Taler Systems SA is looking for investors for development of GNU Taler(taler.net)
taler.net
Taler Systems SA is looking for investors for development of GNU Taler
https://taler.net/en/news/2022-11.html
59 コメント
>taxable
nah thanks
nah thanks
If your vision for the future is a form of money that enables massive scale tax evasion you probably won’t get a whole lot of buy-in from the people with guns who are funded by taxes.
There’s little chance that any form of digital currency that does not allow for tax evasion at then same level we currently have will ever take off. The people doing the tax evasion are the ones running the world.
The thugs who take your money by force using guns don’t like the idea of not taking your money? You don’t say.
ETH_start(3)
That is a lot to put aside. Of course physical/legacy cash has its own problems. They are all the same problems at root though what with human nature being what it is.
You're simply eager to trade one set of problems for the other as nobody can stop you from writing software but you are not authorized to write laws.
Say you were god-emperor of the world with the power to redesign, and enforce, how physical cash and existing monetary/payments systems work in real life - it becomes a distinction without a difference.
Somehow - despite all the good intentions - we always end up with an eclectic mix of nerds reinventing wheels, self righteous power mad Che Guevara's, opportunistic grifters, and lottery players.
You're simply eager to trade one set of problems for the other as nobody can stop you from writing software but you are not authorized to write laws.
Say you were god-emperor of the world with the power to redesign, and enforce, how physical cash and existing monetary/payments systems work in real life - it becomes a distinction without a difference.
Somehow - despite all the good intentions - we always end up with an eclectic mix of nerds reinventing wheels, self righteous power mad Che Guevara's, opportunistic grifters, and lottery players.
Obviously because that is how the system was designed. What did you expect? Without the ability to express negative interest rates the only way for the system to continue is through grifting.
I mean think about for a second. Positive rates mean more want to borrow than others want to save.
Negative rates mean less people want to borrow than others want to save.
If you don't think borrowers have a right to repay their debts then what exactly did people expect to happen? Are we supposed to blame debtors for their systematic inability to pay even though we decided they don't have the right to repay?
I mean think about for a second. Positive rates mean more want to borrow than others want to save.
Negative rates mean less people want to borrow than others want to save.
If you don't think borrowers have a right to repay their debts then what exactly did people expect to happen? Are we supposed to blame debtors for their systematic inability to pay even though we decided they don't have the right to repay?
> Without the ability to express negative interest rates the only way for the system to continue is through grifting.
I mean think about for a second. Positive rates mean more want to borrow than others want to save.
I'm not sure what you mean. The European Central Bank has dabbled with negative interest rates. So have others.
Anything you can express in a system like Taler you could conceivably replicate in existing financial systems, it always just comes down to political will.
I'm not sure what you mean. The European Central Bank has dabbled with negative interest rates. So have others.
Anything you can express in a system like Taler you could conceivably replicate in existing financial systems, it always just comes down to political will.
When I clicked the link, my browser (Brave on Android) gave a popup saying "did you mean taleo.net, lots of scam websites try and make similar names.
I've never seen a warning like that, but it's at least an interesting coincidence given Brave is vaguely crypto-scam focused. I don't know enough about either Brave or Taler to know of there is any overlap in their interests, it's more likely just a coincidence, but still odd
I've never seen a warning like that, but it's at least an interesting coincidence given Brave is vaguely crypto-scam focused. I don't know enough about either Brave or Taler to know of there is any overlap in their interests, it's more likely just a coincidence, but still odd
With an edit distance of one from the suggested URL, it's more likely to be a misfire of a well-intentioned system.
I'm interested in the business plan for Taler SA. I find it super cool to have a for-profit company provide a paid service with the open source software with the (non-profit) goal to promote the adoption of the software/system.
Short version: see RedHat. Long version: contact us.
But who are the customers for that business model? Central banks looking to roll out their own digital currency? companies involved with complicated supply chains that want to use some kind of pseudo-monetary credits for managing internal resources? payment processors that want to accept a cryptocurrency unburdened by a reputation for money laundering, sex trafficking, and drug dealing?
I want to work on this!
I'm looking forward to helping raise these millions and making the wheels turn. 5 million is really not that big of an ask here.
Massive potential here. They're not asking for much either.
”Chief moral officer” – is this some kind of weird in-joke or meant verbatim as stated? I don’t get it.
It's not a joke. Taler is all about scolding crypto people for not paying taxes.
I took it more to mean that the role held by RMS is to ensure that Taler remains free software (as in freedom) as defined by FSF. He also mentions in the video that he is there to ensure that Taler remains free software (as in freedom). It is my impression that in the eyes of RMS and FSF, non-free software is immoral. And hence the title, I think.
I see. It appears to be yet another instance of Stallman being Stallman. I’m going to be very surprised if this goes anywhere at all.
Towards the end of the video, when talking about anonymity they use graphics associated with the loosely defined “Anonymous”.
I wonder what /g/ and /biz/ feel about GNU Taler. I feel like /g/ ought to like it. I don’t know if the opinion of /g/ and /biz/ on this matters anyway though :p The “Anonymous” graphics just got me to think of them.
Also it’s interesting to hear in the video that GNU Taler can work in conjunction with cryptocurrencies, while GNU Taler itself is not a cryptocurrency, and that GNU Taler does not add any additional volatility on top of the volatility of the underlaying payment currency itself. Makes me wonder if they have any resources on accepting payments in BTC or ETH using GNU Taler.
I wonder what /g/ and /biz/ feel about GNU Taler. I feel like /g/ ought to like it. I don’t know if the opinion of /g/ and /biz/ on this matters anyway though :p The “Anonymous” graphics just got me to think of them.
Also it’s interesting to hear in the video that GNU Taler can work in conjunction with cryptocurrencies, while GNU Taler itself is not a cryptocurrency, and that GNU Taler does not add any additional volatility on top of the volatility of the underlaying payment currency itself. Makes me wonder if they have any resources on accepting payments in BTC or ETH using GNU Taler.
https://arbor.bfh.ch/17195/ describes how to accept BTC or ETH using GNU Taler.
I have never seen /g/ discuss it outside of DigiCash's failure.
In /biz/ there is a general sense of dread about anything related to "CBDCs". /biz/xmr has a more balanced opinion
You comment about cryptocurrency backed chaumian cash, there is already a project for this aimed at increasing the efficiency and privacy of bitcoin spends: https://fedimint.org/
You comment about cryptocurrency backed chaumian cash, there is already a project for this aimed at increasing the efficiency and privacy of bitcoin spends: https://fedimint.org/
I know they say it isn't a currency on their main page, but my first thought after reading it was a GNU-backed payment platform was "Stallman-bucks".
"Stallbucks?"
> GNU Taler is developed as part of the GNU project for the GNU operating system.
Ha, yes, the GNU operating system. I appreciate GNU's commitment to this idea notion that they are developing an operating system (for which Linux is just the kernel)! And, I mean, I understand their thinking (I think). But it stills makes me chuckle for some reason.
Ha, yes, the GNU operating system. I appreciate GNU's commitment to this idea notion that they are developing an operating system (for which Linux is just the kernel)! And, I mean, I understand their thinking (I think). But it stills makes me chuckle for some reason.
GNU Taler seems totally obsoleted by something like Monero. Can anyone enlighten me on the advantages of Taler?
It's the complete opposite. Taler wants to make decentralized transactions while keeping accountability and transparency. The idea of Taler is to have a system where buyers and sellers can have their data report to the authorities (at least what is needed for tax/compliance reasons) completely automatically.
You could do that with Monero as well. Ultimately, you would use a taxable system because you’re honest and want to pay taxes. So nothing about using Monero prevents the parties from reporting their transactions to tax authorities. Just as nothing prevents merchants from reporting their cash transactions.
Taler is basically a framework for issuing something like a gift card
The T in Taler stands for "taxable", and that's a big difference. Depending on where you (or your government) stand on the spectrum between maximum privacy and maximum accountability, Taler may be a better fit than Monero.
Taler does not even appear to come close.
It requires a central authority.
It seems distinctly less useful than bitcoin. And I despise bitcoin.
It requires a central authority.
It seems distinctly less useful than bitcoin. And I despise bitcoin.
One is a chaumian cash system, the other is cryptocurrency with sender-obfuscation by ring-signatures.
The technical differences are too many for me to enumerate here. They are completely different technologies that make different efficiency-privacy-decentralization tradeoffs.
Functionally, Taler (and other forms of chaumian cash) are payment systems and not currencies. It requires a bank to implement it, in this sense it is less de-centralized, but likely much more efficient as there is no need for network consensus (because it depends on a central entity's blind signatures, etc. anyway). It has different (possibly better) privacy charichteristics than monero. They are both free and open source projects.
The technical differences are too many for me to enumerate here. They are completely different technologies that make different efficiency-privacy-decentralization tradeoffs.
Functionally, Taler (and other forms of chaumian cash) are payment systems and not currencies. It requires a bank to implement it, in this sense it is less de-centralized, but likely much more efficient as there is no need for network consensus (because it depends on a central entity's blind signatures, etc. anyway). It has different (possibly better) privacy charichteristics than monero. They are both free and open source projects.
Highly unethical project: It's a centralized digital cash premised on pervasive always-on surveillance. It's marketed by dishonest descriptions of how taxation regimes work or need to work in order to pretend that it's unprecedented surveillance is in any way normal or acceptable or useful for any purpose.
I stopped supporting FSF over their backing of this.
I stopped supporting FSF over their backing of this.
As opposed to pretending that money laundering and tax evasion is normal or acceptable?
Do you also think that everyone who doesn't support a government installed camera in their bedroom is pretending that raping children is acceptable?
GNU Taler is an unprecedented mass surveillance system.
GNU Taler is an unprecedented mass surveillance system.
If you don’t want your transactions recorded, you have two options: don’t record them, or launder the records. Electronic transactions are inherently recorded.
How is it centralized? All the descriptions of GNU Taler calls it decentralized.
> pervasive always-on surveillance
What is surveilled, except for the amount an anonymous entity has paid you?
> I stopped supporting FSF over their backing of this.
So this was six years ago?
> pervasive always-on surveillance
What is surveilled, except for the amount an anonymous entity has paid you?
> I stopped supporting FSF over their backing of this.
So this was six years ago?
> How is it centralized?
The system is a simple chauvinism digital cash with integrated surveillance. All transactions in the system must be cleared by a centralized server that checks against double spends and validates that each transaction contains the required key-escrowed surveillance data.
> All the descriptions of GNU Taler calls it decentralized.
Unethical actors like the creators of GNU Taler are willing to lie. Surprise.
> So this was six years ago?
In 2016, I believe, yes.
The system is a simple chauvinism digital cash with integrated surveillance. All transactions in the system must be cleared by a centralized server that checks against double spends and validates that each transaction contains the required key-escrowed surveillance data.
> All the descriptions of GNU Taler calls it decentralized.
Unethical actors like the creators of GNU Taler are willing to lie. Surprise.
> So this was six years ago?
In 2016, I believe, yes.
Eh, we never called it decentralized. And you are right, it absolutely is not. We can disagree about whether allowing the government to see your income is ethical or not. However, we have consistently stated the facts (not decentralized, income visible, expenses non-traceable).
I appreciate your concern that income transparency enables (some) surveillance. However, are you willing to acknowledge that without it, you will have significantly more criminal activity in the system and will never be legal in most jurisdictions? And that this would force most people to effectively use account-based systems without any privacy? (Or staying with physical cash, which we also advocate for, btw.).
I appreciate your concern that income transparency enables (some) surveillance. However, are you willing to acknowledge that without it, you will have significantly more criminal activity in the system and will never be legal in most jurisdictions? And that this would force most people to effectively use account-based systems without any privacy? (Or staying with physical cash, which we also advocate for, btw.).
> We can disagree about whether allowing the government to see your income is ethical or not.
That is a false comparison. A compulsory integrated surveillance system is not equivalent to "allowing the government to see your income". I file taxes, if my activity gives the government reason to suspect I'm engaged in fraud it can seek access to my records through due process. My computer reporting on me in real time wouldn't be a necessary or even useful part of that process, since its data will necessarily lack the context needed to correctly establish levels of taxation.
Not having my computers spy on me and report back is already completely legal, and in fact for the moment it would be unlawful for my government to require me to use spyware like Taler, though I don't think it would be too objectionable for me to argue that it is the objective of the creators of taler that laws are changed to deny me that freedom (since opt-in surveillance systems will never be particular successful).
And sure there is likely some more of some kinds of crime in a world where we don't have government cameras in our bedrooms, government microphones in our pockets, and government reporting integrated into our computer software. At the same time, it's reasonable to expect a world with pervasive state surveillance also have a multitude of other more heinous crimes: after all authoritarian governments like Maoist china have been responsible for mass murder on scales unimaginable by any set of conventional criminals.
It's one thing to argue that inviting invasive state surveillance into our lives would be a good thing, that we should give up more essential liberty to obtain some more temporary safety-- I wouldn't agree, but it's something people could debate. The extraordinary unethical behavior of Taler is that it pretends that it's doing anything but: that it's preserving the status quo instead of introducing new survailance. That it's promoters maliciously and dishonestly characterizes its critics as being pro-crime or anti-taxation (e.g. as we see kube-system doing in this very thread!), that it pretends that its massive increase in surveillance isn't something new, or even that it's something legally required. It's not.
We have taxation today. It doesn't require mass surveillance. Systems that don't embed mass surveillance aren't inherently anti-taxation for not doing so, though surely opponents of taxation also prefer less government surveillance.
That is a false comparison. A compulsory integrated surveillance system is not equivalent to "allowing the government to see your income". I file taxes, if my activity gives the government reason to suspect I'm engaged in fraud it can seek access to my records through due process. My computer reporting on me in real time wouldn't be a necessary or even useful part of that process, since its data will necessarily lack the context needed to correctly establish levels of taxation.
Not having my computers spy on me and report back is already completely legal, and in fact for the moment it would be unlawful for my government to require me to use spyware like Taler, though I don't think it would be too objectionable for me to argue that it is the objective of the creators of taler that laws are changed to deny me that freedom (since opt-in surveillance systems will never be particular successful).
And sure there is likely some more of some kinds of crime in a world where we don't have government cameras in our bedrooms, government microphones in our pockets, and government reporting integrated into our computer software. At the same time, it's reasonable to expect a world with pervasive state surveillance also have a multitude of other more heinous crimes: after all authoritarian governments like Maoist china have been responsible for mass murder on scales unimaginable by any set of conventional criminals.
It's one thing to argue that inviting invasive state surveillance into our lives would be a good thing, that we should give up more essential liberty to obtain some more temporary safety-- I wouldn't agree, but it's something people could debate. The extraordinary unethical behavior of Taler is that it pretends that it's doing anything but: that it's preserving the status quo instead of introducing new survailance. That it's promoters maliciously and dishonestly characterizes its critics as being pro-crime or anti-taxation (e.g. as we see kube-system doing in this very thread!), that it pretends that its massive increase in surveillance isn't something new, or even that it's something legally required. It's not.
We have taxation today. It doesn't require mass surveillance. Systems that don't embed mass surveillance aren't inherently anti-taxation for not doing so, though surely opponents of taxation also prefer less government surveillance.
[deleted]
Perhaps the only credible, open, democratising, taxable, pseudonymous electronic approximation to actual "digital cash"?