In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously • Hacker News Board

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#261

Post by vkou » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:54 AM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #248

throwaway22032 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, we're just not talking about the same thing. He's saying that using cash is inconvenient because no-one uses cash where he is. I'm saying that it's not because at its' core it's fundamentally just handing over a bit of paper. It's not a statement about how many people accept cash where I am. I can't easily pay my mortgage with cash directly either. The point is that it's not an insurmountably difficult thing. Th…

> He's saying that using cash is inconvenient because no-one uses cash where he is. No, I'm not. I'm saying using cash is inconvenient for me for things like paying my monthly bills because it would require me to physically go to each individual company I pay bills to and pay them in person. Whereas with a credit card I can pay all my monthly bills in a few minutes from my desk at home. Even if my utility company, fo…

> I'm saying using cash is inconvenient for me for things like paying my monthly bills because it would require me to physically go to each individual company I pay bills to and pay them in person.

We could solve this problem with an a service where you'd be able to pool all the money you intend to spend on bills, and then the service would handle getting the cash to each individual company. :)

That money could even accrue 0.001% monthly interest, while it's waiting to get spent on bills.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#262

Post by throwaway22032 » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:54 AM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #248

throwaway22032 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, we're just not talking about the same thing. He's saying that using cash is inconvenient because no-one uses cash where he is. I'm saying that it's not because at its' core it's fundamentally just handing over a bit of paper. It's not a statement about how many people accept cash where I am. I can't easily pay my mortgage with cash directly either. The point is that it's not an insurmountably difficult thing. Th…

> He's saying that using cash is inconvenient because no-one uses cash where he is. No, I'm not. I'm saying using cash is inconvenient for me for things like paying my monthly bills because it would require me to physically go to each individual company I pay bills to and pay them in person. Whereas with a credit card I can pay all my monthly bills in a few minutes from my desk at home. Even if my utility company, fo…

If you're unwilling to read what I'm writing and just want to waffle, go for it.

If I don't have coffee in the cupboard is it inconvenient to drink coffee or is it just that I don't have coffee in the cupboard?

If you're arguing that it's inconvenient, then okay, that's your definition of the word.

I'm really not interested in arguing about definitions of words and neither should you be.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#263

Post by beardedetim » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:55 AM UTC

nathanaldensr wrote: post #159

caylus wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything this reinforces the author's point about the dangers of lack of transparency of "digital jail". How do we know that statement is true? It's hard to hide who has been jailed (though "disappearances" come close), whereas we have no choice but to take the word of the entity which we have granted unchecked power that it has not abused that power. There's also plenty of wiggle room in their statement - they sa…

It is utterly amazing to me that despite all of human history being filled with stories of egregious human rights violations, lies, and propaganda coming from governments all across the political spectrum and world that people still trot out the "look, read this official information. This is proof!" excuse. How many more examples do we need before the opposite is assumed?

Where else should we go to but the official information? I agree it's not great and as faulty as humans so where can I find information about these things that is great and not faulty?

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#264

Post by yellowapple » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

This is why I roll my eyes every time someone goes off on some tirade about how cryptocurrency is a scam. Yeah, grifters exist. No, that doesn't make the most viable alternative we have to these centralized digital monetary systems any less vital. My BTC can't be frozen, and my ADA can't be seized during a traffic stop.

I strongly disagree with the antivax protestors currently the subject of these measures; I think they're all plague-enthusiast morons and should go home already. I also recognize that using such measures against these protestors makes it that much easier to use the same measures against protestors with whom I do agree (like, say, First Nations folks trying to reassert their right to the lands stolen from them), and that it's absolutely prudent to prepare for that eventuality should my government on this side of the US/Canada border opt for a similar strategy (as police here in the US already do rather routinely via civil asset forfeiture).

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#265

Post by vkou » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:58 AM UTC

patmorgan23 wrote: post #232

kyrra wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WSJ opinion pages actually have a good opinion piece on this yesterday. The general take I got is that all money police or judiciary collect should go into the state's overall general fund, rather than going to the local government. https://www.wsj.com/articles/policing-for-profit-speed-trap-... Mirror: https://archive.fo/T4tgR

It should go to some completely unrelated dedicated fund. Like the University fund or state parks fund. Leaving it in the general fund means the state could just grant that money back to the departments.

> It should go to some completely unrelated dedicated fund. Like the University fund or state parks fund.

Money is fungible, and if you fund some with , all that means is that funding that was previously earmarked for would get spent on .

The solution to highway robbery and grift is not earmarking revenue, the solution is hanging the robbers and grifters off the mile posts.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#266

Post by xanaxagoras » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:58 AM UTC

Godel_unicode wrote: post #175

reaperducer wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple answer is to reject the cashless society. Agreed. Recently, I came across a coffee shop and a bakery that proudly displayed "We are cashless. No cash accepted." signs. Not accepting cash is a method of discrimination. It keeps people without bank accounts out of your establishment. The overwhelming number of people without bank accounts are minorities and immigrants. That's why in some cities it is illegal…

You don't need a bank account to use cards to pay for things. You also don't need to use an attempt at humor about fat people to add authority to your argument.

^^ shoulda said "add weight to your argument"

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#267

Post by 14 » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:58 AM UTC

jakobdabo wrote: post #45

JacobThreeThree wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No, that battle is lost. How is it lost? Jurisdictions like New Jersey, Rhode Island, San Francisco and Philadelphia have legislated that businesses must accept cash. There are bills being worked on at the federal level. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4395

Lost in the sense of look around how people are spending their money. I'm very happy for that law, and hope common sense will prevail and cash will be around for a long time. But you can't deny that vast majority of money transactions in the modern world is cashless. Hence my point that the battle is lost - if you take away average person's right of using their credit cards or bank accounts, how are they supposed to…

I just realized last night that the self check outs at Walmart don't accept cash, as far as I can tell, and that the only choice is to use their regular till but that is staffed by one person so it is always a long wait which is what I am sure Walmart has planned to discourage its use.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#268

Post by AmericanChopper » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 1:58 AM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #246

caylus wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything this reinforces the author's point about the dangers of lack of transparency of "digital jail". How do we know that statement is true? It's hard to hide who has been jailed (though "disappearances" come close), whereas we have no choice but to take the word of the entity which we have granted unchecked power that it has not abused that power. There's also plenty of wiggle room in their statement - they sa…

> If anything this reinforces the author's point about the dangers of lack of transparency of "digital jail". How do we know that statement is true? If a crucial part of your argument is the epistemological claim that we obviously can't trust anyone who presents evidence or arguments that we don't like because they could be lying , then there's clearly no way of having a reasoned discussion.

The claim isn’t that broad. The democratic model of society has never trusted executive government to dispense justice unilaterally. Having due process and an open system of courts is a mandatory feature of the democratic society, and when a government decides to suspend those safeguards, that governments own commentary about how little harm it’s decisions are causing do not have any credibility.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#269

Post by throwaway22032 » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #250

throwaway22032 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, we're just not talking about the same thing. He's saying that using cash is inconvenient because no-one uses cash where he is. I'm saying that it's not because at its' core it's fundamentally just handing over a bit of paper. It's not a statement about how many people accept cash where I am. I can't easily pay my mortgage with cash directly either. The point is that it's not an insurmountably difficult thing. Th…

> it's fundamentally just handing over a bit of paper. No, it's handing over bits of paper at the particular physical location of the person or entity you are paying . For some transactions, like paying for your food at a restaurant, that's no problem because you're there anyway. For other transactions, like paying monthly bills, it is a problem.

Nah because banks exist and can make digital transactions when you give them cash.

Literally, if you were standing next to me, you can give me 10 quid and I can send someone else that ten quid. You have paid them ten quid using cash, reasonably anonymously in a way that cannot be easily blocked or censored as long as cash exists.

This becomes far, far less convenient or feasible if we only have barter and now you need to find someone that accepts some arbitrary valuable object of a value that isn't exactly the amount you want to send.

No-one is arguing that electronic transactions are not useful, this is a strawman. It makes no logical sense, so perhaps you should consider that I'm not making that argument.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#270

Post by ACanadian » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

ripley12 wrote: post #194

mark_l_watson wrote: post #145

Excellent article and one that I wish my friends would read. Recently on a hike I mentioned how upsetting Trudeau’s actions are, and none of my friends had any idea what was happening up in Canada, except someone talked about a few things that I don’t believe are true: truckers were violent, few Canadians supported them, etc. - I think those things are not true. As other people here have pointed out, cashless society…

I think those things are true, and I live in Canada. I strongly support Trudeau's actions on this, and I'm sad that the government took so long to crack down on the "truckers". It's deeply damaging to civil society when a few extremists can shut down a city without consequences.

So I assume you were equally outraged not long ago at the blocking of rail lines by indigenous / environmental activists?

The truckers were not violent. For real violence, look at the ax-wielding attackers in the recent incident at the gas pipeline site in BC.

It is frightening how you and many other people so easily absorb state propaganda. Try thinking a bit about the circumstances here. Why did Trudeau go out of his way to falsely characterize the truckers as homophobic racist Nazis, while refusing to discuss any of their legitimate concerns? Why did Trudeau invoke the Emergency Act after the the peaceful resolution to the blocking of Ambassador Bridge (which was the most economically damaging part of the protest)?

It seems quite likely that Trudeau was hoping for violence. Hoping that insulting the truckers would provoke them. Hoping that clearing the Ambassador Bridge blockage would involve violence. But when that failed to happen, he invoked the Emergency Act anyway, even though clearing the remaining protesters from Ottawa was then accomplished more-or-less peacefully with ordinary police tactics. Trudeau (or his handlers, he's not particularly smart himself) are clearly delighted to have the opportunity to establish a precedent for increasing state power, and for making everyone think twice before offering any support for any dissent group, lest their life be destroyed. Of course, "dissident" groups that are actually in line with the government's agenda are safe...