Live data from Hacker News

Swedes turn against cashlessness

theguardian.com

261–270 of 357 posts

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Yes... I wonder how Nature implemented that...

By dropping transmutative alchemy from the sprint, allowing the implementation of a capability system on top of a now unforgeable subset of existing resources...

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bitcoin failure (I think it is) teaches something. People don't really give each other money. It's kind of illegal. Money is supposed to move between people and companies or companies and companies, not between people. There is no demand for Peter-pays-Paul. In Denmark, the MobilePay system is massive , and challenging credit card payments. It is designed entirely for person-to-person payments, and only later add…

Sweden has Swish with over 4 million users. Norway also has a hugely popular p2p payment app called Vipps with 2.7 million users. Disclaimer: I work for Vipps AS

Ah, sorry, Swipp was the Danish MobilePay competitor that died due to Danske Bank's disgustingly unfair play (they were part of the Swipp group, but started MobilePay development in the background and launched before Swipp did). I was of course referring to Swish.

MobilePay passed 3 million users in 2016 (out of ~7 million people). I don't have any updated statistics.

Anyway, with your added numbers, it is quite clear that at least in Scandinavia, person to person transfers are very common.

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#263

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…

The bitcoin failure (I think it is) teaches something. People don't really give each other money. It's kind of illegal. Money is supposed to move between people and companies or companies and companies, not between people. There is no demand for Peter-pays-Paul. That last bit, that's a profound observation. There is some real demand, but not much. More so there is theoretical demand. In theory I want the option to pa…

As mentioned elsewhere, "Peter-pays-Paul" is huge in Scandinavia.

MobilePay, a person-to-person payment app in Denmark, is a huge deal here. It had 3 million users in 2016 (out of 7 million people!), and its second-priority shop payment feature (that arrived much later) is challenging credit cards. It's used for everything from selling used goods to splitting bills.

Swish, the Swedish equivalent, has 4 million users.

Vipp, the Norwegian equivalent, has 2.7 million users.

Peter-pays-Paul has huge demand here. Bitcoin is just a terrible solution to that problem.

(uggedal provided the Swedish and Norwegian numbers).

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#264

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…

Cashless transactions don’t have to go through the card networks. Here in New Zealand around 2/3rds of all retail transactions are done via cards because many years ago the reserve bank mandated free inter-bank transactions. This means direct bank-to-bank transactions via the local EFTPOS network are free for both parties (with exceptions for some low-use plans, and businesses typically rent the terminals). Also the…

blows my mind that people overseas still use cash. Literally the only reason I ever get cash out is to buy weed

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#265

As an American, now living in Europe I cannot understand the pushback against cashless systems. In Germany almost every cafe, restaurant, or bar requires you pay with cash. I understand there is a slight charge to the vendor when charging to a credit or bank card, but the amount of time and energy saved by having "exact change" every transaction should increase productivity enough to cover any costs.

Germans are very paranoid about giving their details to anyone: government, banks, corporations, other people. Paying with cash is viewed as a safer way to pay without any number of Big Brothers watching over your shoulder. (The reason for paranoia is the history of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi )

There is also another german word in the realm of centralization - Gleichschaltung. It is nowadays exclusively used to describe the centralization of government functions and bodies during the beginning of the 3rd Reich. Big central government offices, their tracking capabilities and emerging network effects were one of the required precursors for what came later.

It is why many parts of the modern/post-war German bureaucracy were intentionally set up inefficient and why we still dislike any "central databases" for anything, from law enforcement to tax collection. Slow, decoupled government systems slow down unwanted usage patterns much more than valid ones, are generally harder to game (try explaining your urgent need for some data to a rural bavarian city hall employee) and easier to monitor/verify for citizens.

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#266

Looks like most people in this comments section are afraid to pass for a luddite if they don't support cashless transactions. But the argument about centralized system watching every payment you make is still valid. Why are people so eager to jump off something and irreversibly lose its good properties (anonymity, decentralization and reliability in case of analogue money) and that just for the sake of minor comfort?…

The best feature of cash is that it allows you to make anonymous purchases, and to make illegal purchases.

"But I have nothing to hide! I don't want to buy illegal stuff!"

Not right now, maybe. But who decides what's illegal and what's not?

A cashless society is one more step towards turn-key fascism, which is why it has to be opposed.

Also worth noting is that the chairman of the central bank of Sweden basically told the banks to stop whining and continue handling cash.

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#267

Looks like most people in this comments section are afraid to pass for a luddite if they don't support cashless transactions. But the argument about centralized system watching every payment you make is still valid. Why are people so eager to jump off something and irreversibly lose its good properties (anonymity, decentralization and reliability in case of analogue money) and that just for the sake of minor comfort?…

Cash and credit cards are not the only options, anonymous and “offline” payment is also possible. Japan does is for two decades now, any other country could have done the same when introducing crypted transportation cards.

Clinging to an old and limited system because more technically advanced options seem hard and chalenging is a luddite attitude, whatever way you turn it. The way forward is not to go back to cash, but to find or build a better alternative.

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cashless transactions don’t have to go through the card networks. Here in New Zealand around 2/3rds of all retail transactions are done via cards because many years ago the reserve bank mandated free inter-bank transactions. This means direct bank-to-bank transactions via the local EFTPOS network are free for both parties (with exceptions for some low-use plans, and businesses typically rent the terminals). Also the…

blows my mind that people overseas still use cash. Literally the only reason I ever get cash out is to buy weed

It depends a lot on where you go. Both Australia and Canada are easy to go through cashless, except for small stores due to the card fees. I don’t know about Canada but Australia has capped the card fees so debit cards are more popular than in NZ.

Still you don’t really see the vendors at small farmer’s markets with the payclip things like you do in NZ.

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a verb in swedish for this: "I'll swish you 50 crowns" "Can you swish me 200?"

In Denmark "I'll MobilePay you 50 crowns" or "can you MobilePay me 200?", at least when speaking English. My Danish isn't good enough to reliably say what it is when speaking Danish. Probably something like "Jeg mobilepayer dig halvtres¹ kroner" The system in Britain (Paym) hasn't really caught on. They might be less keen to verb a noun. ¹ This is why I avoid discussing numbers in Danish.

It's common parlance around people I know to use "Monzo me a tenner". Monzo has taken off pretty incredibly in some areas, it's just a bank though.

Re: Swedes turn against cashlessness

#270
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see the opposite here in the USA in rural areas. People are constantly holding up the lines because of the chip/pin updates or other failures and confusions. With cash it is always just simple and quick. And I know it doesn't matter but when you pay with a credit card or third party payment service you are not paying. Some other entity is.

It doesn’t help that card terminal/chip card rollout in the US has been catastrophic.

I live in the U.S. and haven't noticed anything catastrophic about it. Am I living in a bubble?
Post reply on HN