I know the part about the government will be unpopular in some circles, but
Imo it’s the government’s job to facilitate trade and provide currency. Nowadays, digital trade is the norm, so the government needs to facilitate a digital currency that is functionally identical to cash. No fees (neither transaction nor accounting), no tracking, no restrictions on how to use it. Ideally, it works offline.
I’m eagerly awaiting what becomes of the digital Euro wallet.
It’s so weird that digital infrastructure is still treated so different from traditional infrastructure in so many ways. Plumbing and electrical networks are run by the state, why not treat fibre networks the same way? Same with digital vs traditional cash.
Especially when most actual network improvements are paid for directly by the government/taxpayer yet magically become the property of private companies.
I still don’t understand what Visa and MasterCard do that justifies 5% of every transaction. Computers have made their job infinitly easier, yet their fee has remained the same.
There isn’t much more they can surveil with a digital euro that they can’t yet with how banking works today. Everything is controlled.
So, between a controlled banking system and a controlled bankless/facilitatorless digital euro, I’ll pick the one that doesn’t give away my money to the financial world.
Any transaction is a request from one to another entity, with some authority registering the exchange of funds. Even bitcoin works like this, where the authority is the consensus of the network, instead of a bank.
Any system without some central authority seems impossible to keep safe from fraud to me. But while I’m skeptical, I’d love to be proven wrong here.
As someone replied before me, monero is one example. There is more, though.
But that’s never going to be government promoted, and I’ll be content with any form of digital currency, cause fuck the banks taking a share of every transaction :')
That would happen in an ideal society but at that point you basically have cash. Cash works offline but a digital currency wouldnt because there is no way to prove that youre the one who has the money. This way an offline transaction could be used to basically duolicate money and the first one to reconnect to the network would get the money. But idk, there are much smartee people than me, they can probably figure something out.
Fully offline is of course impossible. But it can be partially offline. Blockchain, for instance, doesn’t require an internet connection to prove that a transaction is possible, but it does need an internet connection to submit and settle. So you would not need an internet connection to pay, the merchant does to accept payment. Similarly to how this works today with card payments.
the government needs to facilitate a digital currency that is functionally identical to cash. No fees (neither transaction nor accounting), no tracking, no restrictions on how to use it. Ideally, it works offline.
This will happen sooner or later because cash and crypto are currencies of criminals and tax evaders.
I know the part about the government will be unpopular in some circles, but
Imo it’s the government’s job to facilitate trade and provide currency. Nowadays, digital trade is the norm, so the government needs to facilitate a digital currency that is functionally identical to cash. No fees (neither transaction nor accounting), no tracking, no restrictions on how to use it. Ideally, it works offline.
I’m eagerly awaiting what becomes of the digital Euro wallet.
It’s so weird that digital infrastructure is still treated so different from traditional infrastructure in so many ways. Plumbing and electrical networks are run by the state, why not treat fibre networks the same way? Same with digital vs traditional cash.
Especially when most actual network improvements are paid for directly by the government/taxpayer yet magically become the property of private companies.
Or better yet are paid for by the taxpayers. Not even remotely delivered on. Then hand waived with no consequences.
https://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/the-42-billion-internet-program-that-has-connected-0-people
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-book-of-broken-promis_b_5839394
Oh want to do some crimes? Where’s our cut?
https://www.techspot.com/news/102798-fcc-slaps-top-telecom-companies-200-million-fines.html
Because there’s profit to be made and that’s how the EU works, can’t be allowed to centralize networks even if it’s way more efficient
You must be delusional if you think anything good will come of digital euro.
It will be nothing but a mass surveillance tool. And another step towards the abolition of cash.
As opposed to Visa/Mastercard?
Currently, there are only concepts and promises. They promise the wallet will be p2p, anonymous, and non-traceable. We’ll see if that’s the case.
I still don’t understand what Visa and MasterCard do that justifies 5% of every transaction. Computers have made their job infinitly easier, yet their fee has remained the same.
It’s called “we’re a duopoly so fuck you guys”
It’s amazing how people can’t see that cash is the next freedom they will take awzy from us.
There isn’t much more they can surveil with a digital euro that they can’t yet with how banking works today. Everything is controlled.
So, between a controlled banking system and a controlled bankless/facilitatorless digital euro, I’ll pick the one that doesn’t give away my money to the financial world.
“No tracking” is the one we’re least likely to get, since the.Christians want to.be a me to control what you spend it on
How would untrackable digital currency even work?
Any transaction is a request from one to another entity, with some authority registering the exchange of funds. Even bitcoin works like this, where the authority is the consensus of the network, instead of a bank.
Any system without some central authority seems impossible to keep safe from fraud to me. But while I’m skeptical, I’d love to be proven wrong here.
https://www.getmonero.org/
As someone replied before me, monero is one example. There is more, though.
But that’s never going to be government promoted, and I’ll be content with any form of digital currency, cause fuck the banks taking a share of every transaction :')
That would happen in an ideal society but at that point you basically have cash. Cash works offline but a digital currency wouldnt because there is no way to prove that youre the one who has the money. This way an offline transaction could be used to basically duolicate money and the first one to reconnect to the network would get the money. But idk, there are much smartee people than me, they can probably figure something out.
Fully offline is of course impossible. But it can be partially offline. Blockchain, for instance, doesn’t require an internet connection to prove that a transaction is possible, but it does need an internet connection to submit and settle. So you would not need an internet connection to pay, the merchant does to accept payment. Similarly to how this works today with card payments.
This will happen sooner or later because cash and crypto are currencies of criminals and tax evaders.