The current trend of removing cash is a serious mistake

kenmm

Another aspect is security in general. Every transaction logged, so more companies have to maintain this data. Criminals may stop attacking ATM machines with JCBs, but expect cybercrime to go up (Phone scams, vishing and other social engineering, attacks on companies holding data etc).

You can't really trust large companies to do the right thing regarding security - many large companies fail at this all the time (EasyJet being a recent one, albeit a retail/travel company, but financial institutions suck at this as well).

seamus

kenmm wrote: »

Another aspect is security in general. Every transaction logged, so more companies have to maintain this data. Criminals may stop attacking ATM machines with JCBs, but expect cybercrime to go up (Phone scams, vishing and other social engineering, attacks on companies holding data etc).

You can't really trust large companies to do the right thing regarding security - many large companies fail at this all the time (EasyJet being a recent one, albeit a retail/travel company, but financial institutions suck at this as well).

This is the big one.

Companies need to become much, much, much better at handling data. The vast majority of companies do absolutely the bare minimum, 50% of Irish companies have no actual data security policies.

If you think about data as a valuable commodity, even the guy who owns a small newsagent, has a security "policy" to keep his till secure. On a busy day he'll empty the till halfway through the day to stop it getting stolen, at the end of the day he'll remove the cash drawer completely and lock it away.

Small companies who handle personal data on the other hand, save it to an unsecured location and there it remains for the next 15 years, vulnerable to theft at any point.

Data security is more complex, but it doesn't have to be. A national body with responsibility for guiding and auditing companies towards best practice is a must.
The DPC nominally has this job now, but they're too focussed at the corporate end, they produce guides that are 50 pages long and filled with technical language. Following the guides and implementing them is something that can only be properly done by a company with 1,000 people and an in-house security and legal team.

A small software company of 10 have neither the resources or the expertise to go through it, even though they could be storing personal data or card data for hundreds of thousands of people.

kenmm

seamus wrote: »

A small software company of 10 have neither the resources or the expertise to go through it, even though they could be storing personal data or card data for hundreds of thousands of people.

Actually - doing things right is getting easier and easier - but a lot of the time people (developers, business stakehoders) are lazy. Don't prioritise security over other "must have" features or too lazy to implement best practices.

But ye - its a big issue - I went to sign up for a gym, they wanted a photo of my face to save me tapping a card on entry. F-that - U have no idea who is responsible for storing my facial data. Its probably secure and at the moment an attacker can't do much with that information, but what tools are going to be available to help the attackers in the future? Can they use that data to access some other dodgy (financial) application?


Getting off topic slightly, but the point is, when it comes to technology - you need to think about future usages of data that are not possible yet.

tobefrank321

meeeeh wrote: »

So anyone who disagrees with you is either an addict or criminal. Nice.

That's not what I said. But its obvious some people don't want banks knowing what they are spending money on because they are afraid of not getting a mortgage. If you are spending large amounts of money off the books, then its probably best for everyone if you don't apply for a mortgage because you could end up having your house repossessed down the line.

As for corporations getting their hands on your data, newsflash, corporations already hold massive amounts of data on you, most of it far more personal and intrusive than what you spend your money on.

Most people already have almost every detail of their lives splashed across social media.

And applications like Alexa can and do occasionally listen in on your conversations.

https://time.com/5568815/amazon-workers-listen-to-alexa/

We all have a significant data footprint whether we like it or not, and avoiding credit cards isn't going to change that. And has been stated numerous times, even if health insurance providers could see your credit card transactions, they cannot see that you bought cigarettes for example, because credit card statements don't go into that detail.

4068ac1elhodqr

kenmm wrote: »

Another aspect is security in general. Every transaction logged, so more companies have to maintain this data. Criminals may stop attacking ATM machines with JCBs, but expect cybercrime to go up (Phone scams, vishing and other social engineering, attacks on companies holding data etc).

Agree, perhaps the folks over N'Korea have made most of their wealth of late using global harddrive lockdowns (cyber encryption). Their (only) preferred release option and means of contract fulfilment to this issue, was that of crossing their palms with Bitcoinage.

joseywhales

All of these systems are fine, if all data is fully encrypted and not recoverable. From the developers themselves to the agency that sponsors it.

tjhook

I may be an outlier, but I dislike having data recorded about my life, no matter what assurances I'm given about its security and uses. Rather than asking "what's the problem with having it stored?", I'd rather ask "Why would I want that data be stored?". GDPR became seen as a bit of a bogeyman, but I think that was its original intent.

Nobody cares (I hope) if I bought a bag of chips this afternoon. Except theoretically for the marketing companies that can use the information to target me more accurately, the health insurance companies that might like to know I'm an unhealthy slob and my employer who mightn't be delighted to see me heading out to the shops during the working day.

None of those things are allowed right now. But they could be possible in the future. Storing the data only creates a temptation for organisations to find uses for it. I don't benefit from the existence of data showing all my purchases, so why would I want this data to be generated?

kenmm

joseywhales wrote: »

All of these systems are fine, if all data is fully encrypted and not recoverable. From the developers themselves to the agency that sponsors it.

Thats like saying everything is safe if everything is kept safe.

Its a very big if and not as simple as you might imagine. If you work in IT, then its a very naive statement.

RandomViewer

El Tarangu wrote: »

This makes zero difference: if you sell €50k of anything, there will be some degree of tax due.

Why? If Revenue are that mad for the money they should gather the scrap themselves , tax is already paid on it it's illegal to take twice,

RandomViewer

RandomViewer wrote: »

Scrap metal, whatever tax would have been paid when the item was new, revenue have no entitlements to tax for scrap or second hand goods,
Funny it's cents per litre on fuel, would lose too much when price drops.

RandomViewer wrote: »

Why? If Revenue are that mad for the money they should gather the scrap themselves , tax is already paid on it it's illegal to take twice,

Very strange views............... second hand car dealers have no tax liability according to you.

Actual scrap dealers pay tax btw.

Tax is paid on income and profit except on the likes of
- "profit" on sale of PPR
- if you buy a car, use it as your car and sell it on again for a profit
etc etc
Do anything to make money and there's almost certainly a tax liability.

joseywhales

kenmm wrote: »

Thats like saying everything is safe if everything is kept safe.

Its a very big if and not as simple as you might imagine. If you work in IT, then its a very naive statement.

I am not an expert but....

I cannot see an impediment to the implementation if the motivation is to achieve total blinding.

The issue is that will not be the requirement.

4068ac1elhodqr

tjhook wrote: »

I may be an outlier, but I dislike having data recorded about my life, no matter what assurances I'm given about its security and uses. Rather than asking "what's the problem with having it stored?", I'd rather ask "Why would I want that data be stored?". GDPR became seen as a bit of a bogeyman, but I think that was its original intent.

Nobody cares (I hope) if I bought a bag of chips this afternoon. Except theoretically for the marketing companies that can use the information to target me more accurately, the health insurance companies that might like to know I'm an unhealthy slob and my employer who mightn't be delighted to see me heading out to the shops during the working day.

None of those things are allowed right now. But they could be possible in the future. Storing the data only creates a temptation for organisations to find uses for it. I don't benefit from the existence of data showing all my purchases, so why would I want this data to be generated?

Very true you only have to look at San Fran and Silicon Valley , the hub of technical or software innovation. Said they'd put an outright ban any public facial recognition cameras. Also Google (do no evil), dare not dare perform what others (Clearview^) have already done (^3bn faces already on it's digital books), and called it a red line. G'Glasses using AR overlays, would actually have been the perfect tool to realise Clearview's dream.

If your packed of crisp(s) was a daily purchase, and the precise brand had recorded elevated levels of acrylamide (they often do), insurance companies could/would circle a very specifiC risk for reduced payout.

Any cashless society is an open book to all consumer and corporate spending, very useful and efficient, but also very open.

ShooterSF

There is also another point I haven't seen mentioned but I can buy something with a card way easier than if I have to start taking notes out of my wallet. I guess it's similar to how casinos like to give you chips as they are easier to spend than cash. I remember living with an accountant, a nice chap, who would meticulously go through a budget for the week and never used cash and us laughing at each other's system as I would take out the money I had to spend for the week and what was in my wallet was my budget.

RandomViewer

Augeo wrote: »

Very strange views............... second hand car dealers have no tax liability according to you.

Actual scrap dealers pay tax btw.

Tax is paid on income and profit except on the likes of
- "profit" on sale of PPR
- if you buy a car, use it as your car and sell it on again for a profit
etc etc
Do anything to make money and there's almost certainly a tax liability.

They are registered businesses, someone gathering junk in their own time is different, they aren't making anything, just tidying up, none of anyone else's business

GazzaL

Cash is king. I've gone through phases of mostly using debit or credit cards, always paying off credit cards in full every month, but you can't beat Johnny Cash. While I don't have anything to hide, I don't like the idea of any random bank employee being able to see everything that I spend my money on. There's no risk of being unable to make a payment because of a card being blocked. There's no risk of being unable to make a large payment due to some banks limitations on card transaction values. There's also no risk of being unable to access funds as a result of IT updates and IT failures.

Many people find cash easier to use to control spending as it is much more "real" than electronic payments.

Geuze

tjhook wrote: »

I may be an outlier, but I dislike having data recorded about my life, no matter what assurances I'm given about its security and uses. Rather than asking "what's the problem with having it stored?", I'd rather ask "Why would I want that data be stored?". GDPR became seen as a bit of a bogeyman, but I think that was its original intent.

Off-topic, but I want my health data recorded in my GP, and linked to the hosp.

If I collapse in Clonakilty, and a paramedic arrives, I want them, or a doctor in nearest hosp, to be able to pull up my records.

Geuze

I will try to look up cash in circulation stats:

https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/money_credit_banking/monetary_aggregates/html/index.en.html


April 2020 money supply data:
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/stats/md/html/ecb.md2004~42820d7c46.en.html


This may be better:
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/policy_and_exchange_rates/banknotes+coins/circulation/html/index.en.html


Value of cash in circulation is rising, not falling.

4068ac1elhodqr

Geuze wrote: »

Off-topic, but I want my health data recorded in my GP, and linked to the hosp.

If I collapse in Clonakilty, and a paramedic arrives, I want them, or a doctor in nearest hosp, to be able to pull up my records.

Likely this is already the case.

But would you also like them to know what you had for breakfast last week, what magazines are on your coffee table, and if you got a bus all last week instead of walking, when (e.g.) agreeing to do more exercise, reduce BMI and reduce co2 emissions, perhaps at a prior meeting, now subject to penalty.

JJJackal

Mavis Panicky Easel wrote: »

Likely this is already the case.

But would you also like them to know what you had for breakfast last week, what magazines are on your coffee table, and if you got a bus all last week instead of walking, when (e.g.) agreeing to do more exercise, reduce BMI and reduce co2 emissions, perhaps at a prior meeting, now subject to penalty.

This is definitely not the case. If your in Clonakility its unlikely someone in CUH knows your history. Assuming your brought to CUH

RandomViewer

Geuze wrote: »

Off-topic, but I want my health data recorded in my GP, and linked to the hosp.

If I collapse in Clonakilty, and a paramedic arrives, I want them, or a doctor in nearest hosp, to be able to pull up my records.

Don't think it is, heard someone on the other day saying that lots of hospital records are still only on paper

Sarcozies

I abhor the "well if you have nothing to hide" argument with regards to privacy. Do ye live in glass houses? **** with the toilet door open? I doubt it. At least I hope you don't. Also, just because you are in agreement with the powers that be currently, political or corporate, doesn't mean that future entities won't use these for nefarious manners. It's the same reason stipulations on speech are dangerous. If anyone can point me to evidence that the majority of people wanting privacy be it at home, online, or with the current example of cash over plastic are doing so to protect criminal enterprises or participate in illegal activities I would read them.
Guilty before innocent should never be on the table.

ShatterAlan

McGaggs wrote: »

Don't forget the ATM tax you'll be paying to get your money out.

Is that tax?


And when I go to a machine that doesn't have any charges...what's that?

ShatterAlan

Geuze wrote: »

A slow movement away from cash and towards card/online payments has no direct link to tax. I don't get what you mean?

If a haircut is 10 + 13.5% VAT = 11.35, the amount of tax does not depend on the payment method.

If I pay by cash or card in Tesco, the VAT is the same.

Perhaps you might elaborate?

Every transaction you make is recorded.


Now back in the good old days of the Warsaw Pact your letters could be opened and read. Correct?


In the digital age your correspondence can be read unbeknownst to the recipient. A torn envelope back in the 80's was a signal. An email that arrives is no drama.


To summarise....if I want to give you money and the ONLY way to do that is via an eletcronic, recordable transfer, does it not beg the question that the business between you and I is nobody else's "business".?


And I'm not talking about not paying tax.....I'm talking about privacy. Who's business is it if my daughter walks your dogs or your son washes my car?

tobefrank321

ShatterAlan wrote: »

Every transaction you make is recorded.


Now back in the good old days of the Warsaw Pact your letters could be opened and read. Correct?


In the digital age your correspondence can be read unbeknownst to the recipient. A torn envelope back in the 80's was a signal. An email that arrives is no drama.


To summarise....if I want to give you money and the ONLY way to do that is via an eletcronic, recordable transfer, does it not beg the question that the business between you and I is nobody else's "business".?


And I'm not talking about not paying tax.....I'm talking about privacy. Who's business is it if my daughter walks your dogs or your son washes my car?

No one cares what money you give your daughter or son.

What people do care about is if your daughter or son sets up as a business, takes large amounts of cash and does not pay tax, while competing against a company that does pay tax. And these cash in hand businesses certainly do exist and should be brought to book. Most of their transactions are untraceable and with no records of them taking place.

double jobbing

double jobbing wrote: »

I'd say 50 percent of small purchases I make, I have the exact amount ready.

Can you complete a tap and go transaction in under 2 seconds? vs a minimum of 12 for tap and go?

For every person like you, there is another one who fumbles in handbag / arse pocket, spills coins over the till, is 2c short, and takes ages. Or someone who counts out 200 coins to pay for a €10 item. Tap and go is fast.

I agree though that cash shouldn't disappear completely.

Mavis Panicky Easel

Mavis Panicky Easel wrote: »

Likely this is already the case.

But would you also like them to know what you had for breakfast last week, what magazines are on your coffee table, and if you got a bus all last week instead of walking, when (e.g.) agreeing to do more exercise, reduce BMI and reduce co2 emissions, perhaps at a prior meeting, now subject to penalty.

Under GDPR, it shouldn't be, unless you gave your express consent, which you can withdraw at any time. Medical data has even stricter laws than standard personal data.

Mavis Panicky Easel

Mavis Panicky Easel wrote: »

.......................

If your packed of crisp(s) was a daily purchase, and the precise brand had recorded elevated levels of acrylamide (they often do), insurance companies could/would circle a very specifiC risk for reduced payout.

Any cashless society is an open book to all consumer and corporate spending, very useful and efficient, but also very open.

that level of detail isn't on credit card / debit card statements, the receipts aren't attached. The bank has no notion what you actually bought in that particular transaction.

RandomViewer wrote: »

They are registered businesses, someone gathering junk in their own time is different, they aren't making anything, just tidying up, none of anyone else's business

That's called a sideline, if there's profit to be made there's tax to be paid.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/additional-incomes/is-your-extra-income-taxable/index.aspx

How do I declare this extra income?
If you receive payments under €5,000, use myAccount to declare this income on your Income Tax Return. If you receive payments over €5,000 a year, you will need to register for self-assessment. Once you register, file your tax return form on Revenue Online Services (ROS).

4068ac1elhodqr

Augeo wrote: »

that level of detail isn't on credit card / debit card statements, the receipts aren't attached. The bank has no notion what you actually bought in that particular transaction.

Perhaps (not that a retail's ePOS db hasn't got it stored somewhere if some digging was really required, to cross reference bar codes, time stamps etc).


Most likely it refers to online shopping e.g. Amazon where itemised lists are easier to find per customer.

ohnonotgmail

Mavis Panicky Easel wrote: »

Likely this is already the case.

But would you also like them to know what you had for breakfast last week, what magazines are on your coffee table, and if you got a bus all last week instead of walking, when (e.g.) agreeing to do more exercise, reduce BMI and reduce co2 emissions, perhaps at a prior meeting, now subject to penalty.

not even close to being a reality.

4068ac1elhodqr

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not even close to being a reality.

Access to medical data between registered medical practitioners would be the perfect environment for sharing data, if this is not the case.
Every GP, and hosiptal ward, has a computer on desk, a database click away.

Whereas the face scans across many modern cities, across retail, and travel hubs (often announced),
nevermind Clearview's 3BN records, both really require better discussion.

For a moderate fee, you can buy a Clearview licence, and with standard camera, identify (with immense contextual detail), the majority of folks a busy populated high street, almost anywhere in the world.

But an ambulance crew can't access your blood group type, just after suffering Audi R8 generated femoral artery damage upon crossing the road.