Derpy Whooves 
Can you tell me what that proves, or why you keep reposting it as evidence? What is it evidence of, in your mind?
@aperture_tech
Despite all of its regulation and restrictions, the financial landscape is never safe or solid for anyone who depends on others for the services their company provides. All of these companies are in a perpetually precarious position, not only because anyone smaller can do more with less without drawing the attention of regulators and thus rise to be a competitor faster than the established company can respond, but also because unless they themselves are either an Independent Sales Organization or a Member Service Provider or, preferably, a full standalone Credit Card Association, that is - if they are effectively a “Merchant Aggregator” - they are entirely dependent on the vagaries of the policies of other processors, which are entirely dependent on the vagaries of election cycles and the politics of the nations and (where appropriate) states where they operate.
Thus, if the banks they depend on to fulfill their SLAs tell them they have to change something by a certain date, then they have to change something by that date. They have almost no power over their own products, and most of them survive as long as they do by figuring out how to continue doing business every time their business model gets knocked out from underneath them.
This is basically why we almost lost eBay, why CafePress went to shit so fast and is only now recovering, and why companies competing with places like Etsy keep popping up every month or so.
Effectively, unless the processor is a “Bank”, they have to constantly update their policies to comply with their service providers policies, all while living the thinnest possible margins to remain competitive.
Paypal and Square are basically aggregators, and when you buy something through them Paypal pays an interchange fee to the merchant’s bank, the credit card association, and the company that issued the card. They themselves are not a bank, so they have to deposit the funds on account with their own bank, which results in more fees and more restrictions to their business model and their cost of operation. And even though they charge fees on transactions, the margins there are razor thin, so most of their revenue is on the interest they earn on the money in their reserve.
As a result, if the banks that PayPal uses issues new restrictions, then PayPal complies or finds a new bank.
And every time the US legislature gets hawt and bothered about banking regulations, PayPal and other aggregators get knocked around like a pingpong ball in a clothes dryer.
Effectively, their longevity will be as long as it takes for some member of a nation that represents the Bank Card Association to notice that there’s taxes not being optimally collected.
You can see the damage this can do in the changes that Amazon, Apple, and PayPal had to make when ‘state by state taxes’ and collecting Federal (or National) taxes for internet purchases became law.
And, as you can see from Square, some aggregators are reaching a point where they themselves are becoming banks. Then they can choose their own responses to legislation and regulations, state by state, nation by nation.
Whatever the outcome, as long as there is demand for a credit processing service for small businesses or ‘sole proprietors’ exists, there will be solutions for that. And there will be legislatures fucking it up.
Yeah … well, Pixiv is a very special case. They’re aggregating for an aggregator. If you think the American and European financial regulations and banking infrastructure are complex and weird, Japan’s just as complex and weird, but isolated on a very, very different time-line - one where personal cheques were never invented. But, yes - if you wanted to stop them from doing what they are doing, you’d hit them at the Paypal layer.
Looking For My Doctor
@doloresbridge
Outside of the context of the question I was answering, I do not know what the significance of that paragraph is for you, or what, in your opinion, it proves. Here’s the context of that comment that you keep reposting:
Outside of the context of the question I was answering, I do not know what the significance of that paragraph is for you, or what, in your opinion, it proves. Here’s the context of that comment that you keep reposting:
@Background Pony #AC85 being said, you’re essentially telling me that if this policy were enforced fairly across all groups, nothing can ever be mocked or any group potentially antagonized via art ever again on this site.I am not saying anything about fairness or enforcing this fairly across all groups. I haven’t seen anyone on staff saying we were going to enforce this fairly “across all groups”.This is just my personal opinion, but fuck Anti-FA. Fuck Fascists. Fuck Nazis. Fuck … am I missing anyone? Fuck Flat Earthers. Fuck Moon Landing Deniers. Fuck people who don’t play Kerbal Space Program or support Rooster Teeth and their fine programming.We aren’t going to treat violent antifa, fascist, or nazi imagery “fairly and equally”. Not everyone will agree what is or is not a fascist image. Some people think Aryanne is promoting a fascist or nazi subtext, or that allowing images of Aryanne having sex with zebras is promoting an anti-fascist or anti-nazi subtext.Some people think that a picture of a pony OC being hung is racist and fascist. Some people think the exact same image is anti-racist and anti-fascist.If we treated all groups equally, we wouldn’t allow any LGBTQ images on the site, because it offends and triggers a group of our members. There would be no images showing lesbian couples, because it offends and triggers a group of our members. There would be no images showing straight couples, because it offends and triggers a group of our members. There would be no images showing Twilight as an Alicorn, because it offends and triggers a group of our members. There would be no images with Aryanne in them, because it offends and triggers a group of our members.In my personal opinion, you’re taking this to some insane level of end game that is purely speculative and unwarranted.When someone uploads an image showing a bunch of zebras carrying BLM signs being murdered by another pony saying “die racist slurs” then we don’t care what it’s political affiliation might be. We delete it for Rule #0.Which side does that put us on?
Can you tell me what that proves, or why you keep reposting it as evidence? What is it evidence of, in your mind?
@aperture_tech
So, since none of the staff seems to have replied to my earlier question, I will ask once again: how do you feel about the longevity of these patreon alternatives?
Despite all of its regulation and restrictions, the financial landscape is never safe or solid for anyone who depends on others for the services their company provides. All of these companies are in a perpetually precarious position, not only because anyone smaller can do more with less without drawing the attention of regulators and thus rise to be a competitor faster than the established company can respond, but also because unless they themselves are either an Independent Sales Organization or a Member Service Provider or, preferably, a full standalone Credit Card Association, that is - if they are effectively a “Merchant Aggregator” - they are entirely dependent on the vagaries of the policies of other processors, which are entirely dependent on the vagaries of election cycles and the politics of the nations and (where appropriate) states where they operate.
Thus, if the banks they depend on to fulfill their SLAs tell them they have to change something by a certain date, then they have to change something by that date. They have almost no power over their own products, and most of them survive as long as they do by figuring out how to continue doing business every time their business model gets knocked out from underneath them.
This is basically why we almost lost eBay, why CafePress went to shit so fast and is only now recovering, and why companies competing with places like Etsy keep popping up every month or so.
Effectively, unless the processor is a “Bank”, they have to constantly update their policies to comply with their service providers policies, all while living the thinnest possible margins to remain competitive.
Paypal and Square are basically aggregators, and when you buy something through them Paypal pays an interchange fee to the merchant’s bank, the credit card association, and the company that issued the card. They themselves are not a bank, so they have to deposit the funds on account with their own bank, which results in more fees and more restrictions to their business model and their cost of operation. And even though they charge fees on transactions, the margins there are razor thin, so most of their revenue is on the interest they earn on the money in their reserve.
As a result, if the banks that PayPal uses issues new restrictions, then PayPal complies or finds a new bank.
And every time the US legislature gets hawt and bothered about banking regulations, PayPal and other aggregators get knocked around like a pingpong ball in a clothes dryer.
Effectively, their longevity will be as long as it takes for some member of a nation that represents the Bank Card Association to notice that there’s taxes not being optimally collected.
You can see the damage this can do in the changes that Amazon, Apple, and PayPal had to make when ‘state by state taxes’ and collecting Federal (or National) taxes for internet purchases became law.
And, as you can see from Square, some aggregators are reaching a point where they themselves are becoming banks. Then they can choose their own responses to legislation and regulations, state by state, nation by nation.
Whatever the outcome, as long as there is demand for a credit processing service for small businesses or ‘sole proprietors’ exists, there will be solutions for that. And there will be legislatures fucking it up.
“No man’s life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.” – Gideon John Tucker (February 10, 1826 – July 1899)
Soon they will come for subscribestar, and then they will go for pixiv via PayPal.
Yeah … well, Pixiv is a very special case. They’re aggregating for an aggregator. If you think the American and European financial regulations and banking infrastructure are complex and weird, Japan’s just as complex and weird, but isolated on a very, very different time-line - one where personal cheques were never invented. But, yes - if you wanted to stop them from doing what they are doing, you’d hit them at the Paypal layer.
