← Back to context

Comment by mlmonkey

1 day ago

You do know that every color copier comes with the ability to identify US currency and would refuse to copy it? And that every color printer leaves a pattern of faint yellow dots on every printout that uniquely identifies the printer?

And that's not a good thing.

  • Nope, having a stable, trusted currency trumps whatever productive use one could have for a anonymous, currency reproducing color printer

  • I'm just responding to this by OP:

    > Were politicians 20 years ago as overreative they'd have demanded Photoshop leave a trace on anything it edited.

  • Why not? Like, genuinely.

    • I generally don't think that's it's good or just for a government to collude with manufacturers to track/trace it's citizens without consent or notice. And even if notice was given, I'd still be against it

      The arguments put forward by people generally I don't find compelling -- for example, in this thread around protecting against counterfeit.

      The "force" applied to address these concerns is totally out of proportion. Whenever these discussions happen, I feel like they descend into a general viewpoint, "if we could technically solve any possible crime, we should do everything in our power to solve it."

      I'm against this viewpoint, and acknowledge that that means _some crime_ occurs. That's acceptable to me. I don't feel that society is correctly structured to "treat" crime appropriately, and technology has outpaced our ability to holistically address it.

      Generally, I don't see (speaking for the US) the highest incarceration rate in the world to be a good thing, or being generally effective, and I don't believe that increasing that number will change outcomes.

      1 reply →

  • It depends on how you're looking at it. For the people not getting handed counterfeit currency, it's probably a good thing.

    • Also probably good for the people trying to counterfeit money with a printer, better not to end up in jail for that.