3 ms·
That’s just it though, I disagree that governments will have “full control” in that situation, they can only lose control as this technology becomes adopted. T
by save_ferris 6y ago
That’s just it though, I disagree that governments will have “full control” in that situation, they can only lose control as this technology becomes adopted.
They gain nothing while taking on a private partner, one that has an abhorrent history of privacy abuse. It’s so hard to see the benefit for anyone other than Facebook in this
- I_am_tiberius 6y agoPlease consider that just because Facebook is allowed to trade dollars in a digital way, it doesn't mean that they can produce dollars. Production is still in the hands of governments. Privacy wise I'm full on your side. But I still think it's also a benefit for governments - they'll lose on one side but gain on the other. Cash is a burden for them.
- save_ferris 6y agoMaintaining cash currency will cost the US roughly $877M[0], out of the Federal Government’s $4.7T budget, or 0.01% of the Federal budget. So in your view, sacrificing people’s privacy by giving this sensitive data to Facebook and ceding the government’s distribution control for what amounts to minuscule savings is worth it? Just for scale, if you were operating a $100k budget, you’d be saving $10 while giving a private company immense control of the financial system. How do you justify that? 0: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12771.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12771.htm
- I_am_tiberius 6y agoSorry, I don't understand your answer as I'm clearly against Facebook's strategy. And so are you as I understand.