LMAO: Lagarde says Euro CBDC seeks to 'ensure high standars of privacy'.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course.

Digital euro: a common European project

On the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off:

The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.

We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity – such as offered by cash – does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment – for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration – for which identities of users need to be known.

We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions.

So, no privacy.

They want us to believe that with the digital Euro there will be privacy because they won't publish every transaction we make with our name and surname on a website accessible to everyone. And no, obviously they are not going to do that so that your neighbour or a thief knows what you spend your money on, but they are going to know 24/7 what you spend every penny on.

Who are they kidding? I don't even know why I ask myself that question, because it's obvious: the majority of the population who will welcome it as something positive and a modernisation.

What is the advantage in terms of convenience over paying by card? None. A lot to lose and nothing to gain.

[1714858580]

1714858580

[1714858580]

1714858580

[1714858580]

1714858580

[1714858580]

1714858580

[Hispo]

Nothing new under the sun. Completely expected when comes to the CBDCs.

The only question I have if whether our financial information will only be available for government surveillance or there would be some relationship between the government and companies (so the latter can continue to profit off our payment habits, etc).

Either way, it is a quite a distopic situation if you ask me and another reason to keep some satoshis in our power. The future looks darker every year that passes.

[franky1]

its not really different than fiat banks accounts today

central bank creates them money. splits it into accounts with commercial banks and its the COMMERCIAL banks that monitor its customers and keep customer records private from outsiders unless there is a court order

yep CBDC will still use commercial payment providers to facilitate the low level customer base.day to day stuff

and yes the commercial banks can sell your data to other companies for a customer incentive like coupons, points ,interest or "cashback on purchases"

[bitmover]

its not really different than fiat banks accounts today

central bank creates them money. splits it into accounts with commercial banks and its the COMMERCIAL banks that monitor its customers and keep customer records private from outsiders unless there is a court order

yep CBDC will still use commercial payment providers to facilitate the low level customer base.day to day stuff

But this is a completely different scenario.

Nowadays, central bank creates the money and we put that money in a private company, which the government cannot see what happens anymore unless court order (like you said).

With CBDC governments will have free access to our money and statements. Banks will have reduced usage and we will be easier to be spied by the government.

and yes the commercial banks can sell your data to other companies for a customer incentive like coupons, points ,interest or "cashback on purchases"

Governments can sell our data as well.

Who do you prefer to spy your life? The government, or private companies?

I prefer private companies, because they cannot fine me, and they can't break into my house as well.

[franky1]

you might want to  check CBDC including chinas e-yuan

you will be surpirsed even in china they are using payment services like alipay, tencent, and half a dozen others.. if you think that congressmen, senators or ministers sit at computers watching product purchases.. you have been reading the wrong blogs

anyway

for those that cant read lengths of text or do research.. here's the summary..
its B not A


to find out what i am on about try to read

alot of people are screaming with tears and tin foil that CBDC is evil. devils hand stuff.. "biden, putin xi is watching me"' but its obvious those people have never read a CBDC whitepapers or examined one close up. they just found a blog piece of some other non researcher that calls it bad, just to back up the screamers bias

..

many many CBDC are not set up the way cry babies think. yes there are pitfuls. but its not what you think

for one. although a central bank "pre-mines"(to compare buzzwords) trillions. they then distribute that to several commercial banks. and its the commercial banks that do the day to day work of keeping the bank statements(tx history) and also a separate database for KYC.

in many CBDC the commercial banks offer 3 tiers of accounts(wallets)
if you're on a low income needing only to ever receive or spend under X per month. meaning say $1k a month and 'save' upto $12k a year
meaning low untaxable threshold spend accounts.. there would be no KYC

then for middle income there is basic kyc
and then for large businesses/rich there is full KYC

much like how VisaCard offers:
a no-kyc virtual visa debit/gift card program
a basic-kyc account debit/credit card
and a platinum/black card for the rich with full due diligence/kyc

obviously if you want to receive more than $1k in any one go you need to upgrade to the middle tier. and if rich upgrade to top tier. but you can still have a spare bottom tier account(wallet) for just play money spend amounts

there is also fundamental rules built into these systems like fungibility where by it requires court orders for authorities to gain the KYC data from the COMMERCIAL BANKS and also to freeze accounts

yep even china's CBDC functions like US fiat today
yep even chinas e-yuan is not an (A) scenario. its (b)

[Zlantann]

Who are they kidding? I don't even know why I ask myself that question, because it's obvious: the majority of the population who will welcome it as something positive and a modernisation.

What is the advantage in terms of convenience over paying by card? None. A lot to lose and nothing to gain.

The European Central Bank have promised to give high standard of privacy in one hand and with the other hand, they would collect this privilege with anti-money laundering rules. I am very glad that Christine Lagarde acknowledged that privacy is one of the cardinal consideration of the public when it comes to digital money. Although they might be able to convince some persons in the Eurozone that the digital euro promotes privacy but they wouldn't be able to deceive everybody. The only currency that can guarantee to a large extent the privacy of its users is Bitcoin and these anti-Bitcoin forces knows the truth.  

[Don Pedro Dinero]

its not really different than fiat banks accounts today

It is different indeed. I'm with bitmover on this.

Although I see that both you and he are focusing on the difference between current bank payment systems, such as transfers and cards, and CBDCs. But that is not the crux of the matter. The heart of the matter is the difference between cash and CBDCs.

Big Data is big business today. If I go and spend €500 in a clinic and then €100 on medicines in a pharmacy, I keep privacy if I pay in cash. Paying with cards or CBDCs, don't be surprised if your health or life insurance is more expensive.

[franky1]

Big Data is big business today. If I go and spend €500 in a clinic and then €100 on medicines in a pharmacy, I keep privacy if I pay in cash. Paying with cards or CBDCs, don't be surprised if your health or life insurance is more expensive.

your thinking that CBDC is a one level system where "government" /business has your life history.

i have seen a few CBDC and the main ones that are linking to the EU/asia m-bridge. are systems where there are 3 levels of "wallets" where the bottom level.. your $100- $500 spend amounts are non KYC.

which is the same as a virtual visacard/giftcard service offering.

there is no much information about how these eu/asia CDBC set about selling the data of the mid-top wallets. so im going to presume they definitely will. but i know the technology exists that could stop them unless you give consent. and laws could stop it too.. EG you have to use a "cashback/points/interest" account to give consent to sell data for those rewards.

that said, even in the non kyc wallet. just having a bland number as your account address. obviously retailers that receive digital cash from it, can buy records of even blank ID associated with a sale on their side that did have a name on their retailer delivery service..  thus give that bland number account a name indirectly

but thats where signed messages can show easy proof of accepting terms. where a good government would require a user to consent or reject a businesses ability to buy your data
which is what people should lobby for governments to include features of in a CBDC

[NeuroticFish]

What is the advantage in terms of convenience over paying by card? None. A lot to lose and nothing to gain.

Fees. I think that 10% of the fees VISA/Mastercard is charging (from one country's shops) can easily support a country's CBDC.
But, really, politicians (and head of a Central Bank is imho more a politician than an economist) won't know nor tell the entire story.

On privacy and so on, the thing is that it highly depends on how the CBDC is implemented. And there's a good chance even the bankers may not know all its "features". Just my 2 satoshi.

[Wind_FURY]

The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course.

Digital euro: a common European project

On the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off:

The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.

We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity – such as offered by cash – does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment – for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration – for which identities of users need to be known.

We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions.

So, no privacy.

NONE! How can you trust a centralized entity who says that they will give you your privacy. The cabal behind Central Banks WILL LIE to you, and make everyone believe that CBDC is good for society, and WILL LIE to you and convince everyone that Bitcoin censorship-resistance = "bad".

BUT CBDC should be encouraged by the community because it will make Bitcoin self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance more valuable.

[bittraffic]

The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course.

Digital euro: a common European project

On the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off:

The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.

We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity – such as offered by cash – does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment – for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration – for which identities of users need to be known.

We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions.

So, no privacy.

NONE! How can you trust a centralized entity who says that they will give you your privacy. The cabal behind Central Banks WILL LIE to you, and make everyone believe that CBDC is good for society, and WILL LIE to you and convince everyone that Bitcoin censorship-resistance = "bad".

BUT CBDC should be encouraged by the community because it will make Bitcoin self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance more valuable.

The majority of the population doesn't really suspect what else is there when the government tries to experiment on them.
This is only happening in the US but different countries already hurry to digitize thier own currency thinking this will give convenience.

How are they going to ensure compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combat the financing of terrorism if there is privacy?
If they also want transparency then lets all just use the blockchain for everyone to see each account.

[stompix]

So, no privacy.
They want us to believe that with the digital Euro there will be privacy because they won't publish every transaction we make with our name and surname on a website accessible to everyone. And no, obviously they are not going to do that so that your neighbour or a thief knows what you spend your money on, but they are going to know 24/7 what you spend every penny on.

And what do you expect from a national currency, seriously?

This whole privacy thing gets overblown so easily, you want total privacy as in nobody knowing what you're doing with your money, nobody knows where you're money is going, good, then just one day later the narrative change, what the hell we can't track the government spending either, the gubbermint is doing something fishy!!

You have to draw a line somewhere and understand that there is no way this total privacy would work in any environment, you go to a bank you present the ID because without the ID check everyone could come and claim he's you, you run your business there is your name there, you sell a car, you sign for insurance, you buy a pizza the guys know your address. So here, the government and not a bank will know what you have purchased, so instead of two guys there will be only one, and that one will stay as in every single instance there will be someone who knows where your money is going.

It's quite ironic when we have a scam accusation in this subboard forum everyone asks for proof, proof you have sent the money, proof of the bet, proof of the tx, document everything, when it's about privacy, no recordings,s no tracking, no nothing, how dare you, infidel!

Banks will have reduced usage and we will be easier to be spied by the government.
Who do you prefer to spy your life? The government, or private companies?
I prefer private companies, because they cannot fine me, and they can't break into my house as well.

But, but, banks, money laundering, HSBC, ABN AMRO, fractional reserve, all that stuff...
Anyhow, wouldn't it be easier to change the government? I mean, I don't think you can accuse the danish government of leveling people's houses with tanks searching for a stolen bicycle!

Anyhow, as I said, quite funny.
I want to know where the money from FTX went!!!! The government shouldn't be able to trace any transaction, we need bulletproof privacy!!!

[bitmover]

Banks will have reduced usage and we will be easier to be spied by the government.
Who do you prefer to spy your life? The government, or private companies?
I prefer private companies, because they cannot fine me, and they can't break into my house as well.

But, but, banks, money laundering, HSBC, ABN AMRO, fractional reserve, all that stuff...

The point is that banks are not as powerful as governments.
We do not pay taxes to them. They cannot put you in jail.

We don't need to give even more powers to governments

Anyhow, wouldn't it be easier to change the government? I mean, I don't think you can accuse the danish government of leveling people's houses with tanks searching for a stolen bicycle!

It depends where you live. Try to change Maduro or Cuba government... Latin America is not as far from that as most people think.
And China and Russia...

The government in my country is already too much powerful and it interferes a lot in people's life.

[stompix]

It depends where you live. Try to change Maduro or Cuba government... Latin America is not as far from that as most people think.
And China and Russia...
The government in my country is already too much powerful and it interferes a lot in people's life.

Well, you see, neither Venezuela, Cuba, China and Russia are going to use the Euro CDBC, but Denmark might (they don't have the euro) and Belgium will for sure.
So when talking about what this means for the average Joe using there we shouldn't start with the things the NK government is doing to its citizens, because if we talk about those countries all the major banks there are owned already by the government so, what would be the difference?

And if your government is that powerful, what stops them from just getting the bank data, and then proceeding to fine, raid your house and jail you?
Isn't there a government that needs to be changed and not the way a CDBC would be issued and used as no matter what you try to do they can impose everything on you, like swapping your ID card every time when you make a purchase with cash?

[Ucy]

Well, right to be Private/Anonymous has to be guaranteed to the free/innocent citizens... the Public Policy objectives should be based on them rather than the rights depending on the objectives. Large chunk of the rights could only be taken away from criminals or people who deserve to be in jail.

This is why decentralized cryptocurrency like Bitcoin is better alternative and should be further developed to automatically or via consensus unmask the identity of dangerous criminals on its system. If it's impossible to do so, you can simply blacklist or tag crime money with proper proof-based labelling of the crime it's involved in. This can be easily implemented in the current Bitcoin system and it's one of the best ways to tackle the issue of crime money without violating the privacy rights of the innocent.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

And what do you expect from a national currency, seriously?

Well, rather a supra-national currency, as the EU is not a nation. The only thing I hope is that they don't lie to my face saying that the currency will respect privacy.

This whole privacy thing gets overblown so easily, you want total privacy as in nobody knowing what you're doing with your money, nobody knows where you're money is going, good, then just one day later the narrative change, what the hell we can't track the government spending either, the gubbermint is doing something fishy!!

<...>

It's quite ironic when we have a scam accusation in this subboard forum everyone asks for proof, proof you have sent the money, proof of the bet, proof of the tx, document everything, when it's about privacy, no recordings,s no tracking, no nothing, how dare you, infidel!

You are confusing me with your fellow signature campaigners. I don't advocate that. I am defending my right to go to the ATM and withdraw €1,000, and, yes, the bank will know that I have withdrawn €1,000, but then spend it without KYC on whatever I want. That's not going to happen with CBDCs. And yes, for some things I ask for an invoice, which has my details on it, and even if I pay with cash it has KYC, but for many other things I do not. That's what I want, for there to be a small space where they don't have control over me.

Do you live in Germany? I understand that you are quite fond of using cash over there.

[mindrust]

It is not even possible… CBDC’s are all about controlling people. If you don’t comply, they will seize your money easily. Right now you can avoid this situation if you keep some physical FIAT around but they are trying hard to destroy this option.

Maybe she doesn’t mean your privacy but privacy of those who watch your transactions… You will never be able to tell who is watching. Yep, absolute privacy fo the gov agents.

[Wind_FURY]

The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course.

Digital euro: a common European project

On the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off:

The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.

We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity – such as offered by cash – does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment – for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration – for which identities of users need to be known.

We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions.

So, no privacy.

NONE! How can you trust a centralized entity who says that they will give you your privacy. The cabal behind Central Banks WILL LIE to you, and make everyone believe that CBDC is good for society, and WILL LIE to you and convince everyone that Bitcoin censorship-resistance = "bad".

BUT CBDC should be encouraged by the community because it will make Bitcoin self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance more valuable.

The majority of the population doesn't really suspect what else is there when the government tries to experiment on them.

I believe many people/users of CBDC won't suspect anything during the first implementation. Everyone will be astonished in how "covenient", "fast", and "frictionless" CBDC usages are until one day the first iterations of censorship start to happen.

Will I be using CBDC? I will be using CBDC because everyone may never have a choice, BUT I will always have my Bitcoin if I need censorship-resistant, hard-money.

[davis196]

When a big centralized organization promises it's users "high standards of privacy" this means two things:
1.Nothing. It's a lie and a false promise.
2. The big centralized organization might do the best it can to protect the user's data, but at some point, the the hackers will find a way to break its defense systems and steal the data. This always happens to the centralized systems. Sooner or later.
Lagarde promising high levels of privacy but no anonymity is a complete nonsense. You can't have privacy without anonymity.
The Euro CBDC won't solve the economic problems of the European Union...

[franky1]

When a big centralized organization promises it's users "high standards of privacy" this means two things:
1.Nothing. It's a lie and a false promise.
2. The big centralized organization might do the best it can to protect the user's data, but at some point, the the hackers will find a way to break its defense systems and steal the data. This always happens to the centralized systems. Sooner or later.
Lagarde promising high levels of privacy but no anonymity is a complete nonsense. You can't have privacy without anonymity.
The Euro CBDC won't solve the economic problems of the European Union...

in the US
"bank secrecy act" does not mean your funds are secret and private.. the bank secrecy act is not the act that gives you privacy rights.
you cannot quote you have financial privacy rights by claiming ant law/act. the bank secrecy act is not what it seems

you have no privacy rights i regards to fiat, never have
you NEVER had privacy when it comes to bank accounts

bank notes and balance are not your property. they are patented and owned by the bank and its their product to take out of circulation or licence/permit usage of to people under their terms
modern money has NEVER meant privacy as a human right or property ownership.
its at most a presumed lack of exposing transparently to the public as a privilege which the act gives the banks.
...
thats why bitcoin was invented to be different

as for thinking that government(politicians(ministers, senators,congress men)) are watching your every payment. this is not true

banks/payment facilitators/custodians watch and flag suspicious stuff, but that does not mean they are watching everyone with human eyes. they only look with bank employee eyes at the suspicious stuff, and if highly suspicious they send that to regulators.

yes the banks/payment facilitators/custodians keep your data for 6+ years and sell your data and can be hacked.

so understand that your main fears are with banks/payment facilitators(custodians) and their regulator parents. not really the government

i know that my fiat transactions are not seen by my UK prime minister or his deputies(ministers/mps)
my transactions are stored at the bank/custodian level where only if i do something suspicious would some bank appointed 'sherriff' see my spending habits

regulators are not politicians. regulator CEO's are ex bankers.
when a CEO is a banker and not a politician then it means the regulators are parent of the bank cartel not the child of a government cartel. they simply wear a government sheriffs badge but work for the bank

note this is to clarify the reality of how money works and how the different layers are set out, as oppose to the tin foil "gov spies on us" mantra

here in the UK
the UK treasury is owned by HM(his majesty) meaning the king
the UK bank of england is owned by HM treasury(again the king)

the king does not want to day-to-day manage the public. so allows a management company(government) to run the day-to day
every 4-5 years the management contract gets renewed and he king allows the public to vote on who is the CEO of the public management company(PM) by voting in their local management team. where the majority translates to the CEO of the management company being aligned to a certain party

the management company(government) dont want to day-to-day manage finance enforcement/oversight. so they delegate/outsource that to a different management group (regulators) which are usually ex-bank bosses
in the US

many people think citizens own the government and the government are just a service company to the people where the people have shares on the management company(government).

senators and congressmen are voted in as a management company whos members(citizens) of the company(government) are the public
(citizens are customers of a business that allow members to vote on regional sales reps every 4 years to manage the business and set rules on how the company allows its members to use the company)
(citizens pay a membership fee(tax) to then be offered services and products of the business)

government dont want to run the day-today of finance. so they delegate that to a board of trustees of a trust(fed reserve) whos beneficiary is the US treasury.

the fed reserve* prints money and shares it out to commercial banks. and its the commercial banks that day-to-day manage ithe finances of the members(citizens)

*in the US the president nominates attorneys and economists to be the board members(trustees) of the fed reserve and they are then voted in by senators to report activity to congressmen

the fed reserve is not a company in the normal sense. but a "trust" where the board are the trustees and the US treasury is the beneficiary. meaning the fed res is owned by no one and the treasury reaps the benefits while being day to day managed by attorneys and economists. not politicians

the us treasury is a agent(child/subsidiary/contractor) of the government who have another(child/subsidiary/contractor) agent called the US mint that print money. bank notes are patents/products of the us mint->treasury->government

the US mint distribute out the money to commercial banks(businesses) run by private bank managers, not politicians
who are supervised by ex bankers promoted in to supervisory roles(regulators)
and now you see why FIAT around the world is so screwed up

[stompix]

You are confusing me with your fellow signature campaigners.

Nothing confusing here, we're not an entity or a group with the same opinions, we have a lot of different views on a hundred things. And the best example of all would be the fact that the last cheater who was caught with multiple accounts was exposed exactly because he didn't use a mixer to mix his coins and reused addresses. Again, ironic!

I don't advocate that. I am defending my right to go to the ATM and withdraw €1,000, and, yes, the bank will know that I have withdrawn €1,000, but then spend it without KYC on whatever I want.

And who is preventing this?
As I said, the irony of double standards, when China banned bitcoin mining everyone was screaming FUD, now an official says something about CBDC, and despite doubts about future plans, and total uncertainty even on the release of this coins we've reached fear level.
Why not look from this point of view to previous examples, let's take Sweden, where people are abandoning cahs and, what a surprise, the one raising the alarm is the central bank:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/03/sweden-cashless-future-sounds-alarm-bells-for-the-central-bank.html

So, leaving aside your personal dislike of the leaders of the EU and of the ECB, how would you see a working CBDC that would be tailored to your needs for privacy?

[bitmover]

And if your government is that powerful, what stops them from just getting the bank data, and then proceeding to fine, raid your house and jail you?

Exactly the things that doesn't look important. They don't have the data. What stops them to get the data are some laws which are going to become useless with a cdbc.

They need to get bank data through Court. It is a small protection , but it is a protection.
We also may have multiple bank accounts. Spend in cash. And so one.

In a cdbc, they will have all our data in something very similar to an excel file.

They can just make a SELECT in a database and get everyone who is spending more than they expect, for example. No need to go to court in suspious cases anymore.

"Well, you spent 150.000 last year, but your irs anual report said you made only 130"

Cdbc is basically a Spyware.

[Lucius]

I'll just say that it's somewhat tragic that we've been discussing for years about something that's literally called "central bank digital currencies", as if someone's fate depends on it, even less something that's decentralized like Bitcoin. The EU and their digital currency is already in trouble even before it is created because it depends on the eurozone, and the euro is only as strong as its weakest link.

As for privacy and any transactions, even with Bitcoin, we should not be too fooled that this is possible nowadays, considering the technology that exists, which we are not even aware of because it is used in secret.

That old woman who is often quoted because she is the president of the ECB has very big problems with cryptocurrencies, although she does not understand them more than that they represent competition to the system she represents. If their answer to the challenges of the digital age is only that they will design a digital euro, then they are not thinking very constructively, although in a world where the majority behave like ordinary sheep, this is not something that should worry them too much.

[el kaka22]

I feel like they will "say" that but they will do the opposite. There are not that many people in the world who has done something for the good of the people, for the people, and still not liked by the people at the same time.

There was a local ruler here, like head of a town, just 800 people lived, and that guy made anything above 2 stories illegal for buildings, no tall buildings, all same and when earthquake hit, everywhere around got devastated and destroyed and thousands died, and this town didn't even had a crack, didn't had even a single injured person let alone dead. He was ousted next term because people wanted tall buildings to make profit. So if you REALLY want privacy, elect people who would.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Why not look from this point of view to previous examples, let's take Sweden, where people are abandoning cahs and, what a surprise, the one raising the alarm is the central bank:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/03/sweden-cashless-future-sounds-alarm-bells-for-the-central-bank.html

From a serious poster like you, I would expect something more than a post from 4 and a half years ago, which I read at the time, because despite what they said, nothing has changed the trend that Sweden has, and its way to be the first country to completely abandon cash, whose use is practically non-existent in everyday life. If the central bank had wanted to, it had weapons to use.

When someone tells me one thing, and I see with my eyes that they do something else, I listen to my eyes, you know?

I feel like they will "say" that but they will do the opposite.

This.

So, leaving aside your personal dislike of the leaders of the EU and of the ECB, how would you see a working CBDC that would be tailored to your needs for privacy?

Leaving aside my personal dislike of some of the policies of the leaders of the EU and the ECB, a working CBCD doesn't matter to me in the initial stages, but do you think that the plan is the coexistence of cash and CBDCs? I don't. I think the plan is to slowly but steadily substitute one by another.

[so98nn]

So similar to what Nigeria is doing, similar to what china and India and El Salvador. Basically agenda of every country is same, to bring prominent digitalisation within the country. This is either with the intention of making country free from black money OR this could be superseded in the view of crypto usage. So they might be trying to divert the attention of peeps from crypto space and let them know government has got their back. While the idea might seem elegant in the view of authorities like CBDC and may be SEC, it’s dumb idea. There is still large population who still rely on the cash and carry business.

[Gyfts]

But this is a completely different scenario.

Nowadays, central bank creates the money and we put that money in a private company, which the government cannot see what happens anymore unless court order (like you said).

With CBDC governments will have free access to our money and statements. Banks will have reduced usage and we will be easier to be spied by the government.

The remaining separation between private banks and central government is eroding. There isn't much left, if at all.

I figure most users of traditional banking systems understand their privacy is nonexistent. CBDC's just give the government more power to control fiscal policy within their borders. Not that it was too difficult before, but in if the currency supply could be modified simply by generating new digital tokens, or crediting people's digital accounts, seems to be a more efficient way than dealing with a balance sheet full of assets.

It's not as if this is a new concept, because most banking is digital already. Merely an attempt to completely wash the paper currency system and switch to something completely digitalized.

[stompix]

From a serious poster like you, I would expect something more than a post from 4 and a half years ago, which I read at the time, because despite what they said, nothing has changed the trend that Sweden has, and its way to be the first country to completely abandon cash, whose use is practically non-existent in everyday life. If the central bank had wanted to, it had weapons to use.

A thing isn't wrong because it happened 4 years ago and not two weeks ago, it did happen the Central Bank is still against not eliminating cash and you can see that for yourself since it's still printing banknotes. As for the last remark, it's quite funny, the people don't want cash themselves but you would expect the central bank to go against their wishes and use their "weapons"? Well, what a surprise, it does:

These discussions have recently been initiated and the ambition is to have a solution in place well before the new Sveriges Riksbank Act is expected to enter into force on 1 January 2023. This solution will also contribute towards creating greater stability in cash distribution so that unexpected external events, such as the coronavirus pandemic, affect the external parts of the cash supply chain to a lesser extent.
The Riksbank has therefore proposed that a binding obligation to accept cash should be applied to some operations at least, such as pharmacies. The Riksbank also considers that the banks should be set a minimum requirement for the provision of manual cash services to the general public.

When someone tells me one thing, and I see with my eyes that they do something else, I listen to my eyes, you know?

You realize from the above that I can say the same thing, right?  

LE, I don't know why my quote was not there

And if your government is that powerful, what stops them from just getting the bank data, and then proceeding to fine, raid your house and jail you?

Exactly the things that doesn't look important. They don't have the data. What stops them to get the data are some laws which are going to become useless with a cdbc.
They need to get bank data through Court. It is a small protection , but it is a protection.

Laws that a totalitarian regime will don't give a damn to bend.
The small protection didn't help people in Hong Kong, for sure it ain't helping people in Russia and it didn't do wonders for the truck protesters last year either.
The problem is not the CDBC and it's not the laws, it's that you have a government that would abuse it, and if choose to abuse nothing will stop it, not a court in which it can jail and can replace all judges, not the law it can redefine, not banks that can be raided at ease. The only way out of this is to replace the abuser, the government, not to try and play an endless game of cat and mouse that will for sure end badly.

[Darker45]

First off, a currency that has an expiry date? This is something new and mind-boggling. I cannot access the article, but if this is true, I admit I was caught completely off guard. It never ever crossed my mind that money could expire.

Anyway, as to privacy, there is no improvement actually. If at all, there is instead deterioration. I guess part of the reason why cash is to be replaced with its digital version is control and monitoring. That's for security's sake, of course. But it sacrifices privacy. But that's the goal; cash gives too much privacy.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

It's always coming down to that stupid fucking money laundering argument.  And OP I agree with you that the public will probably just blindly go along with whatever these big wigs decide, with no opposition whatsoever.

On the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off:

I wouldn't be laughing at all, as absurd as that statement reads, because the implications it has for this new monetary system are dire.  Not joking or exaggerating at all here:  this frightens me to no end.  Eventually this brand of bullshit money is going to make its way to the US unless it's stopped in its tracks, right now.  If I had any suggestions as to how to make that happen I'd gladly bring them forward....but I don't.

Does any of this frighten any of you?

[Don Pedro Dinero]

First off, a currency that has an expiry date? This is something new and mind-boggling. I cannot access the article, but if this is true, I admit I was caught completely off guard. It never ever crossed my mind that money could expire.

It's not exactly like that, it could be. But you can also print an expiration date on a banknote or say that banknotes expire by serial number.

CBDCs being programmable have many more potential control properties, whether they get to implement those properties or not, such as expiration, we don't know but by default I don't trust.

I wouldn't be laughing at all, as absurd as that statement reads, because the implications it has for this new monetary system are dire.  Not joking or exaggerating at all here:  this frightens me to no end.  Eventually this brand of bullshit money is going to make its way to the US unless it's stopped in its tracks, right now.  If I had any suggestions as to how to make that happen I'd gladly bring them forward....but I don't.

Does any of this frighten any of you?

Well, I was laughing because Lagarde had the nerve to talk about privacy. When compared to the use of cash or bitcoin, privacy in the use of CBDCs does not exist.

It doesn't scare me for the moment, as it has some possibly negative consequences, but this is going to be like the frog in the water that is slowly being warmed up. If there are catastrophic consequences, by the time people want to react it will probably be too late, and many will be delighted with CBDCs, just as they are delighted to be able to pay €0.70 with their mobile phone.

[lixer]

So similar to what Nigeria is doing, similar to what china and India and El Salvador. Basically agenda of every country is same, to bring prominent digitalisation within the country. This is either with the intention of making country free from black money OR this could be superseded in the view of crypto usage. So they might be trying to divert the attention of peeps from crypto space and let them know government has got their back. While the idea might seem elegant in the view of authorities like CBDC and may be SEC, it’s dumb idea. There is still large population who still rely on the cash and carry business.

I think Nigeria, China and India are strict with crypto so definitely they will also release their own CBDC's and say some nice words with it for it to be accepted by the public easily but smart people knows that this wasn't true at all.

You shouldn't include El Salvador in your list because this was a crypto-friendly country and they even made btc as a legal tender. No need for them to create CBDC's as that only contradicts or can make a conflict with cryptos. No matter what other governments do, those who already use crypto won't change their views anymore. They know that CBDC's are not a crypto. It was the same to fiat but only in a digital form.

[Lucius]

~snip~
You shouldn't include El Salvador in your list because this was a crypto-friendly country and they even made btc as a legal tender. No need for them to create CBDC's as that only contradicts or can make a conflict with cryptos. No matter what other governments do, those who already use crypto won't change their views anymore. They know that CBDC's are not a crypto. It was the same to fiat but only in a digital form.

I look at it from a different perspective - because even though Bitcoin in El Salvador is regulated as legal tender and we can say that the ruling politicians are Bitcoin-friendly, can we also say the same about the people who live in that country? The vast majority just used the opportunity to get $30 through the Chivo wallet, and I think I read somewhere that maybe less than 20% of people living in that country use Bitcoin. Of course, this is not a tragedy or as some want to portray it as a failure of Bitcoin in that country, it will take time for people to get used to something new.

In addition, we know that El Salvador has been using the US dollar as its national currency for over 20 years, which means that they tend to experiment with such things - and I wouldn't be surprised if they create their own CBDC one day.

[serjent05]

On the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off:

Why? the privacy of the fund is very close and non-disclose to the client.  They are true when they said that privacy is at a very high standard, and the client needs the power of the court in order to know his statement of account.  That is how government CBDC is.    They are very transparent to financial institutions but opaque to the owner,

So, no privacy.

They want us to believe that with the digital Euro there will be privacy because they won't publish every transaction we make with our name and surname on a website accessible to everyone. And no, obviously they are not going to do that so that your neighbour or a thief knows what you spend your money on, but they are going to know 24/7 what you spend every penny on.

They won't publish it but they will leak it  .

Who are they kidding? I don't even know why I ask myself that question, because it's obvious: the majority of the population who will welcome it as something positive and a modernisation.

We all know financial institutions are liars.  They always keep secret in order for us to not know that our money are being used by them to gain profit from the market.

What is the advantage in terms of convenience over paying by card? None. A lot to lose and nothing to gain.

At least we have another option... to be rekt  . 


On a serious note, financial institution has a different meaning of privacy when they say privacy, it is the censorship of leaking information on customer data and censorship of the information on how the financial institution uses the money deposited in the savings account of a client.

[avikz]

Lagarde had used "privacy" as a double-meaning word. Digital money will give privacy from other users. This essentially means, the person you are transacting with, will not be able to view your balance or your transaction history.

But the government will have full access to your transaction history. So there will be no anonymity. That's the main reason digital money is being introduced. Governments will now start looking into your finances and your spending. There's no surprise, to be honest! Whatever little privacy was offered by cash, will be gone with the introduction of digital money. The majority of governments are now trying to introduce the same due to this benefit because now it will be easier to catch a tax thief.

[bittraffic]

The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course.

Digital euro: a common European project

On the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off:

The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.

We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity – such as offered by cash – does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment – for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration – for which identities of users need to be known.

We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions.

So, no privacy.

NONE! How can you trust a centralized entity who says that they will give you your privacy. The cabal behind Central Banks WILL LIE to you, and make everyone believe that CBDC is good for society, and WILL LIE to you and convince everyone that Bitcoin censorship-resistance = "bad".

BUT CBDC should be encouraged by the community because it will make Bitcoin self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance more valuable.

The majority of the population doesn't really suspect what else is there when the government tries to experiment on them.

I believe many people/users of CBDC won't suspect anything during the first implementation. Everyone will be astonished in how "covenient", "fast", and "frictionless" CBDC usages are until one day the first iterations of censorship start to happen.

Will I be using CBDC? I will be using CBDC because everyone may never have a choice, BUT I will always have my Bitcoin if I need censorship-resistant, hard-money.

You will be forced to use CBDC since everyone will be using it and you may not be able to make transactions to buy something you need.

People are not aware in most cases. No one ever complains anymore because they are going to be poor by the time this war and the high gas price extends to another year. People are not aware they've experimented, we're all getting fooled by this climate change.

[Smartprofit]

CBDC is essentially an integral element of a dark dystopia of the future (an integral part of a digital concentration camp). 

It is impossible to talk about the privacy of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC).  CBDC alienates citizens of all countries from their money. 

CBDC privacy is the inability of citizens to control the country's financial system.  At the same time, the government gets the opportunity to fully control all financial flows in the country. 

Privacy is Monero (XMR), not CBDC...

[Wind_FURY]

CBDC is essentially an integral element of a dark dystopia of the future (an integral part of a digital concentration camp). 

It is impossible to talk about the privacy of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC).  CBDC alienates citizens of all countries from their money. 

CBDC privacy is the inability of citizens to control the country's financial system.  At the same time, the government gets the opportunity to fully control all financial flows in the country. 

Privacy is Monero (XMR), not CBDC...

CBDC is a private ledger wherein the government, or the Central Bank controls the whole system. You may be given some "privacy" from each other, but no privacy will be given to you from the point of view of the government. Although, CBDC "may" be useful for us Bitcoiners, merely to show how "good citizens" we are, and that we "prefer" CBDC over the "evil" Bitcoin. "Support" and use CBDC my fellow plebs.

[RealMalatesta]

CBDC is a private ledger wherein the government, or the Central Bank controls the whole system. You may be given some "privacy" from each other, but no privacy will be given to you from the point of view of the government. Although, CBDC "may" be useful for us Bitcoiners, merely to show how "good citizens" we are, and that we "prefer" CBDC over the "evil" Bitcoin. "Support" and use CBDC my fellow plebs.

That is a fact, and they will have everything on that ledger and that is good enough reason to know that it won't be privacy filled. Their privacy understanding is between people, meaning what you spend your money on will not be known by your friends, and that is understandable, considering how many government programs have been hacked, including FBI as most famous because they have so many secrets and hacking into it means death of so many people, I do not trust that they would be able to keep it a secret between people neither.

However, assuming that they mean that, they do not mean it's a privacy thing between you and government though, that's open channel for sure.

[Wind_FURY]

CBDC is a private ledger wherein the government, or the Central Bank controls the whole system. You may be given some "privacy" from each other, but no privacy will be given to you from the point of view of the government. Although, CBDC "may" be useful for us Bitcoiners, merely to show how "good citizens" we are, and that we "prefer" CBDC over the "evil" Bitcoin. "Support" and use CBDC my fellow plebs.

That is a fact, and they will have everything on that ledger and that is good enough reason to know that it won't be privacy filled. Their privacy understanding is between people, meaning what you spend your money on will not be known by your friends, and that is understandable, considering how many government programs have been hacked, including FBI as most famous because they have so many secrets and hacking into it means death of so many people, I do not trust that they would be able to keep it a secret between people neither.

However, assuming that they mean that, they do not mean it's a privacy thing between you and government though, that's open channel for sure.

Plus it's because it's the government's ledger, in which they can manually override transactions and program the ledger to not accept certain parameters, it's truly the opposite to the ETHOS of Bitcoin. It's a censorable, centralized, permissioned network for transactions. I said transactions, not money, because CBDC is not actual money.

We should continue to educate everyone on the differences. Both will be useful, but a person should always be HODLing some Bitcoin