oh well!"

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

    Wouldn't you use PayPal as a digital wallet for you credit cards & reverse fraudulent charges through your credit card company?

    Now if you link an actual bank account to PayPal, pay with that bank account, and get scammed, then that's your actual money spent, and no shit that's harder to reverse. You'd probably have to refer to your bank, and they may not do it.

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

    Well that's how money transaction works. The only way for you to have any recourse in this situation is something that can enforce laws. Or avoiding the situation all together through a reputable escrow.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 180 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Meh. Paypal deserves everything bad that happens to it. Barely used it in the last few years. Definitely do NOT keep funds on there unless you're okay with just losing them.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    Long ago, I used to work for a small business that did most of its sales through eBay using PayPal. They were the single biggest impediment to our business, yoinking money away at the slightest excuse. It seemed like they just lived to screw us over.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 63 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I mean, I don't want to keep funds in PayPal, but they make a good proxy for a credit card.

    Credit card POS systems permit for me to do (reasonably, lack a trusted display or input mechanism) secure transactions. But I can't do that with my computer


    I don't have a way to use a smartcard reader and purchase things online. I have to send my actual credentials to a vendor and trust that they're treating them securely.

    But if you use PayPal to pay at a vendor and then send that payment to a credit card, you avoid the security problems inherent to direct personal use of credit cards.

    I'm not comfortable sending credit card data to sketchy-looking sites. With PayPal, worst case they don't send me whatever I paid for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    I don't know if they do, but I've used a service before that provides similar functionality, a "temporary proxy credit card", which also permits one to not even provide one's real name and address to a vendor.

    But it's more work to set one up than it is to do a PayPal transaction. Like, I could do it if a vendor doesn't permit for PayPal payments and I really really want what the vendor is selling, but PayPal does the big "the vendor doesn't get your credentials" security fix and avoids creating extra hurdles for a purchaser to jump through.

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

    Use a virtual card like the ones from privacy. You can select if it’s a one time payment or a monthly payment and set limits.

    It saved me many times from companies charging me way more than I agreed to. (Bought a phone and never activated it, they tried to charge me $150 the next year, but I used a virtual card!)

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

    Look into the Privacy app (kind of a terrible name honestly). It's effectively a Paypal type system but one that issues CC numbers for each vendor or transaction and allows you to easily audit and manage them. It's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than Paypal.

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

    It's not a credit card, but I use Revolut and they have temporary virtual debit cards on their free plan even. They work a single time per generated card only. Great also if you want a 1 month subscription of something and don't trust yourself to cancel it.

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

    Btw this feature is exactly why certain companies are also banning Revolut cards; turns out authorizes for payments on a card that is about to disappear is a great way to not have to pay for anything (the Dutch OVPay had fraud issues with these cards for example).

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 55 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Good time to delete my PayPal. 👌

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I thought that my account was deleted years ago, but recently found out it still existed.

    Deleted now!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    I haven't used mine in several years, also deleted now 😁

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Wish I could but Patreon uses it, and it's the only way to pay with them.

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

    Wow, really. That's pretty crummy.

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

    Yeah can't even get paid without it. Believe it or not a lot of sites rely exclusively on Paypal. Lot of smaller businesses use it because it's easier and cheaper then trying to build your own online payment processor. Tell truth I used it on my own sites when I sold things online. If I remember correctly Ebay was the first to make it the way to pay with them. I only remember that because its how I first ended up with Paypal.

    Of course this was before Square, and Stripe was available.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    Here's a photo of the headquarters of PayPal in 2014, it explains why PayPal and eBay were so closely connected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago (37 children)

    I wouldn't mind seeing a ValvePay system. 1% transaction fee, available to anyone who wants to use it, including OnlyFans, Itch, Kagura, DLSite, and others. Valve can team up with Japan, the EU, and Brazil to handle their respective ends of the business, so that Valve can focus on the United States.

  • source
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    or just use Wero which they are gonna use anyway

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (31 children)

    Based off what? The option are credit cards or crypto.

    They don't need a valve pay for crypto. They could easily accept something like USDC to accept crypto and not deal with volatility.

    For credit cards all that would do is bypass the intermediaries if they directly integrated to a credit card company, and then they'd still be subject to their rules that the intermediaries claim they violate to protect MC etc from having to say it themselves. It'd solve absolutely nothing.

    Also a direct integration like that is a multi billion dollar business and all the effort and expenses that would come with that without even solving the root problem.

    This kind of problem is the exact reason crypto exists and is really the only solution even if it's not perfect yet.

    Edit: sorry, they could do a bank integration through ACH / EFT / Wires etc, but that's slow and realistically not an option. If people want to buy something they won't want to wait days for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I think the point is that Valve has the reach to start their own credit card network. It might be far fetched, but I'm old enough to remember when Sears launched the Discover card. It's totally doable for a company that already has the technical capabilities of Valve.

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

    That is such a monumental task and valve only has between 350-400 employees.

    Stripe has around 8500 employees, and they only integrate with credit card banks who integrate to the credit card companies. But they finally got a license to directly integrate so we might finally see that in the near future.

    When sears made the discover card, they had hundreds of thousands of employees, and they didn't need to deal with all the digital shit we gotta deal with now.

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

    they had hundreds of thousands of employees, and they didn't need to deal with all the digital shit we gotta deal with now.

    They needed hundreds of thousands of employees because they didn't have "digital shit". Today, the entirety of Discover Financial Services is around 21k, and probably falling.

    If Valve did it, it wouldn't be under the Valve organization anyways. It would be a subsidiary, and Valve has plenty of cash-flow to build it out.

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

    The digital shit is so complicated it takes a huge amount of employees. Integrations with hardware (payment terminals), banks, setting up infrastructure so others can accept your payments, automated fraud detection, digital compliance in every country they want to target, it's huuuuuuge. Thousands of employees.

    It used to be do a carbon copy of the card and send us the receipt.

    Valves internal structure wouldn't scale to that size either, and they have no experience running a company of the size that would be required in a different structure.

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

    What payment terminals? They could go years just being an online credit card. Hell, initially it wouldn't be very different from any company that bills their customers. Start it as a Steam only thing, then add select partners one at a time. It doesn't have to be in your grocery store on day one, or ever really. Fraud detection is easy when you can just yank the game back. Sears couldn't do that when you bought a washing machine. I worked in banking infosec and I have no idea what "digital compliance" means in this context. The hardest compliance standards in this space are PCI, and those are defined and enforced on clients by the payment card industry itself.

    Valves internal structure wouldn't scale to that size either

    Which is why I specifically said it would be run as a subsidiary.

    and they have no experience running a company of the size that would be required in a different structure.

    Gosh, where on Earth could they find people with experience running a company that would look like 99% of the companies in existence?

    You're just throwing shit on the wall and hoping something sticks. You could neigh say anything, and nothing in the world would ever be accomplished.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (15 children)

    Are you aware you can just transfer money between bank accounts, usually for free?

    Much like with a credit card, you could just transfer money to Valve, which would be credited to your account, and you can then use it to buy stuff.

    There's no need for crypto anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (12 children)

    That takes time (days) that people don't want to wait to make a purchase, nor do people want to leave a balance with companies or have to worry about topping it up so they have enough to buy the next game they happen to want without waiting.

    Edit: Not to mention the risk of sharing bank account information.

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

    Bank to bank transfers typically show up in under an hour in my country, and you would obviously be able to credit your account ahead of time.

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

    Hours?? Lost of places (see EU, India, Japan) have instant transfers.

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

    Even having to wait an hour is a fantastic way to lose a sale.

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

    Valve could extend a limited credit for the first two hours of play time. If after downloading and playing for two hours there's still no confirmation from the bank, they'd then block your access to the game.

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

    That's actually a pretty realistic option given the 2 hour refund window.

    Maybe allow it only after 1 successful deposit, and revoke it after 1 failure for a long period and X successful payments.

    Also maybe only 1 game is playable if you happen to buy more than 1 in that time

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

    This is to top up your account, not make a purchase.

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

    And that's back to my point of people not wanting to leave money places in case they want to buy a game in the future.

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

    Instead of leaving it in your bank account just in case?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Money in my bank account I can spend on just about anything. If I realise "shit, I'm out of toilet paper", I can go to the grocery store and pay by EC, with the money in my bank account. The money that I keep in there, just in case there's something I want or need to spend money on literally anywhere.

    Besides, my bank is subject to my local jurisdiction and my own country's laws and regulations. If my money is with some US company, I can't be sure whether they'll suddenly go "sorry, pal, your money has been confiscated on some bullshit pretense you have no way of actually fighting back against".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

    Fuck credit cards they are terrible for your finances.

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

    Only if you're bad with finances & don't understand their use cases.

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

    Even if you are good with your finances, they are still more expensive and if you use some kind of bookkeeping or budgeting software, you will have issues connecting the export.

    Yes, I know of cashback, but those don't exist everywhere and exist so you buy more to fund the consumerism going on. Which is actively hurting society.

    The insurance part is nice, but often it's not better than what you get with a normal bank card.

    Creditcards in most countries will hurt your credt score because of if you are paying money to pay off a credit card you cannot use that money to pay for your mortgage.

    There is also that technical benefit of having to pay later which means you can "invest" that money, but for the average joe that is an irrelevant benefit.

    The only benefit to me of having one is that I can use them on American sites that don't support other payment platforms which is most American sites (including Amazon.com, while the European brands do support Wero etc.)

    You might be able to handle the responsibility of the credit card, but a lot of people don't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    they are still more expensive and if you use some kind of bookkeeping or budgeting software

    Not in the slightest (cost me 0), and I do.

    cashback

    Not the main selling point.

    insurance part

    That is a good use case: charges easier to dispute & reverse. Fraudulent credit card charges don't disrupt your available funds.

    A normal bank card spends your real money. Disputing through a bank may take longer. Until the bank returns money to your account, that money is gone: fraudulent charges to your bank account disrupt your available funds.

    technical benefit

    That's a use case for me: risk mitigation & flexibility to optimize returns on my savings.

    Assumptions

    • my checking account earns diddly squat interest & risk of unauthorized debits is meaningful (eg, debit cards or ye olde timey checks)
    • other accounts of varying liquidity (such as emergency savings, taxed investment, retirement, etc.) earn better
    • transferring between accounts (or selling less liquid assets) takes time
    • I budget correctly to always spend within my means, so I know enough money is somewhere.

    Constantly transferring between accounts for every single transaction is inconvenient. Leaving money in the checking account isn't ideal due to low interest earnings & risk of unauthorized debits.

    Solution

    • as much as possible, keep checking account near 0 & keep most money where it earns better returns
    • charge expenses to a credit card (at most 30% of its credit limit), then transfer to checking account the total to completely pay off the credit card when convenient well before payment due date.

    The credit card is simply an instrument to allow me time & flexibility to move money I already have to pay expenses. The money is usually earning kickass interest (at least enough to beat inflation) somewhere and takes a non-instant amount of time to transfer.

    Always completely pay off a credit card by the payment due date. A credit card is a shitty account to carry a debt (any non-0 balance past the due date): only dumbasses do that.

    will hurt your credt score

    If it works like in the US, then as long as you make mortgage & all other bill payments on time, completely pay off credit cards by payment due dates, and keep credit utilization low (at most 30% of card's credit limit), you should be fine.

    Starting a mortgage temporarily lowers your credit score until it recovers with consistent repayments over a few months. Then the added credit mix usually improves credit scores.

    Are mortgages not paid there in regular installments with due amounts like in the US?

    the average joe

    You don't have an account (maybe savings) that earns better interest? You're not saving for emergencies, retirement, or goals?

    the responsibility of the credit card

    It's usually just slack time (until payment due date) to make a payment you would already make some other way.

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

    Not in the slightest (cost me 0), and I do.

    I work at an accounting firm and part of my job is advising on automation software and the like, automating credit cards is a hassle and often impossible. Sometimes when it is possible, only half the transactions are posted (just the payments and not the money received from other your bank account).

    If they don't cost you any more, then those are the once which are expensive on the stores you buy from. For one, there is additional bookkeeping to be done (deduct the costs from the payment when receiving the money) and the extra costs itself.

    Not the main selling point.

    For a lot of people on the internet, that small cashback is their reason they use it.,

    A normal bank card spends your real money. Disputing through a bank may take longer. Until the bank returns money to your account, that money is gone.

    A normal bank card is way harder to even get into a situation where you need to open a dispute and most credit card companies do not care about you getting scammed either btw because you authorised the transaction.

    my checking account earns diddly squat interest & risk of unauthorized debits is meaningful (eg, debit cards)

    Unauthorised debits are such a rare thing, nobody is going to accidentally wire money to you. Unless you are a business and it's a double payment.

    You are also explaining the reasons as to why I said that technical benefit of earning money on borrowed money is bullshit for the average Joe. Why are we discussing this if we agree it's bullshit?

    transferring between accounts (or selling less liquid assets) takes time

    Transfers between accounts are instant these days and payments on your normal bank accounts can be a lot larger than on most credit cards. Credit cards are limited to 1k, 2.5k or 5k for most private individuals since you generally need to make x amount more a month (after taxes) than the limit of the card. The maximum on basically every bank account of a private individual is 50k

    Constantly transferring between accounts for every single transaction is inconvenient. Leaving money in the checking account isn’t ideal due to low interest earnings & risk of unauthorized debits.

    Irrelevant issue, you still gotta do this with a credit card since you have to pay off the dang thing. Most things are also a consistent thing and a monthly thing. You also mean unauthorised credits, btw. Banks turn around debit and credit like it's their party.

    charge expenses to a credit card (at most 30% of its credit limit) So like 300 bucks a month for most people, or 1500 if you have an advanced amount.

    Always completely pay off a credit card by the payment due date. A credit card is a shitty account to carry a debt (any non-0 balance past the due date): only dumbasses do that.

    This happens way more than you think, remember most people are terrible with money. You see this even more in countries like the US, where people take out loans for everything.

    If it works like in the US, then as long as you make mortgage & all other bill payments on time, completely pay off credit cards by payment due dates, and keep credit utilization low (at most 30% of card’s credit limit), you should be fine.

    In a lot of scenarios, they look at what you can monthly spend, because your past experiences don't dictate your future. In NL and other countries it works something like this,, but it is a lot more complicated in practise. If you have a monthly income of 5k, you pay say 1k taxes from that, which means you have 4k left over. In NL, there is something saying that you can only spend say 75% of your net income on loans. In this example, that's 3k. If you have a car loan for 1k a month and a credit card of 1k and a phone where you pay 50 bucks for and a student loan where you pay 50 bucks for. Which means you can only spend 900 euro on your mortgage. In the US system you might be able to take a mortgage of 2k (just guessing/execrating) because you always paid off your phone, car and credit card loans nicely. Which means you would spend 3,1k a month on loans. Which is one way that a people get into financial trouble.

    Are mortgages not paid there in regular installments with due amounts like in the US?

    And this is why the US credit score is bullshit because yes we do, everywhere in the world.

    You don’t have an account (maybe savings) that earns better interest? You’re not saving for emergencies, retirement, or goals?

    Ofc we have savings for emergencies, most people do. Most of my emergency fund is located in a savings account, but still instantly accessible, which means it is at a low interest rate. I could lock the money for a year to get like 2.9% interest instead of the 1.2% I am getting or something (it's on a free account).

    It’s usually just slack time (until payment due date) to make a payment you would already make some other way.

    Only the first month, after that it doesn't really matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    If credit cards users pay higher prices than non-users, checking accounts are secure from erroneous/unauthorized transactions, and transfers are instant, then the use case for credit cards is less clear.

    If they don’t cost you any more, then those are the once which are expensive on the stores you buy from.

    That changes the trade-offs a bit. I missed the assumption that credit card users pay the same prices (& no extra fees) as everyone else: processing fees are typically paid by the vendor who includes it in prices everyone pays regardless of credit card.

    In the US, credit card users basically get short-term, interest-free loans subsidized by the hidden costs in processing fees everyone is paying. Since consumers in the US mostly can't avoid the hidden costs, they don't benefit as much by avoiding credit cards as consumers in other places where consumers can avoid those fees by not using credit cards.

    It doesn't help that those credit cards compensate (poorly) for deficiencies in our financial system as I'll explain.

    A normal bank card is way harder to even get into a situation where you need to open a dispute

    Maybe yours. Here, online payments only need some numbers on the debit card & your name & billing address.

    Unauthorised debits are such a rare thing

    All it takes here is debit card information or an (e-)check. A check openly shows your routing number & bank account number & states to pay from there. Low barriers to fraud.

    most credit card companies do not care about you getting scammed either btw because you authorised the transaction

    Different here: by law no one who disputes a charge within 60 days is obligated to pay it until the dispute is resolved (within 90 days). It's usually charged back immediately. Due to weak security, authorization is easier to dispute, and they won't simply assume it.

    Transfers between accounts are instant these days

    Maybe in more civilized parts of the world. In the US, transfers & payments between financial institutions usually take business days to settle. Real-time payment is still uncommon there.

    You also mean unauthorised credits

    I agree that makes more sense in accounting. It's often stated as I did with bank accounts & I gave up trying to figure that out.

    I could lock the money for a year to get like 2.9% interest instead of the 1.2%.

    My regular & emergency savings go in an account like this with 4.3 APY, and that's "instantly" (as fast as a checking account) accessible. The slow settlement times, security risks, and "free" credit cards may offer some insights into our haphazard financial landscape & stopgap "solutions". The stronger use case for credit cards here is a byproduct of this broken system.

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

    processing fees are typically paid by the vendor who includes it in prices everyone pays regardless of credit card. Depends a bit on the fees, most cc also do charge something to the user for paying in foreign currencies. Cc are more expensive on the vendor especially when using contactless payment.

    Different here: by law no one who disputes a charge within 60 days is obligated to pay it until the dispute is resolved (within 90 days). It’s usually charged back immediately. Due to weak security, authorization is easier to dispute, and they won’t simply assume it. Even in the US they don't do this in half the scenario's

    Yeah you are right, credit cards in the US are part of the consumerism system and are designed to get you people in as much debt as possible. Which is part of the reason why I am so against credit cards and keep complaining about the dang things. Companies in the US also force me to use a credit card (and to not have clear prices because you exclude the tax which is illegal when selling to the EU)

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

    So paypal is unreliable, is the takeaway.

  • source
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    https://voidfox.com/blog/payment_processor_fun_2025_making_your_own_msp/

    Someone breaks down why it'd be a monumental task for Valve/Itch to vertically integrate the whole payment processing thing into their business. The essay is highly readable.

    The only thing I had to look up was
    Escrow: a financial arrangement w/ a third party who holds/manages funds on behalf of two parties in a transaction

    My takeaway was that Valve/itch/GOG would still be beholden to the banks who track porn as high risk for fraudulent transactions.

    So what can we do about it? asking in earnest, btw. I buy porn and toys like a regular ass person, too

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    Monero/XMR or GNU-Taler may be good alternatives. As for Banking, well.... There are OpenSource Core-Banking-Systems like Apache-Fineract

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

    Monero is good, but is currently facing troubles of their own with potential 51% attacks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    How does using a cryptocurrency work in this instance? Does a game that costs 20 coins always cost 20 coins or is it going to be 10 one day and 60 the next depending on its value? If it stays at 20 coins are those 20 coins going to cost me 1% of my paycheck one day and then 3% the next? (Numbers just for example) Theres so many issues with just having to deal with another currency not just crypto. How can you guarantee its stability in relation to your original currency? How much are you going to have to spend to convert currencies and/or make transactions?

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

    Those are all really good questions, I don't really know the answer to. Not all coins have the wild spikes like bitcoin. Monero has been fairly stable. I haven't listened a game before, but I'm pretty sure you can pick which currency you want to get paid in. The conversion rates would be roughly the same for crypto.

    However, Valve is no stronger to imaginary digital assets that wildly fluxuate in real world value. If there was any company that could figure out how to process crypto I think it would be them.

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

    They know exactly how to do it as they did it before but had to stop because the bitcoin network was artificially congested with insane fees and it caused failed transactions or multi hour long transactions where the price dramatically changed. This resulted in complicated refunds or delays which resulted in unhappy customers.

    They can avoid that all now by simply accepting stable coins like USDC. For every issued usdc there is 1 usd in a bank account somewhere. The value barely fluctuates. There are networks that can handle the volume this would create without getting congested nowadays as well.

    Given the mess that happened last time though I imagine they are highly reluctant, although this could be enough motivation.

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

    Some crypto are called stablecoins, which are backed by some currency (such as the USD for USDC) inside of a bank. There's a bit more to it than that, but effectively what you get is one coin = one unit of currency.

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

    They could even issue their own stable coin if they were weary of being reliant on another. I think valve would be viewed as trustworthy in keeping the 1:1 backing in a bank account. They could partner with someone else to issue it, like coinbase and Gemini do USDC.

    USDV

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›