Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

taler.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 188 posts

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#161

Post by jakeogh »

alkonaut wrote: post #83
Spivak wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because unless the government can track citizen's income it cannot tax it. That's simply not true. When I do my taxes I have to report my yearly income. The kind of system where a government can monitor all of my transactions in real time is without any court involvement is insane. You might as well use your bank card as at least those require a warrant or subpoena to acquire.

> That's simply not true. When I do my taxes I have to report my yearly income. And the reason you report your income correctly, and trust that your neighbors do too is...

A presumption of guilt? Better DRM their currency.

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#162

Post by alkonaut »

wyager wrote: post #149
alkonaut wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very simple: a system like this could become a legally accepted standard.

I don't want a system like this to become the standard. It's horribly authoritarian and pro-surveillance.

The point of it is: it's better than what we have now, and it's something that you can actually have (Assuming only systems that are traceable will ever be legal).

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#163

Post by Nursie »

jakeogh wrote: post #156
Nursie wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not coerced into using many government services. You may be taxed to pay for them, but you don't have to use them all.

Great. Where do I click to opt out of the IRS personal data storage system?

http://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/immigra...

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#164

Post by ionised »

jMyles wrote: post #68
freshhawk wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Governments on the other hand... Have an awfully bad track-record of power abuse" Well ... yes, but isn't that just an unnecessarily specific version of the true statement "Humans have an awfully bad track record of power abuse"?

That's the big question in a nutshell: Are some humans just bad? Or does power make any human bad?

All are capable of doing evil, given the power and opportunity.

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#165

Post by saalweachter »

pervycreeper wrote: post #144
saalweachter wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As near as I can tell, they aren't trying to be a digital currency, just a digital payment system. This is really an iteration on PayPal (and similar businesses): the new feature is that it is a system for letting multiple PayPals compete. Instead of being forced to make an account with a specific company, you can pick from a hopefully-large number of mints, who will be competing on things like fees and the customer…

>a digital payment system Existing cryptocurrencies already perform this function well. If that's the sole claimed advantage of Taler, it's a step backwards.

Cryptocurrencies (by which I mean, Bitcoin, since it is the one with significant adoption) perform this function, but not particularly well.

For a payment system, being a currency is a negative -- fluctuations between the value of the digital currency and the value of the currency goods are priced in is a headache few people enjoy.

A payment system that is set up as a payment system -- instead of a decentralized trustless network -- can also better optimize things like transaction time (transactions can happen ~instantly if you're willing to trust central agencies) or having a known transaction cost. Right now Bitcoin's transaction cost is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- some combination of inflation from printing money to pay the miners and direct payments to the miners per transaction and payments to the exchanges to put cash in or take cash out and the risk of currency fluctuations mid-transaction. Regardless of whether it costs a little more or a little less, just knowing the transaction cost is a huge benefit to consumers and merchants.

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#166

Post by xg15 »

msandford wrote: post #131
dagss wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it is nothing compared to the reality without taxes, where ANYONE (who can afford more men with guns than you can) can come and shoot you dead right away and take your property, not even giving you a chance to pay taxes (or vote) first.

> But it is nothing compared to the reality without taxes Technology has come a long way in the last 1000 or so years. I suspect that there are new solutions to the problem that you describe. But they don't get explored because the State has a monopoly on violence and is very resistant to change. Most of the time that's a good thing as it means that things get screwed up only very slowly. But it also tends to prevent…

> Technology has come a long way in the last 1000 or so years. I suspect that there are new solutions to the problem that you describe.

Then give a concrete example of such a solution. The current system (having a state actor) works more or less well in preventing power abuse by private entities. But shouldn't we wait with abolishing it until we have actually found a better solution?

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#168

Post by dragonwriter »

msandford wrote: post #131
dagss wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it is nothing compared to the reality without taxes, where ANYONE (who can afford more men with guns than you can) can come and shoot you dead right away and take your property, not even giving you a chance to pay taxes (or vote) first.

> But it is nothing compared to the reality without taxes Technology has come a long way in the last 1000 or so years. I suspect that there are new solutions to the problem that you describe. But they don't get explored because the State has a monopoly on violence and is very resistant to change. Most of the time that's a good thing as it means that things get screwed up only very slowly. But it also tends to prevent…

> But they don't get explored because the State has a monopoly on violence and is very resistant to change.

No, wrong. Alternatives get explored all the time, and radical changes in the dominant role of social organization have happened over the 1000 year time period you discuss. You've anthropomorphized the abstract concept of the State improperly: the state is whatever entity or collection of entities taken together have a monopoly on legitimate violence, but the entities or collections which do that over time have changed quite rapidly -- the modern nation-state system is only a few hundred years old -- it is a fairly new model -- and there has been considerable evolution within that model (and its one that has been widely perceived as weakening in the face of evolving, powerful, non-nation-state actors of various types.)

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#169

Post by keyboardwarrior »

pzone wrote: post #59
dublinben wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question remains, why would anyone choose to use a system like this? Wealthy individuals and companies (aka those with most of the money) have a vested interest in having their transactions not easily tracked by the government.

Simple: this aims for regulatory support. If Taler (or a system like Taler) is embraced by governments, and is therefore given the full support of the financial system, Bitcoin could be permanently relegated to black-market-only use.

Why would we want bitcoin to be relegated to a black market only use?

Bitcoin is more valid money then paper currency. we can directly verify the creation of the transaction.

Re: GNU Taler – Electronic payments for a liberal society

#170

Post by jMyles »

ionised wrote: post #164
jMyles wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the big question in a nutshell: Are some humans just bad? Or does power make any human bad?

All are capable of doing evil, given the power and opportunity.

It seems obvious, right?

From this premise (and lots of other reading of the political "sciences"), I also find it easy to conclude that the internet and open source are preferable to government as methods of diffusing power.

Post reply on HN