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

361–370 of 717 posts

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

#361

Post by pessimizer »

Seattle3503 wrote: post #13

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.

Look what happened to Wikileaks and Assange. I think that was the test that began the slippery slope.

edit:

Wikileaks to sue Visa, Mastercard over "financial blockade"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wikileaks-to-sue-visa-mastercar...

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

#362

Post by qingcharles »

I've just gone several months without access to any electronic money (e.g. debit cards, credit cards, phone etc) and it has been complicated. I've been thrown out of several stores at the checkout because they couldn't or wouldn't take cash.

You also lose the ability to take advantage of many special offers that are available only through retailers apps, e.g. McDonald's. You can get the discounts, free items, nor can you accrue any credit (e.g. Walgreen's Cash) or points towards future discounts.

I also couldn't ride any of the scooters or bicycles in my city that are available everywhere, because it is incredibly difficult or impossible to use cash to access these forms of transport. You can't even use your cash to buy a prepaid debit card as they won't accept prepaid debit cards to rent the items.

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

#363

Post by rsaesha »

lazide wrote: post #356
elzbardico wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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’

What's stopping someone to doing exactly that in the current system?

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

#364

Post by lazide »

codehalo wrote: post #354
lazide wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won't know what?

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

Are you reading what you are writing? People can (and do) know things without having enough evidence to stand up in court. It’s how 99% of everything works, frankly.

Banks right now are denying transactions because they ‘know’ it’s fraud, based on ML models and probability and no other evidence.

If you require someone to not ‘know’ something until they have enough evidence they could prove it in court, they won’t be able to function. Even investigators don’t have to meet that bar.

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

#365

Post by scoofy »

anigbrowl wrote: post #228
scoofy wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might, sure, but it might also have to do with the fact that people carry almost nothing in cash compared to 40+ years ago. In 1985, when I was a child, my father would care around $300 on him effectively at all times. Credit cards were still new, and checks were a limited option, most places you still needed cash. That's the equivalent of $850 today. I rarely carry more than $200 on my person today (less than the…

It's easy to use a stolen credit card, nobody asks for ID. Mugging isn't that uncommon, I interrupted a robbery just over a week ago.

Again, since the system is based on trust, the vast majority of stolen credit cards results in no serious loss of value to the individual.

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

#366

Post by lost_tourist »

arcticbull wrote: post #94
Seattle3503 wrote: post #13

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.

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 personally feel if the business is legal, then CC issuers should have to process it. If they want to be the top 3 or 4 gate keepers, they absolutely need to be completely neutral as long as the payment is legal.

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

#367

Post by inetknght »

colinsane wrote: post #329
onionisafruit wrote: post #116

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 the payment processor knew the transaction was for a contract killing but processed it anyway

If the payment processor knows what your contract is for, it should have an obligation to report it to you. If the payment processor knew the transaction was for contract killing then it should have an obligation to report it to the authorities.

> 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?

No, I think that some parties between the "first" and "last" should be indemnifiable because they provide neutral services that everyone relies on for legal purposes. Without proof that a contract between two parties is illegal, it should be permitted.

Do you have any idea how many employers have unenforceable clauses in their contracts? If you think that payment processors should be held liable for criminal contracts then perhaps we should hold payment processors and banks liable for criminal contracts of all employers.

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

#368

Post by lazide »

rsaesha wrote: post #363
lazide wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What's stopping someone to doing exactly that in the current system?

There is no such central database, for one.

All the transactions are controlled by multiple independent parties, whose interests do not align to do that as they’d lose their customers to their competitors when it came out what was happening.

Some of the data does go through central clearing at some step (ACH, Fedwire), but credit card charges, Zelle, cash, checks deposited at the same bank, etc. do not.

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

#369

Post by Am4TIfIsER0ppos »

walterbell wrote: post #285
Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? There are people in this comment section doing exactly that.

For example?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36117704 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36117435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36117805 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36116663

Then there are the people defending the steps to the cashless society because those steps happened to be on people they didn't like: canadian truckers and pornhub.

I recall one explicit comment I can't find now so I am willing to believe I hallucinated it.

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

#370

Post by ledgerdev »

Seattle3503 wrote: post #13

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.

I also feel strongly we need some sort of semi-local payment system that connects merchants, local banks and customers. Sending a payment to my local municipality should not involve wall street.
Post reply on HN