After Banks Froze Their Accounts, Some Adult Entertainers Turned to Cryptocurrencies (cnbc.com) 167
CNBC interviewed six adult entertainers about cryptocurrency use, including webcam performer Allie Eve Knox, who became interested in cryptocurrencies after "several vendors, including PayPal, Square Cash, and Venmo, shut down her accounts because of red flags related to sex work."
[T]he biggest attraction was having total and irreversible ownership over the money she had earned. "I could cash it out. I could hold it. I could watch it go up and down," said Knox. "It was mine." Knox is one of many adult workers who say that cryptocurrencies like bitcoin give them a sense of security and independence as banks, credit card companies, and payment processors tighten regulations around adult content. With crypto, there is no middleman making a judgment call on which transactions are acceptable....
"The majority of sex work in the U.S. is legal. It's not dealt with fairly, but it's still legal," explained Kristen DiAngelo, an activist and Sacramento-based sex worker who has spent over four decades in the industry.... Some escorts — who charge anywhere from $1,700 an hour to $11,000 for a full 24 hours — now explicitly say in their ads that they prefer to be paid in bitcoin or ethereum.... DiAngelo tells CNBC she will never forget the first time her bank account was closed without warning.... DiAngelo called Citibank and learned that her account had been frozen and she should tear up her credit card. DiAngelo says the customer service rep told her that they weren't "at liberty" to tell her why it had happened, and she would have to write a formal letter to request additional details.
They did, however, say that she was still responsible for any money owed.... There was particular irony in her situation, as DiAngelo did a stint as a stockbroker at Citibank in the 1980âs, always pays her taxes, and has a credit score over 800.... [S]he brought her money to another bank. When they also flagged and closed her account, she moved on to the next. After being shut out of a third bank, DiAngelo says she turned exclusively to bitcoin for her online banking needs. Nearly every sex worker interviewed for this story mentioned platform hopping....
Nowadays, it's par for the course to see adult websites accept cryptocurrency, and some deal in it exclusively... Some adult media companies have even turned to blockchain technology to develop their own digital currencies and platforms....
Sex workers who do accept crypto also have to contend with volatile prices, which can cut into their earnings. For instance, bitcoin is down more than 40% from its November all-time high.
Knox also tells CNBC she's sold photos of herself as NFTs on sites like OpenSea. "Thus far, the most she's gotten from a single sale is $1,200 worth of ethereum."
"The majority of sex work in the U.S. is legal. It's not dealt with fairly, but it's still legal," explained Kristen DiAngelo, an activist and Sacramento-based sex worker who has spent over four decades in the industry.... Some escorts — who charge anywhere from $1,700 an hour to $11,000 for a full 24 hours — now explicitly say in their ads that they prefer to be paid in bitcoin or ethereum.... DiAngelo tells CNBC she will never forget the first time her bank account was closed without warning.... DiAngelo called Citibank and learned that her account had been frozen and she should tear up her credit card. DiAngelo says the customer service rep told her that they weren't "at liberty" to tell her why it had happened, and she would have to write a formal letter to request additional details.
They did, however, say that she was still responsible for any money owed.... There was particular irony in her situation, as DiAngelo did a stint as a stockbroker at Citibank in the 1980âs, always pays her taxes, and has a credit score over 800.... [S]he brought her money to another bank. When they also flagged and closed her account, she moved on to the next. After being shut out of a third bank, DiAngelo says she turned exclusively to bitcoin for her online banking needs. Nearly every sex worker interviewed for this story mentioned platform hopping....
Nowadays, it's par for the course to see adult websites accept cryptocurrency, and some deal in it exclusively... Some adult media companies have even turned to blockchain technology to develop their own digital currencies and platforms....
Sex workers who do accept crypto also have to contend with volatile prices, which can cut into their earnings. For instance, bitcoin is down more than 40% from its November all-time high.
Knox also tells CNBC she's sold photos of herself as NFTs on sites like OpenSea. "Thus far, the most she's gotten from a single sale is $1,200 worth of ethereum."
Time for a new stable coin... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Time for a new stable coin... (Score:5, Funny)
Bukkake Cash
Hell of a concept, but I hear investors are fearful you're not going to save and just end up blowing your wad all at once.
Don't worry though. Marketing has it covered.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Time for a new stable coin... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is wrong with prostitution? Its their body and their choice, all parties directly effected are consenting adults. As for banks suspending peoples accounts, that needs to change, in modern society a bank account should be a right no a privilege, since it is an essential. A bank or major institution like paypal should not be able to stop you using their service just because they disagree with you. In order to that, the goverment should have to go through a court, and account holder has to be found guilty of a crime that justifies that.
Re:Time for a new stable coin... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Time for a new stable coin... (Score:3)
Very good examples. Now let's see.
Getting drunk is legal, driving is legal, so why is drunk driving illegal?
There ia an actual reason for that. Because being drunk makes you misjudge situations and driving makes you dangerous, so the combination is being dangerous while having impaired judgement -- good reason for it to be illegal.
Going to the park is legal, sleeping is legal, so why is sleeping in the park illegal?
Exactly. It shouldn't be.
Making baby is legal, getting paid is legal, so why is getting paid to make baby illegal?
This also shouldn't be. However, selling / trafficking of humans should be illegal, so selling your baby has a good reason to be. But carrying out someone else's implanted embryo shouldn't (i.e. "renting out" your functional wom
Re: (Score:2)
There was once something called "E-Gold" which was supposed to be tied to the price of gold, and possibly be backed by gold. It wasn't a cryptocurrency, it was centralized.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you trust the E-Gold company any more than other gold depositories? This is called a fly-by-night company. They take all your money in exchange for false promises, then run away!
Re: (Score:2)
Inevitable (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Inevitable (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe we should stop being prudes and de-criminialize/legalize sex work. Why shouldn't these folks be able to have a Square account like any other small business?
Lot's of banks and industries partake in "legal" economic activity that I find distasteful but they are still allowed to do it.
Re:Inevitable (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe we should stop being prudes and de-criminialize/legalize sex work.
That's the thing. It already is legalized, or at the very least decriminalized, on most places. The problem is that governments still don't like it, so instead of explicitly forbidding/recriminalizing it, which would cause public discussions and risk making it all even more legal and accepted, they ask private companies to pretty please restrict it. They don't order it, something that would violate the 1st Amendment and stuff in the US, no, they just ask for it, as a favor. And the banks etc. do them this favor on a perfectly, purely voluntary basis. Which is why con Constitutional violation is involved. After all, those whose accounts were closed because the banks just felt like it out of nowhere, can build their own banks if they really want to have bank accounts, can't they?
Any similarity with the US government asking pretty please for Twitter, Facebook, Google etc. to shadowban, demonetize, and restrict wrongthink isn't mere coincidence. No censorship is happening, after all, they're all private companies. Sure, the government just asked for a few favors and the like, but that's no big deal really, after all, friends can ask their friends favors, can't they?
And so on, and so forth, as respecting the letter of the law while violating its spirit is the true law of the land nowadays.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it though? Outside of a few counties in Nevada prostitution is still illegal in every US state. Not exactly voluntary for banks not engage in services for something that is not just defacto-illegal but illegal-illegal, unenforcable as it may be. If I am a sex worker I am not able to incorporate, form an LLC and do the work out in the open. There are loopholes for sure but by the letter of the law the work I would do is still at the very least a misdemeanor across the greater US.
Re: Inevitable (Score:2)
That's the the point. Sex work is NOT in violation of US law. It's up to each state to decide. And since federally chartered banks must only comply with US law, they can (if they choose) do business with anyone operating legally. Which pretty much means Nevada.
So I wonder why more prostitutes just don't get a PO box and open their accounts in Pahrump's state banks.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a lot of sex work that isn't prostitution. Pornography and phone sex, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely and that only makes it more illogical and silly that solicitation (what we are talking about when talking about women charging $1700 an hour) is still a crime. If I just agree to pay a woman for sex it's a crime. If I pay her to film us having sex it's all nice and legal.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't the market supposed to sort this out? Shouldn't someone be offering credit card payment processing for sex workers?
The issue is regulatory capture.
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, the market is supposed to work this out. In theory market stabilizes these issues, but it only does if there are enough players.
In practice, the banking industry is SO large that it is impossible to compete with visa and mastercard unless you have hundreds of billions to throw at the problem.
The barrier of entry is SO high that very few institutions have the size necessary to make that entry in the market. And if they don't deem it profitable enough for the risk (which it probably isn't) then the
Re:Inevitable (Score:4, Informative)
Shouldn't someone be offering credit card payment processing for sex workers?
Plenty are. Then the government knocks on the door and ask them to pretty please stop that. For those who reply "sorry, can't do that", the government smiles sweetly, says "oh, no problem!", and walks away. The next day, though, and for as long as the provider continues refusing, it notices a massive expanse of governmental audits, investigations, audits, investigations, audits, investigations... until they change their answer to "yes, sure, all for a friend!"
The issue is regulatory capture.
Undoubtedly.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, that's what should happen, in a free market.
The problem is (as it usually is) that there isn't a free market here. Go ahead and try to start your own payment processor to compete with Visa and Mastercard. We'll wait. Even if you do, Big Tech can crush you like they did Parler.
This isn't the gov't doing anything (Score:3, Insightful)
The gov't got out of the business of policing porn in the 80s. There's a few spots in Texas that still make trouble for the local sex toy shops, but it's only because of the religious extremist voters.
The gov't is seldom your
Re:This isn't the gov't doing anything (Score:4, Insightful)
While the hyper-vocal minority as I like to call them is a big part of the problem, it goes deeper than that.
The dark side of the adult industry (sex/human trafficking, rape, pedo shit, etc.) certainly exists despite a plethora of laws attempting to prohibit it. Since most governments long-since realized that laws often need to follow the money to be effective, plenty of them intentionally include anyone who deals with $$ related to adult work. Granted, many of these are just feel-good laws that actually do the opposite of what they intend (ahem SESTA/FOSTA).
Some rapist pervert in a developing country won't care about the threat of a million $ fine or the bad publicity for being associated. You can bet Visa and M/C do though - and the government has the ability to massively impact their business depending on how hard it wants to smack their hand. So in the end, banks and CC processors become the enforcement arm for all the ill-planned laws meant to "help people" that generally do anything but.
The dark side is often a byproduct (Score:2)
And if we care about sex trafficking the solution is to go after underlining causes. Poverty, general strife and war (a lot of which is caused by our drug war, and our mega corps trying to keep the price of bananas in line with their profit forecasts).
Going after sex trafficking like we do is like lancing a boil on a person with bubonic plague. It's not really gonna do all that
Re: (Score:2)
While that side of the sex industry should be stopped that should be done through laws not financial institutions deciding. Also I think a large part of the bad things about the sex industry are caused by it being illegal in the first place, it causes the type of people who are willing to break the law to get involved in the first place.
While on the subject, the manufacturing industry also has a dark side of paying people that they can barely survive, and are poisoned, or poison the environment. Why aren't
Re: (Score:2)
Its the same as the online casino laws.
The US knew it couldn't stop online casinos in the Caribbean and elsewhere so it passed laws that target the banks and force the banks to stop doing business with those online casinos (or something similar at least, not sure exactly how the laws work)
Re:This isn't the gov't doing anything (Score:5, Insightful)
Wrong. Operation Choke Point was a Department of Justice operation under Obama [thefederalistpapers.org] that deliberately and with malice aforethought tried to cut off porn stores, escort services, and drug paraphernalia shops from their bank accounts.
The gov't is seldom your problem.
When did the hard left start shilling for the US government? Aren't we supposed to #resist? The same US government that genocided native americans? Slavery of africans, native americans, and asians. Indentured servitude for immigrants. Using your own population to test everything from drugs, to dangerous chemicals, to disease. Purposefully flooding poor, black areas with crack. Illicit arms deals with terrorist states. Starting wars over resources while claiming moral high grounds. The US government that you claim is "seldom the problem" have literally lied to world in order to get a UN approval to invade a sovereign nation, with the only motive of profit for the military-industrial complex. You can look up videos of Rumsfeld and Bush presenting or referring to evidence of WMDs they know is fake. How can anyone with a brain trust them?
Re:This isn't the gov't doing anything (Score:5, Interesting)
Not quite true. While I do admit that most of the time it is not government causing the problems, this is one of those times it is.
The government punishes banks that deal with criminals. HEAVILY.
The banks are acting this way out of fear that the customers are criminals, despite having zero evidence of it. It is not worth their time to figure out who is and who is not a criminal, so they simply shut down any business that has enough red flags.
Re:Inevitable (Score:5, Insightful)
And so on, and so forth, as respecting the letter of the law while violating its spirit is the true law of the land nowadays.
We allowed our large corporations to become Not-A-Monopoly MEGA-corps, so eventually both the letter and the spirit of the law will be replaced with Fuck You That's Why, because even when they're dead wrong, there won't be a fucking thing you can do about it, because Control.
And soon, there won't be a fucking thing Governments can do about it either, because Greed.
And by "soon", I mean we're already there. Too Big To Fail, is now enshrined into the halls of Precedent. It's rather obvious who's running who.
Re: (Score:2)
Politics exists for Greeds sake. You either understand it to be the Mass Distraction tool that it is for Greed N. Corruption to execute what it wants, or you pick up your pom poms and keep cheering your flavor of distraction on.
We don't need three parties in America, because we don't even have two. We have one, and the entire justification for politics is clear now. It sure as hell isn't representing you.
Re: (Score:2)
You've never had the right to access someone else's audience without their permission.
Neither to someone else's financial services. The US has paper bills and coins as legal tender. You can always use those... provided, evidently, you also keep detailed records for the origin and destination of every single individual paper bill and coin in your possession, as you don't want to risk having it forfeited then sued into oblivion. The money, not you, so you don't have legal standing to reclaim it back.
See how nice that whole "freedom of association" is? As the saying goes, everything is funny as
Re:Inevitable (Score:4, Insightful)
Because banks aren't forced into something similar to "common carrier" status.
Try owning a gun shop - complete with Federal and State licensing, etc. - and getting a business bank account with BoA, Chase, etc.
Perfectly legal business, but due to politics you won't get service, or if you do you'll be paying tons of extra fees, etc.
Re:Inevitable (Score:5, Interesting)
You don't even have to sell firearms - I own an engraving shop that occasionally does work on firearms, and it's just as bad there. PayPal, Square, all of the big online payment processors are very clear that NO firearms-related transactions are allowed. My bank itself doesn't give me any grief, but their chosen payment processor sure does.
Re:Inevitable (Score:5, Insightful)
Because this is the future we've chosen. Megabillion dollar corporations are going to decide on their codes of conduct, and you had better obey them or they will cease doing business with you. It's better than any government control could ever be. When you can't take payments with Visa, Gofundme steals your donations, Youtube shuts down your channel and Bank of America shuts down your account, what are you going to do? If government were doing this, it would be illegal, but they've outsourced the role to private industry.
Say, what's it called when government and corporate interests merge? I'm certain I had a class on this once.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe we should stop being prudes and de-criminialize/legalize sex work.
The work isn't illegal. The problem is that banks aren't regulated as utilities and forced to provide a service. And an old white man's morals decides yet again what some woman can do with her body.
Re: (Score:3)
There's your actual problem. The US doesn't need an underground currency, it just needs some sensible regulation of critical industries.
Re: (Score:3)
And an old white man's morals decides yet again what some woman can do with her body.
Stop it, stop blaming white men. I can't see why men would want to make something they do illegal. Prostitution is probably looked down upon because of women, not men. Sure men are the ones that enact it but probably because they don't want to look like they support that sort of thing in front of their partners and wives.
How would women control men through sex, if it was socially acceptable to just go out and hire a prostitute. The best way to control men is through sex.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop it, stop blaming white men.
I'm not blaming white men. If you're a young white man you're fine. If you're an old white man not deciding on other people's lives based on a fictional story used to brainwash you as a child you're fine too.
I'm blaming old white men who have their moralities guided by religion because ... they are objectively the problem.
I can't see why men would want to make something they do illegal.
That's an advert for Specsavers right there.
Re: (Score:2)
Lot's of banks and industries partake in "legal" economic activity that I find distasteful but they are still allowed to do it.
Lots of public speakers partake in "legal" speech that I find distasteful but they are still allowed to do it. Er ... except they aren't, really, because, as you note, "private companies" can deplatform them.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, I guess. Did you think this would only be used against stuff that you don't like?
Re: (Score:2)
Is it illegal in all 50 states to run a social media platform? Because soliciting and engaging in prostitution is illegal in all 50 outside a few counties in Nevada.
This is pretty analagous to cannabis, where despite the state laws the Federal law is enough to keep banks away since banks are fairly risk averse when it comes to the law. Otherwise much like social media I would imagine for cannabis and prostitution that even if Bank of America and Wells Fargo don't want to engage with it other banks would se
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well you dont do what Jerry Springer did back in the day and pay your escort with a check in the first place
https://www.cincinnati.com/sto... [cincinnati.com]
Re:Inevitable (Score:4, Interesting)
I am very much a cryptocurrency skeptic.
I was too, up until this very article. Now that the porn industry is backing it, I have no doubts whatsoever that it is going to enter the mainstream. The porn industry has been on the vanguard of too many fringe services that went mainstream because of them to continue doubting cryptocurrencies.
It's a never ending irony how the U.S. government has promoted the success of things just by the act of opposing them. It's almost like the U.S. government is cheering for the expansion of the porn industry by opposing it, thus legitimizing it far faster than would have happened on its own.
Re:Inevitable (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL what a name for a sheriff. Also look at why they pulled him over:
the driver "prematurely activated his turn signal."
Wow, I'm glad our faithful police are out there making sure turn signals aren't on too early, I'm terrified!
Re:Inevitable (Score:5, Interesting)
Wow (Score:2)
Some escorts — who charge anywhere from $1,700 an hour to $11,000 for a full 24 hours
People really pay this price for boom-boom?
Re: (Score:2)
The more horrendous the payer is, and the more glorious the payee, the higher the payout.
For some of these guys literally their only hope besides paying is to go all Weinstein or Epstein, and they have the money, so why not spend it? Can't take it with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people just want to have a good time without the work put into dating and their associated apps. Things like Tinder have made hooking up easier for sure but it's time and work you have to put into it to make things happen and let's not lie to ourselves and think that dating, even casually does not usually carry it's own transactional aspect to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Covid also ended the "stop staring at my tits" era and brought on the "come stare at my tits for $9.99/month" movement.
Be interesting to see how this plays out long term and how prevalent transactional sex becomes. With that, do people (read: predominantly women) get re-defined back to sex objects for purchase?
Re: (Score:3)
Outside of romance, it's always been transactional. Even long term relationships like marriage are. One side offers protection and resources for the little crotch demons that inevitably comes from such a relationship, the other side offers sex and domestic labor. Romance wasn't invented until quite late in human history.
The main difference with a proper market is both sides know what they're getting. He's there get off. She's there to get paid. Neither side needs to pretend it's anything else and neither ca
Re: (Score:2)
Well, people pay millions for meme NTFs, so this seems like pocket change.
Re: (Score:2)
No, not really. A huge amount of that is just money laundering and what's left is largely fake transactions between coordinated (or the same) people artificially inflating prices.
What's left, is a few novel NFTs that no one's likely to care about in a few years. Without scarcity (i.e. there's only ONE of these anywhere) then it's nothing more than chest thumping about "owning" a picture of a cheese sandwich. The increase in NFTs that are fake/duplicated or simply things the creator doesn't own rights to
Re: (Score:2)
Wanking is free.
Re: (Score:2)
Some escorts — who charge anywhere from $1,700 an hour to $11,000 for a full 24 hours
People really pay this price for boom-boom?
Yes, but just like how some people buy billion dollar yachts - you'd be wrong to assume the edge case is indicative of the broader industry.
Those aren't banks! (Score:4, Informative)
Neither PayPal, Square Cash, nor Venmo are banks. Seriously, they are very explicit that they exist to transfer funds.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't even bother reading the excerpt? (Score:3)
A lot of people here don't bother going to read linked articles, which is a problem itself, but the second quoted paragraph already talks about Citibank, and you didn't even get there.
Paypal tried to pretend they weren't a bank (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah and uber isn't a taxi service. It's very explicit that it's "ride sharing".
Re: (Score:2)
Neither PayPal, Square Cash, nor Venmo are banks. Seriously, they are very explicit that they exist to transfer funds.
And what about Citibank? I mean you started reading the summary, but is your attention span so short you couldn't make it more than halfway through?
Re: (Score:3)
Because they've fought very, very hard to avoid being classified as banks - in order to avoid the massive compliance rules that come with it.
But let's be real - the hold your money, let you send or receive money from others. Buy things. They'll even let you buy something and pay for it later (hello lending/credit).
Might as well buy the not-a-flamethrower because "flamethrowers" are illegal.
This is the future (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the future we're heading for. Being able to buy and sell is going from something everyone can do, to something that only the approved can do. This isn't the first time banks have closed the account of morally reprehensible people, and it won't be the last. In our new age of social justice, doing business with megacorporations will require that you obey their code of conduct.
And once they've established this power, it's natural that it will be abused. Vengeful divorcees will close their exes accounts. Political dissidents will be cut off from society until they learn to obey. Weirdos and freethinkers will be shown the error of their ways and required to become conformists. The alternative is to live life at a 1980s tech level. Just wait until internet access starts implementing a code of conduct as well. China leads the way here with a social credit score and real name verification required to connect to the internet.
How many people here cheered when people they didn't like had their bank accounts closed? It'll happen to you. These people are possessed with a certainty of their mission. They almost never doubt the superiority of their cause, or waver in their hatred of their enemy. This gives them a great deal of resilience and persistence. They will fight before they give in. And good luck fighting them with no bank account.
Re: This is the future (Score:2, Insightful)
Morally reprehensible?
That's a mighty fine high horse you are sitting on top of. Why do you feel the need to judge people's profession?
What someone chooses to do with their body is no one's business, including the banks.
Sex workers, adult entertainers, and others in related fields should be free to do what they want.
Read Again (Score:2)
That's a mighty fine high horse you are sitting on top of.
He's not sitting on the horse, he's pointing out the horse.
He's saying that the bankers deem sex work "morally reprehensible", not that he himself thinks that.
And he's saying that over time, more and more free thinkers will also be "morally reprehensible" for whatever random reason of the week there might be, and they too will be shut out of banking.
Re: This is the future (Score:3)
Or, I should clarify. Are you saying that are morally reprehensible, or stating that the banking industry finds them morally reprehensible?
Re: (Score:3)
"stating that the banking industry finds them morally reprehensible?"
That is the one. And it's not just limited to sex workers.
https://www.usatoday.com/story... [usatoday.com]
So what other enumerated constitutional rights are going to get you unbanked if you choose to actually exercise them? And if they do ban cash and go all-digital then it gets even easier to starve out the opposition.
Re: (Score:2)
laws can force theme to take it like race laws (Score:2)
laws can force theme to take it like race laws.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same story with freedom of speech. If "hate speech" existed in the 60-ies it would have been abused against the civil rights movement. This crucial point, however, is lost on today's activists. Once you infringe on free speech for whatever reason it is downhill from there. No exceptions. None.
The bankers shenanigans are not restricted to sex workers. Since several months you cannot pay in a coffee shop in NL with Visa or MasterCard. Because the bankers like Epstein's island and cocaine, not some pe
Re: This is the future (Score:2)
If CRT had been part of the civil rights movement maybe hate speech laws could have applied, but other than that it's a bit of a stretch.
Hate speech law and civil rights are part of the same ideology, compromise freedom to correct historic wrongs. Hate speech laws compromise freedom of speech, civil rights compromise freedom of association (at least the civil rights act does, if the civil right movement had stopped at ending separate but equal it would have been compatible with freedom).
Re: (Score:2)
Hate speech is speech I hate.
No, really. Hate speech is a weasel word mostly used by bad actors to enforce their ideology and protect their religion from valid critique. We won't let hysterical intersectional activists completely destroy us. Criticizing misogynist Sharia law is 'hate speech,' Georgetown students say. [georgetownvoice.com] "I for one, reject and condemn any organization that hides behind the righteous principles of free speech."
And it will come back to bite you in the ass. In Europe, Hate Speech Laws are Often [archive.ph]
Re: (Score:2)
It'll happen to you.
No it won't. I'm a white male not involved in activities that Jesus's good book tells a bank manager are unacceptable.
Banks need to be regulated, but please make sure the laws aren't written when republicans are in power.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a private corporation, who is free to determine who they do business with.
Indeed, and since they are essential to an open economy they should be regulated to ensure that they *can't* decide who they do business with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I draw the line at the existing players having sufficiently cornered the market to deny new entrants. Banks are definitely in that category. ISPs too. Social media not so much and neither are mom-and-pop bakeries.
Of course technology can change those fairly quickly. A cheap new AESA-style beam-forming rooftop "dish" with nearly unlimited bandwith can break the ISP oligopoly (maybe even 5G could do it). A less costly Bitcoin / Etherium could do the same for banks. The same thing already happened with the int
This is what we need public banking for (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
We need banks that are under democratic, legal control, that need strictly legal reasons to refuse service.
No. Democracy, specifically government democracy, is exactly the problem here.
I really doubt any bank or payment processor gives a stripper's ass what your business is, as long as it's legal. That includes legal weed, webcams, and everything else which gets people's panties in a knot. If it's generates fees and not court cases, that's going to be good enough.
It's our democratic and legal government which is causing the problem. They lean on financial companies to not do business with disfavored companies. A
Re: (Score:2)
I agree the bank doesn't care about strippers, however the do care about you going bankrupt which another reason they stop service, why just don't lend people money, don't they have system in place to do that?
Banks do however care about public opinion, and if they see making more money by banning someone they will.
The government through courts and laws should control this, there are instances where it is necessary, like money laundering, robbery, forcing some to pay debt etc. But it is important to have an
Banks didn't get this squeamish on their own (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The Department of Justice under Obama spent the '10's trying to stop gun dealers from being able to do business with banks. It was called "Operation Choke Point" (horrifying name, isn't it?).
>"That means gun shops that offer their products online and use a third-party company such as PayPal to handle credit card transactions are increasingly not worth the risk.
>Already, gun retailers in Florida, Nevada and Arizona have experienced the fallout of such heavy-handed government tactics â" from b
Re: (Score:2)
You have people in power exercising their various prejudices as to what's morally reprehensible and what's not, and bullying the rest of us by cutting off our ability to buy and sell. Oh, but you think that's a good thing and gun dealers deserve the treatment? No, what you actually believe is that powerful people should decide what's right and wrong, and we should all bow down and accept that the powerful are always right.
Your example doesn't really prove that. Anti-gun sentiment is fairly common.
The actual problem is one group (possibly a majority) stepping on the rights of the rest.
Wait, what? (Score:2)
Gonna need to see a citation on that. I'd imagine that the majority of sex work in the US when counted by number of acts is prostitution, which is legal only in some parts of one state. It's not like there's not a lot of porn being made or anything, but I'm guessing a whole lot more paying-for-sex-with-no-camera is going on than that. Polls suggest that around 6% of Americans have received money for sex, and about 12% of men and 1% of women say they have paid
Re: (Score:2)
That's a very narrow definition of porn you have there. You are ignoring:
1: Any webcam workers like onlyfans / whatever other self publishing platforms e-thots use to sell anything from titty pics to hardcore videos of themselves and their partners.
2: Strippers. Of which the vast majority do only take their clothes of for people to ogle them while they pole dance, and aren't fucking customers in the back room.
3: The ones that do it for fun, many of them don't even have links to a payment site. Like the redd
Re: (Score:2)
So what you apparently missed here is the broad definition of "sex work" used in TFA.
They made it intentionally broad in order to support a bullshit statement. I didn't miss anything.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, prostitution is legal just about everywhere as long as you are filming it and have intent to sell the recording.
Re: (Score:2)
This is what's always boggled my mind. It's illegal to pay someone to have sex with you... But it's perfectly okay to pay two people to have sex with each other, while you film them. That's just insane.
I'm actually kind of surprised that I haven't seen DIY sex studios. The studio rents you everything you need to shoot your own porno -- sets, cameras, actresses. All you need to do is hire yourself on as an actor, yell "Action!" and "Cut!" at the appropriate times, and you walk away with the master recor
Re: (Score:2)
Polls suggest that around 6% of Americans have received money for sex, and about 12% of men and 1% of women say they have paid for sex. Only about .1 to .5% of Americans have been in porn.
Honest numbers are hard to come by, but if you assume the ratios are about the same in the US as in New Zealand, then around 0.3% (1 in 330) women are prostitutes, and about 16% (1 in 6) of men are clients.
0.3% in prostitution vs. your claim of 0.1% to 0.5% in porn would be essentially equal amounts.
There's also stripping (which may or may not be included in porn), and other acts, like paid dating, which may or may not be sex work depending on who you talk to. And there's a lot of stuff on the fringe, like
Sort of suits them (Score:3)
The privacy issues with blockchains aren't going to put off someone who's job is having sex with strangers/while being watched by strangers.
Huh (Score:2)
Slashdot zeitgeist: de-platforming is a perfectly reasonable, fair tool that private businesses (pretending not to be allied with governments) can use against bad things and ...
{sees this story} Noo!!! Not the pornz!!!!
Really? (Score:2)
The majority of sex work in the U.S. is legal
I highly doubt that - please define the "sex work" that's legal - and no, dancing topless isn't really "sex work".
Trapped (Score:3)
So if one of these fine ladies ever wants to start working in a "legitimate" business, she'll be unable to open a bank account?
I think the closure is how bankers keep these people from ever moving on to better things.
This is on ongoing problem for many people (Score:2)
It's interesting that sex workers might turn out to be the ones who wind up the most clear-cut case of abuse by financial institutions....
But it's not difficult to do a web search on PayPal and find MANY people who suffered from their policies of freezing accounts whenever they pleased. I had it happen myself when I was doing a lot of sales on eBay. It turned out, someone who purchased an item from me was under an investigation, so they elected to freeze accounts of anyone he did business with. For several
Matt Damon (Score:2)
Now we know who Matt Damon was speaking to in those ads: financially neglected sex workers that traditional banks have abandoned. Crypto.com is the brave new financial institution willing to brave into the new world of providing financial services to those that have been long forgotten and treated as financial lepers.
Typical capitalism (Score:3)
"We think you're in the sex trade, and there's a chance that you're involved in [pedophila|something else|whatever we don't like], and so rather than close your account and give you your money, we'll seize your money as well as close the account.
Warning to Banks (Score:2)
Warning to banks: stay out of politics, or you may go the way of the Dodo. Or the Doge. Whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
Warning to banks: stay out of politics, or you may go the way of the Dodo. Or the Doge. Whatever.
(Too Big To Fail) "Hey buddy. You seem to have forgotten who you're talking to. We didn't go anywhere in 2008, and we sure as hell aren't weaker now. In fact, we'll probably take this bubble and fuck you over again, and then sit back and laugh as we make you pay for it. Again."
America is broken... (Score:2)
..how do you people tolerate, and permit to continue, behaviour like this from critical public services?
How is closing a customers account with no justification even remotely legal?
Re: (Score:2)
Please have some self-awareness. You are the one of the reasons why this is broken in the first place. You want banks to fight for your pet cause. Guess what? They are not law enforcement. They don't have due process or an "innocent until proven guilty" presumption. They don't care enough to do that. So the only way they will appease you is by implementing wide-ranging policies that cause tremendous collateral damage.
You and millions of other people, each with their own pet causes means millions more are ou