When we think about designing the digital money of the future, the elephant in the room is anonymity. Should digital designers replicate the anonymity of cash in the digital realm? After all, there are people who think that the anonymity that cash affords them is a fundamental liberty. Of course, there are people who prefer to exist in a cash economy for reasons other than a fundamental lack of trust in the international financial and monetary system. Criminals and corrupt politicians, for example. Cash works rather well for them, but can sometime be quite inconvenient. For remote purchasing, for example. Only recently I read about two freelance pharmaceutical intermediaries who were arrested in California after police caught them dumping nearly $1 million in cash which was intended to buy marijuana some distance from their main place of residence.
If you are wondering why they didn’t just Venmo or Square Cash the money, remember that the state of California imposes a 15% excise tax on licensed cannabis so the cash-based black market avoids tax. The state estimates the regulated market has captured less than one-third of activity, once again suggesting to me that the primary function of $100 bills is tax evasion. Talking of $100 bills, by the way, the state of California has a huge $100 bill problem right now and not only along I-5. The coronavirus has disrupted supply chains so that drug dealers in the USA cannot use the normal trade-based cross-border money laundering pathways to pesos. Hence, massive quantities of dollars are piling up outside the financial system, which makes me wonder how it is that these people have never heard of cryptocurrency. Given the huge hassle bagging the Benjamins, why didn’t these informal chemical economy entrepreneurs simply buy a few bitcoins, drive to the drop zones and press the “send” button when the goods are in front of them. It only takes an hour or so for the half a dozen confirmations that the wholesale distributors would want to see, and then you are all set. But no, they packed up the greenbacks and set off in their car.
There must be many people who don’t want to carry around huge wads of cash for such purchases. Why aren’t they in crypto? How can it be more convenient to cart around great wodges of cash than to zip some magic internet money through the interweb tubes? Surely, I am forced to reflect, if drug dealers won’t use bitcoin, then who will? What is the niche for cryptocurrency? A quick investigation tells me that the market-leading adult content site accepts four cryptocurrencies, three of which I’ve never heard of, and not Bitcoin, Monero or Zcash although that may change soon as I note that a number of campaigners have sent letters to Visa, Mastercard, Amex and all demanding that they stop processing payments for adult services. (Mastercard said that they were investigating claims made the and would “terminate their connection to our network” if illegal activity was confirmed.)
Maybe taking payment cards away from sites such as PornHub will stimulate evolution in user journey and ease of use for Monero et al and push them into the mainstream at last. If history is any guide, it’s demand from the adult industry that shapes the paths of new technologies and I can’t see why digital money should be any different. Maybe the porn and gambling guys will get together and launch an over-18 version of Libra which, as it will be the only way to pay for these services, will soon become the currency of choice for adult services and then, by extension, for adults.