5 ms·

> Data surveillance Until an integrated facial recognition POS system becomes standard, in-person transactions using cash are largely anonymous and ephemeral--

> Data surveillance Until an integrated facial recognition POS system becomes standard, in-person transactions using cash are largely anonymous and ephemeral--versus card transactions which produce personally identifiable, long-lived data joined at scale with any other other data an entity has about you. For the first time in history it is economical to surveil an entire population, and a large part of that is because of digital payments databases. > Exclusion Right now anyone who can't get a bank account (a significant number of people, including anyone without a permanent address or lacking personal documentation) is excluded from the digital economy. You have brought up a vague hypothetical that some future group will be excluded from the cash economy, but this is not meaningful until you explain specifically who will be impacted and how this compares with who is currently excluded from the cashless economy. > Censorship Hard cash is certainly not confiscated as easily as a line in a database (for better or worse), and importantly cannot occur with negligible cost at scale. But the censorship does not have to be governmental: card companies and payment processors have crafted their own rules on acceptable behavior and transactions and enforce these rules on the population. See any of the long list of stories about PayPal blocking transactions to a business that was automatically flagged as violating their ToS.

taeric 3y ago
Trust me, your cash usage is far more trackable than you think it is. It is harder than credit, to be sure. Still surprisingly trackable. And I'm sympathetic to the exclusion and censorship concerns. I just don't think cash really solves much there. We had plenty of both well before electronic payments were a thing. Consider, you are worried about people that can't get bank accounts being excluded. But... they aren't really allowed in a cash environment, either. Without a permanent address, it is getting harder to get a license. Without a license or other personal documentation, it is nigh impossible to get a job. These are very real problems. Cash does basically nothing to help there. Note, I'm emphatically not claiming that cashless helps, either. I'm saying it is a completely separate problem that payment systems don't really enter into.
- ramblenode 3y ago
  > Trust me, your cash usage is far more trackable than you think it is. It is harder than credit, to be sure. Still surprisingly trackable. Tracing cash money back to a specific person requires the time and resources of dedicated forensic experts and is fraught with uncertainty. There is not just a big but an astronomical difference in the ease of tracking electronic transactions vs. cash. The difference is so huge that surveillance and policing are now being automated at scale for the first time in history. > Consider, you are worried about people that can't get bank accounts being excluded... Cash does basically nothing to help there. Sure it does. I see homeless people paying for street food in cash. I am aware of battered women who save cash in secret because their bank accounts and phones are controlled by abusive partners. There are subcultures of nomadic people who don't have a permanent address and rely on cash jobs and payments. There are entire microeconomies in many cities that run on cash because their precariat members work under the table and don't have bank accounts.
  - taeric 3y ago
    Ish. If you are just talking about that stick of gum or something else tiny that nobody cares about, sure, cash is easier. If you want to trace larger things, it gets a whole lot easier. Especially with modern AMA laws. Homeless people should be offered homes and food. Not given petty cash to try and get these things. I'm open to the idea that cash is the best we can do today for that. But... that is a pretty weak reason. Housing and food stability are not won with petty cash.
- Canada 3y ago
  > Trust me, your cash usage is far more trackable than you think it is. It is harder than credit, to be sure. Still surprisingly trackable. Are you serious? Okay, how would you figure out what a person purchased at a store 3 years ago on a given date? Can you do that just as well for 1000 people? for 10 million people? > But... they aren't really allowed in a cash environment, either. With cash, anyone can walk into a store and buy food. Without cash, people would be completely at the mercy of others to help them. > Without a license or other personal documentation, it is nigh impossible to get a job. With cash, it's absolutely possible to offer labor in exchange for money without any ID.

taeric 3y ago

Trust me, your cash usage is far more trackable than you think it is. It is harder than credit, to be sure. Still surprisingly trackable. And I'm sympathetic to the exclusion and censorship concerns. I just don't think cash really solves much there. We had plenty of both well before electronic payments were a thing. Consider, you are worried about people that can't get bank accounts being excluded. But... they aren't really allowed in a cash environment, either. Without a permanent address, it is getting harder to get a license. Without a license or other personal documentation, it is nigh impossible to get a job. These are very real problems. Cash does basically nothing to help there. Note, I'm emphatically not claiming that cashless helps, either. I'm saying it is a completely separate problem that payment systems don't really enter into.

ramblenode 3y ago
> Trust me, your cash usage is far more trackable than you think it is. It is harder than credit, to be sure. Still surprisingly trackable. Tracing cash money back to a specific person requires the time and resources of dedicated forensic experts and is fraught with uncertainty. There is not just a big but an astronomical difference in the ease of tracking electronic transactions vs. cash. The difference is so huge that surveillance and policing are now being automated at scale for the first time in history. > Consider, you are worried about people that can't get bank accounts being excluded... Cash does basically nothing to help there. Sure it does. I see homeless people paying for street food in cash. I am aware of battered women who save cash in secret because their bank accounts and phones are controlled by abusive partners. There are subcultures of nomadic people who don't have a permanent address and rely on cash jobs and payments. There are entire microeconomies in many cities that run on cash because their precariat members work under the table and don't have bank accounts.
- taeric 3y ago
  Ish. If you are just talking about that stick of gum or something else tiny that nobody cares about, sure, cash is easier. If you want to trace larger things, it gets a whole lot easier. Especially with modern AMA laws. Homeless people should be offered homes and food. Not given petty cash to try and get these things. I'm open to the idea that cash is the best we can do today for that. But... that is a pretty weak reason. Housing and food stability are not won with petty cash.
Canada 3y ago
> Trust me, your cash usage is far more trackable than you think it is. It is harder than credit, to be sure. Still surprisingly trackable. Are you serious? Okay, how would you figure out what a person purchased at a store 3 years ago on a given date? Can you do that just as well for 1000 people? for 10 million people? > But... they aren't really allowed in a cash environment, either. With cash, anyone can walk into a store and buy food. Without cash, people would be completely at the mercy of others to help them. > Without a license or other personal documentation, it is nigh impossible to get a job. With cash, it's absolutely possible to offer labor in exchange for money without any ID.