Maybe the idea of BTC was fine. What wasn’t fine is the idea of mining.
And maybe payments over the Internet or over PSTN are fundamentally different from messaging, conferencing, downloading files, all that stuff.
But what’s important is the ability to pay for a service with something resembling cash IRL in the sense that an ATM machine from which you took that cash can’t take it back because you are paying for an adult journal with it.
But at the same time how can there be so few payment processors that they can affect a platform’s decision to do a kind of business?
That’s where we should look. Why is it hard to be a payment processor.
gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Yeah, payment processing is among the many many many industries that ought to be nationalized so they can be administered in a transparent and democratic manner (see also, healthcare education housing electricity internet etc.)
There’s just too much opportunity to use it to manipulate markets and oppress minority viewpoints for it to remain in private hands imo
DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Putting the ridicoulous idea that governments are fair and transparent aside, payment processors need to be international. Otherwise, most countries will not be able to access services because their local payment processor is not supported.
However, the payment processors should be regulated with something similar to net neutrality where they can discriminate. And EU could launch a government run competitor to dilute their duopoly.
Bubbey@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Really the only time they should be even allowed to discriminate on payment is when it is suspected to be part of a crime.
DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Well, yes. I just did not consider them to be the ones discriminating if it is against the law, but the government.
chunes@lemmy.world 2 days ago
To me it’s insane that food also isn’t on that list. Anything that isn’t a luxury can’t be trusted to be handled by capitalism.
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 1 day ago
So you want Trump and MAGA politicians to be able to deny your payments instead?
The problem with “just let the government do it” is when the government is run by people like this.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
So don’t let them.
Basically nothing works if no one cares about their community. One of the reasons Trump is in power right now is because of a deep American apathy for, like… everything.
Trump, et. al., are dismantling USPS, but I like USPS. It’s bad that they’re doing that.
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 1 day ago
How naive can you be? You think your vote matters here?
When every single district has been gerrymandered to death for 100 years, nobody’s vote really matters anymore.
stephen01king@piefed.zip 2 days ago
Do you really think most governments will administer payment processes in a transparent and democratic manner?
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 2 days ago
They can do a really shit job of administering payment processes in a transparent and democratic manner before they end up being worse than the status quo where it’s entirely untransparent and undemocratic. Also, governments already have the power to make things they don’t like illegal, so there’s no reason to expect they’d block payments for things they’ve left legal, whereas payment processors currently block plenty of legal things.
stephen01king@piefed.zip 2 days ago
So you expect governments like the Trump administration or Saudi Arabia will less likely block porn games than for profit companies?
You do realise this happened because thousands of people called the payment processors to complain about it, which means with thousands of people, you can pressure these companies to change their mind again. Try doing that to your own government, let alone a foreign government.
ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
A lot of governments already do. The credit card duopoly is the reason the US decided to come after Brazil’s solution
stephen01king@piefed.zip 2 days ago
Because they can't make it illegal in another country. I'm sure plenty of countries would just use US or China owned payment processors rather than spending money to set up their own. This would just give them more control over other countries than they already have now.
gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I think it is possible to have a government that functions in this way on a long term basis. I don’t think the same can be said of for profit companies.
stephen01king@piefed.zip 2 days ago
A for profit company can be replaced with another and is more easily affected by boycotts. A goverment is neither easily replaced or influenced by people from other countries.
altima_neo@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
It’s end up line the shit we’ve got going on now with. ICE being given access to Medicaid and tax records in order to deport more people.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
What is stopping the government from just commandeering PayPal’s records?
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Power finds a way, so I wouldn’t hope for nationalization itself to be anything good.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
power already did find a way, and thats called privatization.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Yes, because without one government that was helping them out, punishing their competition and funding them, also making regulations convenient for them, Alphabet, Meta and others would be even more powerful. /s