The threat of privacy

[Zenaan Harkness]

It is a human right to participate in any financial system imposed / instituted upon us.

We have the right to financial agency.

Participation in our community requires that we have the right to participate in the financial system of the day.

Privacy is another fundamental human right.

Folks need to live their human rights.

Use it or lose it.




On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 12:01:20PM -0400, John Young wrote:
> Good stuff. Thanks.
> 
> Reminds that cryptography has led to the loss of privacy by tagging crypto
> users, coders, rebels!, promoters, investors. So too cryptocurrency, the
> Internet, anonymizers, TOR, drop boxes, secure drops, Signal, Telegram, burst
> transmissions, privacy policies, pro-encryption advocates, comsec wizards, the
> array of promissories one by one gobbling gullible adopters urged on by lists
> like this and social media, MSM. financial greeders, hackers, leak sites,
> turncoats needing pensions.
> 
> To be sure, "cash' the imaginaire of economists, is not the same as paper
> money which can also be tracked by human residue, transactional spoors,
> aggrieved victims, informers, world bank scholars under contract to finger
> malefactors, family members eager to payback those who fucked them, dear Mary
> tell what you know.
> 
> At 10:38 AM 8/3/2020, you wrote:
> 
> > http://www.kahnfrance.com/cmk/The%20threat%20of%20privacy%20distribution%20version.pdf
> > 
> > 
> > The Threat of Privacy
> > By Charles M. Kahn1
> > 
> > Like artists, we academics want to believe that if one of our works
> > doesn’t get enough attention it’s because we’re ahead of our time.
> > I’d like to pretend that everything I’ve written is pathbreaking, and
> > will eventually be recognized for its true importance. But I have to admit
> > that there are really only a couple of cases where I can say with
> > hindsight that something I wrote has been ahead of its time.
> > 
> > One of them2 is a paper written with Jamie McAndrews and Will Roberds,
> > published in 2005, and titled “Money is Privacy.” We wrote it partly
> > as a response to Narayana Kocherlakota’s famous paper “Money is
> > Memory,” which could be taken as arguing that cash is essentially a
> > record‐keeping device, tracking who was a net creditor and who a net
> > debtor to society with respect to resources provided or consumed. The
> > implication was that if it became easy to keep credit records directly,
> > cash could wither away.
> > In our paper we argued instead that a key role of cash was its ability to
> > protect the purchaser’s identity. So we predicted that, even while the
> > reductions in costs of record keeping and increases in the speed of data
> > transmission were expanding the usage of credit‐ and
> > deposit‐account‐ based payments arrangements, cash would survive.
> > Because the desire for privacy would always generate demand for cash, it
> > would be a mistake—and ultimately futile—to attempt to abolish it. At the
> > te time, people were attuned to many of the problems of privacy, but there
> > had not yet been a clear recognized link between the value of privacy and
> > the role of payments systems. (Remember, bitcoin was only released in
> > 2009).
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > 
> > 1 Keynote address at “Financial Market Infrastructure Conference II: New
> > Thinking in a New Era” at De Nederlandsche Bank, Amsterdam, 7‐8 June
> > 2017.
> > 2 The other was my dissertation, back in 1980. It was on liquidity and the
> > pricing of illiquid assets. At that time, no one thought this was an
> > important issue in finance: financial markets were liquid; everybody
> > “knew” that. So the work went nowhere. Oh well.
> 
>