In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously • Hacker News Board

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#81

Post by caylus » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:20 AM UTC

adriand wrote: post #57

I agree that this needs to be taken very seriously. However, the author overstates his case significantly when he writes: > Doing this to someone—a small business owner in BC, a public servant in Winnipeg, a student in Halifax—who made a small donation to support the convoy is a clear abuse of power. However: > The RCMP, banking sector and federal government said Monday that account-freezing powers bestowed under the…

If anything this reinforces the author's point about the dangers of lack of transparency of "digital jail". How do we know that statement is true? It's hard to hide who has been jailed (though "disappearances" come close), whereas we have no choice but to take the word of the entity which we have granted unchecked power that it has not abused that power.

There's also plenty of wiggle room in their statement - they said they froze the accounts of "influencers" and people they "suspect" committed illegal acts. If it turns out they did in fact freeze someone who just donated, they didn't technically lie if they can fit them into one of those vague groups.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#82

Post by ddingus » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:21 AM UTC

jakobdabo wrote: post #13

throwaway22032 wrote: post #3

The simple answer is to reject the cashless society. In the medium to long term it's simply incompatible with any reasonable definition of freedom. Surveillance is bad enough, but a system that allows governments to arbitrarily "turn off" thousands or millions of people at the push of a button is too powerful to not be abused. Even the mere existence of such a system has a chilling effect. Which I suspect is precisel…

> The simple answer is to reject the cashless society. No, that battle is lost. Cashless is easier and more convenient, it's hard to beat that. We need more constitutional human rights. It's not okay to take or freeze somebody's money/property without any court decision. Edit: some of the answers assume that I'm against cash or that by saying "battle is lost" I mean cash is gone; My point of "cashless winning" is tha…

I agree on rights and mapping them into the digital space.

That is long overdue.

However, until we actually do move past this "wild west" digital time, rejecting it is reasonable and prudent behavior.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#83

Post by throwaway22032 » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:21 AM UTC

jaredandrews wrote: post #62

jakobdabo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple answer is to reject the cashless society. No, that battle is lost. Cashless is easier and more convenient, it's hard to beat that. We need more constitutional human rights. It's not okay to take or freeze somebody's money/property without any court decision. Edit: some of the answers assume that I'm against cash or that by saying "battle is lost" I mean cash is gone; My point of "cashless winning" is tha…

Your last sentence sounds like civil forfeiture and I certainly think it should be outlawed. As far as cashless society winning, I dunno, I'm definitely worried about that outcome, but it's straight up illegal in my state to not to accept cash in a retail establishment and a good number of bars I go to don't accept cards at all. I use cash all the time and I find it way more convenient than a credit or debit card. My…

Agree with this.

I've always found that people throw around this word "inconvenience" without even defining it. It makes no sense to me.

Both paying for and accepting payment for things in person are strictly easier for me to do in cash. It's literally just handing over a bit of paper.

There's always some resort to "but I don't have cash". Well duh, that's a circular argument. If you don't use cash you don't have cash and so you don't have cash. Try harder.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#84

Post by DoreenMichele » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:21 AM UTC

zdragnar wrote: post #75

bugbuddy wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Driving is also easier and more convenient than walking but it would be absurd to suggest that everyone should have a car available for them to drive as a constitutional human rights. Another counter point is that cash is arguably easier and more convenient in some aspects for some people.

Nit: owning property is a constitutional right. Compelling someone else to provide it for you with the force of law is not.

Yeah, it's a driver's license that's a privilege not a right. Own all the cars you want. Create a car museum if that's your thing and you've got the funds.

But behave if you want to actually legally drive any of them.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#85

Post by fuckcensorship » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:21 AM UTC

xiphias2 wrote: post #33

MithrilTuxedo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought cashlessness without a trusted third party was a solved problem. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Satoshi called it digital cash actually for a reason, not cashlessness. It has similar properties to physical cash, as the ownership can't be taken away trivially. The problem is that people are still waking up slowly. For me the Cyprus bail-in in 2013 was the wake-up call that I need full ownership of my assets.

The key issue with using Bitcoin as a digital form of cash is that Bitcoin lacks a key property of cash: fungibility. Combine this with the transparent nature of Bitcoin's blockchain and you have a currency which is an authoritarian's dream and not a currency that could/should replace cash.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#86

Post by reaperducer » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:22 AM UTC

forty wrote: post #42

forty wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you pay taxes in cash? I don't think it's possible in my country.

Also as noted in the article, things like electricity, internet and other utility cannot be paid in cash either here.

Also as noted in the article, things like electricity, internet and other utility cannot be paid in cash either here.

In the United States you can.

Almost all bills, utility and otherwise, can be paid for in cash at most supermarkets or other money-handling businesses. ("Currency exchanges" in Chicago, or whatever your local equivalent is.)

Also, every utility company I've had serving my last five apartments has had a public lobby where people can make cash payments. I suspect even cell phone bills can be paid with cash at a cell phone company's retail store.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#87

Post by ddingus » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:22 AM UTC

forty wrote: post #36

walterbell wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, that battle is lost. Cashless is easier and more convenient. Incorrect, the battle is partly won in several U.S. cities (including NYC & SF) which passed laws to mandate acceptance of cash. However, cash-acceptance laws were mostly motivated by the unbanked, who are now being used to justify the introduction of nation-state CBDCs. China's CBDC is two-tier and preserves retail bank competition. People close to t…

Can you pay taxes in cash? I don't think it's possible in my country.

My cash says, "Legal Tender For All Debts Public and Private."

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#88

Post by pdonis » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:22 AM UTC

throwaway22032 wrote: post #3

The simple answer is to reject the cashless society. In the medium to long term it's simply incompatible with any reasonable definition of freedom. Surveillance is bad enough, but a system that allows governments to arbitrarily "turn off" thousands or millions of people at the push of a button is too powerful to not be abused. Even the mere existence of such a system has a chilling effect. Which I suspect is precisel…

> The simple answer is to reject the cashless society.

We can't. Too many transactions are conducted remotely now, and you can't send cash over a phone line or over the Internet. And having those transactions remote is not just a minor convenience; in many cases the transactions would not happen at all if they had to happen in person, and a lot of wealth creation would not take place.

The simple answer is, as the article says, to view freezing people's bank accounts and credit cards as a punishment at least as serious as imprisonment, and to view doing it without first having a trial as at least as serious as imprisoning people indefinitely without trial. Right now most people do not view it that way, and governments reach for freezing assets as a tool of first resort because they do not view it as having serious political consequences. That is what needs to change.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#89

Post by stickfigure » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:22 AM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #22

jakobdabo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple answer is to reject the cashless society. No, that battle is lost. Cashless is easier and more convenient, it's hard to beat that. We need more constitutional human rights. It's not okay to take or freeze somebody's money/property without any court decision. Edit: some of the answers assume that I'm against cash or that by saying "battle is lost" I mean cash is gone; My point of "cashless winning" is tha…

> No, that battle is lost. Cashless is easier and more convenient. Incorrect, the battle is partly won in several U.S. cities (including NYC & SF) which passed laws to mandate acceptance of cash. However, cash-acceptance laws were mostly motivated by the unbanked, who are now being used to justify the introduction of nation-state CBDCs. China's CBDC is two-tier and preserves retail bank competition. People close to t…

> Incorrect, the battle is partly won...

Not in the slightest. You can mandate that people accept cash, but you can't force people to pay with it. The writing is on the wall; barring some sort of major social upheaval, cashless will be more dominant in the future. It's just too convenient.

So let's figure out what kind of benign future we actually can build. "Everyone decides to use cash again" just isn't going to happen.

Re: In our cashless society, we need to take digital jail seriously

#90

Post by henryfjordan » Wed, Feb 23, 2022, 12:22 AM UTC

ska wrote: post #41

henryfjordan wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Massachusetts says you owe money, they must accept cash. That's the point of cash being "legal tender", you cannot refuse it if someone is trying to settle a debt. That said, it might be really hard to figure out how to pay in cash.

That's potentially interesting: legal tender means it must be accepted to settle certain debts and contractual obligations, but it doesn't mean you must accept it for transactions. Something like EZ pass seems potentially gray area; can they just say "well don't use these roads if you don't like the payment terms" ? I suspect you are right that with a state agency they probably have to provide some way for you to set…

If there was a gate at the entrance to the road and they verified you had an EZ Pass before letting you drive onto their road, sure. It's the same as a coffee shop not giving you any coffee until you've paid using a credit card.

If they put up a sign that said "don't use these roads if you don't like the payment terms" and then you drove on the road anyway, that would technically form a contract between EZ Pass and the driver. However, contracts are made to be broken and any damages would be payable in cash so we're back to the start.

The legal tender thing has nothing to do with the agency being part of the state. Private debtors must also accept cash.