“Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon”

  • 44 Posts
  • 230 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 24th, 2022

help-circle





















  • So is there a legitimate reason to want to be able to use large amounts of cash

    Before answering this question we should define “a large amount” as it stands today, I, a private citizen with no criminal record, who hasn’t ever been investigated by fiscal authorities in my life, can’t spend more than €2000 in cash or else I’ll face a huge fine and I’ll be automatically considered a “money launderer” and a “financial criminal”

    Now, to answer your question: personal data is digital gold, it’s only natural people don’t want their banks to track every thing they buy, your data won’t just be sold to the highest bidder. It will be sold and shared to the “1683 partners” you see on the cookie banners. Not wanting your financial and spending data to be sold and shared with thousands of (sometimes really malicious) entities. Not wanting the prostitution of your data, and, to the maximum possible extent not participating in this coercitive datamining system (you don’t really have a choice, every bank does this to some often cryptically disclosed if disclosed extent) is the legitimate reason I believe cash is a payment method that, when possible, should be used.

    To clarify my position: I don’t oppose limitations on cash transactions necessarily because I want to buy something like a car with cash, buying a car still requires extensive paperwork and as such most privacy benefits from paying cash vanish instantly. I oppose the marginalization of cash because it’s leading to a bankized societiy, we are seeing it with our very eyes.

    At least where I live you:

    can’t get your paycheck in cash

    can’t withdraw more than an undisclosed amount, else you’re suspicious and may be investigated, without your knowledge (oh, and the burden of proof is on you!)

    Can’t receive many welfare benefits without a bank account

    A bank account is nothing short of mandatory, yet there’s not national bank you can open an account in. School is mandatory, public schools exist.

    Private banks offer many benefits such as:

    Investing in fossil fuel companies.

    Not ensuring a single cent of the money they should keep safe, a national fund ensures up to €100k,but if it was for the banks id let you guess.

    Offering subpar and overpriced investment products with ludicrous fees to unsuspecting and financially illiterate but often hard-working people, eroding their life savings.

    Seeing the above points, I tend to look with distrust at laws, regulations etc that aim at pushing people into banks. People should be able to live their entire life without opening a bank account if they want, and without being judged as criminals.

    It’s not like this is impossible, there are places with way less financial crime than my country, than the USA or other countries who restrict cash who don’t marginalize cash as much, countries such as Japan or Germany.

    but this is a privacy basically nobody chose to have anyway

    If there wasn’t a societal unspoken obligation to have a bank account, many people would have ditched theirs a long time ago, me very much included, people are just coerced into accepting it. Not saying we should live like financial hermits, just that we should stop accepting the status quo, and that many people only use their bank account to receive their salary and withdraw it later, maybe put something away if they can afford it. That shouldn’t require your data to be mined.


  • It’s 100% because they want it to be traceable. I’m not sure, but I think I’m OK with that.

    Yes criminals use cash because it’s private, but criminals also use:

    • E2E encryption
    • VPNs
    • Private operating systems (Linux, Android ROMs)

    Criminals use private technology because they need to hide from the police. That does not mean we need to ban or heavily restrict (current state of cash in parts of the world, such as the USA or the EU) private options and private technologies just because “criminals use them” if you accept a ban on privacy and an increase in surveillance in order to counter criminality, you will receive an omnipotent government and corporations spying on you with a mandate.

    The criminals will just go even more underground. They always adapt, they always had and always will.

    We must not sacrify privacy in exchange for “safety”


  • frippa@lemmy.mltoProgrammer Humor@programming.devHey, I'm new to GitHub!
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Not OP but many Linux project I follow, since they don’t have many resources, publish their releases through Torrent, a seeebox is fairly cheap (something like €10 a month) and could be easily crowdfunded even for a small project, and isn’t a huge expense anyway. And the site could just be a static page, or better yet the magnet link could be aviable on Github for people that want the precompliled binaries instead of the source.

    E: did i say something controversial?