That's not true. When Robinhood (or any other retail broker) sends orders to a 3rd party to be filled, there is no way for that 3rd party to see who is sending the order other than it's coming from Robinhood. Robinhood maintains their own book customer orders; the FIX protocol that the orders are coded in doesn't even support that kind of granular info.
There are valid criticisms of payment for order flow but privacy isn't one of them.
Pretty sure they were banned for taking on a public political stance supporting disinformation peddlers like Alex Jones. Payment processers don't want to be associated with this kind of content for obvious reasons.
Why don't payment processors want to be associated with someone calling for violence in the streets while peddling conspiracy theories they know to be untrue?
They don't want to become liable for any illegal behavior and end up having to pay a fine.
They don't want to be associated with any political stance that might not agree with the vast majority of the population because they want to have as many clients as possible.
Is/was it the platform maintainers applying their own morals, or is it the money (advertisers) who don't want to be associated with these topics?
The walled gardens are already quite ridiculous, with FB censoring Michaelangelo's David and the Napalm Girl, giving us a kindergarten version of the Internet (although funnily enough, they can't censor fake news, so the "children"'s minds got brainwashed there).
OK, how about this: he's a polarizing nutcase who has adopted controversial and unsupportable standings on several calamitous events in the past two decades.
Most people that see a mainstream business supporting him assume that business adopts those same ideas, rightly or wrongly. So, the perception of supporting Alex Jones can be incredibly damaging to the reputation of a business.
I m sure paypal or patreon are doing business with many criminals or even terrorists who are unknown. The reason is the bad PR and negative publicity they get from these channels.
edit:
1) I don't think the priority of life is getting a switch for these Kid at Christmas.
2)I don't think he had to call and waste his time for then complaining.
3)We have all at once the same problem but did had written an article about it, because it's useless. When I had the problem, the same day I had my package, because I directly go to the DHL post office get my package. Done. Strict to the point. Same with UPS.
Wow, I didn't know people were still talking about gamergate like it was a controversy worth caring about. And what does it have to do with legitimate conservative causes? You're as bad as the president. "Not all the white men carrying torches and chanting 'Jews will not replace us' are bad people"
Not really, just don't like backhanded character assassination.
Also, not all the people protesting were chanting "Jews will not replace us". Oddly, some of the white nationalists that helped organize the protest were Jewish. And I also personally know many conservative people in favor of the statues that aren't nazis either (and at least for some, it's because they personally are Jewish, so it would make no sense).
Calling all conservatives white nationalists is the equivalent of calling all BLM protesters black nationalists, or all counter protesters antifa. It's just easy namecalling and almost always ends up just being very heavily cherrypicked images and such used to construct a narrative.
I completely agree with the statement 'not all conservatives are Nazis.' Just the people who show up at white nationalist rallies and decide to go with the mob. Why can't conservationism be about cutting taxes again? The repubs have a serious image problem turning a blind eye to this insane fringe and if they want to fix it they need to stomp it out and focus on economics or something less divisive.
Anybody who likes that will like subnettree, too, which offers a C-based Patricia tree for IP addresses. In the past, I've gotten a lot of mileage out of this library:
Market makers put lots of quotes (orders) out on the various exchanges hoping to buy low and sell high, collecting the spread between the two. These days spreads are very small so market makers have to rely on automated quoting in order to make a profit. A side effect of this is that when markets are moving quickly the algorithms tend to take a conservative approach so the firm doesn't end up extremely long or short in a position. So when someone comes in and tries to buy up all the open orders at once they'll cancel their orders on other exchanges that haven't been executed yet so they can reprice to reflect the increased demand. The phantom liquidity really isn't much of a mystery when you look at it this way.
