Valve confirms credit card companies pressured it to delist certain adult games

At least in Germany in particular older people prefer to pay cash if possible - this gives the banks also less leverage with respect to abhorent fees. Since many people in Germany neither trust the banks nor the government anymore, acting this way is very rational.

Also the arguments concerning cash restrictions are seen very differently by the population: since there existed two oppressive regimes on German soil in the 20th century, a lot of people realize that the restrictions on cash are just another step towards restrictions of the citizen's freedoms (thus I am honestly surprised all the time that a lot of US-Americans who are so freedom-loving and distrust the government concerning the restrictions of civil rights are not in love of cash).

Thus, in Germany there exists the saying "Bargeld ist gelebte Freiheit" [cash is lived freedom].

Speak for yourself, this is either heavily overstated or a fringe opinion, luckily. Most people definitely do trust both government and banks to a sensible degree, even if they don’t like some decisions.

Some people like you apparently also don’t appreciate the immense freedom of SEPA transactions. Sure it’s good to have cash as an escape hatch for the occasional transaction off the record, but for almost everything else bank transfers are safe, inaccessible to third parties, free from fees, and easy to use. And above all else, we have a working democracy and not an oppressive regime? This whole debate often feels very disconnected and overblown in Germany.

Sure, but that's for small, everyday amounts. For values upwards of 500€, I think the familiarity of paying cash would be swamped by the nervousness of carrying way too much money with you, what if it gets stolen?

> this gives the banks also less leverage with respect to abhorent fees

The only time my bank has ever charged me a per-transaction fee was, ironically, when I withdrew cash abroad using my credit card.

I suspect it's a combination of factors, one of them being that US cash has absolutely awful usability compared to the Euro.

In what way? One unpleasant discovery I made in Portugal (and also saw to some extent in Spain) was that ATM’s - every one I could find, including those that were bank-owned at physical branches - had a limit of EUR200 per transaction regardless of my own bank limit (at USD1000/day, that should have been at least EUR800).

And while convenience stores, fast food, etc., won’t take a bill over $20 (which is understandable but really a trifling sum when you consider inflation - it’s a fast-food breakfast for three people), many other businesses are happy to do so. Nothing above $100 is in circulation anymore, and inflation means that $100 in 1980 is worth over $400 in today’s money even by government figures. A $20 bill 45 years ago was worth almost $100 in today’s money. And, of course, cash declaration rules have not updated the amounts to reflect this.

Well as you can see from the US currently, a country that is now free and democratic, might not continue to do so in the future. But once you've given up the ability to use cash because you didn't need it then, how are you going to get it back when you do need it?

Besides, I’m not advocating for the abolishment of cash, but against dramatic claims of an evil scheme to control and spy on citizens. That’s a right-wing narrative in Germany, but nonsense nonetheless.

Also, I believe when buying used cars and such, most people still prefer cash transactions.

The major far-right fundamentalist opposition party has built its unprecedented success on a narrative of low government trust, and has been gaining ground in both polls and elections for years and years now.

So perhaps we shouldn't dismiss the parents' perspective entirely.

> Some people like you apparently also don’t appreciate the immense freedom of SEPA transactions.

If you include the wrong words in the transaction description, your account will almost certainly be cancelled. In a truly free payment system that safeguards democratic freedoms, these descriptions would be encrypted from end to end. (Just in the same way all personal communication should be protected.) This will, of course, never happen.

> And above all else, we have a working democracy and not an oppressive regime? This whole debate often feels very disconnected and overblown in Germany.

Any data we collect will probably be misused at some point in the future. Why take a risk with German institutions if we don't have to?

Germany recently experimented with greater financial control over some parts of the population, and it wasn't a total disaster in terms of control. In terms of freedom, however, it is a disaster.

Unfortunately, the source is German-language: https://netzpolitik.org/2024/faq-was-bezahlkarten-fuer-geflu...

Despite cash being a pillar of freedom and democracy in an open society, there is still no good anonymous alternative to it that is usable by normal people on a daily basis.

I had a debit card with some hundreds of EUR already charged, but I ended up using it with an NFC enabled smartphone.

No issues at all, even going in far places outside Barcelona. Everyone very receptive in BCN.

I looked at ATM terminals and they seemed full of rules and complications. I tried to get some cash just to collect the notes as a souvenir, but I gave up.

Again, everyone accepted my NFC enabled smartphone, I tested my debit NFC card and my local bank CC NFC card as well

So I think ATMs present a lot of friction for sure.

ApplePay connected to my no forex transaction credit card earning 3% cashback covered 95% of these transactions and a few times I had to use that credit card directly.

And yet, that is very far from the majority.

> If you include the wrong words in the transaction description, your account will almost certainly be cancelled.

That isn’t true. If you put "murder contract + 2kg heroin" in the description, at most a bank clerk will call to ask you to avoid that. The description is reviewed to detect fraud, and protects a lot of people from illicit transactions. We have that for the same reason we have KYC regulations; you may disagree with it, but it protects a lot of people, right now. If you need to obfuscate the description, you’re free to use an encrypted string or a numeric reference without any trouble.

> Any data we collect will probably be misused at some point in the future. Why take a risk with German institutions if we don't have to?

There are valid arguments against widespread cash usage; money handling is one of the top expenses in retail, for example. There also is fraud potential actively being used for sure. Yet, I don’t hear anyone working on completely abolishing cash, which is just not going to happen. Still, even Germans could benefit from questioning our ways from time to time.

So, you compare the whole USA to only a part of Europe? Why is that?

Euro bills differ clearly in color and size, which means they are quickly identified.

Also the Euro coins differ in shape and size quite a lot, which is easy to identify blind even when handled individually. More than U.S. coins which are more similar.

I don't know about an objective difference caused by the fact that 1€ and 2€ are coins and bills start only at 5€ whereas the one dollar coin isn't much used in favor of the one dollar bill.

Banking in Croatia is like UK banking 40 years ago, or at least it is with Erste. Charged even just to have the account.

They even charge me to send me an email to tell me I logged in to the online banking.

Hell even France, everyone's just lucky that de Gaulle wasn't much into dictatorship.

maybe if it was larger, thicker, and a more dense material. most of those matter more to the person holding it, rather than an observer, though

I was traveling with family so spending limits were higher than 5 euros

I’m talking about the post-WW2 order, which has been remarkably solid. Until Trump showed up, that is. But even the USA are still a working democracy, despite all the fear of an authoritarian regime. So I would at least argue for a bit of calm and reason before proclaiming the end of freedom due to discontinued 500€ notes.

I think there are a lot of Americans who distrust government/banks and try to deal in cash as much as they can. And there are a lot of people here who have bad credit and can't get a credit card, and quite a few unbanked lower-income folks who don't have bank accounts or debit cards.

But I think maybe as someone from another country you're misinterpreting the whole "individual freedom" thing that a lot of Americans push. I don't think cash vs. credit cards is really a big part of that, for whatever reason. While it is more common in some places in the US these days for some businesses to not take cash at all, still the vast majority of businesses do take cash, and everyone has a choice in how they'll pay.

There's also a financial engineering component, as most credit cards in the US offer some kind of rewards program or cash back for purchases made. For example, a credit card I have, when used for Lyft rides, gives me the equivalent of 7.5% off (I have to use the savings for travel costs through the credit card's travel site, but that's fine and worth it for me). Some cards are simple and just offer 1% or 2% back and that's it, but some have categories (like "3% cash back for gasoline purchases"), and some people get into the "game" of trying to match a credit card with a purchase to get the most cash back.

And even for people who don't get into the "game", they certainly won't mind a "free" 1% or 2% discount on everything just for using a credit card. Some businesses offer a discount for paying cash, or a surcharge for using a credit card, but many do not, so if you pay with cash, you're essentially overpaying, since the cost of credit card fees is built into the prices. (This is of course another way that poor people who can't get credit cards get screwed.)

I guess often enough, convenience and saving money wins over the whole "freedom" thing for people here.

Finally, I think there's also a bit of separation. Many credit cards don't even feel like they're associated with a bank. Many larger retail stores offer a branded credit card that of course has a Visa or MasterCard logo on it, but you have to dig to find mention of an actual bank. So even Americans who might distrust government and banks just don't see a strong association there when it comes to credit cards.

I also just don't think there's that much bank distrust going on in the US. Sure, people are still sore about the financial crisis of 2008, but also consider that was 17 years ago. We haven't had big bank issues in the US where banks devalue currency, or follow government orders to across-the-board steal money from citizens, at least not in widespread ways. People generally love to rag on banks when it comes to fees and penalties and hidden costs and crap like that, but many of those things have been made illegal, and, again, even for a bank-issued credit card, I think many people just don't make that association. It's just an easier way to make payments, without the risk of carrying cash around (and with protection if the card gets stolen and used), and sometimes you get discounts and cash back... what's not to like?

(I remember reading long ago that if if a potential customer has to leave the dealership to go secure the proper form of payment, a significant percent just don't come back at all. They want to keep you there until you buy something, fairly standard sales tactic.)

But for a regular person just trying to sell their own car directly to someone else, they're absolutely going to want a cashier's check or cash. (Even the cashier's check can be risky; I doubt your average person is an expert in detecting a fraudulent one.)

I know quite a lot of people in Germany who think this way. In particular during the time when there was a risk of negative interest on savings (when this topic was brought up by politicians and banksters) these people were much more open in shouting out their political opinions.

Also the anti-corona measures separated the population into two groups:

1. Those who were in favour of the anti-corona measures also became more open with respect to paying with cards (well, to help avoiding the spread the virus)

2. Those who were against it became much more distrusting towards politicians (for obvious reasons) and banks afterwards. Why also banks? Because various groups at that time brought up idea that anti-vaxxers should be de-banked.

So, I am quite sure I'm not overstating. But if you only hang up with specific groups of people, it is in my opinion eather easy not to get in contact to those who think this way.

(In Canada, I’ve never actually seen a certified/cashier’s cheque used for anything. My house downpayment and vehicle purchase were both done via bank draft.)

Germany is basically 16 countries (federal states [Bundesländer]). Europe is a whole countinent - here a suitable American analogue miht be USA+Canada+Middle America. Or if we talk about the EU, a suitable analogue would be NAFTA (the EU also started as a set of free trade agreements).

Remember that our parent said, "Many people in Germany neither trust the banks nor the government." You denied that, and I suggested that the turnout for the AfD might be a useful proxy for institutional distrust. I don't know how the reference to majorities fits here or what argument it is intended to support. Presumably, there are also people in other parties who distrust public institutions, right? Why are we talking about majorities now?

I argued that the SEPA system has several flaws, one of which is the lack of privacy surrounding transaction descriptions. This can have consequences far more serious than receiving a call from a bank. While banks do check flagged transactions, if a certain number of criteria are met, they will definitely escalate your transaction to the authorities. This is a legal requirement, by the way — it's not specific to any particular bank. This can be mitigated almost entirely by using cash.

As you did not answer my question about why to gamble on institutional consistency, I wonder: Would you actively argue in favour of greater surveillance of the payment sector?

This would align with your seemingly tongue-in-cheek suggestion to manually encrypt transaction descriptions. Payment privacy can only foster democratic resilience if it is enabled by default. It's like saying an instant messaging app doesn't need end-to-end encryption for personal communication because users can encrypt the text by hand.

> There are valid arguments against widespread cash usage; money handling is one of the top expenses in retail, for example.

Liberty is not usually defined in monetary terms. For instance, regular elections are costly. We still do not eliminate them for economic benefit. Similarly, I think the idea of removing the option of payment privacy to reduce transaction costs is cynical, or very radical.

> Yet, I don’t hear anyone working on completely abolishing cash, which is just not going to happen.

I don't know why intention would be relevant here. The use of cash has been declining in Germany (and the EU) for quite some time now. This basic fact is not new or disputed by anyone in this field. To deny the decline of cash as a proportion of overall payments would be counterfactual.

Problems arising from reduced cash usage, such as the vulnerability of civil society and the reduced resilience of democratic institutions, occur regardless of whether someone is actively working to abolish cash payments.