Hacker News Reader

Comment by dmitrygr | Hacker News Reader

Good. Payment processors need to either be regulated or voluntarily self-commit themselves to processing all legal payments. Nobody asked them to act as censors.

Also: this is why cash should not die

View on HN

> Payment processors need to either be regulated or voluntarily self-commit themselves to processing all legal payments. Nobody asked them to act as censors.

Finance is the single most heavily regulated sector of the economy. Almost certainly someone in government coerced them to stop taking these payments, exactly the same as has been done to unbank other disfavored industries.

This is one of the rare times that it's probably not that. I know a couple of devs who have built/worked on sites that have "adult" content, and they say that payment processors are always pretty hostile because the chargeback rates for adult content are an order of magnitude higher than most other areas[1].

This has resulted in payment processor execs historically being very prejudiced about against any site that provides that sort of content.

Combine this with the dual facts that no one of good standing is very motivated to stick their neck out to defend porn publicly, while many people define their politics by being very publicly against it, and you get a system that routinely discriminates against sex workers.

[1] Historically, this was from angry spouses/parents seeing it on the CC bill and the person who ordered it lying that "someone else must have stolen the card and ordered it"; nowadays actual identity fraud is so common that it's a real concern

This reasoning never made sense to me, given merchants have always been liable for card not present chargebacks. Processors, card networks, and even issuers don't lose a cent, because fees aren't refunded. Meanwhile, the merchant is out the charge and, nowadays, an additional fee. Even if the merchant wins and gets the charge, they still pay an additional fee.

It feels like this is one of those things that card networks say because they know folks who hear it won't think about it more than a few seconds to realize how much sense it doesn't make.

Then perhaps it is time for guillotines

People get the government they demand and deserve.

You imagine that the guns of government regulation will always be in your favor, and are totally surprised when they are pointed at your head instead.

100% with you on both points, which is why i asked for laws that says "no censorship by processors, no exceptions"

> this is why cash should not die

Or even better: why cash should work on the internet, too.

Americans ought to adopt the Canadian Interac system.

The US already has several debit card networks; debit cards are also required to be usable on at least two unaffiliated networks, so there's a requirement for options while charging a card. [1] However, debit card transactions are unpopular. Users would rather pay later than now, especially when dealing with fraud or returns; rewards credit cards are popular and merchants typically don't charge more for credit than debit, so the user gets a nominal dollar discount and a time value of money discount when using credit (otoh, the merchant also gets paid with a discount and paid in arrears).

Many of the interbank networks were formed by a consortium of banks, as was Interac; Mastercard was also formed this way (as Interbank).

[1] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/chapter-II/subchapter-...

And even still, my debit card says “Mastercard”, so it’s still using their protocols.

Interac is an example of a debit card system that specifically isn't using the Visa / Mastercard protocols.

Most banks (all?) provide Interac cards that can operate with Visa/Mastercard protocols. They won't allow you to incur debt, but you can use them as a credit card.

It's helpful when traveling abroad to places that do not have Interac.

The Canadian government unbanked protestors they were unhappy with.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-pro...

I think Americans are better off with annoying blocks on porn than the alternative.

I don't see why you're assuming that Americans won't get both bans and unbanking.

That would require a court order against VC and MC, that they in turn might contest, and possibly get suspended--even if temporarily.

But in Canada, bureaucrat Foo talked to bureaucrat Baz, and presto--you're unbanked!

The WikiLeaks experience kinda demolishes your argument.

I'm guessing you're talking about Julian. What's interesting in this case, is that Julian refused to let himself get arrested which would have brought him to court and due process.

But that's not what happened in Canada. With no due process non-violent people were unbanked, simply for protesting against the government.

> I'm guessing you're talking about Julian

No. This pre-dates anything related to Julian Assange's criminal trial. https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2010/12/07/visa-m...

Simply speaking, Visa and Mastercard debanked Wikipedia because of their journalistic activities, simply because the US government did not like them, before there was any judicial process whatsoever.

Banks are happy to de-bank risky customers all on their own; they don't wait for court orders.

I'm specifically thinking about political protestors. Such as BLM. Or No Kings.

Their right to political protest is protected and VC/MC isn't going to un-bank them without a court order. And since their right to protest is protected, that's unlikely to happen. Unlike Canada.

The Government was unhappy with them because they were occupying the capital, blocking border crossings, and their MOU demanded that Parliament be dissolved, and that Senators and Bureaucrats who disagreed with the MOU resign; under the threat of the Governor General not allowing Parliament to sit again.

It was entirely warranted to freeze their accounts and make arrests.

And when other protests like BLM caused huge public disruption during a pandemic the government did nothing. It was entirely a political response.

In a free society people should be able to protest whatever in public without getting arrested and debanked. Otherwise you might as well be one of those authoritarian countries where protesting requires a permit.

Different country, different Government, different protests.

BLM was a nothingburger in Canada. The most similar protests to that would have been the Wet'suwet'en solidarity protests. Those lasted a few weeks and were ultimately resolved peacefully, for the most part. An important thing to consider is that the protestors weren't interested in toppling the Government; they simply wanted the Government to hear them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Canadian_pipeline_and_rai...

Briefly reading about it Iterac for the first time, it looks basically just like a Canadian version of Visa.

Tangentially, Canada has a much saner banking system than the US, in that it has a handful of very large banks which are inherently much more stable than the many thousands of banks/credit unions in the US.

as a Canadian its bizarre that the USA of all places is behind us in card-payment technology. I went to LA in 2016 and they had never heard of a chip in a credit card, only swipe.

As a European living in Canada, Canadian banking is already lagging behind on the EU banking I had.

Paying online with Debit Cards is possible (at least in Belgium), alongside 2FA, not just entering 3 digits on the back of a card. And when dealing with RBC, their mobile app is.. not great.

That's just fallout from the US's first mover advantage.

Chip vs swipe is meaningless to people. They both work. The us had good protection for swipe fraud so nobody cares. The EU went to chip+pin because historically their consumer laws were inferior.

chips last longer!

Perhaps Canada should hang its head in shame and stay humbly quiet on the topic of de-banking

https://www.newsweek.com/banks-have-begun-freezing-accounts-...

Nothing shameful about attempting to use temporary, non-violent means to end the occupation of the nations' capital, and the blockage of border crossings, when the occupying group has produced a MOU that calls for the dissolution of Government and voluntary removal of all bureaucrats and Senators who disagree with them, under threat of the Governor General refusing to allow Parliament to sit again.

Here in USA we have a constitutionally-called-out inalienable right to petition (yell at gvmnt critters, words to be chosen for occasion) and assemble (do so in groups, arbitrarily large). Take a lesson.

Care to elaborate? Based on the Interac Wikipedia page, I see nothing that would indicate that their monopoly in Canada is any better than the MasterCard/Visa Duopoly in the USA.

Interac doesn't have a monopoly in Canada; Visa / MC obviously have a presence as well.

Are there Visa and MasterCard Debitcards there? From what I saw, and again only a basic look, Interac is the only major player for Debit Cards. Of course, I welcome more competition if Interac were to enter the USA market.

Yes, and in some cases both, e.g. Scotiabank has debit cards that allow both Visa and Interac transactions: https://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/personal/ways-to-bank/debit...

I hadn't heard of Interac before but it looks perfect.

It’s outrageous that private duopolies control > 95% of transactions in the country.

in Canada im pretty sure 95% of the population doesn't know Interac is Canadian only or different from debit in any way.

Yep, they're infrastructure now, they should be regulated like infrastructure. Better yet, replace them with some other system like SEPA.

The problem is, lobby groups have asked them to act as censors. There has been exhaustive effort over decades.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com