7 ms·

Cashless societies terrify me. So easy to control people when you can decide what and with whom they can transact with.

by spaceman_2020 4y ago

m4rtink 4y ago
Well, with most salaries going to bank accounts it's half way there already, isn't it ?
- FpUser 4y ago
  Well you can still take cash out and hide it under the mattress ;)
  - imtringued 4y ago
    How to generate unemployment 101.
- luckylion 4y ago
  Especially since it's more common now to pay digitally and not get cash from the bank and then use it in every day shopping. I've adopted it too when merchants strongly encouraged it during the lock downs, and it's just so easy, I've kept it. I do spend more, but I don't know if there's a causal relationship -- would handing over bank notes make me more aware of what and how much I'm buying?
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Also if you think of payment flows. I would guess that less than a dozen operators on average in each country cover nearly all of payments. And top 3-4 likely vast majority. For Europe I believe VISA+MC, SEPA and maybe one or two domestic solutions handle most of transactions.
  - m4rtink 4y ago
    This is already an issues when global/regional payment processors start to apply either their local law or questionable company policies in the whole region or globally. Payment processors being a near monopoly, this has a disproportionate effect.
- whywhywhywhy 4y ago
  CDBC is way beyond that, it allows things like if someone has taken too many flights that year, bought too much sugar or alcohol that month you could make the offending purchases or all their purchases more expensive to penalize them. Or you know if they had a bad social credit score, too bad now your morning coffee costs 1.5X of the person next to you, maybe reconsider your actions. Few reasons to implement this stuff unless that's your endgame.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Marginal sales taxes make more sense to me than marginal income taxes. You consume more resources, you pay more.
  - adql 4y ago
    You can do that now already. Only thing making it not legal is law. Sure, with paper money you could just take it out of the bank and pay directly but you can do stuff to that too like making it more expensive to take out then track people who just take out big sums of money Like, sure, all electronic makes it easier, but it is by no means impossible or even hard now. Again, only thing stopping it is the law, if that is fucked doesn't matter how money are transferred
- spaceman_2020 4y ago
  It's never a problem if its one of many options. It only becomes a problem if it's mandated. If you can only get paid/pay digitally, it becomes incredibly easy to track you. There are some people who have a legitimate, non-criminal reason to hide their work.
alkonaut 4y ago
Any good implementation of a central bank digital currency should have some anonymity handling, or it's not really a good cash replacement (Unless the goal all along was monitoring, which of course will be the case in some countries). Being able to spend $500 on something without anyone knowing is important. As is not beig able to launder $5M without anyone noticing. "Tomatoes, not diamonds" is the key feature here.
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago
  That's the kicker; I don't believe there's any government that wants anonymous digital cash. If anything, they want to be the only ones that can track it.
  - alkonaut 4y ago
    Now you are assuming that "governments" and "citizens" are two disjoint groups with different agendas. That's a really bleak way of looking at it, at least in functioning democracies. I'd certainly protest loudly if some sort of anonymity wasn't part of the plan at every step. I was happy to see at least some footnotes from a recent pilot CDBC mentioning this. https://www.riksbank.se/globalassets/media/rapporter/e-krona/2022/e-krona-pilot-phase-2.pdf https://www.riksbank.se/globalassets/media/rapporter/e-krona... It's bascically exactly how the bank+card+cash system works. When I purchase a car with a bank transfer, it's easily traceable. When I purchase a guitar with my card, it's traceable. But if I really want to buy something untracably I go to an ATM and get cash. Similarly in any CDBC that citizens shouldn't be protesting loudly about, you can simply grab cash-like tokens. They might have an amount cap, but so does cash. You could never really go and fetch an unlimited amount of cash without having authorities ask questions due to KYC requirements.
    - mnky9800n 4y ago
      the question becomes, are systems that are made up of humans making decisions, organisms themselves that make decisions against the humans within the system?
    - 4y ago
FpUser 4y ago
It is one thing to be connected when it augments things and provides lots of benefits. But instead of adding we are moving many vital services into digital always connected realm to the point where they will not function without Internet connection. One day it will blow big time in our faces. I mean we already have warnings here and there like recent ROGERS outage disabling phone services including 911 emergency calls.
jqpabc123 4y ago
So easy to control people when you can decide what and with whom they can transact with. Surprise! Your bank and credit card company can do that now. As being proposed in the USA, a CBDC will only affect settlement transactions between banks. Everything else will stay exactly the way it is now except transactions will be much faster with settlements taking place in real time, 24/7/365 instead of only during "bankers hours". You'll be able to split the dinner check with a friend by putting money in his account instantly at the dinner table. And this is all much closer than most people realize. It is in trials now and expected to go live in mid-2023. https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow
- snapcaster 4y ago
  But we currently have the option to bypass those restrictions if we want. Isn't it concerning that these systems might become more or less "mandatory" at some point?
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    Anything imaginable *might* become "mandatory" at some point. As of right now, no one is proposing to change anything at the consumer level. The only impact will be faster, easier transactions.
    - snapcaster 4y ago
      So you put this becoming more or less mandatory in the future at roughly the same odds that wearing pink unitards will become mandatory? Any system like this that provides the capacity for heavy centralized control and censorship will at the very least have people attempting to leverage it to their own ends right? Not saying they will succeed but I think it rises above the level of "any random shit might become mandatory" right?
      - jqpabc123 4y ago
        I put the odds in the same category as the military overthrowing the civilian government. It has happened around the world, so we know the threat is very real --- people have leveraged the military to their own ends, right? So by your same logic, we need to oppose, resist and abolish the military now before it's too late.
1letterunixname 4y ago
Yep. China is a prime example. If you don't have access to a handful of apps, you're effectively unable to eat or do anything else. Elsewhere, when a business touts itself as cashless, I consider if they're discouraging armed robbery and/or hostile to the unbanked.

Cashless societies terrify me. So easy to control people when you can decide what and with whom they can transact with.

m4rtink 4y ago

Well, with most salaries going to bank accounts it's half way there already, isn't it ?

FpUser 4y ago
Well you can still take cash out and hide it under the mattress ;)
- imtringued 4y ago
  How to generate unemployment 101.
luckylion 4y ago
Especially since it's more common now to pay digitally and not get cash from the bank and then use it in every day shopping. I've adopted it too when merchants strongly encouraged it during the lock downs, and it's just so easy, I've kept it. I do spend more, but I don't know if there's a causal relationship -- would handing over bank notes make me more aware of what and how much I'm buying?
Ekaros 4y ago
Also if you think of payment flows. I would guess that less than a dozen operators on average in each country cover nearly all of payments. And top 3-4 likely vast majority. For Europe I believe VISA+MC, SEPA and maybe one or two domestic solutions handle most of transactions.
- m4rtink 4y ago
  This is already an issues when global/regional payment processors start to apply either their local law or questionable company policies in the whole region or globally. Payment processors being a near monopoly, this has a disproportionate effect.
whywhywhywhy 4y ago
CDBC is way beyond that, it allows things like if someone has taken too many flights that year, bought too much sugar or alcohol that month you could make the offending purchases or all their purchases more expensive to penalize them. Or you know if they had a bad social credit score, too bad now your morning coffee costs 1.5X of the person next to you, maybe reconsider your actions. Few reasons to implement this stuff unless that's your endgame.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Marginal sales taxes make more sense to me than marginal income taxes. You consume more resources, you pay more.
- adql 4y ago
  You can do that now already. Only thing making it not legal is law. Sure, with paper money you could just take it out of the bank and pay directly but you can do stuff to that too like making it more expensive to take out then track people who just take out big sums of money Like, sure, all electronic makes it easier, but it is by no means impossible or even hard now. Again, only thing stopping it is the law, if that is fucked doesn't matter how money are transferred
spaceman_2020 4y ago
It's never a problem if its one of many options. It only becomes a problem if it's mandated. If you can only get paid/pay digitally, it becomes incredibly easy to track you. There are some people who have a legitimate, non-criminal reason to hide their work.

alkonaut 4y ago

Any good implementation of a central bank digital currency should have some anonymity handling, or it's not really a good cash replacement (Unless the goal all along was monitoring, which of course will be the case in some countries). Being able to spend $500 on something without anyone knowing is important. As is not beig able to launder $5M without anyone noticing. "Tomatoes, not diamonds" is the key feature here.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago
That's the kicker; I don't believe there's any government that wants anonymous digital cash. If anything, they want to be the only ones that can track it.
- alkonaut 4y ago
  Now you are assuming that "governments" and "citizens" are two disjoint groups with different agendas. That's a really bleak way of looking at it, at least in functioning democracies. I'd certainly protest loudly if some sort of anonymity wasn't part of the plan at every step. I was happy to see at least some footnotes from a recent pilot CDBC mentioning this. https://www.riksbank.se/globalassets/media/rapporter/e-krona/2022/e-krona-pilot-phase-2.pdf https://www.riksbank.se/globalassets/media/rapporter/e-krona... It's bascically exactly how the bank+card+cash system works. When I purchase a car with a bank transfer, it's easily traceable. When I purchase a guitar with my card, it's traceable. But if I really want to buy something untracably I go to an ATM and get cash. Similarly in any CDBC that citizens shouldn't be protesting loudly about, you can simply grab cash-like tokens. They might have an amount cap, but so does cash. You could never really go and fetch an unlimited amount of cash without having authorities ask questions due to KYC requirements.
  - mnky9800n 4y ago
    the question becomes, are systems that are made up of humans making decisions, organisms themselves that make decisions against the humans within the system?
  - 4y ago

FpUser 4y ago

It is one thing to be connected when it augments things and provides lots of benefits. But instead of adding we are moving many vital services into digital always connected realm to the point where they will not function without Internet connection. One day it will blow big time in our faces. I mean we already have warnings here and there like recent ROGERS outage disabling phone services including 911 emergency calls.

jqpabc123 4y ago

So easy to control people when you can decide what and with whom they can transact with. Surprise! Your bank and credit card company can do that now. As being proposed in the USA, a CBDC will only affect settlement transactions between banks. Everything else will stay exactly the way it is now except transactions will be much faster with settlements taking place in real time, 24/7/365 instead of only during "bankers hours". You'll be able to split the dinner check with a friend by putting money in his account instantly at the dinner table. And this is all much closer than most people realize. It is in trials now and expected to go live in mid-2023. https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow

snapcaster 4y ago
But we currently have the option to bypass those restrictions if we want. Isn't it concerning that these systems might become more or less "mandatory" at some point?
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  Anything imaginable *might* become "mandatory" at some point. As of right now, no one is proposing to change anything at the consumer level. The only impact will be faster, easier transactions.
  - snapcaster 4y ago
    So you put this becoming more or less mandatory in the future at roughly the same odds that wearing pink unitards will become mandatory? Any system like this that provides the capacity for heavy centralized control and censorship will at the very least have people attempting to leverage it to their own ends right? Not saying they will succeed but I think it rises above the level of "any random shit might become mandatory" right?
    - jqpabc123 4y ago
      I put the odds in the same category as the military overthrowing the civilian government. It has happened around the world, so we know the threat is very real --- people have leveraged the military to their own ends, right? So by your same logic, we need to oppose, resist and abolish the military now before it's too late.

1letterunixname 4y ago

Yep. China is a prime example. If you don't have access to a handful of apps, you're effectively unable to eat or do anything else. Elsewhere, when a business touts itself as cashless, I consider if they're discouraging armed robbery and/or hostile to the unbanked.