Does this qualify as such?
qyron @ qyron @sopuli.xyz Posts 34Comments 1,885Joined 2 yr. ago
qyron @ qyron @sopuli.xyz
Posts
34
Comments
1,885
Joined
2 yr. ago
I'm running the same desktop for nearky 14 years and I have two laptops that are over 8. Still daily use.
What is that?
Don't have one. Can't.
It seems we are forced to agree on disagreement.
Where do you even live? Do you own your money? Does not seem like it.
A bank can not close an account here, unless the costumer actively requires it. There are banks that will close an empty account, with no movements to it for a determined time, but even then the institution is obligated to warn the client in advance. There is even a special, minimal bank services account, established by force of law, where it is established that no bank, acting in the country, can deny access to bank services and charge more than a established amount for it, per year.
Risk assement is done in a case by case system; there is no such thing as a credit score. The only thing it exists is a data base, at the central bank, for credit responsabilities, and if you default you are banned from accessing credit, not bank services. A client can have zero credit near a bank, use their services, and maintain their account as long as they live.
What you do with your account is your business. I should know: I worked for a company that owed money to state, suppliers and the bank itself and it only their account frozen after a judicial order was issued.
And yes, I am claiming to cut the middleman and have more money delivered to the creators. And I stand by those words.
I'm going to try my best to answer your concerns, point by point. This has been a really good exchange.
The threat model for a local sports club putting a bank account on their window is completely different than a popular content creator posting it on the internet. I can't speak definitively about your country, but it's probably safe to assume they have business accounts, which are different than personal accounts, incur fees for having them open, fees for deposits, fees for transfers etc - negating the monetary benefit you see from "cutting out the middle man".
Yes, there are business accounts and personal accounts.
What distinguishes most business accounts from personal ones are connected automated paying terminals and facilitated overdraft, cash advance or factoring solutions.
I risk around 90% of all banks in my country charge for monthly account maintenance fees, transfer orders and other services. Most will try to offset that expense the customer has by offering a number of "free" services, like a number of free instant transfers or a couple of free or heavily reduced price for market orders.
Receiving money in an account is not something it has to be paid for.
Banks typically don't like you running businesses on personal accounts and they will notice. The scenario this particular creator describes will result in lots of small irregular payments and few withdrawals from the account - that's pretty much a textbook example of usage that will trigger a KYC red flag at a bank. Now your account is being investigated and has a chance of being closed/frozen.
I am fiscally declared as an independent professional, as is my partner. I receive small transfers in my account for payment of invoices I issue and my partner receives even more, as she has a used book store.
Both of us use our personal accounts to run our businesses. I have considered opening a second account, just to keep VAT and other values I receive from customers partitioned, and have called my bank questioning if there would be any issues in doing so and they did not care.
Even if my account was flagged for suspitious activities, it would be a matter for police and fiscal services to investigate, not the bank.
We've not even gotten into international transfers, malicious "fans" trying to reverse payments/reporting you for fraud etc which could end up with your account frozen, [...]
All transfers are final, here. You can file a complaint but you have to go to the police first, then present that complaint to the bank and wait for legal procedures to take place. Have your evidences ready, too.
[...] the fact you now have to build and maintain your own infrastructure for web hosting, video sharing, customer service - which will eat time, money or both (and unless you're particularly technical you're likely to need several middlemen). You'll likely also need to deal with a drop in users/income because you've now made paying you significantly more difficult for many users.
You're describing a multinational. And I'm concerned with getting paid, alone. A creator should employ whatever services they see fit to forward their business, be it video editors, IT services, etc. Services from which they should be capable of detaching in favor of another, better, offer.
For some reason, Youtube came to mind as read that snippet of your text. That company should be starved tomorrow. There are several hosting services you can hire to upload and share your video - or any other, by extent - content and withold your work as yours. How many creators have had their work demonitized, for them, because what they do does not align with the platform morality yet the platform still loads adds on those videos for the people watching it?
Frankly, because you think there's an easy alternative doesn't mean there is one. There's a reason these middlemen exist - because everything I've described up there is difficult, time consuming and not what these creators want to be doing. Like them or not, many creators wouldn't be creators without them
Just because one solution exists, does not mean it has to be the one and only, and right now, the platforms that offer these services do not serve their customers better interests.
Good morning! I apologize for leaving this hanging yesterday.
I am aware that making account numbers is highly unadvised by banks but I do know as well special accounts exist for public facing entities and professionals where withdrawing from it requires a very long and tedious process, with several security steps and verifications.
There is a local foundation that almost plasters their windows with poster with their IBAN. Local sports clubs do the same. The opportunities for malicious actors are plentiful, yet these entities do it, safely.
I don't doubt you can point me to some security flaw or loop hole but, getting back to the where this conversation started, cutting the middle man out should be a priority.
Those same payment processors can unilaterally change their terms of service and deny creators of their income. Paypal has done it. I wonder who else.
In my country I already have a transfer subsystem where I can give you my phone number and you can use it to transfer money directly to me. All national banks are part of and own that system.
Fintechs are shady or have too many strings attached.
Nice to meet you.
If I was a creator of content, looking to have a direct way for people to support me, yes.
Are you interested in sponsoring my idiocy? Save your hard earned income; I wouldn't pay myself.
What is this? Mafia? If you have my account number that is it. You can send me money but you can't get anything out of it.
My bank number account is a string of numbers. Besides the country and bank entity code, no other information can be obtained and no movements can be ordered on it by a non titular.
Money can be transfered in but the account can't be moved by anyone but the titular.
Direct bank transfers. Those are a thing.
p.s
They commented, I replied. Is it that exotheric of an idea? I can transfer money anywhere I want, to any bank account. You want to support someone, send them money directly.
There was a world before PayPal.
If was to become part of the diet of one, he'd change his views very quickly.
Well, he is right on the mark in the first part: go vote and talk to two friends.
Go vote, damn it! You don't like how things are going, do something about!
And this is why platforms are nice yet cutting the middle man is important. There was a time before walled gardens.
I've read it. And it's a hard read, indeed. But strangely enough it helped to put into place a few loose pieces in my mind, on a good deal of matters.
I have no words and I tend to talk too much. Between what you have told me and what I read, I'm simply horrified.
And it should be up to the parent to show that it was indeed an extreme circumstance that needed an extreme reaction, it shouldn't be assumed.
Completely agree.
And after your reply, I also noticed I needed to clarify another thing.
I understand "corporal punishment", in the context we are talking, is severe and recurrent physical aggression; that is not what I intended to parse when I mentioned "extreme measures".
An "extreme measure", in what I intend to convey is a swat - on the back of the head, on the butt; at the very worst a slap - just to cause a break in a locked state of mind and set a hard boundary, from where something positive can be done.
I suffered "corporal punishment". That is aggression and abuse, calculated and reiterated. I'm not advocating for that.
if a child's disrespect went unpenalized, they'd lip off to a biker and get killed
This snippet caught my attention. At an intuitive level, something tells me this is not about discipline and education but control, physical and mental. And that shows the "respectful and upstanding" citizens (parents and teachers) are the true bad actors.
I'll read your link a bit later. Thank you.
My father was abusive. He often told me I had it good because unlike his father, he didn't use the belt to punish me. I was under surveillance at school because that little sentence slipped from my mouth once and he was warned that if I ever gave signs of being abused, they would immediatly call the authoritiesm
Meanwhile, my grandfather from my mother's side, raised my mother with care, concern and respect and nothing beyond a stern word ever came her way. That same man told my father he'd beat him to death with a shovel if ever hit after I showed up bruised for visiting my grandparents.
And at school, we had a teacher that found it adequate to twist kids ears and bang their forehead on the blackboard. When that came to be known by my father, it was the only time he stepped up to prevent abuse on me and threatned to beat the woman if she was ever to lay a finger on me.
Corporal punishment is wrong. But let me add one caveat: under extreme circumstances, extreme measures are required.
I do not hit my children. I'm stern but I don't take myself too serious and my pants don't fall to the ground if I have to apologize for a wrong decision or word from me. But I do not subscribe to the quasi-cult of ever showing or even imposing hard limits to kids. And kids, more often than not, like to push boundaries and test limits. And there are extreme cases where one single swift swat replaces quickly and effectively hours of negotiation. It saddens me to watch grotesque scenes play out in public venues with kids throwing tantrums, screaming their heads off and demanding this that and the other because parents, and now I quote a couple I personally know, "do not believe in negative reinfforcement, be it by words or actions". Theirs and other kids alike are horrible humans.
I'm sad for what you personally lived. It's inhunane and monstruous. And belief is never an excuse for any behaviour.
Just out of morbid curiosity: where do those religious folks find the backing in their books to uphold those rotten ideas?
Figure of speech. The family took the hit on their pride, being the people they are. But life carried on. The kid is fine and happy.
No. An absent parent is an absent parent. What makes that person absent is what may make them bad parents.
A couple or a single parent that has to work long hours to provide for their house, which forces them to entrust their children to a school and care system are not bad people nor parents: they're just doing what they can to live and provide for their child or children.
A parent that is not present for their children because they can't be bothered to do so, when they could is a bad parent. A parent that just checks out to go to work, thinking that material possessions can fill the gap they create by not being around are absent but not bad. Stupid but not bad.
I stand by my words. Meddling in personal likings, interests and sexuality is not a role any parents should take. But feel free to elaborate on this point. I sense there was more to be said. I'm an adult; I can take a critique.
And I appreciate your concern for my children but it wasn't you that had to search help for feeling inadequate as a parent, because my own father was a sorry excuse of a human being and I didn't want to go down the same road.
I'm not passing judgement on you; how about you show me the same courtesy?
People would have to kneel, in order to do so. It's about humiliation and asserting dominance, in weak mentalities.