That also doesn't make sense. Visa has been doing things like this for over 20 years.
Idea for an adult game site
- Thread starter DoAdventures
- Start date
And they've failed every other time they attempted this level of over reach.
But the political landscape is different now and it would be an easy opportunity to finally achieve their goals.
patreon
gumroad - people just forge this, but i don't. i even have content from them that's no available anymore
so... not really
politics might give them new powers, but they did that for a long time.
They've learned. Get an activist group to take the worst possible example, paint it in the worst way possible, and even throw in a few lies as the cherry on top. That'll get people who aren't paying attention to agree with it.
- Nov 20, 2017
- 7,464
- 17,303
- 944
You could read what only this site have done over the years:
And it is simple I have one group of people who are shouting I do something bad (regardless if it is true or not) and it seems that I don't have a group of people that raise their voice against the first group, thus as an only profit oriented company, I make my decision if the market volume I will loss is worth the hassle or not.
/E:
I also mean their website name is ridiculous collective shout. It is not something like we against child abuse, women equality, just collective shout. Making noise and being destructive as I read it.
You must be registered to see the links
as well as
You must be registered to see the links
And it is simple I have one group of people who are shouting I do something bad (regardless if it is true or not) and it seems that I don't have a group of people that raise their voice against the first group, thus as an only profit oriented company, I make my decision if the market volume I will loss is worth the hassle or not.
And if they have no one who gives them contra, they will win by default.
/E:
I also mean their website name is ridiculous collective shout. It is not something like we against child abuse, women equality, just collective shout. Making noise and being destructive as I read it.
they are a bunch of hypocrites who i'm pretty sure they just use the money and make petition and letters (who are basically free) and then they brag about what they've done.
a bunch of sad people who masturbate of the though of making other people suffer!
also they lie without an issue. if they really believed in what they do, they didn't have to lie!
With the current fiasco now extended to itch, we need a safe site like this now more than ever, otherwise this will never end.
i mean the fbi did say they are arresting people who pirate games so this site might not even be safe.
they will go to any website they want. and steam or itch will not drop them as payment processors because they can't, so they will comply
if not stopped NOW , this will only get worse. they just proved that nobody is save
with a website done especially for this kind of games it will be harder because the payment will be handled with that in mind, the webserver etc....
so we NEED to do this! because all porn is potentially in danger.
if not stopped NOW , this will only get worse. they just proved that nobody is save
with a website done especially for this kind of games it will be harder because the payment will be handled with that in mind, the webserver etc....
so we NEED to do this! because all porn is potentially in danger.
true... but they probably don't care about this kind of site. if they do after it it will be to shut it down, not to regulate it. unfortunately that could happen given what shit they have done!
f95 is a site that devs accept it's a pirated site, but use it to promote they're games
- Jun 10, 2017
- 12,742
- 20,933
- 1,026
Fees that are lower than the cost that each bank had before 1965-1970 when they were operating their own card, and lower that what they would have to spend if they were still operating them.
And it's not limited to the fact that Visa ~30,000 employees do the job that each bank would have to do internally, and therefore saved them around ~10,000 employees each. It's also regard the research and development, as well as the implementation of innovation that come from others entities (introduction of IT systems early 1970's, electronic authorization late 1970's, holograms (now abandoned), magnetic strip, and ATMs mid 1980's, PIN validation late 1980's, online processing protocols early 2000's, then RFID no contact not so long ago). Something that, here too, would have been at the charge of each banks, costing them millions each in R&D, then other millions to see it adopted, then for the less lucky, again millions to switch to the solution that became the standard.
I'm probably among the few old enough to remember this, but there were a time where owning a card wasn't at all seen as something interesting. It doesn't removed the need to goes to one of your bank agency when you wanted to get some cash, and it wasn't easier than paying by check; it just took less space to carry. The good old machine taking the imprint of the card, imprint that you had to sign while showing your ID. Probably more can remember the times when you needed to sweep your card through the magnetic reader.
All this had a cost for the banks, and they weren't the ones that had to spend money to find faster, more effective, more secured, and less expensive, alternatives. It's banks consortium like Visa that spent the money and found agreement for a solution to become the standard. The money that each individual bank lost in fees for Visa or MasterCard since they joined one or the other is lower than what they would have had to spend just to stay in touch with the technology evolution.
As for the layer of liability, it too have two edges, presenting a potential risk on one way, and a security on the other way. Something that is especially important nowadays since it serve at central point for the transactions, whatever if they are online or real life.
You can potentially doubt of the legitimacy of any IRL outgoing transaction, but incoming ones come from a trusted source. This while for outgoing online transaction, banks have their own controls over them. If you don't have a second factor authentication operated directly by your bank when you pay online, change your bank; a modulo here, smallest payments (for me it's below 20€) don't have the second factors, and a site can join a bank's trustworthy list by complying to their strict security conditions and frequent control/pen-tests.
By the way, this doesn't limits to the fraud aspect. There's also the whole numeric traffic that play a role here. There's a gate open for it on your own systems, and it's a fucking vulnerable point. Having to open only one gate, and for a single entity that you can trust, is obviously better than having to open highly controlled airlocks for thousands of banks.
By definition, Visa/MasterCard are a central point, the gate through which each card transaction have to pass. And securing a single gate is, and will always, be easier and better than having to secure thousands of different gates; it will also always be cheaper since you've to pay a fraction of the operating cost for that gate, instead of the totality of the operating cost for thousands of gates.
All this is the reason why banks are happy to involve Visa/MasterCard, it save them millions to billions (depending on the size of the bank) each year, even counting the fees.
If they weren't, they wouldn't have joined the consortium in the first place, they would have continued with their own card, and our life would be a mess. They also wouldn't have grouped at national level to create their own consortium in order to operate the local transactions, like many banks did.
They can switch to MasterCard, American Express,
You must be registered to see the links
,
You must be registered to see the links
,
You must be registered to see the links
, and few others. Or they can create their own entity, like
You must be registered to see the links
. So far EPI is more a sleeping entity than an active one, because the threat isn't big enough, but it's fully operational and already act as secondary layer for some transactions implying European banks.Thinking that Visa is all mighty is not knowing how big and complex the banking system is. By example in France we have our own network for banking cards,
You must be registered to see the links
. All national card transactions are handled by it, while internationals are handle by Visa/MasterCard (depending on your bank), with still CB acting as hidden layer between Visa/MasterCard and the bank. And it's far to be something exceptional.It would have a cost, and wouldn't be immediate, but CB can turn international if Visa decide to goes too far. This even if it need at first to rely on an entity like Stripes or PayPal to handle the online transactions, the time for online shops to implement the handling of their service.
There's a limit that Visa can't overpass without risking to loose partners, and even them know it. This simply because being the biggest consortium doesn't mean, far from it, that they are the only one.
Even politically, Visa and MasterCard can't goes too far. It would create a risk that UnionPay (China) grow to fill the gap. A risk that the US government, whatever if it is red or blue at that time, can not afford to take. The instant a big enough bank would threaten to leave Visa consortium due to a move made by Visa, the head of Visa would receive a call from the White House telling him to stop being an idiot.
More than "adult content", the fact that Visa is a partner of OnlyFans is the demonstration that sex works is not banned by Visa.
What Visa don't want to deal with is prostitution, because it's illegal, they would be held liable, and all. But as long as a platform can offer them the guaranty that there's no prostitution, and provide the security deposit to cover the frauds cost, they are happy to deal with your sweet money.
- Dec 17, 2020
- 5,274
- 15,232
- 903
These are all additional points sure. I think that for most banks, sure, doing their own PCI to have their own card simply isn't feasible. 3% is a small price to pay when the costs/complexity and liability rest solely on their own doorstep. For other much larger, international banks - cost of scale would probably make it cheaper for them to do it themselves. Would they want to? Maybe yes, maybe no. It's definitely far, far too late to do it now though.
They can't, I used Visa as an example but I was referring to both Visa and Mastercard as both of these combined account for ~90% of all transactions (not including china).
The better option is using something like SEPA and IBAN etc. I think some banks in some european countries have SEPA only cards, I don't - personally I think this is a far better option. Changing to Discover (etc) just puts you at the whim of a different payment processor who can pull the same stunt whenever they want and then you're back at square 1.
If legislation isn't passed to modify section 230 and stop payment networks like Visa (etc) from meddling with their customers wallets, then the only real solution is cutting out the cancer entirely. It's very much wishful thinking but hey, here's hoping.
Brazil's PIX has been doing phenomenally for them.
- Jun 10, 2017
- 12,742
- 20,933
- 1,026
I named MasterCard because it's one of the alternative, and only because of this. But saying that the couple Visa/MasterCard account for ~90% of all transactions is highly misunderstanding the banking system. They represent 90% of the cards but, as I implied, they don't singly operate all those cards. For many it's co-operated card, with Visa/MasterCard only handling the operations not handled by the main operator.
You claimed that "Visa has an entire industry by the balls and no, there is nothing anyone can do about it", I just explained why it's not the case, especially for the last part, period.
As I said, the whole banking system is far more big and complex than you imagine it. Visa and MasterCard are nothing else than the tip of the iceberg, the layer that we actually directly interact with. But it's only one of the layers, mandatory only because so far there's it's more useful than annoying.
You know that section 230 only apply in the US, and regard operators of interactive computer services, right? And it happen that Visa is not an operator of interactive computer services...
- Dec 17, 2020
- 5,274
- 15,232
- 903
I noted it right at the top of the post. Maybe I should have made it clearer? It's kinda ridiculous to expect me to list out every processor every time I mention them....even when I noted at the top that I was using one as an example.
Why are you trying to nitpick tiny little things when you know very well what country Visa and Mastercard were founded, are headquartered in and enjoy their biggest market in?
Please read more about it -
You must be registered to see the links
- I bet if you read it all you'll see Visa/Mastercard mentioned at least once. Whether you like it or not, the rest of the world follows America and if America choose to clamp down, everyone else benefits. It's probable that the majority of this sites users are American (like you, i'm not either), that's why I posted the link to the American act and the proposed legislation.I really don't care for some deep thinking exercise about the inner workings of the banking system. It's irrelevant. The problem is payment processors.
Last edited:
Tatsubuki
Active Member
- Jan 18, 2019
- 570
- 829
- 204
Agreed, traveled to Rio de Janeiro once and used the system. I'm baffled no other place in the world uses something like it.
- Jun 10, 2017
- 12,742
- 20,933
- 1,026
This have absolutely nothing to do with what you quote...
Explaining the reality is not nitpicking, and being the biggest market doesn't mean that you are the biggest part of the whole market.
They are,
You must be registered to see the links
, and it doesn't back up your understanding of the section 230; they are named as part of a lawsuit and because, under pressure, they goes against the said section 230.The section 230 exist to protect service providers from the content published by their users. Unless they apply a moderation pre-publication, what would give them the role of editor, they can't be held liable for the content they host; at least as long as they react accordingly in case of report.
Payment processors do nothing of this, they aren't concerned by the section 230, period.
BIG LOL. Even while limiting to the West or the OECD, it's not true.
All polls that have been done point to them being around a third of the members.
It's relevant, because it's the reason why payment processors do not have the power you're giving them. Knowledge is the biggest weapon against fear...
- Dec 17, 2020
- 5,274
- 15,232
- 903
The above user has conveniently forgotten that 2 sentences after this, they were looking at a wikipedia page where visa were named in prior section 230 legal cases.
It's very tiring when I see a reply from you Anne and just seeing these comments again remind me why I stopped posting here. You're completely and utterly, insufferable.
Last edited: