Live data from Hacker News

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

wsj.com

351–360 of 717 posts

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

#351
post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until it’s politically uncool to be you, and the gov’t bans your ability to buy food. The Nazi’s got elected in their first time, democratically (ish).

Brother fckn nazis taking the government is a much bigger systemic problem that no financial system can protect against. The system works if democracy works. If we lose democracy, of course, the blocks built on top of it would crumble. That does not means everyone should stop building on top of democracy. Even more so for things that makes the life of the people better.

No, making it so you can’t buy anything without the gov’ts permission makes it not only more tempting for someone like Nazi’s to take over, but also much more effective for them to keep it and far more damaging when they’re in. Germany is a strongly ‘cash’ society partially because of this, but also because of what the Stasi did to East Germany.

You really don’t want the folks in power to have even more of that kind of power, no matter how convenient it is most of the time.

At least Visa/MasterCard, etc. mainly just care about making money. The gov’t doesn’t even have to care about that!

Using ‘we’re currently in a democracy’ to justify creating an even more tempting and likely to be abused tool of oppression is not a good idea.

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

#352
post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I'm not familiar with Brazil's system, but moving a central bank to being democratically controlled is betterbthan leaving this in the hands of a private company. The US central bank isn't currently democratically controlled, but it could be. Then collectively we could decide how a Brazil type system should function. People are better served when their banks aren't run for-profit.

Important comment: PIX is not a bank killer and isn't designed this way. Banks still exist in Brazil and they rake in pornographic profits just like everywhere else. The absolute majority of the banks profits here does not comes from payments processing fees. The fees exist to cover the transaction operating cost. Since for PIX there is a much much lower operating cost, it makes the service free for people and businesses! The ones losing here aren't banks, but credit cards companies.

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

#353
post #315
post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not familiar with Brazil's system, but moving a central bank to being democratically controlled is betterbthan leaving this in the hands of a private company. The US central bank isn't currently democratically controlled, but it could be. Then collectively we could decide how a Brazil type system should function. People are better served when their banks aren't run for-profit.

Until it’s politically uncool to be you, and the gov’t bans your ability to buy food. The Nazi’s got elected in their first time, democratically (ish).

If the nazis take power, and you happen to be one of their targets, having cash won't help much when your photo is being displayed everywhere with wording saying there's a bounty on your head as a dangerous terrorist.

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

#354
post #320
post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's no evidence or due process, then you don't know.

Won't know what?

You don't know if the money was used for trafficking. Are you reading what you are writing?

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

#355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If they knew the payment was for a contract killing, they should be picking up the phone and calling law enforcement.

This isn’t even about individual transactions. The situation here is more like them saying, “your business has characteristics in common with the kind of a business that might facilitate a contract killing and we’re lazy so we just aren’t going to do any business with you at all”.

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

#356
post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until it’s politically uncool to be you, and the gov’t bans your ability to buy food. The Nazi’s got elected in their first time, democratically (ish).

If the nazis take power, and you happen to be one of their targets, having cash won't help much when your photo is being displayed everywhere with wording saying there's a bounty on your head as a dangerous terrorist.

But guess what makes it easier to identify and target individuals? Being able to do something like SELECT * FROM transactions WHERE recipient like ‘synagogue’

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

#357

Whether or not you agreed with the trucker protest in Canada, I hope we all agree it’s pretty terrifying that the method the state decided to use to silence protesters was freezing their bank accounts without due process, any trial, anything. Cash is the best weapon against this.

It seems like being able to do this sort of thing. And being able to make government payments to people that must be spent (use it or lose it) and only on approved things are the big motives. Control.

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

#358
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bank transactions are trivially traceable and reversible by the state. I've been actively against bitcoin and monero exactly because they facilitate kidnapping and other forms of effectively irreversible digital theft. The best part about living in a society with institutions based on trust instead of non-trust, is that it's trivially easy to eject bad actors from the system.

Without bitcoin, you collect the ransom in gold with a dead drop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_drop "But the police can watch the dead drop." True. "No police or the victim dies." Also true. Bitcoin does make kidnapping a bit easier though. It is true. It also makes hyperinflation by the state impossible. Hyperinflation does a lot more damage than kidnapping.

> Without bitcoin, you collect the ransom in gold with a dead drop.

Where the perpetrator needs to:

1. Be in the general area.

2. Only ask for enough currency that's easy to physically move (an actual real limitation in many countries)

3. Be sure the bills aren't marked (practically impossible). Because of this:

3(1). Be sure to not deposit the currency, ever.

3(2). Be sure not to use the currency with anyone who knows you who will every deposit the currency ever.

3(3). Allow the victim only enough time to procure a large amount of currency (likely days), but not enough time to procure a large amount of marked currency (this is an inherent conflict).

Obviously kidnapping is possibly via use of physical currency, but the practical limitations of cash over anonymous digital currency with regards to kidnapping are massive.

Your concerns with hyperinflation are alleviated by investing in any commodity, and trading on a black market. The fact that the commodity is a blockchain asset is effectively moot. The days of states not forcing individuals to be up front with capital gains on blockchain assets are over.

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

#359

My concerns about a cashless society are the power it hands to a few oligopolistic credit card processors. Look at what happened to Pornhub. Regardless of whether you think Pornhub was in the wrong, it is striking that a business was cut off from global financial system by a small number of credit card companies. This was done without due process and under no countries laws. That should scare us at least a little.

This all started way, way before Pornhub.

First it was federal and state moral laws (mostly porn, but also race and gender related stuff) with state/local and USPS cops handling enforcement, back when there was no internet and the way you got information out was via newsletters, zines, and such. USPS cops used to literally spend their days steaming open envelopes and rifling through people's packages that seemed like they might contain lots of flyers for unions or newsletters for black panthers, or nudie mags. But religious conservatives lost court cases left and right, eventually giving up on that front.

So they shifted to banking to enforce a moral code in the private sector they couldn't do so via the government. After all - if you can't ban something, just starve it of money...making it impossible, or very expensive and inconvenient, to fund.

For decades, porn stars have been basically shut out of the banking system, blacklisted, finding their bank accounts suddenly closed with little warning, with little or no explanation. I'm not talking prostitutes - I'm talking people who are clearly employed and receiving paychecks for being adult actors in films, all very verifiable. What's wild is that clearly banks are spending labor and resources to have computers and staff go through and find these accounts and close them.

Criminals figured out pretty quick that porn stars had lots of cash hanging around, and they became targets for both organized (and less so) crime...as well as a place for organized crime to dump/launder money.

The credit card industry claims they restrict / charge such high fees for porn because of fraud rates, but...look at the gym industry, which is infamous for fraudulent billing practices, and how they have access to credit card processing and even ACH access. The banking industry also seems more than delighted to handle the finances of boy scout troops and catholic churches.

When ads dominated revenue, that was how censoring happened - major advertisers would contractually ban adult content from sites running their ads. With subscription fees taking over, it's now credit card payment processing. Most of the major crackdowns on adult content on various platforms have come from merchant and processing banks threatening to pull service because they don't like what they see on the site...or from the site trying to get an app onto Google and Apple app stores.

Speaking of which: that's also why Apple is so paranoid about adult content in apps, podcasts, etc. They make a massive amount of cash off their take from app purchases and subscriptions. Even a slight increase in the percentage they pay, due to "risk" or some percentage of the fees going to adult content - means a huge, huge loss in revenue for them. Well, that and I think Tim Cook has internalized a lot of the conservative "gay = child predator" stuff which is why he's so fucking obsessed with Protecting The Children (coughCSAMcough) - but that's another story.

ChatGPT, by the way? They didn't implement prudish (and pretty ineffective) censoring out of some moral code (otherwise they would have better filtered the training set, which clearly contains a LOT of porn), they did it to satisfy their credit card processor. The really big crackdown on naughtiness recently? Notice it happened right when they were submitting their iOS app for approval...

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

#360
post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I asked a specific question and you refuse to answer it because your entire premise is based on not being able to know if someone is engaging in unethical behavior. That's premise is seriously flawed.

The problem you're trying solve is caused by lack of competition and near monopoly players. The fix isn't to force those businesses to ignore ethics. The fix is hugely increasing the competition.

Post reply on HN