PayPal’s Objectionable Terms Are Back, $2500 Fines for Content They Don’t Like

Ongoing discussion at: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=33348913" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=33348913</a>

I don&#x27;t understand why most journalist&#x2F;users don&#x27;t spend &lt;5min on the wayback machine to see that this exact wording has been in the ToS since Sep 2021, and very similar wording since before that time. They didn&#x27;t add anything after the backlash. People equate the &#x27;Updated&#x27; message to mean that the wording is new, it is not. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20210922061858&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.paypal.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;webapps&#x2F;mpp&#x2F;ua&#x2F;useragreement-full" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20210922061858&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.paypa...</a>

The article is saying that PayPal could &quot;presumably&quot; charge your linked bank account. If you read their actual user agreement it&#x27;s clear that this is not the case - which makes sense, because that would open them up to a world of lawsuits. Speaking from experience, the reality is that when you owe PayPal money and they will try to withdraw it from your PayPal balance and then go to collections like any other business would.

The U.S. dollar in a competitive, fair, and efficient market cannot be tied to the services of a few companies. Individuals must have the right to spend money independently. People have a right to participate in markets.<p>Theres a few options - force all online sales to also accept bank transfers.<p>Create a gov owned company that competes with these services (like USPS).<p>Or regulate payment services on what can be considered things they don&#x27;t have to service.

God I hate to say it, but Bitcoin fixes this (with the Lightning Network). <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lightning.network&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lightning.network&#x2F;</a><p>I am not a Maxi, but Jesus what other options are there?

I like how the headline rightly calls the terms &quot;objectionable,&quot; which is exactly the word they use for content they don&#x27;t like, where they alone get to decide how that term is defined and in what context.