181–190 of 357 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The network can still run between those two people alone (if consolidation is solved).
Nature has an elegant solution to the double-spending problem for physical commodities. If only there was a way to timestamp digital transactions without a write-only ledger...
Cashless transactions require a third party to give permission for the transaction, typically in real-time. It's completely normal to be "basically okay" with that... I use cards/apps to pay on a regular basis. However, it's a long haul between "okay with cashless transactions being a popular payment method", and "eliminating cash."
All the security people I know think that it is possible though, and likely to happen sometime. I feel like the longer it takes, the worse. We need something to shake us out of complacency.
I live in Sweden. No one I know uses cash. I haven't had the need for nor used cash for years. Even if headlines often are overblown, this feels particularly misleading, as it implies that there would be some bigger trend. Considering that many people only read headlines, I'd support a movement for becoming more accurate even with headlines. "In Sweden, some worry about the cashless society" would be way more apt.
The second sentence corrects the sensational headline: "the small but growing number of Swedes anxious about their country’s rush to embrace a cash-free society." It must be very small. The only person I've ever heard complain about it is... myself. Not for the reasons this article gives, though. I'm more upset about Visa and Mastercard skimming 1% of profit off of the entire country's retail commerce. Maybe if they…
I live in Sweden. No one I know uses cash. I haven't had the need for nor used cash for years. Even if headlines often are overblown, this feels particularly misleading, as it implies that there would be some bigger trend. Considering that many people only read headlines, I'd support a movement for becoming more accurate even with headlines. "In Sweden, some worry about the cashless society" would be way more apt.
People must still use cash to buy drugs, sex, and that sort of thing no?
Good. The cashless drive gives me the creeps. 1 - First, I like cash. It's tactile and gives me a feel for my spending. 2 - Cards are an duopoly, layered onto an oligopoly. Cashless gives this system a 2% tax on all spending (+ fraud, which retailers pay for). 3 - Government control is creepy too. Liberty reasons, privacy reasons, single-point-of failure reasons. Just simple competency reasons. 4 - It advantages big…
Also the local eBay equivalent TradeMe gained its popularity on this network. Given somebody’s bank account number I can transfer money to their account within an hour (used to be overnight until a few years ago). There’s no reversal for this so it’s safe for the seller, and since it’s a real bank there’s no way to freeze it without a court order.
The banks being banks of course are trying to ruin this, since using the big card networks gives them free revenue.
Good. The cashless drive gives me the creeps. 1 - First, I like cash. It's tactile and gives me a feel for my spending. 2 - Cards are an duopoly, layered onto an oligopoly. Cashless gives this system a 2% tax on all spending (+ fraud, which retailers pay for). 3 - Government control is creepy too. Liberty reasons, privacy reasons, single-point-of failure reasons. Just simple competency reasons. 4 - It advantages big…
What recourse do you have if banks refuse to take your money? If credit card companies refuse to give you a line of credit? I don't know much about that level of infrastructure but it definitely seems ripe for abuse in this way. I don't know what laws govern this and it concerns me how the current system is set up that through activist pressure that people might not be able to sustain themselves for opinions that are declared outside the Overton window.
I live in Sweden. No one I know uses cash. I haven't had the need for nor used cash for years. Even if headlines often are overblown, this feels particularly misleading, as it implies that there would be some bigger trend. Considering that many people only read headlines, I'd support a movement for becoming more accurate even with headlines. "In Sweden, some worry about the cashless society" would be way more apt.
It's about an opposing opinion to the cashless trend that we're already used to.
You might not know anyone who shares the opinion but I do, several of them.
Personally I share the opinion on an ideological level but practically I'm just too lazy to make a real change in my life.
I have friends who always swing by the ATM before we go out, while I pay for everything on my cards.
But the real issue here is that if we rely 100% on an electronic method of payment we'll be more crippled than necessary if some calamity would befall our society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People must still use cash to buy drugs, sex, and that sort of thing no?
These will be provided by a municipal body in cities from now on, parochial for rural areas.
Good. The cashless drive gives me the creeps. 1 - First, I like cash. It's tactile and gives me a feel for my spending. 2 - Cards are an duopoly, layered onto an oligopoly. Cashless gives this system a 2% tax on all spending (+ fraud, which retailers pay for). 3 - Government control is creepy too. Liberty reasons, privacy reasons, single-point-of failure reasons. Just simple competency reasons. 4 - It advantages big…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's not a debtor/creditor relationship in a private retail transaction, at least in the USA. It is an exchange of value, not an extension of credit. A retail store is perfectly permitted to have a "no cash accepted" policy. Even the public transit here generally has a "no cash" policy for fares.
Not in Germany, for example. We still have laws that cash has to be accepted for (almost) any trade.