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

681–690 of 717 posts

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

#681

Post by tchaffee »

x-complexity wrote: post #493
lazide wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

> Because arresting people requires evidence and due process, which is work. Such work is paramount in order to maintain the foundations of an accountable society. The alternative being suggested here is no better than witch hunting in the worst case, wherein certain groups/classes of people are barred from doing their business online just because of the sensitive nature of a given topic. (drugs/medicine, pornography…

Doing business online is not a basic human right. Access to a fair trial and due process before throwing you in jail is a basic human right. Comparing the two is a major false equivalence.

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

#682

Post by tchaffee »

JohnFen wrote: post #669
lazide wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, people know things all the time without evidence and due process.

The whole reason we have notions of due process and evidence is because people are very commonly wrong when they make these sorts of judgement calls from their gut.

We are talking about denying a payment, not throwing someone in jail.

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

#683

Post by tchaffee »

midoridensha wrote: post #502
lazide wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, people know things all the time without evidence and due process.

They think they know. Many times, they're right too, but sometimes they're wrong. That's why evidence and due process are important.

Evidence and due process are important for convicting someone of a crime. You're not violating a basic human right when you deny a credit card transaction. The requirement for evidence and due process should be far lower, if even needed at all.

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

#684

Post by tchaffee »

kubanczyk wrote: post #679
tchaffee wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you know it's for human trafficking? It's a thought experiment. There are surely cases in life in which you know for sure that crime is being committed. What you're asking for though is that due criminal process be a part of denying a payment. Which seems extremely heavy handed. If my payment processing company doesn't want to help sell guns, or help with human trafficking, or hell, doesn't want to support t…

> There are surely cases in life in which you know for sure that crime is being committed These are the cases of having evidence, right? Which should be reported. > I should be able to run my business according to those ethical choices. My company isn't sending someone to jail. They are just refusing to accept a payment. There is no need for due criminal process to refuse a payment. And if two or three large business…

> if two or three large businesses cover 99% of a given market (payment market), how about some anti-monopolistic legal protections?

Yes, that's the actual problem. Breaking up the existing near-monopoly and creating a functioning market with thousands of competitors would be a far better solution than trying to force the existing payment processors to process all payments, regardless of risk or ethical considerations.

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

#685

Post by [deleted] »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #299
medler wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So should everyone simply disregard any laws they disagree with, provided they can get away with it? Where does it end?

Obviously yes. If you don't agree with a law and there is close to no chance of getting caught then why follow it?

[deleted]

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

#686

Post by thedirt0115 »

autoexec wrote: post #677
usernew wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They key is, the payment processor would not know, because they should not have the ability to ask. What's needed here, is a replacement for cash. Nothing more, nothing less. The digital dollar wallet, with a number and a passcode that only you have. And you can send that to another wallet number. That is the scope, and the complete scope. Bitcoin w/o the blockchain. This should be provided by a government, not a ban…

> The court looked at the wife's toll records, showing she comes home from work real late, and that would impact the quality of life for kids. Boy, I bet she never thought she'd lose her kids by using a toll tag. Do you have a source for that? Google wasn't being helpful.

This got me interested as well. I couldn't find the specific incident they were referring to with a brief search, but I did find this, which implies that toll data can be and has been used in child custody disputes, etc: https://familylawyermagazine.com/articles/i-pass-tollway-dat...

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

#687

Post by tphyahoo2 »

scoofy wrote: post #524
tphyahoo2 wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Without bitcoin, you collect the ransom in gold with a dead drop." maybe you missed the bit about gold.

I wouldn’t have much idea how to purchase that much physical gold in a short time, and if I did, I’d surely get a call from my bank.

I'm sure the kidnapper could help you with that.

Curent ransomware helpfully tells you where to buy bitcoin.

Btw as a bitcoin maxi, this doesn't make me happy.

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

#688

Post by qingcharles »

no_time wrote: post #573
qingcharles wrote: post #362

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…

>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. What stores? How do they serve kids and old people?

All sorts of stores. These are all regular stores who for some reason suddenly are unable to process cash, including Chipotle, McDonald's, Dollar General and more. They will say "CARDS ONLY".

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

#689

Post by qingcharles »

htag wrote: post #541
qingcharles wrote: post #362

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…

1. Why did you lose the ability? 2. What efforts were required to regain the ability?

Going to jail for a long time. When you get out you have no ID, you're a nonperson. It can be very difficult to get things like ID, then Internet connection to try and get bank accounts etc.

You have to just spend the weeks and months necessary to reboot your entire life from the ground up to be able to use electronic money.

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

#690

Post by neom »

thesz wrote: post #674
neom wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's hardly "changing the law" - that was invoking an existing law in the face of a valid national security risk. Granted law makers voted to extend the law slightly, never the less, the law has always existed in Canada. I would never want to live in a Canada where payment processors are blind to transactions and the government couldn't freeze accounts of extremists/terrorists.

Define extremists/terrorists, again. Be sure to define it in such a way that you can't be labeled as such in any cicumstances.

Why would I be sure to define it in such a way that I can't be labeled as such in any circumstance? I'm not afraid to work against my own self interest in the name of a better situation for the collective. What happened in Ottawa as a bunch of self-centered ego maniacs with extreme views terrorizing the people of that city. Never mind the bank accounts: they should have been jailed for life.
Post reply on HN