| ▲ | throwaway290 11 hours ago |
| Because they don't want to make money from CSAM and they have the right and freedom to choose who they do business with? |
|
| ▲ | mijoharas 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Unfortunately no. I believe the reason for this is that the risk of chargebacks for adult content is much higher, so the card networks need to pay more to service these merchants and it's less profitable for them (or maybe in some cases unprofitable). Essentially it just comes down to the bottom line. |
| |
| ▲ | stickfigure 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > the risk of chargebacks for adult content is much higher Stop repeating this as if it is true. | |
| ▲ | aleph_minus_one 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > I believe the reason for this is that the risk of chargebacks for adult content is much higher Why do you think this is the case? | | |
| ▲ | mijoharas 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Sorry a very fair question. This is due to an article I read a fair while back asserting that. Let me see if I can find it or similar. Ok here is an HN comment (relevant section extracted from comment[0], full thread[1]) with some discussion on that. > In the adult/porn world, there's a high amount of chargebacks and fraud relative to low-risk industries like SaaS software. If you pass a certain chargeback threshold in the adult industry, your account is terminated, and no payment processor will do business with you. Now it was ages ago that I read this, and I'm sure it's a more nuanced topic than my simplified answer, but that's what I understood from my reading at the time. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24294801 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24291790 | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | If you read your own sources, the thread your linked, the stories shared by people working in that industry make it super clear that the root cause is that payment processors are allergic to adult industry (ie porn) not higher chargeback risk. They specifically set low chargeback tolerance just for this industry. So how can you deny that it is about people's ethics and values. Of people who run corporations and people who are willing to sue them. And it was ethics and values for Pornhub too. See my other comment or just look up what happened. |
| |
| ▲ | brookst 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | People buy porn; spouses see credit card bills; people are performatively outraged and say it must be fraud. | |
| ▲ | chownie 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The classic example case is "honey, I don't know what this charge on our monthly expenses is I promise, look I'll charge it back" — ie cover up for an angry spouse. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | What you and mijoharas allude to is a cute urban myth. Pornhub never appeared as Pornhub on your bank statements and the same goes for every serious adult content site for decades. And if it was about chargebacks Visa would never even touch Amazon or AliExpress. Read why Pornhub was ditched in 2020/2022. Trigger alert, it involves rape and trafficking victims. Or read the sources mijoharas posted. They specifically say that payment processors simply do not like porn. I guess he did not read his own links. | | |
| ▲ | chownie 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Mijoharas and I both mentioned the adult industry, you've closed the scope down to just pornhub for some reason -- essentially you're arguing some other argument no one else made. Payment providers note higher chargeback rates for adult/porn services than those for other mundane services, this is a longstanding -- pre-internet, even -- pattern which has nothing to do with the pornhub situation within the last 5 years. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | pornhub is a good recent example of when payment processors ditched a major company due to csam scandal and this is very relevant to unregulated models. > Payment providers note higher chargeback rates for adult You get cause and effect inside out. Read the link posted by the guy you are defending https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24291790. Payment processors selectively nerf/buff industries. They see porn immoral and set stricter rules. Including lower allowed chargeback. And yes this means they actually make less money because of it. Believe it or not not everyone thinks money is everything. I give up if you guys actively resist facts. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | throwaway290 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is actually easy to debunk. Timing. MasterCard/Visa ditched Pornhub subs the same month after the story about csam went public. It had nothing to do with chargebacks. Then they also ditched Pornhub advertisement company. Not relevant to chargebacks. Read https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/mastercard-visa-sus... for how it went down. And of course big adult sites including Pornhub are not stupid enough to use anything mentioning "porn" on bank statements. And if you talk to actual programmers working in adult industry you will learn payment processors have special strict rules for adult industry. Literally because of moral standards. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24291790 where it is discussed. So no. It was not about chargebacks, it's about making money from child rape videos. Some people have values. Corporations are run by people who have to face their kids and spouses. |
|
|
| ▲ | krige 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| CSAM? Let's see... no, both support payments on xitter so that can't be the reason. |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway290 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Since this is the first time I hear of this I think's false. But if you have real evidence of csam on xitter any journalist not owned by alt right will jump on it. One good news story by a reputable outlet and Visa/MasterCard is out of xitter 100%. If you're lucky they'll also stop processing ad money and the platform is toast. Do it, leak it. Remember, payment providers ditched pornhub the same month the story about csam and other abuse went public. That's all it takes. But anyway. Payment processors do not like porn. See my other comments. Maybe they are scared to ditch xitter because of current politics but I think it's the matter of time and good reporting. Let NYT write about it | | |
| ▲ | chownie 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | > But if you have real evidence of csam on xitter any journalist not owned by alt right will jump on it. One good news story by a reputable outlet and Visa/MasterCard is out of xitter 100%. If you're lucky they'll also stop processing ad money and the platform is toast. Do it, leak it. This already happened and I believe nothing changed as a result. 100,000 tweets found between march and may in 2023 which matched at least 1/40 of the CSAM hashes they used. https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/06/stanford_internet_obs... |
|
|
|
| ▲ | potato3732842 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| >Because they don't want to make money from CSAM The industry doesn't give a crap as long as they don't know enough to feel dirty/culpable. Ain't no different than moving money for terrorists or whatever. |
