MasterCard breaks ranks in WikiLeaks blockade
wikileaks.org
wikileaks.org
One step back: http://torrentfreak.com/mastercard-and-visa-start-banning-vp...
So basically, the card providers are throwing security out the window because they want to increase the rate of legitimate transactions and then wholesale black banning whole segments of the market that have slightly higher risk to counterbalance the increased risk. If they were willing to apply slightly higher security measures they could easily mitigate the risk, but they don't want to because it would decrease the rate of legitimate transactions.
With UK credit laws I might be OK with this on a credit card but there was no way I wanted it on my debit card with a direct line to my current account. I only use the debit card for cash and the very occasional purchase (think car purchase once every 5 years or so frequency and inconvenience to pay cash).
Sure it sucks if you need a VPN, but if you're someone trying to catch people trying to defraud you it makes a lot of sense. VISA and MasterCard has rather high demands from businesses when it comes to preventing fraud, so naturally we have high demands to them. Restricting access to VPNs is a simple way of blocking a large number of low ranking fraudsters.
It doesn't personally affect me, though, because just about anything you can do via a VPN you can do by buying a VPS and ssh -D'ing through it. It takes slightly more technical skill, but anyone who can operate PuTTY can do it after reading about 1 page of instructions. And I consider it unlikely that Visa will start blocking payments to Linode or Digital Ocean...
Yes. the nature of credit card "security" is that, well, there is no security. The agreement between the merchant and the bank is that if anything goes wrong, the merchant has to return the money.
This means that they generally only want to give merchant accounts to people who are "good for it" - they will check your credit, and if it isn't awesome, they will either hold back a bunch of your money, or deny you outright.
They want to avoid industries with a lot of chargebacks for the same reason.
"adult content" has the same problem... you get a /lot/ of chargebacks, so if you want to have a merchant account and sell adult content? well, you are going to pay substantially higher fees, and you are going to have a limited number of providers who will take you at all.
But yeah, from what I've seen, reputable VPS providers have fairly low chargeback rates. I've never run a VPN service, so I wouldn't know, but from what I have been told, the chargeback rate is way higher.
I like my VPN service because my network traffic is mixed in with all the other users. Makes it harder to distinguish between my web browsing and their web-browsing.
The other major benefit I get from VPN is the ability to very quickly switch VPN egress points - so I get a new IP address half-way across the planet. That makes it harder to isolate my web usage too, it also is a work-around for geo-blocks on some websites.
I don't think either of those are functions of a VPS.
Big deal VPN providers can accept bitcoin, Okpay, direct deposits, or get around this by selling vouchers and credits for cards on a seperate site.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020400230457662...
I think it is a terrible state of affairs when the only people who can have privacy are those either rich enough to opt out of the mainstream (no mortgage, no car loan, no college loans for the kids, etc) or those willing to live in a state approaching poverty. I'm fortunate enough to be in the former group, but I have a lot more compassion for those in the second group.
Oh, it's missing the final 'l':
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020400230457662...
That the purchase history is not mine is truly a large issue. The banks should not have any right to "listen in" on my transaction and use what ever information they fish out to their business advantage. They should be behaving as the bank of old, which was more of a care holder of assets than anything else.
*All based on banks in Sweden, and to a degree, Swedish banking laws
The "credit utilization" component of my rating according to creditkarma.com went from A to C because my utilization was 0% (I pay for everything with my Simple debit card or direct debit). 0% is in the C bucket, while 1-20% is in the A bucket.
I started using it like that. I use it for some of my purchases every month, and have them debit the full balance at the end of each month. My rating in that category went back to A the very next month.
In a letter from VALITOR´s lawyers, VALITOR relates how it sought the opinions of MasterCard International and VISA on the proposed July 1 cut-off. In its response MasterCard made clear to VALITOR that it no longer desires to blockade WikiLeaks. VISA has not responded.
There goes, I read the article for you.
* All currency and barter systems ever successfully deployed have been used by criminals, terrorists for money laundering. The use of these systems by such people is merely a sign of widespread adoption and ease-of-use.
* In the modern world every human is a criminal because the laws contradict each other and almost all human actions involve the violation of laws.
Some sarcasm there, but, on reflection, not really. Which is sad.
Obviously this is a dealer, but I suppose it would be possible.
Presumably those governments can't afford for the wealthy to run from centrally controllable banking systems to tangible assets like gold, because short of raiding everyone's home the cash grab strategy fails at that point. If those assets are small enough to be smuggled out, then even raiding homes wouldn't help.
The problem they now have, of course, is that some places have lost anything resembling public trust in either the government or the banking sector. The moment they lift the restrictions, they're going to see a large chunk of wealth leaving their borders. Moreover, their chances of getting serious investment from anyone to help their countries recover from the financial mess of recent years are now very low, and any investment they do get is going to have all kinds of horrible strings attached and high interest rates.
For the EU, generally currency or convertible instruments (likely including gold coins) in excess of €10,000 must be declared: http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/common/travellers/enter...
The US similarly requires gold be declared, over $10,000: https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/322/~/importing...
And if you're sympathetic to the Wikileaks cause, you're probably already on an NSA list anyway...
"Illegal" in the sense that doing so no doubt exposes you to tracking and other forms of extrajudicial government abuse.
What about just donating to Wikileaks, Pirate party, or spending your money doing things made only possible because of "freedom, openess, and the rule of law". Like filing that FOI request you've always wanted.
Does anyone knows why not they accept bitcoins?
EDIT: Oh, good to know they accept bitcoins, thanks!
This man has been holed up in an Ecuadorean embassy in London for the past 2 years, roughly and the USGov't has tried to stifle donations to Wikileaks and he has stuck through all of that.
Now his stick-to-it-ive-ness is starting to pay off.
Congrats to him for a) Having the conviction of his beliefs, and b) To stick with his conviction, despite the great personal costs.
Hats off Assange. Hats off.
Not that it will stop me!
You could save a few bucks by booting into a live-cd on your usual laptop and using a coffe shops wifi I guess.