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

25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

which.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 136 posts

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#91

Post by sandov »

Given the current technological landscape, we are not ready for a cashless society. People don't have the knowledge nor the equipment required to make it a good system. Avoiding this cashless thing seems like the correct move, until we have good social infrastructure (in my opinion, not likely to happen before 2060). We need what Richard Stallman calls digital extraction:

>Projects with the goal of digital inclusion are making a big assumption. They are assuming that participating in a digital society is good, but that's not necessarily true. Being in a digital society can be good or bad, depending on whether that digital society is just or unjust. There are many ways in which our freedom is being attacked by digital technology. Digital technology can make things worse, and it will, unless we fight to prevent it.

>Therefore, if we have an unjust digital society, we should cancel these projects for digital inclusion and launch projects for digital extraction. We have to extract people from digital society if it doesn't respect their freedom, or we have to make it respect their freedom.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-digital-society.en.html

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#92

Post by Wildgoose »

frosted-flakes wrote: post #33
mschuetz wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The concept of not having your own private bank account that isn't shared with your significant other or anyone else baffles me.

Why? It baffles me that a husband and wife don't trust each other enough to pool their resources.

Ditto. We each have our own JOINT account. We can use each other's accounts (including the associated credit cards) but it's easier to manage if we (generally) don't.

After all, if you are married you are jointly and separately liable for all assets and debts so why doesn't your banking arrangements reflect that fact?

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#93

Post by fauigerzigerk »

sametmax wrote: post #47

Another problem is that no society is perfect. And even if it were, it won't stay that way. There is a need for a small grey area in any system to stay sane, where people can workaround the limitations of said system. Yes, it will be abused, and also used for nefarious purposes. But it's better than the alternative. You need people to sometimes be able to do things the state doesn't approve. You need children to be a…

I totally agree, but I wonder if physical cash is really the only way get there.

I fear that trying to keep a cash infrastructure in place will turn out to be a futile effort because it is so expensive. Long before cash is completely gone I bet that almost everyone who needs it will be priced out of actually using it. Also, cash has the downside of not being usable online.

The problem is that I know of no government wise enough to legislate/regulate in order to keep all the very important things you mention. Right now these possibilities exist only because they are side-effects of the physical properties of cash.

I suspect that once we really do lose cash, some sort of grass roots replacement will emerge (cryptocurrencies?). The danger is that it will be something that lends itself to money laundering and tax evasion on a grand scale. That would make it far too high risk for the purposes you're talking about.

The best solution I can think of is a constitutional right to make and receive smallish payments anonymously and a constitutional obligation for all vendors to accept one such form of payment that is available to everyone.

That would make cash one option without equating the struggle for a right to anonymous small scale payments with a specific solution that is easy to reject because it is so expensive.

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#94

Post by 2038AD »

Unless there were a state (consumer) bank, the implication of a cashless society is that it ought to be a illegal for people not to use private banks. In my mind this effectively make banks an extension of the state apparatus without the sort of accountability that would be expected.

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#95

Post by [deleted] »

crazygringo wrote: post #80

I would love to see a cashless society because carrying around dirty bills and heavy coins is just a nuisance, and adds real overhead for stores as well... ... BUT , for privacy and the unbanked, I suspect this necessarily needs to go along with credit-card-compatible "cash cards" that would have to be: 1) Anonymous (e.g. buy a card for $1 from any drugstore, swap them with friends, buy in bulk and give away, whateve…

[deleted]

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#96

Post by teddyh »

Avamander wrote: post #89
teddyh wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your opinion of GNU Taler?

Not who you asked this from, but in my opinion it has a huge problem of any mistakes being unfixable - either you mistransact or get scammed - taler provides no way to fix that.

I don’t get it – if you could just take it back whenever, it wouldn’t be “money”, now would it?

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#97

Post by 2038AD »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #32
verbify wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not have a personal bank account that your significant other doesn't audit?

While this is common where I live now (Norway), it is not common in the states. Married couples (or just couples) often have a joint account. It was more difficult to transfer money between two people's accounts as well, though there is a chance this has changed recently.

FWIW In the US something called Zelle launched a couple of years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zelle_(payment_service)

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#98

Post by sametmax »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #93
sametmax wrote: post #47

Another problem is that no society is perfect. And even if it were, it won't stay that way. There is a need for a small grey area in any system to stay sane, where people can workaround the limitations of said system. Yes, it will be abused, and also used for nefarious purposes. But it's better than the alternative. You need people to sometimes be able to do things the state doesn't approve. You need children to be a…

I totally agree, but I wonder if physical cash is really the only way get there. I fear that trying to keep a cash infrastructure in place will turn out to be a futile effort because it is so expensive. Long before cash is completely gone I bet that almost everyone who needs it will be priced out of actually using it. Also, cash has the downside of not being usable online. The problem is that I know of no government…

No electronic system is safe enough to guaranty secret because it depends on too many other systems.

It would just be a trojan horse for total control.

In fact, it would allow big actors to pretend giving freedom while in fact having perfect discreet local control when they want.

At least with cash, it's clear when you face a hostile system.

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#99

Post by crooked-v »

crazygringo wrote: post #80

I would love to see a cashless society because carrying around dirty bills and heavy coins is just a nuisance, and adds real overhead for stores as well... ... BUT , for privacy and the unbanked, I suspect this necessarily needs to go along with credit-card-compatible "cash cards" that would have to be: 1) Anonymous (e.g. buy a card for $1 from any drugstore, swap them with friends, buy in bulk and give away, whateve…

> Secure and robust

> value stored on-card

These two things don't go together.

Re: 25M Brits would struggle in a cashless society

#100

Post by fauigerzigerk »

sametmax wrote: post #98
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree, but I wonder if physical cash is really the only way get there. I fear that trying to keep a cash infrastructure in place will turn out to be a futile effort because it is so expensive. Long before cash is completely gone I bet that almost everyone who needs it will be priced out of actually using it. Also, cash has the downside of not being usable online. The problem is that I know of no government…

No electronic system is safe enough to guaranty secret because it depends on too many other systems. It would just be a trojan horse for total control. In fact, it would allow big actors to pretend giving freedom while in fact having perfect discreet local control when they want. At least with cash, it's clear when you face a hostile system.

I don't think it is technically impossible. But the likelihood of pushing through the necessary constitutional changes to protect any right to such a system is extremely small.

Unfortunately the longer term likelihood of retaining a cash infrastructure is equally small, at least as a realistic, effective and affordable option to pay for what people actually want to pay for.

Post reply on HN