[HN Gopher] PayPal shuts down long-time Tor supporter
___________________________________________________________________
PayPal shuts down long-time Tor supporter
Author : tirz
Score : 260 points
Date : 2021-06-02 17:51 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.eff.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.eff.org)
| c01n wrote:
| Paypal is a scam. Use crypto-coins!!!
| lostgame wrote:
| So I can pay with crypto on Amazon? Etsy? Discogs?
|
| I don't understand why there are so many posts here saying
| 'just use crypto', like - PayPal is a scam and needs a
| replacement but the problem is until sites start _accepting_
| crypto as simply as PayPal works then things will stay the
| same.
|
| What you're saying to do in your comment - on most major online
| retailers - is not yet possible, and it will probably take a
| long time even if it can find critical mass.
|
| Crypto is another _currency_ - it's not another payment
| processor and while those are starting to exist we are nowhere
| close.
|
| I believe the laments here are more so related to PayPal's
| dominance - for most websites it's that or your credit card.
| readflaggedcomm wrote:
| >This is the first time we have heard about financial persecution
| for defending internet freedom in the Tor community.
|
| But they don't know that. Paypal refuses to give details. He
| describes a second recipent, the hosting company, and there could
| be more. Paypal's fraud and crime detection is pitiful*, and
| their silence can cover both incompetence and malice.
|
| [*] https://slate.com/technology/2020/02/paypal-venmo-iran-
| syria...
| lsaferite wrote:
| > they don't know that
|
| Isn't that already covered by
|
| > first time we have heard about
| tssva wrote:
| Paypal has denied that funding of Tor nodes is the reason for
| closing the account so the EFF is making claims without any
| proof.
| whizzwr wrote:
| No. Paypal denied giving any details. It could be 100%
| because of Tor, could be 100% unrelated to Tor. Who knows,
| that's what EFF is disputing.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Whoever made this call must have been pretty inebriated. All of
| the bad actors here are willing to pay for their Tor nodes with
| crypto, which really only sabotages the legitimate users on the
| platform.
| tyingq wrote:
| I don't understand how it's legal for PayPal to hold his money
| for 180 days because they don't like the nature of his
| transactions. Kick him off their platform, sure...that's their
| prerogative. But why do they get to hold the money hostage?
| lynndotpy wrote:
| I believe that's in the ToS. At least in the US, they have a
| quite restrictive binding arbitration agreement.
| tyingq wrote:
| Interesting. I wonder if a small claims court (assuming the
| balance wasn't too large) would help.
|
| Edit: found the text in the TOS:
|
| _" Holds based on PayPal's risk decisions
|
| We may place a hold on payments sent to your PayPal account
| if, in our sole discretion, we believe that there may be a
| high level of risk associated with you, your PayPal account,
| or your transactions or that placing such a hold is necessary
| to comply with state or federal regulatory requirements...
|
| Risk-based holds generally remain in place for up to 21 days
| from the date the payment was received into your PayPal
| account. We may release the hold earlier under certain
| circumstances ..., but any earlier release is at our sole
| discretion. The hold may last longer than 21 days if the
| payment is challenged as a payment that should be invalidated
| and reversed based on a disputed transaction as discussed in
| the following paragraph below. In this case, we'll hold the
| payment in your PayPal account until the matter is resolved
| (but no longer than 180 days)."_
|
| https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full
| judge2020 wrote:
| In general it might be there to ensure no fraud is happening -
| when my account was flagged for being under 18 (at the time),
| they held my money for the 180 days before letting me take it
| out. I imagine they do (or used to) experience fraud from
| people signing up for accounts using the identities of
| children.
| slownews45 wrote:
| Uh - because he may be ripping people off or people may file
| claims for a refund, and if they give it to the scammer it's
| hard to give get it back to make folks who got ripped off
| whole?
|
| This is 101 stuff. Credit card companies do this routinely as
| well. I'm hearing fyre festivals will be harder to get
| immediate payout on.
|
| Travel does this when businesses are near bust - credit card
| companies will hold funds.
| dahart wrote:
| > because he may be ripping people off or people may file
| claims for a refund
|
| This is a reasonable argument in general, but it falls apart
| here because there was a human in the loop who knows why the
| account was disabled, and knows that it wasn't for suspicion
| of scammy behavior, nor for suspicion of insufficient funds.
| tyingq wrote:
| It's a 20 year old account, and this activity doesn't seem to
| be new, or associated with fraud, etc. What aspect of what
| he's doing seems similar to Fyre? I don't understand the
| flippant tone.
| slownews45 wrote:
| The tech companies are not analyzing things at this level.
| They close a number of accounts each month. A certain
| number of those were engaged in fraud and will generate
| chargeback activity. Others were legit but accepting
| payments in advance. Once the business is out of business
| those too will generate chargeback activity. Some are legit
| but had bad service, lost key employees resulting in
| complaints. Once the account is shut those also often
| generate chargebacks.
|
| So they sit on the money for 180 days, it doesn't cost them
| anything and saves them a big pain in trying to claw money
| back from any of these folks who may not look at them that
| fondly after being cutoff for what may have a been a silly
| reason.
| syshum wrote:
| The problem here is that is sounds like he was SENDING
| money not RECIEVING money,
|
| They can trace where the money came from, if I put money
| into the account so I could pay someone they find
| objectionable and then shut me down they should not be
| able to hold that money because it is not a fraud issue,
| i did not receive from a 3rd party, it is 100% my money
|
| yet they also hold these funds for the 180 days
| teclordphrack2 wrote:
| Something tells me, "read the fine print"?
| [deleted]
| sofixa wrote:
| And his account can be taken over by someone else, or his
| behaviour could change. Account age shouldn't be a huge
| determining factor.
| xvector wrote:
| News like this is proof that cryptocurrencies like Monero are
| necessary.
|
| It's proof (not that we needed any) that centralized finance does
| not have your best interests at heart, and they can and will
| abuse their power.
| teclordphrack2 wrote:
| Nothing keeps an exchange from taking your money and running or
| not receiving the goods/service you pay for.
| xvector wrote:
| Businesses are legally obligated to deliver your goods, so
| they will do that anyways, just like if you pay in cash today
| and go back to the store asking for a refund.
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| Paypal are legally obligated to hand back the money after
| 180 days.
|
| Nothing stops an exchange refusing to do business with you.
| swensel wrote:
| Why Monero specifically though, with all the options in crypto
| available?
|
| If you want privacy there are also Zcash shielded transactions.
| Or if all you want to do is eliminate central parties then why
| not just Bitcoin?
|
| My understanding with Monero is if you don't run your own node
| there's not that much privacy guarantee anyway (otherwise you
| have to trust the third party node you point to). Someone
| please correct me if I'm mistaken about that.
| xvector wrote:
| Monero is much more private than Zcash.
|
| The issue with Zcash shielded transactions is that something
| like 14% of transactions are shielded, but only 1% are truly
| private. Optionally shielded transactions make chain analysis
| much easier and immediately make said transaction suspect. So
| you cannot comfortably use Zcash for private transactions.
| See the report by Chainalysis [1]:
|
| > 14% of the ZCash transactions use a so-called "shielded
| pool", but in only 6% of all cases both the sender, recipient
| and the number of transactions are fully encrypted. The
| report states: "So even if the concealment on Zcash is
| stronger due to the zk-SNARK encryption, Chainalysis can
| still provide the transaction value and at least one address
| for over 99% of the ZEC activities."
|
| Clearly, optional privacy is not privacy at all. It needs to
| be on by default, which is the philosophy behind Monero.
|
| Re. Monero nodes - if you're using a remote node you can just
| use Tor, which I believe is soon to be baked in by default.
| Otherwise, Monero is still quite private. Your transaction
| history, transaction amounts etc are not revealed to nodes.
| Some metadata like restore height is, but that's not a big
| deal.
|
| [1]: https://www.kryptokumpel.de/en/kryptowaehrungen/chainaly
| sis-...
| reedjosh wrote:
| Arrr or Pirate is Zcash, but with always on privacy BTW. I
| like it a lot, but it's relatively new.
|
| Also, the ZKSnark method that provides the privacy requires
| that the devs threw away their initial PKs. If you trust
| they did, then it's a great option.
| Wistar wrote:
| I _think_ VRSC is similar to ARRR and Pirate.
| Wistar wrote:
| "IRS offered $625,000 bounty to anyone who could 'crack'
| Monero; no one succeeded"
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25752042
| R0b0t1 wrote:
| You can analyze the dust spend in transactions to
| deanonymize Monero users. You need to be processing a lot
| of transactions to do this, or have the ability to spy on
| the processing of a lot of transactions.
| reedjosh wrote:
| Even if someone could _see_ the transaction and identify
| the user behind the wallets, at least a crypto still
| prevents fund holding and transaction blocking.
| pessimizer wrote:
| If it were government crypto (or centralized government money
| transfer), you'd have recourse in the courts.
| [deleted]
| reedjosh wrote:
| But if it were just crypto, nobody would be able to hold your
| funds. I don't think transferring the power to an even more
| inscrutable bureaucracy makes this problem any better.
|
| Most people already acknowledge that the little guy doesn't
| have the funds to hire the lawyers for a protracted court
| case.
| skrowl wrote:
| Monero + Distributed Exchanges will go a long way to fix these
| kinds of online payment problems.
|
| Unfortunately, at least near term you'll still need fiat-tether
| "on ramps" to convert your local currency back and forth to
| tether before you move them to a distributed (or at least a
| non-KYC) exchange to Monero, then sending to your local wallet,
| then use online.
| xvector wrote:
| Yup. It's worth checking out LocalMonero [1] and the Haveno
| DEX [2]. The former already works and lets you buy Monero
| without relying on a KYC exchange.
|
| [1] https://localmonero.co/
|
| [2] https://github.com/haveno-dex/haveno
| Ekaros wrote:
| Paypal being Paypal? Nothing new on Internet. And this sort of
| action is exactly why I will never accept money via Paypal.
| unethical_ban wrote:
| "We don't like what you are doing, and are going to hold your
| money for six months. I hope you don't subsist on it, or have any
| business obligations to attend to. We'll call you."
|
| This should be illegal for Paypal to do, period. Absolutely
| illegal.
|
| And if it is on behalf of a government or banking/fraud
| regulations, then the person should be referred to relevant
| agencies.
|
| Let's be clear and drop the pretense: They are confiscating his
| property.
| [deleted]
| slownews45 wrote:
| Are you sure it is being confiscated? He will have a claim
| then.
|
| What can happen is when your credit card / other payment
| providers cuts you off is that you go out of business. You
| might fail to provide services to users - so they do a
| chargeback / ask for a refund from payment provider.
|
| So when a payment provider is shutting you down, they usually
| want to hold onto some money to be able to handle those refund
| requests. Very common in travel situations as well.
| mdoms wrote:
| So PayPal is holding onto his money in case he incurs
| expenses as a result of going out of business due to PayPal
| cutting him off? And this seems normal and good to you?
| wearywanderer wrote:
| The beatings will continue until morale improves.
| slownews45 wrote:
| This is the way many providers that offer recourse
| settlements handle things.
|
| They have data showing when they cut off a business from
| processing credit cards etc they may receive claims from
| customers who have already paid whose money they are either
| holding or have forwarded.
|
| If they are holding it they refund that customer, and
| business can ask for payment using another method.
|
| If they are not holding funds, they run into an issue of
| asking merchant for money (which is difficult to collect).
|
| So most providers of this type when making a decision to
| end a business relationship hold onto the funds for a while
| to let everything settle. This is not unique to paypal.
|
| Some providers don't hold funds if payor has no recourse.
| You usually need to be settling with what are called "good
| funds" for that to be the case, then merchant is paid out
| usually within 1 day under all circumstances. A fair number
| of B2B wire type clearing operations work like this.
|
| I'm just explaining what happens. They don't generally
| closely evaluate the reasons or likely outcomes of account
| closures, and there is enough fraud and profit motive /
| cost cutting in system that the rules tilt pretty heavily
| against merchant.
|
| That said, if OP is not lying and they really do confiscate
| the funds there will be an issue for them. Especially
| individuals, they'll send the unclaimed funds to the state
| generally even if not claimed by the person.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| PayPal has been doing this for more than a decade now. I
| wouldn't be surprised if its part of their business model to
| hold funds indefinitely and to collect interest on them.
| astrange wrote:
| There's hardly any such thing as interest in the US and there
| hasn't been for at least a decade.
|
| Besides, if that was their business it'd be in their S-1 and
| it isn't. (IIRC it says they keep customer funds in interest
| free accounts)
| [deleted]
| krisroadruck wrote:
| Way back in 2011 they did this to me. My marketing agency had
| been running most of our customer payments through PayPal for
| several months, and we were growing fast. At some point they
| took the $50K we had in the account and froze it for 180 days
| with no recourse, claiming it was to protect against charge
| backs (despite us never having a single chargeback).
|
| I explained to them that if they didn't release the funds they
| would most certainly have charge backs because we'd be out of
| business and thus unable to deliver on the work promised for
| the money.
|
| Nothing we said did any good. That is until I looked up the
| laws in Washington State about money transmitters. Turns out
| based on the specific license they had in Washington State at
| the time, it was illegal for them to hold funds for longer than
| 7 days.
|
| Me telling them this did nothing at all, but when I sent a
| letter to my state governor explaining my predicament and
| someone from that office sent a letter to the folks at PayPal,
| suddenly my funds were released and a note was placed on my
| account to never withhold funds on that account ever again.
| Been smooth sailing ever since :-D
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| > a note was placed on my account to never withhold funds on
| that account ever again
|
| Did PayPal just tell you this or did you find out another
| way?
| helios_invictus wrote:
| Stop using paypal. They neither pay or are your pal.
| Jiocus wrote:
| Pals don't let pals pay with _Paypal_.
| johndevor wrote:
| Who pays for pals anyway.
| Jiocus wrote:
| You'd be surprised.
|
| My thinking was, if a friend confide in me about their use
| of PayPal for online payments, then it's a moral obligation
| to inform them of the risks their taking and treatments
| available such as alternative providers.
| nonbirithm wrote:
| I remember having my PayPal account locked for no specified
| reason, and they said because too much time had passed since it
| had been locked they would only reopen it if I physically mailed
| them a check with my bank information. Of course I refused such a
| ridiculous request and vowed never to use PayPal again.
|
| Yet I was still forced to use PayPal for another retailer because
| the retailer's credit card processing was broken, so I had to
| create a new account. It's frustrating when you have to go
| through a middleman or external company that treats you like
| garbage instead of being able to use an established payment
| system that works.
| fsflover wrote:
| Many stories how PayPal kills FLOSS projects:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20191011190010/https://minifree....
| danlugo92 wrote:
| #BitcoinFixesThis
| [deleted]
| xvector wrote:
| I wonder where all the people that complain about
| cryptocurrency's energy consumption went.
|
| It may be a problem, but it's a hell of a lot better than
| situations like this. Cryptocurrency was created precisely for
| this reason - giving financial freedom back to the individual
| in a censorship-resistant manner, because it was obvious as day
| to the cypherpunks that created it, that governments and
| corporations would abuse our financial freedom where possible.
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| This problem is utterly immaterial to crypto.
| [deleted]
| toss1 wrote:
| At least I'm not being held hostage, but PayPal has just had
| their last interaction with me.
|
| After few sales of an un-marketed old product for most of the
| pandemic, someone tracked me down and wanted to purchase. Agreed
| on options and I said I'd have an invoice out in minutes.
|
| Should be easy, right? Login to PayPal, fill out invoice info,
| hit [Send] . . . . Nope, something wrong, contact support. Phone
| w/half-hour+ wait times, support ppl 'cant hear' and line drops,
| repeat, send email, both put me off, took a bit of info and said
| a specialist would get back to me quickly. Yeah, right.
|
| While I was waiting, I apologized to my customer and checked out
| alternatives. I'd worked with Stripe on a previous project, and
| they now have manual invoices (i.e., not only code-generated from
| website=>API).
|
| Signed up, got authenticated, setup invoicing, sent invoice, got
| paid, and the money is in my account, and the product packaged
| and on the loading dock -- all within an hour or so.
|
| More importantly, Stripe did a setup and execution from scratch
| in less time than I squandered even getting to initial PayPal
| help, and more than an order of magnitude faster than PayPal even
| began to send a useful answer my issue.
|
| Done with PayPal - strongly recommend not using them -- and never
| store money there.
| bobthechef wrote:
| You know this sort of thing is going to become more common,
| right? I guess we just have to accept it and obey. Anything else
| might make life less comfortable.
| tr3ntg wrote:
| I know I'm preaching to the choir as everyone here is aware of
| how terrible PayPal is, but I too have been burned by them. They
| shut down access to my personal account with no warning and no
| option for recourse.
|
| Thankfully I didn't have any funds stored there, but it was
| inconvenient and ruined any trust I previously had in them.
|
| Overall a terrible experience.
| the_optimist wrote:
| Far from being illegal, this type of engagement has been
| historically preferred by US regulators.
|
| Perhaps someone can kindly check if this is a quiet reincarnation
| of Operation Choke Point?
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point
| freedomben wrote:
| I've been burned by Paypal a number of times. But until recently
| I hadn't yet been held hostage. Now I have. I wish I'd listened
| to people on the internet. DO NOT USE PAYPAL.
| swiley wrote:
| If you don't like cryptocurrency stop making it necessary.
| dandanua wrote:
| At this point I believe crypto whales will intentionally ruin
| conventional financial institutes and systems.
| xvector wrote:
| The systems are ruining themselves. Time and time again,
| "conventional financial institutes" have abused their
| positions of power wherever possible.
|
| It's no surprise that people are looking towards crypto,
| which was created explicitly for the purpose of taking power
| back from these institutes. People finally have another
| option.
| dandanua wrote:
| Aha, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dI3MARgU0s8
| shkkmo wrote:
| It isn't really clear what happened here, and that is a
| significant part of the problem. I think we are well past the
| time that we pass a law mandating the companies that provide
| public services do what the EFF has suggested:
|
| > Provide meaningful notice to users. If PayPal is choosing to
| shut down someone's account, they should provide detailed
| guidance about what aspect of PayPal's terms were violated or why
| the account was shut down, unless forbidden from doing so by a
| legal prohibition or in cases of suspected account takeover. This
| is a powerful mechanism for holding companies back from over-
| reliance on automated account suspensions.
|
| > Adopt a meaningful appeal process. If a user's PayPal account
| is shut down, they should have an opportunity to appeal to a
| person that was not involved in the initial decision to shut down
| the account.
| croes wrote:
| This IT company bans are always like out of a Kafka novel. We ban
| you for your wrongdoing, you can't do anything about it and we
| won't tell you what you did wrong.
| seaourfreed wrote:
| PayPal doesn't care about Tor. An intelligence service probably
| wanted to force this shutting down of Tor enter/exit nodes, so
| the percent of Tor enter/exit nodes were mostly the intelligence
| service. (For the best Doxing)
| gruez wrote:
| >An intelligence service probably wanted to force this shutting
| down of Tor enter/exit nodes, so the percent of Tor enter/exit
| nodes were mostly the intelligence service. (For the best
| Doxing)
|
| It's a nice conspiracy, although I'm not going to believe it
| unless there's more evidence corroborating it (ie. mass reports
| of people getting their paypal banned or increased churn in tor
| relay nodes).
| livueta wrote:
| > increased churn in tor relay nodes
|
| There actually was something kinda close to that recently:
| https://nusenu.medium.com/tracking-one-year-of-malicious-
| tor...
|
| But that's an increase in known-malicious relays and exits
| and doesn't speak to churn in existing, non-malicious nodes.
| The attribution efforts made in that article also suggest a
| different motive, though if I was a three-letterer attacking
| Tor I'd probably also try to look as if I was a Russian
| criminal bad at hiding my tracks.
| timdaub wrote:
| Biiiiitttccoooonnneeecccttttt
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| My bet would be that he's done non-Tor stuff with his account,
| and that's why it's been shut.
| [deleted]
| StanislavPetrov wrote:
| Perhaps you should read the linked article which states that
| the EFF examined his paypal history and found nothing remotely
| suspicious.
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| From what he shared.
| wydfre wrote:
| Why would anyone support Tor? I mean, really, it allows for
| absolute evil. I would rather read about terrorist attacks in
| foreign countries because of discontent than read about a tor
| site, okay?
| convery wrote:
| Holding the money hostage for half a year on a 20 year old
| account? Not surprising. Paypal and their other entities like
| Ebay are pretty shit when it comes to nuance and their impact on
| others.
|
| Had a 15 year old Paypal business account (parent started it and
| I took it over ~7 years ago) and last year they shut it down
| because I, as the new owner, was not 18 when the account was
| created. Nothing from the support but "computer said you bad,
| nothing we can do".
|
| In Ebays case I sold an item, got the regular email from Ebay
| (DMARK/SPF/IP verified) that they had received payment and was
| holding it until the item had been delivered. Then a week later I
| got another email from them saying they had blocked the buyer for
| abuse (i.e. a fraudulent transaction to them) and that I
| shouldn't ship the item they told me to ship a week ago. After 2
| months of trying to get through to the support they just claimed
| that someone spoofed their DMARK, SPF, and servers IP. After
| explaining how impossible that would be their 'proof' that it was
| 'spoofed' was that there should be a copy of the message in the
| Ebay inbox where, after the reply, all messages about the auction
| ever existing were suddenly gone.
| syntheticnature wrote:
| Not that it really matters to your points, but eBay and Paypal
| split in 2015.
| Qub3d wrote:
| Not only did they split, they just forced all sellers to move
| from PayPal to direct deposit: https://gizmodo.com/ebay-and-
| paypal-finally-break-up-for-goo...
| FridayoLeary wrote:
| That sounds like good news. I don't see why i should have
| to give PP a cut of everything i sell on Ebay.
| Qub3d wrote:
| I am ambivalent, but the reduced fees are nice.
| gene91 wrote:
| The cost to seller is mostly the same. eBay is now taking
| the cuts (the cut they have always taken plus the cut
| that used to be taken by PayPal) themselves instead.
| FridayoLeary wrote:
| Oh. That's nasty then.
| exporectomy wrote:
| I know that's mean of them but is it possible the account still
| had your parent's identity attached to it? You certainly
| shouldn't be access an account as if you're someone else. For
| example, did you provided Paypal with all the identification
| documentation to prove you're your real self and not still your
| parent?
| baybal2 wrote:
| Personal experience:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23506276
|
| https://fairshake.com/paypal/how-to-sue/
|
| http://www.screw-paypal.com/resources/small_claims_court.htm...
| astrange wrote:
| It's easier to file a report with the CFPB:
| https://www.consumerfinance.gov
|
| I did get my PayPal account back by doing this, after I sent
| out an eBay order so fast they decided I was a scammer
| because the tracking info already said it arrived when I
| added it to the invoice.
| [deleted]
| joe_momma wrote:
| Doge to a dollar, then crash, then reset
| theknocker wrote:
| I removed all of my payment information from paypal when I
| noticed they would readily engage in what amount to political
| sanctions.
| arvindrajnaidu wrote:
| Long-time Tor supporters are model citizens. How does PayPal not
| get this?
| Dah00n wrote:
| Evil is always fighting against good.
| swayvil wrote:
| Sounds like Paypal got one of those secret government demands
| that we aren't allowed to talk about on pain of imprisonment.
| amaccuish wrote:
| We turned off PayPal for certain countries, because the "buyer
| protection" found too often in an obviously fraudster favour.
| (reinjection of label into UPS network, forged label for return
| address etc. PayPal doesn't care as long as there is a tracking
| number... who cares where it goes to right?).
|
| Anyone who has ever had anything to do with PayPal as a Seller
| will tell you the same thing, as a buyer, always order with
| PayPal, and you'll always win.
| theturtletalks wrote:
| Everyone is locked-in to PayPal at this point. Buyers have
| their credit cards on it and get buyer protection. Sellers have
| to support it since buyer's use PayPal as the default and don't
| trust companies with their credit card info.
| mpol wrote:
| So, what is the alternative for PayPal?
|
| I sell only small-time. I don't want to do Creditcard, no Stripe
| either (I don't have a registered company) and iDEAL is only
| working in the Netherlands. So what is the internet alternative
| for international selling. And, please, no crypto-currencies :)
|
| I am off to sleep, see you tomorrow.
| kenniskrag wrote:
| why not a traditional bank? You can open the account on your
| name or the company (depends on the legal form). The advantage
| is, that you can reach them by phone or in an office. Cross
| country cash transfer are usually no problems and you can
| manage your account on an e-banking website or sometimes on an
| app.
| adamcstephens wrote:
| I'd even say go one step better and join a credit union. Less
| to worry about when you're a member-owner of an organization
| that is focused on its members and community over corporate
| shareholders.
| mattnewton wrote:
| Sounds like you are aware of many alternatives to Paypal. Why
| not register a company and use Stripe?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-02 23:00 UTC)