cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/13133455

It used to be that you could insert a coin into a washing machine and it would simply work. Now some Danish and German apartment owners have decided it’s a good idea to remove the cash payment option. So you have to visit a website and top-up your laundry account before using the laundry room.

Is this wise?

Points of failure with traditional coin-fed systems:

  1. your coin gets stuck
  2. you don’t have the right denomination of coins

Points of failure with this KYC cashless gung-ho digital transformation system:

  1. your internet service goes down
  2. the internet service of the laundry room goes down
  3. the website is incompatible with your browser
  4. the website forces 3rd party JavaScript that’s either broken or you don’t trust it
  5. you cannot (or will not) solve CAPTCHA
  6. the website rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
  7. the payment processor rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
  8. the bank rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
  9. the payment processor is Paypal and you do not want to share sensitive financial data with 600 corporations
  10. the accepted payment forms do not match your payment cards
  11. the accepted payment form matches, but your card is still rejected anyway for one of many undisclosed reasons:
    • your card is on the same network but foreign cards are refused
    • the payment processor does not like your IP address
    • the copy of your ID doc on file with the bank expired, and the bank’s way of telling you is to freeze your card
    • it’s one of these new online-only bank cards with no CVV code printed on the card so to get your CVV code you must install their app from Google’s Playstore (this expands into 20+ more points of failure)
  12. your bank account is literally below the top-up minimum because you only have cash and your cashless bank does not accept cash deposits; so you cannot do laundry until you get a paycheck or arrange for an electronic transfer from a foreign bank at the cost of an extortionate exchange rate
  13. you cannot open a bank account because Danish banks refuse to serve people who do not yet have their CPR number (a process that takes at least 1 month).
  14. you are unbanked because of one of 24 reasons that Bruce Schneier does not know about
  15. the internet works when you start the wash load, but fails sometime during the program so you cannot use the dryers; in which case you suddenly have to run out and buy hanging mechanisms as your wet clothes sit.
  16. (edit) the app of your bank and/or the laundry service demands a newer phone OS than you have, and your phone maker quit offering updates.

In my case, I was hit with point of failure number 11. Payment processors never tell you why your payment is refused. They either give a uselessly vague error, or the web UI just refuses to move forward with no error, or the error is an intentional lie. Because e.g. if your payment is refused you are presumed to be a criminal unworthy of being informed.

Danish apartment management’s response to complaints: We are not obligated to serve you. Read the terms of your lease. There is a coin-operated laundromat 1km away.

Question: are we all being forced into this shitty cashless situation in order to ease the hunt for criminals?

    • freedomPusher@sopuli.xyzOPEnglish
      1·
      5 months ago

      It’s not spontaneous shopping. People don’t walk around with dirty clothes either. A laundromat inside an apartment building for the residents living therein is not in the market for people walking around. Customers do not need to carry around cash and need not buy a special wallet because they are walking directly from their apartment to the basement on a planned basis. They can put the cash in a sandwich bag and set it on top of their clothes.

      Cash is inherently inclusive.

      Cash accepts all people without exception. So cash just works from all standpoints: socioeconomic, legal, and from an engineering point of view. If someone does not like to touch money, that’s not cash failing to work; that’s a manifestation of Tyranny of Convenience (as described by Tim Wu) by someone choosing not to touch money. Such consumers are their own problem. Laughable to call that preference an engineering failure.

      Banking is inherently exclusive.

      Many demographics of people are involuntarily excluded. Banks have refused to open accounts for me. Banks are in the private sector and have a right to refuse service to people. European banks cannot refuse someone a “basic” account, but those basic accounts are not required to be free of charge and they cannot accept cash deposits so if you’re starting with cash such accounts are broken from the start. For people who banks accept there are countless disempowering circumstances consumers are forced to accept in return. Unlike those who don’t like to touch cash, people voluntarily objecting to banking have countless good compelling reasons for not pawning themselves.

      Banks violate human rights when they treat people differently based on their national origin. The privacy abuses actually also undermines human rights, as well as environmental harm inherent in forced periodic phone upgrades and in the banking industry’s fossil fuel investments. So when a consumer demands #forcedBanking because they don’t personally like the burden of carrying cash, it’s rather selfish that they prioritize some trivially esoteric convenience/novelty above human rights and also above people’s need to be free from nannies. So there is a very strong case for people to not bank by choice even if the bank accepts them. By comparison, it’s fair to dismiss anyone who supports forced banking simply on the basis of not liking the inconvenience of cash.

      A forced banking design violates several rules of the IEEE Code of Ethics

      “1. to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public, to strive to comply with ethical design and sustainable development practices, to protect the privacy of others, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment;”

      “II. To treat all persons fairly and with respect, to not engage in harassment or discrimination, and to avoid injuring others.”
      …
      “7. to treat all persons fairly and with respect, and to not engage in discrimination based on characteristics such as race, religion, gender, disability, age, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression;”

      The banking sector discriminates against people on the basis of national origin. So when an engineer designs as cashless system, they violate ¶7 of the IEEE code of ethics.