How a cashless society could kill Bitcoin.

[deisik]

Also, it is not clear which government you imply specifically. There are many governments out there, and all of them are different in respect to Bitcoin (if you meant to refer to them collectively). Nevertheless, the government may just have underestimated the potential threat of Bitcoin, and it probably still does so. On the other hand, is there any real threat coming from Bitcoin at all? Surely not if we mean major players like the US, EU, China, and their kind. Smaller governments are irrelevant anyway, even if they choose to outright ban Bitcoin, and they seem to understand that. Paradoxically, Russia also changed their attitude toward Bitcoin eventually, as I got it, mostly because of other big players being more or less loyal toward Bitcoin (so as not to be a black sheep of sorts)

Bitcoin is too small to be a threat right now (so that is another reason to buy it at this price.)  The US-led system has clearly seen it as an asset rather than liability, for the reason I stated.

If the major governments present a united front (as often has been the case when the imperial system was strong, e.g. the IMF stipulates no member may anchor its currency with gold,) and if this united front doesn't want Bitcoin, Bitcoin would probably be dead.

Right now, only the West, plus Japan, Australia, etc. support the imperial system.  Russia and China are not (fully) co-operating, so that is another reason for buying Bitcoin, (similarly for gold in this case.)

So they will have to make it into the UN Security Council to outlaw Bitcoin on a world-wide scale, right? I'm not talking about under what guise or pretext they are going to ban Bitcoin (money laundering, terrorism financing, climate change, etc), my point is that it would mean in effect recognizing Bitcoin as the threat to all "advanced and progressive humanity" as Joseph Stalin put it and, at the same time, its strength. The main issue is that governments today don't have as much power as they had some fifty years ago, and they may lose this battle in the end...

Bitcoin is parasitizing on fiat making use of its weaknesses, and while there is fiat there will be parasites

[virasog]

If you want to look how that might look in the future, look at a company that already functions are entirely electronic payments.
Take a look at Amazon: If Amazon was ordered not to accept Bitcoin, and cash no longer existed in the world, how would one be able to use Bitcoin to purchase things on Amazon?

In order for Bitcoin to work in a world that is hostile against it, it needs the anonymity of cash. What happens when that goes away?
Would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this dilemma I've been having.

What I understand is that you mean that the world is going cashless like only through banks and only through online and without physical money, this is true but this is good for banks as they don't spend money to print them but just by changing the digits on their system but I don't think that this could kill bitcoin because we already see the range of bitcoin and it's popularity.

Remember that it will all take time. But I expect it to happen in next 5 to 10 years. And I don't see how bitcoin will fail when people go cashless. There are only ways for bitcoin to flourish!

[Ndasmu Njeblug]

This is just waiting the time, many peoples said if bitcoin will banned by the government and then will die, but until now its never happen.

[dinofelis]

If the government came out today and declared that Bitcoin cannot be accepted as legal tender for purchases, I believe Bitcoin would find a way. It would find a way only because of the anonymity that today's cash affords people. Cash is the lovely bridge that people use in turning their Bitcoins into value.

Tomorrow though, when there is no longer cash and the only form of payment is electronic, and where all electronic payments are handled by auditable pools of companies, what will happen?

Unless one implements a form of anonymity in bitcoin, bitcoin is a privacy hell as compared to electronic fiat cash.  In fact, I guess it would be a dream for all agencies of whatever nature that want to audit people for their behaviour, that people use bitcoin.  Bitcoin is a privacy nightmare with its transparent ledger as it stands today.  Electronic cash (fiat) can only be audited with a special request, but the block chain is open to read and analyse for anyone.  It propagates real world knowledge of transactions like a bush fire.

[oblivi]

Also, it is not clear which government you imply specifically. There are many governments out there, and all of them are different in respect to Bitcoin (if you meant to refer to them collectively). Nevertheless, the government may just have underestimated the potential threat of Bitcoin, and it probably still does so. On the other hand, is there any real threat coming from Bitcoin at all? Surely not if we mean major players like the US, EU, China, and their kind. Smaller governments are irrelevant anyway, even if they choose to outright ban Bitcoin, and they seem to understand that. Paradoxically, Russia also changed their attitude toward Bitcoin eventually, as I got it, mostly because of other big players being more or less loyal toward Bitcoin (so as not to be a black sheep of sorts)

Bitcoin is too small to be a threat right now (so that is another reason to buy it at this price.)  The US-led system has clearly seen it as an asset rather than liability, for the reason I stated.

If the major governments present a united front (as often has been the case when the imperial system was strong, e.g. the IMF stipulates no member may anchor its currency with gold,) and if this united front doesn't want Bitcoin, Bitcoin would probably be dead.

Right now, only the West, plus Japan, Australia, etc. support the imperial system.  Russia and China are not (fully) co-operating, so that is another reason for buying Bitcoin, (similarly for gold in this case.)

We can only hope that by the time they consider bitcoin a real treat, our technology is robust enough, and private enough that we can bypass all the government 1984 tier surveillance. Make no mistake, it is only a matter of time until US, EUR China and Russia start banning bitcoin, some other places may follow. Governments hate to not have control of the monetary policy, they will not give up without a fight, so bitcoin and its community must remain strong in order for freedom to finally win.

[U2]

If the government came out today and declared that Bitcoin cannot be accepted as legal tender for purchases, I believe Bitcoin would find a way. It would find a way only because of the anonymity that today's cash affords people. Cash is the lovely bridge that people use in turning their Bitcoins into value.

Tomorrow though, when there is no longer cash and the only form of payment is electronic, and where all electronic payments are handled by auditable pools of companies, what will happen?

Unless one implements a form of anonymity in bitcoin, bitcoin is a privacy hell as compared to electronic fiat cash.  In fact, I guess it would be a dream for all agencies of whatever nature that want to audit people for their behaviour, that people use bitcoin.  Bitcoin is a privacy nightmare with its transparent ledger as it stands today.  Electronic cash (fiat) can only be audited with a special request, but the block chain is open to read and analyse for anyone.  It propagates real world knowledge of transactions like a bush fire.

What the hell!? You think electronic fiat transactions are more anonymous than bitcoins? With bitcoins you can mix your coins, how the hell do you do that with fiat? Run a shady drug ring out of your backyard!? Come on man. That doesn't make sense at all.

[tunctioncloud]

If the government came out today and declared that Bitcoin cannot be accepted as legal tender for purchases, I believe Bitcoin would find a way. It would find a way only because of the anonymity that today's cash affords people. Cash is the lovely bridge that people use in turning their Bitcoins into value.

Tomorrow though, when there is no longer cash and the only form of payment is electronic, and where all electronic payments are handled by auditable pools of companies, what will happen?

Unless one implements a form of anonymity in bitcoin, bitcoin is a privacy hell as compared to electronic fiat cash.  In fact, I guess it would be a dream for all agencies of whatever nature that want to audit people for their behaviour, that people use bitcoin.  Bitcoin is a privacy nightmare with its transparent ledger as it stands today.  Electronic cash (fiat) can only be audited with a special request, but the block chain is open to read and analyse for anyone.  It propagates real world knowledge of transactions like a bush fire.

Seeing a Hero Member saying this is astonishing. Okay the ledger is public, and in the only purpose that if someone wanted to verify that someone possesses what he claims to own, or cases like that. You can know how much one possesses, but only if he choose to let you know, and that is the beauty of the thing. NSA can not know how much I have if I do not want them to know.

[Bitcoinsummoner]

If the government came out today and declared that Bitcoin cannot be accepted as legal tender for purchases, I believe Bitcoin would find a way. It would find a way only because of the anonymity that today's cash affords people. Cash is the lovely bridge that people use in turning their Bitcoins into value.

Tomorrow though, when there is no longer cash and the only form of payment is electronic, and where all electronic payments are handled by auditable pools of companies, what will happen?

Unless one implements a form of anonymity in bitcoin, bitcoin is a privacy hell as compared to electronic fiat cash.  In fact, I guess it would be a dream for all agencies of whatever nature that want to audit people for their behaviour, that people use bitcoin.  Bitcoin is a privacy nightmare with its transparent ledger as it stands today.  Electronic cash (fiat) can only be audited with a special request, but the block chain is open to read and analyse for anyone.  It propagates real world knowledge of transactions like a bush fire.

What the hell!? You think electronic fiat transactions are more anonymous than bitcoins? With bitcoins you can mix your coins, how the hell do you do that with fiat? Run a shady drug ring out of your backyard!? Come on man. That doesn't make sense at all.

I think he is not talking about fiat transaction or electronic transaction is not anonymous he is just talking about special request that honestly we i never experience that there is special request in electronic cash to transfer or sending or receiving ..
Bitcoin is anonymous even you do not need to use mixer.

[carlfebz2]

If the government came out today and declared that Bitcoin cannot be accepted as legal tender for purchases, I believe Bitcoin would find a way. It would find a way only because of the anonymity that today's cash affords people. Cash is the lovely bridge that people use in turning their Bitcoins into value.

Tomorrow though, when there is no longer cash and the only form of payment is electronic, and where all electronic payments are handled by auditable pools of companies, what will happen?

Unless one implements a form of anonymity in bitcoin, bitcoin is a privacy hell as compared to electronic fiat cash.  In fact, I guess it would be a dream for all agencies of whatever nature that want to audit people for their behaviour, that people use bitcoin.  Bitcoin is a privacy nightmare with its transparent ledger as it stands today.  Electronic cash (fiat) can only be audited with a special request, but the block chain is open to read and analyse for anyone.  It propagates real world knowledge of transactions like a bush fire.

What the hell!? You think electronic fiat transactions are more anonymous than bitcoins? With bitcoins you can mix your coins, how the hell do you do that with fiat? Run a shady drug ring out of your backyard!? Come on man. That doesn't make sense at all.

I think he is not talking about fiat transaction or electronic transaction is not anonymous he is just talking about special request that honestly we i never experience that there is special request in electronic cash to transfer or sending or receiving ..
Bitcoin is anonymous even you do not need to use mixer.

Yes bitcoin is anonymous but these days there are ways that bitcoin transaction could be tracked already thats why some really need to use mixers to increase the anonymity features of bitcoin.Cashless society would really be on the future and electronic payments and transactions would be there it might affect bitcoin somehow regarding on adoption but it cant kill bitcoin.

[South Park]

It is not easy to make your community or society cashless because people are addicted to make cash pay , which is traditional .
But instead of incoureging few people to adopt digital payment , we should make some campaigns , So that we can explain about this to all person together .
In this way they can easily adopt online payment system , even they can enter in bitcoin Job also .

Sure, it is not easy to make people to go cashless. It will take time and efforts from the side of the Government. But once people see the benefits and uses cashless means for payments, Bitcoin will start to gain massive attraction.

Going cashless is not that good, since you are going to leave a record somewhere of your transactions, one of the good thing a bout cash is you can buy stuff and it is not reflected anywhere. So I see a cashless society where people still use fiat as a terrible idea for those that are concerned about their privacy.

[d5000]

I disagree with the OP. A "cashless" society would even benefit Bitcoin.

Electronic payment systems are eye-openers, they show people that there exist other methods than cash and credit/debit cards (that also are "cashless", but their usage is more similar to that of cash as you don't need a computer or smartphone to use them).

If some governments would forbid Bitcoin payments to large companies in some countries (like in your Amazon example) then let me remark two things:

1) there are a LOT of governments and countries, it's extremely improbable that Bitcoin payments to large companies would be banned in all or even a majority of them;
2) if Bitcoin is popular and there would be only companies from a Bitcoin-hostile country (e.g. the US with Amazon) banned from accepting it, there would be, very probably, other alternatives in other countries.

What could kill Bitcoin is a "moneyless" society. I think that's less utopic than it sounds. (Take the open-source-software business: it's already largely money-less). In a few decades, maybe we'll not need the USD nor Bitcoin to get access to goods. Then Bitcoin, probably, will die.

[alyssa85]

I disagree with the OP. A "cashless" society would even benefit Bitcoin.

Well if India is anything to go by, then you are right - there wasn't much interest in bitcoin there at all till the withdrawal of the notes in circulation.

[dinofelis]

What the hell!? You think electronic fiat transactions are more anonymous than bitcoins? With bitcoins you can mix your coins, how the hell do you do that with fiat? Run a shady drug ring out of your backyard!? Come on man. That doesn't make sense at all.

"mixing bitcoin" is a somewhat clumsy way to obtain a kind of anonymity in bitcoin, but you need a third, trusted party for that, and (shady ?) partners that want to mix too.  With sufficient effort, such "mixing constructions" can be obtained with fiat too if you are allowed to trust third parties.  The bitcoin protocol IN ITSELF doesn't allow any form of automatic anonymity.   
The point is that mixing is clumsy in bitcoin, that most coins aren't mixed, that the mixing itself "colours" the coins, and that non-mixed coins, with the network of change addresses and combinations to arrive at the right amounts of payment, are propagating real-world knowledge to *anyone*, not just to banks and law enforcement if they obtain a warrant for it.

If I'm a plumber, and I get paid in bitcoin to repair the toilets in Joe's bar, and then I give some of those coins to Mary, who is my friend, and Mary goes and has a coffee at Joe's bar, then Joe can EASILY find out that the money he gave me to pay for his toilet repair, ended up in Mary's hands, so that there is a link between me and Mary.  If the same is done with fiat, Joe doesn't know such a thing.  Bitcoin's ledger is propagating real world knowledge like a bush fire.
Yes, I can mix my coins.  Yes, I can do 20 transactions between my own accounts and pay a lot of fees to "hide" this.  Joe will nevertheless see that Mary got the bitcoins he gave me at a certain point, even though now Mary COULD also have obtained them from a shady drugs dealer on the other side of the world I happened to mix with. But what should have remained (innocent) private information, is shouted out to the world with bitcoin's transparent ledger, and to even try to hide it takes me a lot of effort, and the necessity to trust a third (mixing) party ; while with fiat, that kind of innocent privacy comes automatically.  If Joe has paid me with a wire transfer, and I gave money to Mary with a wire transfer, and she paid with her VISA card at the bar, then Joe cannot know in the most remote way that the money he got from her was the money he paid me.  Actually, in fiat, that doesn't even make sense, because bank money is fungible while bitcoin isn't (by definition, every coin has a whole history to it which distinguishes it from another one - apart from a mixer operation).

[dinofelis]

Seeing a Hero Member saying this is astonishing. Okay the ledger is public, and in the only purpose that if someone wanted to verify that someone possesses what he claims to own, or cases like that. You can know how much one possesses, but only if he choose to let you know, and that is the beauty of the thing. NSA can not know how much I have if I do not want them to know.

Look at the answer in my previous post.   I fully agree that *if there is no real world knowledge* then it will not be propagated (obviously) on the block chain.  This is probably the kind of anonymity Satoshi thought he implemented.  But using money means of course giving out real world knowledge about a specific transaction.  Most of the time, the buyer and the seller know each other (it is even legally required, with KYC).  That a buyer and a seller know each-other, and know the specific transaction between them, is normal.    However, that this knowledge (to the buyer - emitter of coins - for future information propagation, to the seller - receiver of coins - for information propagation in the past) LINKS to other transactions is the privacy nightmare of a public ledger.

In my example of me, the plumber, Joe and Mary, Joe received future knowledge as a buyer about MY transactions ; Joe further received coins from Mary, which propagated information backward about HER transactions.  When he combined both, he found out something new, namely that I (he knew me) transacted to Mary (he knew her).

The fundamental error in thinking that bitcoin's pseudonymity implies transaction anonymity is by looking at addresses and transactions in an abstract way.  Of course, there's no way to find out, JUST from looking at the ledger, what real world identity is connected to what bitcoin addresses or transactions.  But that's not the point.  ONCE you know something, and with use of money, that's very normal, as money is about agreements and interactions between people, that knowledge
PROPAGATES.

[RealBitcoin]

I do not think cashless society will kill bitcoin but increase its price. Imagine a society without any currency notes the only method of paying is online. Since bitcoin transaction is fast and cheap and anonymous hence it would be preferred.

I agree, once they would start freezing bank account randomly, and people could not buy a piece of bread and starve to death because there would be no other currency.


Then people would quickly realize why it's important to have a decentralized payment system and currency.



It would exponentially accelerate the use of Bitcoin.

[Positid]

I do not think cashless society will kill bitcoin but increase its price. Imagine a society without any currency notes the only method of paying is online. Since bitcoin transaction is fast and cheap and anonymous hence it would be preferred.

I agree, once they would start freezing bank account randomly, and people could not buy a piece of bread and starve to death because there would be no other currency.


Then people would quickly realize why it's important to have a decentralized payment system and currency.



It would exponentially accelerate the use of Bitcoin.

How the hell would they freeze bank accounts? It is done for a reason, especially when you violated laws.

[Yakamoto]

I do not think cashless society will kill bitcoin but increase its price. Imagine a society without any currency notes the only method of paying is online. Since bitcoin transaction is fast and cheap and anonymous hence it would be preferred.

I agree, once they would start freezing bank account randomly, and people could not buy a piece of bread and starve to death because there would be no other currency.


Then people would quickly realize why it's important to have a decentralized payment system and currency.



It would exponentially accelerate the use of Bitcoin.

How the hell would they freeze bank accounts? It is done for a reason, especially when you violated laws.

They... just freeze them? Government order or bank choice? The thing is a cashless society makes it exponentially easier for a government to maintain complete control over their citizens because it can freeze accounts of political enemies or people who want to think outside of the system, or critiques of the government can find their entire bank account wiped, frozen or they can be blacklisted on the system, preventing them from ever making their money.

If you don't think governments do this, you haven't been paying attention to world history. It happens over and over, just not in the exact same way.

[RealBitcoin]

I do not think cashless society will kill bitcoin but increase its price. Imagine a society without any currency notes the only method of paying is online. Since bitcoin transaction is fast and cheap and anonymous hence it would be preferred.

I agree, once they would start freezing bank account randomly, and people could not buy a piece of bread and starve to death because there would be no other currency.


Then people would quickly realize why it's important to have a decentralized payment system and currency.



It would exponentially accelerate the use of Bitcoin.

How the hell would they freeze bank accounts? It is done for a reason, especially when you violated laws.

Haha you are too naive.

They will just freeze your bank account for any reason. You know laws change every time, and if for some reason some Orwellian Nazis take control, then we are all fucked.


The scumbag Nazis froze and confiscated Jewish bank accounts in 1935, no trial, no hearing, just like that based on a hateful racial ideology, so what makes you think that your current govt has your best interest in your mind?

It can happen again if totalitarianism comes back.


Just read this thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1738530.0

[Barbut]

I do not think cashless society will kill bitcoin but increase its price. Imagine a society without any currency notes the only method of paying is online. Since bitcoin transaction is fast and cheap and anonymous hence it would be preferred.

I agree, once they would start freezing bank account randomly, and people could not buy a piece of bread and starve to death because there would be no other currency.


Then people would quickly realize why it's important to have a decentralized payment system and currency.



It would exponentially accelerate the use of Bitcoin.

How the hell would they freeze bank accounts? It is done for a reason, especially when you violated laws.

In the movies happens all the time, in reality even more times, innocent guy get arrested and prosecuted. What are our options, that is the point here? What we can do if we become unwanted in eyes of law?
Maybe this duality is a good thing, to have bitcoins and cash in the same time. In that way we will always be able to choose what we suit more.

[geopolisch]

This is just waiting the time, many peoples said if bitcoin will banned by the government and then will die, but until now its never happen.

That will never happen for ever in all the countries even if it happens, it will not find significant impact.

Government will emphasize cashless society just to fight against black money and corruption but that will help bitcoin to get popular among people as they will find more advantages rather than using other traceable e-currencies.

Then Government may take bitcoin favor or against decisions but bitcoin will get rapid adoption among cashless society regardless of their government's stand.