|
|
|
|
|
by dmantis
20 days ago
|
|
Studies say otherwise: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-40654-6_... Cash is actually faster in many cases, the 'slowness' is the matter of perception and the need to make a cognitive operation of 1st grader counting, which is apparently a daunting prospect for many people. And even if it were slower by 20-30 secs, the advantage it gives in control and privacy is such enormous that I don't understand people who use banks at all. The last thing other people should know is how, where, and when a person spends their money. And due to the AML surveillance from the discussed article the banking privacy is practically dead. |
|
I never spoke about speed.
> the need to make a cognitive operation of 1st grader counting, which is apparently a daunting prospect for many people.
Don't be a condescending prick. The fact that counting exists at all is a cost that people don't measure.
> due to the AML surveillance from the discussed article the banking privacy is practically dead.
Or if you read the fine article you would realise that AML rules generate so much noise that there isn't any analysis.