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

Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 717 posts

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#321

Post by mixmastamyk »

cipheredStones wrote: post #120
noduerme wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what are the main benefits of going fully cashless One piece of advice I got a long time ago, from a family member in politics: Don't put your groceries on a credit card. Especially if you buy junk food or alcohol. Obviously the same goes for bars, tobacco, strip clubs, gun purchases[0], and lots of other perfectly legal things that you might not want being counted up if you ever run for office. At the systemic lev…

> Don't put your groceries on a credit card. ...huh? "Don't use store membership cards that track your specific purchases" is one thing, but in what world does your credit card processor get info about the individual goods on your receipt?

CC doesn’t, the grocery chain does. And they’d love to make money on it.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#322

Post by petilon »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #279
petilon wrote: post #243

When you pay cash you are paying for the credit card convenience (the fee that is built into nearly all price tags) without benefiting from it. My bank returns 2% of the charged amount. If I paid cash I would forego this benefit.

I don't have a credit card, and don't know anyone who does - only debit cards. So this might be specific to your bank and/or country ?

Most US credit cards return 1%, some return 2%. Another advantage of credit cards is that the bank acts as a mediator in case of disputes regarding the charged amount. Also, rental cars and hotel rooms are only available if you charge them to a credit card.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#323

Post by kortilla »

lazide wrote: post #300
cortesoft wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you know it is for human trafficking, why would you cut off the payment instead of arresting the people?

Because arresting people requires evidence and due process, which is work.

If you don’t have evidence or due process, then you don’t know it’s for human trafficking.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#324

Post by [deleted] »

Aunche wrote: post #214
mc32 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also the threat to civil liberties was exposed in Canada when the government saw it fit to freeze people's bank accounts. I believe this is being reviewed and maybe something will come of it so that the gov is not allowed to cavalierly freeze accounts in the future, but you can see how even liberal people are ready to violate people's civil liberties when they see it fit. It's like principles are only followed when t…

Would you prefer if they ended the blockades through more forceful means, even if that would escalate into violence?

[deleted]

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#325

Post by rsaesha »

throwuwu wrote: post #277
rsaesha wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an option: a direct payment system provided by the Central Bank to the general public. In Brazil it is called PIX, and was implemented in 2020. Last month it has processed more than 3 million operations. Works 24/7, 0 fees to end users, low cost for business. IMO, going cashless is not an "if", it is a "when". https://www.bcb.gov.br/en/financialstability/pix_en

Who controls the central bank in Brazil? Who can implement changes to this system? How much PII is recorded with each transaction and who can view it?

From https://www.bcb.gov.br/en/about/faq

BCB is a governmental institution, composed mainly of career civil servants hired rather than appointed or elected, whose institutional tenure typically survives transitions of political leadership. They answer to the government, not a political party.

The Complementary Law No. 179/2021 defines a four-year term for the nine members of the BCB’s Board of Governors that does not coincide with the term of office of the President of the Republic, as well as establishes the rules for the dismissal of the Board’s members.

The personal information and the information related to the operation (value etc.) transmitted in Pix is protected by banking secrecy, as governed in Complementary Law 105, and in the provisions of the General Data Protection Law.

All transactions take place through digitally signed messages that travel in encrypted form.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#326

Post by landemva »

renewiltord wrote: post #168
incone123 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they were making that argument, more that websites don't usually take cash anyway. (Can't imagine pornhub selling gift cards at the supermarket checkout next to the App store ones)

Interesting. We could probably sell cards with crypto on it with immediate resolution by simply transferring the passphrase/wallet rather than on the chain. Could do it with pure stablecoin.

A bitcoin bearer instrument. Like this https://opendime.com

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#327

Post by kortilla »

tchaffee wrote: post #265
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. There are other mechanisms to target illegal actions, such as sending the police to arrest the person. Those actions are guarded by due process and the right to trial. Using the financial system to target people is not.

So you would willingly, knowingly, and personally process a transaction to kill someone? Not your problem, let the police discover it?

If you have evidence that a murder is about to occur, you report it to the fucking police. You don’t just remove yourself from the pipeline and hope it doesn’t happen.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#328

Post by zhfliz »

tchaffee wrote: post #307
zhfliz wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you know about/suspect it you report it. how do you know with 100% certainty/due process that this is indeed the case and it's not just your ML algorithm going crazy? people can also pay with physical money if they desire to do so.

What I asked is specific: if you know the money is for a hit job will you still accept the business and take your fee or is there a moral line you personally won't cross? Yes, it's the job of the police to investigate but do you want the freedom to not engage in business that you consider evil?

at best you suspect it, you don't know it unless you're on the sending or receiving side of the transaction.

it shouldn't be my decision whether i want to allow the transaction, even if i wouldn't want to allow it. i'm not in a position to perform due legal process to determine whether you're indeed being paid for a hit job.

the provider should be in a neutral position.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#329

Post by colinsane »

onionisafruit wrote: post #116
arcticbull wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take this opportunity to advocate for 'payment network neutrality' - given their importance in the economy, I agree payment processors should be required to process all lawful transactions, by law. We should require this of any national payments processor in the US at the federal level - or state, I'm looking at you, CA and NY.

I would go further and remove the "lawful" from that. If you pay me $50 it shouldn't matter to the payment processor whether I gave you a painting or a blow job in return.

if the payment processor knew the transaction was for a contract killing but processed it anyway, would they not be facilitating a crime (“aiding and abetting”)? are you saying we should specifically exempt payment processors from being held responsible for crimes that the rest of us — or any other business — could be found guilty of when performing the same functions?

or are you suggesting something more broad: that in the chain of cause and effect that eventually effects a crime, only the “last” party should ever be held responsible? e.g. anyone can sell weapons to anybody, only the person who pulls the trigger should be legally responsible? in this case presumably it’s legal to hire a contract killer, the only illegal part is the killing itself, and a skilled contractor could probably shift that final act onto the victim as well.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#330

Post by [deleted] »

er4hn wrote: post #278
theturtletalks wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a clever setup. Using laws like the Anti-Money Laundering rules, the government nudges credit card companies to avoid high-risk businesses. These companies can then turn away any business without explaining why, all in the name of "security through obscurity." But when you think about it, this setup skips past important legal protections like due process and the presumption of innocence. It's like the government…

patio11 covers this a bit in a series of blog posts in his newsletter: https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/money-laundering-and-... . Quoting a relevant paragraph from the AML post above: Much like KYC, AML policies are recursive stochastic management of crime. The state deputizes financial institutions to, in effect, change the physics of money. In particular, it wants them to situationally repudiate the fungibil…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN