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

In praise of cash

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 369 posts

Re: In praise of cash

#51

Post by phil21 »

nunez wrote: post #2

While I agree that cash is extremely convenient and largely anonymous, it is still much more of a hassle to manage than credit or debit cards are. I lived in NYC for a bunch of years and the one thing that I absolutely do not miss is paying for >$100 dinners, entirely in cash, because the restaurant was "too cheap" to handle processing and transaction fees.

> because the restaurant was "too cheap" to handle processing and transaction fees.

I applaud businesses like this. The fact we slowly let a few giant private corporations enact a 1-3% fee against pratically the entire consumer economy would be ludicrous in any other situation.

Plus the privacy concerns just are not worth the convenience. Whenever possible I use cash, simply so I slow the day coming where I can't function in society without having my entire spending history out there for any agency to decide to take a look at.

Re: In praise of cash

#52

Post by schoen »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #38
nannal wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a bitcoin supporter (and user) for this among many other reasons.

I must admit that I don't understand the details of bitcoin. But if I understand correctly, can't a majority of owners block your transaction?

It's very complicated to articulate exactly who can block Bitcoin transactions. The traditional simple answer is that "a majority of mining power" can block an individual transaction by refusing to include it in blocks.

However, they have to be pretty committed to this, because if someone outside of the group does eventually mine a block that contains the censored transaction, the group members also have to be willing not to build on that block, and to trust each other not to do so. Just agreeing not to include the transaction in blocks themselves would be insufficient.

At that point there are complicated questions about how stable and credible the arrangement will be, since systematically avoiding building on certain mined blocks involves slowing down the consensus slightly, and also trusting that the eventual consensus will exclude those blocks.

If, say, 51% of mining power committed to censoring one particular transaction, that might yield an effective fork of Bitcoin for some period of time because the other 49% might gamble on their ability to get their rival blocks accepted in the long term (or, if they didn't know about the 51%'s policy, not see any reason why they shouldn't simply build on what appeared to be the longest chain!).

Re: In praise of cash

#53

Post by maxerickson »

phil21 wrote: post #51
nunez wrote: post #2

While I agree that cash is extremely convenient and largely anonymous, it is still much more of a hassle to manage than credit or debit cards are. I lived in NYC for a bunch of years and the one thing that I absolutely do not miss is paying for >$100 dinners, entirely in cash, because the restaurant was "too cheap" to handle processing and transaction fees.

> because the restaurant was "too cheap" to handle processing and transaction fees. I applaud businesses like this. The fact we slowly let a few giant private corporations enact a 1-3% fee against pratically the entire consumer economy would be ludicrous in any other situation. Plus the privacy concerns just are not worth the convenience. Whenever possible I use cash, simply so I slow the day coming where I can't fun…

I'm not a big fan of credit cards, but cash isn't free.

Re: In praise of cash

#54

Post by Retric »

schoen wrote: post #52
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I must admit that I don't understand the details of bitcoin. But if I understand correctly, can't a majority of owners block your transaction?

It's very complicated to articulate exactly who can block Bitcoin transactions. The traditional simple answer is that "a majority of mining power" can block an individual transaction by refusing to include it in blocks. However, they have to be pretty committed to this, because if someone outside of the group does eventually mine a block that contains the censored transaction, the group members also have to be willin…

The economics of bitcoin and all alt coins mean some company will have the most efficient solution long term and thus mine far more than 51%. And once someone can mine 80+% of a block chain they can do what they want with it.

PS: Add up the Chinese pools and one country effectively already controls bitcoin.

Re: In praise of cash

#55

Post by phil21 »

nxc18 wrote: post #4

In my experience as a college student, it is exceedingly rare to use cash, especially cash in amounts greater than $5, for anything other than crime. While you can argue that one should be able to reasonably break laws and not get caught - anything else is a surveillance state and there is value to discretionary enforcement - I wouldn't characterize criticism of cash as just manipulative. For example, on my campus, t…

Why do you feel it's a currency's place to (help) enforce the law?

If all you can think of for things "people don't want tracked" is "crime" I don't think you've thought about the problem set very long.

It's incredibly damaging to never have "things be in the past". One thing experience has taught us is that any electronic records generated will be kept indefinitely regardless of policy or law.

I just don't understand folks who seem to be completely ok with any agency remotely curious in you being able to re-construct your entire spending history over your life. You might just be so boring you can't imagine hiding anything, but I think you're in the minority.

This is also ignoring the additional transaction taxes private institutions put upon the entire consumer economy. All this so you can maybe do away with some crime (I just think payments will transition and simply cost more) for what amounts to convenience and security. As with all things, I think making that trade ends in long-term ruin.

Re: In praise of cash

#56

Post by jliptzin »

phil21 wrote: post #51
nunez wrote: post #2

While I agree that cash is extremely convenient and largely anonymous, it is still much more of a hassle to manage than credit or debit cards are. I lived in NYC for a bunch of years and the one thing that I absolutely do not miss is paying for >$100 dinners, entirely in cash, because the restaurant was "too cheap" to handle processing and transaction fees.

> because the restaurant was "too cheap" to handle processing and transaction fees. I applaud businesses like this. The fact we slowly let a few giant private corporations enact a 1-3% fee against pratically the entire consumer economy would be ludicrous in any other situation. Plus the privacy concerns just are not worth the convenience. Whenever possible I use cash, simply so I slow the day coming where I can't fun…

The bulk of that transaction fee gets rebated back to the consumer as points, cash back, etc. I only use 2% cash back cards.

Re: In praise of cash

#57

Post by seppin »

sparrish wrote: post #13

After having my card skimmed for the 4th time (at a gas station pump, at checkout at grocery store, etc), I decided to pay for everything with cash. It's not worth the hours it takes to clear up things with the bank and I get a better understanding of where my money is being spent when my wallet gets light.

Only use a card with a chip. Problem solved

Re: In praise of cash

#58

Post by RugnirViking »

PaulAJ wrote: post #39

The thing about the cashless surveillance panopticon is that it still can't stop illegal drugs. Every prison is exactly that kind of surveillance society, and in every prison drugs are readily available. HSBC is one of the principle members of this privatised money system. It was found to be laundering money for international drug dealers, and got off with a slap on the wrist. Nobody working at the bank has been pros…

I don't mean to be pedantic, but that statement would definitely be improved with a link to a source

Re: In praise of cash

#59

Post by jliptzin »

nxc18 wrote: post #4

In my experience as a college student, it is exceedingly rare to use cash, especially cash in amounts greater than $5, for anything other than crime. While you can argue that one should be able to reasonably break laws and not get caught - anything else is a surveillance state and there is value to discretionary enforcement - I wouldn't characterize criticism of cash as just manipulative. For example, on my campus, t…

Here is just one example (of many that immediately pop into my head) of a recent situation where I needed to use cash for something completely legal - buying a birthday present for my significant other who I share credit cards with. He'd potentially see the purchase on our statement and so I paid cash to make sure the surprise wouldn't be ruined.

Re: In praise of cash

#60

Post by jjawssd »

nunez wrote: post #2

While I agree that cash is extremely convenient and largely anonymous, it is still much more of a hassle to manage than credit or debit cards are. I lived in NYC for a bunch of years and the one thing that I absolutely do not miss is paying for >$100 dinners, entirely in cash, because the restaurant was "too cheap" to handle processing and transaction fees.

I assure you the reason they didn't accept anything but cash was not because they were cheap but because they could mix in and clean up dirty cash from their other clients for a fee without an audit trail.
Post reply on HN