4 ms·

> It's untraceable Feature of cash, not a bug. It's not the best choice for every situation, but neither is digital, which is why it's important that people ha

> It's untraceable Feature of cash, not a bug. It's not the best choice for every situation, but neither is digital, which is why it's important that people have both options available.

ziikutv 9y ago
Its virtually untraceable. There are ways to find out if the note was new and released by the bank only to that person etc. Which is why the tinfoil me gets change before doing tinfoil purchases xD
trowawee 9y ago
Yeah, the ability to make payments outside of the scope of the panopticon is one of the better arguments in favor of cash and against a completely cashless society.
- hasbroslasher 9y ago
  I'd like to think that in time someone will solve this too by some kind of clever obfuscation, but it's not going to be BoA doing it. It's going to be someone who wants to fuck with their status as a state-sponsored usurer. Or at least I hope. Also consider Bitcoin as a "cashless society" alternative to the financial panopticon - no one's looking over your shoulder there and it's definitely not "cash".
  - trowawee 9y ago
    I'm skeptical about Bitcoin as a potential alternative because I suspect that, if you combine the surveillance abilities of the state and the money of the state with the time and effort of the very many clever people who work for the state, Bitcoin will become substantially less anonymous.
    - AnsemWise 9y ago
      Usually traceable unless you use a tumbler to "clean" your coins, even then it's still traceable I think
  - pteredactyl 9y ago
    If it's digital, it's traceable. If it passes through DARPA wires, or FCC waves, it's traceable. There are ways to obfuscate. But never completely like an 'air-gapped', transaction wherein I hand a cashier $5 in exchange for ice cream. I'm clearly in the 'it's nobody's business except for the parties involved' party...
pteredactyl 9y ago
This. 'Cashless' as in 'cash is illegal' terrifies me. It's nothing more than a force multiplier for the power brokers (banks, govs, etc.). There will always be corruption, theft, etc. But in one scenario, anyone can do it. In another, only the third (one) party can do it. Tell me which is better, oh starry-eyed Valley dreamer?

> It's untraceable Feature of cash, not a bug. It's not the best choice for every situation, but neither is digital, which is why it's important that people have both options available.

ziikutv 9y ago

Its virtually untraceable. There are ways to find out if the note was new and released by the bank only to that person etc. Which is why the tinfoil me gets change before doing tinfoil purchases xD

trowawee 9y ago

Yeah, the ability to make payments outside of the scope of the panopticon is one of the better arguments in favor of cash and against a completely cashless society.

hasbroslasher 9y ago
I'd like to think that in time someone will solve this too by some kind of clever obfuscation, but it's not going to be BoA doing it. It's going to be someone who wants to fuck with their status as a state-sponsored usurer. Or at least I hope. Also consider Bitcoin as a "cashless society" alternative to the financial panopticon - no one's looking over your shoulder there and it's definitely not "cash".
- trowawee 9y ago
  I'm skeptical about Bitcoin as a potential alternative because I suspect that, if you combine the surveillance abilities of the state and the money of the state with the time and effort of the very many clever people who work for the state, Bitcoin will become substantially less anonymous.
  - AnsemWise 9y ago
    Usually traceable unless you use a tumbler to "clean" your coins, even then it's still traceable I think
- pteredactyl 9y ago
  If it's digital, it's traceable. If it passes through DARPA wires, or FCC waves, it's traceable. There are ways to obfuscate. But never completely like an 'air-gapped', transaction wherein I hand a cashier $5 in exchange for ice cream. I'm clearly in the 'it's nobody's business except for the parties involved' party...

pteredactyl 9y ago

This. 'Cashless' as in 'cash is illegal' terrifies me. It's nothing more than a force multiplier for the power brokers (banks, govs, etc.). There will always be corruption, theft, etc. But in one scenario, anyone can do it. In another, only the third (one) party can do it. Tell me which is better, oh starry-eyed Valley dreamer?