WikiLeaks better watch out...
"PayPal is a fucking liar, a cheat and a thug,"
Yep, that pretty much sums PayPal up.
WikiLeaks better watch out, although they do use MoneyBookers as well.
Cryptome: PayPal a 'liar, cheat and a thug'
"PayPal is a fucking liar, a cheat and a thug," says Cryptome operator John Young. The eBay-owned payment service closed the Cryptome account last week, with over $5,000 of donations intended for Young in limbo. Last night Anuj Nayar, PayPal's global director of communications, told us by email that Cryptome's account had been …
-
Wednesday 10th March 2010 20:48 GMT Anonymous Coward
If you rely on someone...
Don't risk pissing them off.
Crypthome has a PayPal account.
Crypthome publishes info that PayPal didn't want out there
Crypthome has to bend over and take it like a man
But to put these things into perspective, try this experiment. Go into your local bank, ask to speak to the bank manager, call them a "fucking liar, a cheat and a thug" and see how quickly he rushes to sort you out a increased overdraft.
-
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 10:57 GMT amanfromMars 1
Personally, I blame Ignorance ..... which opens the Door to Arrogance ..... which Allows Abuse.
That is just so typical of the Basic Anonymous Coward ........ Impotent and Subservient with No Get up and Go Gumption ..... and Quite Perfect for Life Long Abuse whenever Frightened or Unenabled in Searching for the Truth.
-
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 10:57 GMT amanfromMars 1
SMARTer Cyber Security Systems Required ..Call your nearest Virtually Secured Centre of Operations.
"But to put these things into perspective, try this experiment. Go into your local bank, ask to speak to the bank manager, call them a "fucking liar, a cheat and a thug" and see how quickly he rushes to sort you out a increased overdraft." ..... Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 10th March 2010 20:48 GMT
AC, Try this experiment and see if you get a similar reaction to the one which RBS give/gave. Go into your local bank, ask to speak to the bank manager with regard to their provisioning a funding facility for a new dynamic business with a strategy for protection of critical and strategically sensitive programs in the cyber virtual environment, [which all who would be reading El Reg here would surely recognise as THE Command and Control Environment which now powers and/or destroys earthly operating systems with SCADA exploits and others vulnerability probes/cyberborne invasions/hack attacks/call them what you will, and therefore THE MOST VITAL of Environments to Command with Future Control of Power Supply] and which faithfully and accurately would be a reflective mirror of their own model, and listen to the admission that it would be considered criminal and they would not wish to proceed.
Although you would not be wrong in suggesting that that would just your average bank employee who is never going to go anywhere and obviously not the right person to be chatting to. But the admission of their own criminality/theor own perception of criminality is not something you would normally expect them to be so forthright in providing. And of course, if not only a virtual perception but also a business reality, is it a Systemic Weakness which can be Easily Virtually Exploited to Transfer Wealth Remotely to SMARTer Players in the Banking Sector ...... or of course, if it be your wont, a Systemic Weakness vector which can be supplied to Others to Crash and Burn the Sector in a Scorched Earth Virtual Shark Feeding Frenzy.
Spookily enough, thoughts of third parties preparing for such shenanigans crossed my mind after reading Dan Goodin in San Francisco's piece, "Zeus botnets suffer mighty blow after ISP taken offline ... One quarter of C&C channels vanish" ..... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/10/massive_zeus_takedown/ , with future activities now much more likely to accurately targeted against Virtual Machinery which actually renders Global Remote Command and Control of the Money System.
And Dan's last two paragraphs would certainly not disagree with that possibility/probability ..... "That has touched off speculation that the people running the botnets had advance notice that allowed them to build new botnets that would be unaffected by the action.
"It's certainly an odd coincidence," Landesman said. "I think it's an indication of possible forewarning and an attempt to get new bots out there.""
One does wonder at the Very Evident Distinctive Lack of Virtual Intelligence in the Executive Offices of the Global Banking Sector, that they would allow such Achilles Heel Vulnerabilities to Threaten their Model, whenever they have all the World's Wealth to Play with, and to Channel to Suppliers of Virtual Space Security, leading One to Believe that Fat Cats have No Greater Vision than to be just Fat Cats and thus are Easy Prey to ZerodDay Plays which Target the Systems that Support them and are being Systematically Fleeced.
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 11:58 GMT Eddie Edwards
Er ...
How does this put it into perspective? These comments on PayPal aren't from out of nowhere, and they aren't asking PayPal for an increased overdraft. If anything, your comment removes perspective.
If you rely on someone (or, rather, some corporation) and they basically steal your money, then I would suggest not relying on them any more, rather than bending over and lubing up. But, each to their own.
-
-
Wednesday 10th March 2010 20:52 GMT Anonymous Coward
Yep
Paypal is a liar, cheat, and a thug.
Errr.... yep - sounds about right to me! That's the main reason I don't use eBay any more. Of course, Paypal isn't even covered by any kind of banking code (well, none of any use to non-Lichtenstein customers, because that's where it's based), and you effectively have no redress at all in case of dispute (which is WHY it moved to Lichtenstein, of course).
Can't help thinking that some sort of law should be passed to make it a legal requirement for such a service to be brought under the UK banking rules if it wants to trade here, especially considering the HUGE amounts of money it makes.
It is a scum organisation and should not be allowed to operate.
-
Wednesday 10th March 2010 20:58 GMT Bardlee
Well....
Most companies probably despise having these types of items leaked. (and by most, I mean all)
But to think they would sit around and let him use their service even when he posted PayPal confidential information?
Basically they will probably say they made a mistake, but their goal has been completed. I doubt he will use PayPal for this type of service again.
-
Wednesday 10th March 2010 20:58 GMT Anonymous Coward
Pretty much...
... my own experience too, and many of my friends. PayPal is fine right up to the point where something goes wrong or you have a dispute with them. In which event you might as well find a convenient brick wall to bang your head against.
About time they were subject to far more rigorous regulation.
-
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 10:57 GMT Anonymous Coward
You're joking right?
With the banking industry being a bunch of crooks as well, it is actually better that you keep your money somewhere else, like under your bed! They've effectively fixed the interest rates to punish savers who now get virtually no return while they themselves cream lots of money off of you!
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 11:58 GMT Destroy All Monsters
Nope
Banks don't fix interest rates. States do. They also grant banks the license to print money.
Keep it under your bed and state will make you a pauper with its traditional inflationary policies Even more so than currently where you see your pension scheme and real bank account value go further buh-bye at each ministerial declaration.
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 12:04 GMT Jimbo 6
Better still...
Use that spare cash to buy some gold, and bury it on a Welsh mountain. That stops you having problems when the banknotes get withdrawn and irredeemable, as they do about every 10 years in the UK (some of my gold coins have Napoleon III on them, but they're still as good as cash !)
Mine's the one with the quarter Krugerrands sewn into the lining
-
-
-
Wednesday 10th March 2010 23:36 GMT Chris Thomas Alpha
why does he keep the money in paypals account?
it beggars belief more that he left so much money inside the paypal account instead of daily transferring the money to his REAL bank, paypal is not a bank, stop storing money in it, any money you receive, transfer immediately to your own bank account, withdraw it, don't leave it piling up in their account.
they are not a bank, stop treating them like it, they are basically a glorified western union, who also cannot be trusted with a hot chicken leg, nevermind money.
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 00:16 GMT Coward for a reason!
Yup
About sums them up, my account was locked for "illegal" activities, I sold a monitor and pc parts and had £140 in there, according to paypal I had numerous outstanding accounts, which of course was a lie. I lost my money fighting them and gave up after getting no further forward and proving any other accounts werent mine. Never use them again, I lost the goods and the money.....law unto themselves, the sooner people realise this and stop using them the better.
-
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 10:47 GMT Anonymous Coward
Paypal sucks.
I accept payments for software on my site; and I have many ways of payment available.
Even if I received ~50 payments through the other options (it's a small hobbyist thing), I never got anything from paypal. And yes, people tried. Every time, it failed, paypal claiming that it was not granted by the client, which annoyed both me and the client because PayPal decided he can't pay.
I suggest you go over to Liberty Reserve; they at least know what they are doing, and their system has decent security, not like those fucktards at paypal who think that security means give anybody a right to juggle with the money randomly. I don't have time to speak with PayPal custom service IQ ~50 idiots.
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 10:58 GMT Peter Hood
Never
Before reading this post I had already decided that I would never use PayPal - there are alternatives of course - but the article has set my attitude in concrete. Having already read reports of accounts being inexplicably frozen I took the view that I would be unwise to put my cash in the hands of such people. I've never had a problem with my bank, nor seen reports of such problems with them, and cannot fathom why PayPal feel free to deviate from this.
Theirs is the loss, and I hope that these vile creeps are reading this.
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 11:04 GMT Matthew 3
Query
I may be being incredibly naive here but surely, in the UK at least, if an organisation is withholding your property/money/assets improperly you have the right to sue.
And the Small Claims Court would have allowed him to reclaim up to £5000 for a £50 cost I believe. Surely that is a better bet than just hoping they'd see reason?
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 12:02 GMT Lord Lien
PayPal...
So if PayPal suspend your account, who keeps the money?
I'm surprised that they are not regulated. I know it's almost impossible to regulate an online company, but if your operating in a global market, then you should at least have some sort of code of practice.
1 rule of thumb when it comes to money. If you cant go & punch someone in the face when it all goes wrong. Don't leave your money there.......
Pirate icon... cos PayPal are the new breed of pirates... Robbing the poor digitally, to give to rich.
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 12:42 GMT Philip Cohen
eBay/PayPal: Dead Men Walking
PayPal and Bill Me Later are not a bank, are not regulated as banks are and yet offer banking-type services, services that would be more appropriately, efficiently, and competently carried out under the auspices of the banking community (via their credit card company partners).
The simple fact is that without the bankers’ knowledge of the entities involved in the transactions, PayPal, or any other non-bank provider, will always be handicapped. Non-bank providers can never guarantee anything for the buyer or seller because they simply don’t have the bankers’ knowledge of the entities involved.
PayPal is an unregulated, unprincipled, systemically dysfunctional, amateur organization (just like its ugly parent, eBay).
The head turkey at eBay, ‘Noise’ Donahoe, has talked of the possibility of offloading PayPal because he is just barely smart enough to know that when the major credit card companies do get off their butts and introduce a like card/terminal-less payments system to complement their credit card system, they will do it properly, and the dysfunctional PayPal will then sink like a stone—other than, possibly, on what is by then left of the Donahoe-ever-shrinking eBay marketplace. The banks may also let PayPal keep those ‘no hoper’ customers that the banks, who will always better ‘know’ their customers, might not likely allow a merchant-type facility.
If Donahoe has any brain at all he will be actively trying to sell PayPal to the banks to complement their credit card system; but I doubt the banks would want to lower their image any further by associating themselves with the likes of PayPal; not even for a peppercorn consideration would the banks touch such an incompetent amateur operation as PayPal, I suspect.
Does anyone then think that ‘all the banks’ are not watching this market segment with interest, and is it possible that PayPal (along with the upstart ‘Bill Me Later’) could be having a negative effect on their credit card business? Why then would ‘the banks’ not be considering a like system to complement their existing card systems? After all, every internet banking user is already set up to receive such a service directly, efficiently and securely, from their bank. The simple fact is that anything that PayPal can do ‘the banks’ can do so much better.
Do we then need to offer the banks and the major credit card companies another such monopoly-type situation? Ideally not. But, having said that, within the credit card system the individual banks do compete with each other on interest rates, etc.
Regardless, it would be nice to have a card/terminal-less system that worked efficiently and effectively—as does the banks’ credit card system. Regrettably (or thankfully, some say), PayPal does not have such a partnership with ‘all the banks’ and so PayPal can never offer that same effectiveness.
My only surprise is that ‘all the banks’, via their credit card partners, have not yet announced their own system. When they do, it will be bye, bye, PayPal—you most ugly of daughters. And, more importantly, we will then have a system that works effectively, just like our credit cards do!
In support of the above comment I offer an introduction to the full sad/ugly story of eBay/PayPal at
<url>http://www.auctionbytes.com/forum/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=6502877</url>
-
Thursday 11th March 2010 13:10 GMT Fred Flintstone
Give me £100k and I'll zap PayPal
No, seriously. The CC companies don't want to change their business model because they have effectively put the transaction liability on the clients and now treat the cost of fraud as a business expense, so they won't play and leave Paypal meddling away.
However, it is possible to seriously cut fraud if you know what you're doing, and I happen to know precisely how. With about 100k I can build this up in 3 months flat and take a serious chunk out of Paypal with users who turn real money - and almost no fraud risk (0% is unrealistic, but it's possible to completely avoid virus and fraudulent repudiation risks). The result would be a drastically lower overhead, and no need for new infrastructure other than the data centre,
Result: less risk AND less transaction overhead means lower cost per transaction. I'd have this well past break even in under a year. As a matter of fact, I think I ought to talk to someone about this...
-
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
