this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2025
1379 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

73581 readers
4059 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Statement: https://www.mastercard.com/us/en/news-and-trends/press/2025/august/clarifying-recent-headlines-on-gaming-content.html

Mastercard has not evaluated any game or required restrictions of any activity on game creator sites and platforms, contrary to media reports and allegations.

Our payment network follows standards based on the rule of law. Put simply, we allow all lawful purchases on our network. At the same time, we require merchants to have appropriate controls to ensure Mastercard cards cannot be used for unlawful purchases, including illegal adult content.

Media contact

Seth Eisen

seth.eisen@mastercard.com

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Gloria@sh.itjust.works 169 points 1 day ago (5 children)

American Payment Processors really need more competition. They can not be trusted to act in a free market sense and not drift into a chaindog for political ideas.

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 88 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It feels to me like payment processing has a similar function to physical currency. Like all of those security features on the bills are used to ensure the transaction is trusted.

Point being, I've long thought that payment processors are essentially doing a job that should be done by the government.

There are strange gaps where physical services have digital analogues but are completely ignored by the government.

I don't understand why the treasury doesn't process payments or why the post office doesn't issue email addresses, for another example.

Anyways, back to the point, physical currency specifically says that it is valid for all debts. If they applied the same logic to payment processing, then this would never happen.

[–] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago

Probably because government and the people in charge of government are largely tech illiterate and being literate or seeking policy advice from literate people isn't expected.

[–] SheeEttin@lemmy.zip 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Postal banking is a thing in some places.

I'm not sure I want the government running those services. Like a basic one, sure, but for handling credit cards and general banking services? Nah, I don't want the Trump administration having direct access to my purchases.

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 36 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't see any reason to trust the credit industry more than the government, though.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The main reason is that the credit industry isn't in the business of running an intelligence service or part of law enforcement. That said, what they are connected to is almost the same as an intelligence service, that being the advertising industry, and there's literally nothing stopping them from selling or even being forced to give their data to law enforcement. The only reason it doesn't happen more I'd say is just the optics of it.

Ultimately what's needed is a digital payment system that's at least somewhat anonymous, but that's an incredibly hard nut to crack. Bitcoin tried it, but largely failed to do so (and immediately got corrupted by speculators that wanted to use it as a forex instead of currency). A couple of the other crypto currencies that have come out since then have claimed to be better but I'm still incredibly skeptical that there's any real anonymity there.

[–] LwL@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Someone above linked GNU Taler which seems to go in the right direction, but I'm not sure how mature it is yet. It specifically claims to not be a new currency, so hopefully the speculation part won't be an issue.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

It is fucking wild that we don't have INTERAC credit cards here in Canada

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Payment processing is one of those things that really should have been treated as a public utility from the start. The same way we treat water, electricity, and phone lines. But even getting the internet treated as a utility has been a losing battle thus far.

[–] aramova@infosec.pub 7 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Only problem with a public utility like that now would be Trump and his Insane Cunt Posey would weaponize it for the religious right.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

As if they're not weaponizing private entities anyway

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Would it be possible to build a FOSS alternative to all this?

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

They're trying with GNU Taler, but it's pretty much a pipe dream at this point.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

With how volatile cryptocurrency has been in general in the last decade or so, I wouldn't bet on it.

Crypto is ultimately a different form of money, as compared with fiat.

What I think people in this discussion are seeking is an electronic, FOSS , secure network that can facilitate economic transactions of fiat currency.

Of course the two don't have to be mutually exclusive

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Deliberate Anal Inebriation — a.k.a. “boofing,” “plugging,” “butt chugging,” “booty bumping,” And so forth — is a popular subgenre of concert-style praise music long enjoyed by American evangelicals.

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

That's... Way out of left field for this post lol

[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 1 points 9 hours ago

Yeah I guess Collective Shout are fans, but I’m not one to judge

[–] arin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] hraegsvelmir@ani.social 19 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

It really isn't, in this case. The issue is not the currency being used for the transactions, but rather two companies having a duopoly on processing those transactions that allow them to dictate terms to other people on how they can legally use their money. If there were two similar points of failure in processing cryptocurrency transactions, they would be just as vulnerable to having whoever occupied those two spots throwing their weight around. Sure, I suppose in that situation, companies could take payments to a new wallet easier than they could open new business accounts, and bypass the restrictions temporarily, but it still wouldn't be a viable solution in the long term.

[–] pibfyhd7g57gd5u64f@piefed.social -2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, it does. Pretty wild that people will proudly fly their luddite flag even in threads like these lol.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago

Bitcoin is sadly a failed experiment and you're not a luddite for pointing out its various shortcomings. I was an early adopter back when you could get an entire coin for a buck or two, but never invested much in it and lost most of what I had when one of the early exchanges imploded.

The concept of bitcoin was great, a decentralized currency not under the control of any government or institution, but that was still reliable and pseudo-anonymous. The execution however was beyond disappointing. It was quickly commandeered by "investors" looking to gamble on something even more volatile than forex markets and ceased being able to function as an actual currency due to the wild swings in value. In order to be a useful currency something must have a relatively stable value. Additionally scammers and criminals also gravitated to bitcoin further driving legitimate businesses away from it not wanting the guilt by association. Finally it turned out that the anonymity was even easier to break than initially thought and the tax headaches involved in buying, selling, or trading in bitcoin or any cryptocurrency make it too annoying to actually use (massively compounded by its wildly fluctuating exchange rates).

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I feel like it should be super easy now for smaller competitors to pop up by just offering digital credit services using tap on mobile phones. No need to manufacture and ship out plastic cards, just a digital version people keep on the phone, until they get large enough to be able to provide physical cards.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The issues here are trust, security, adoption and so forth. It's not easy to start a competition here I'd say.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's a catch 22. You need a phenomenal amount of capital to stand up a payment network with all those criteria, but anyone with that amount of capital can't actually be trusted not to abuse their position in exactly the same way the existing banking networks have.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 3 points 14 hours ago

Probably not just capital, also political influence and other ways I guess. But yes, it's always a problem if it's like that. If you ask me, there should be a generic independent payment backbone, where many providers could provide payments - like internet or something like that.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 1 points 19 hours ago

Well at least with phone tap there's like a limit of $200, so maybe some company can corner a niche market where they only cover small daily purchases. No $10,000 credit balances or $2000 purchases and points and whatnot, just like $1000 balance limits and max $200 on purchases through tap.

You wouldn't need quite as much capital that way, and I bet that would eat a good chunk of business from visa and MasterCard.

[–] Nastybutler@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Have you tried Discover or American Express?

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

I live miles and/or kilometers away from the three business that accept either of those