The Truth about Bank Privacy odysee.com/@NaomiBrockwell:4/Financial-surveillance:e?r=8T2xqWjtafHWYGxQBSsrbw1wQPm7sWRq

5567 sats \ 19 comments \ @Undisciplined 5 Apr privacy

From Naomi Brockwell

Video Description

Financial privacy has practically vanished over the last 50 years. Most people are in denial about it, and still believe that their relationship with their bank or their credit union is confidential -- the reality couldn’t be further from that.

In this video we walk you through the history of how financial privacy slowly disappeared, and how we built a gargantuan financial surveillance system that no one really understands the extent of.

00:00 Financial Privacy is an Illusion

02:14 Pre-1970

03:23 Bank Secrecy Act

08:02 Annunzio-Wylie AML Act

10:38 Patriot Act

12:51 $600 Rule

16:17 The Future Ahead

18:24 Is This the World We Want?

We have slowly built a gargantuan system of unchecked financial surveillance, and it’s time to question whether this is the world we want to live in. The first step is just making people aware of how far financial surveillance norms have shifted in just a few decades.

view all related items

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @JesseJames 5 Apr

Definitely an eye opener, the sad part is that there are some services one wants/need to use that require a bank account (e.g. GCP or AWS) they don't take cash or even visa cash give cards. Does your local power company take cash? Car lease payments? Mortgage? It's the opposite they want you to set everything on "auto pay" for "your convenience" of course. Personally I'm trying to reduce my dependence on banks but its hard... We are in deep $&@^# on this one...

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 5 Apr

I hear you. I'm working on the same thing. Becoming your own banker is a long process.

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @purpurato 5 Apr

No lightning for donations 🙁 https://www.nbtv.media/support

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 5 Apr

That's a little surprising, but perhaps another reminder that we're still super early.

50 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinIsTheFuture 5 Apr

Be your own bank! Privately…

50 sats \ 12 replies \ @elvismercury 5 Apr

I wish there was a thing that did this but for all the key aspects of life -- e.g., your privacy from a telecom / ISP pov, from a corporate profile pov, etc. Put the pieces together.

20 sats \ 11 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 5 Apr

There are still a lot of people who don't realize that privacy is pretty much an illusion (and who would be upset by that). The first step is admitting you have a problem, right?

61 sats \ 10 replies \ @freetx 5 Apr

If you go to places like HackerNews, the "tech class" has now flipped. In 80s-90s the tech industry was dominated cypher-punk ethos....gpg....encryption...freedom, etc.

As younger workers came into those industries the attitudes have flipped 180. They now say "its no big deal" and even welcome the surveillance state.

4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Its hard to imagine a more blatant violation of the 4th amendment than the Banking Secrecy Act (and all that followed), however no one dares mention it.

155 sats \ 9 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 5 Apr

They now say "its no big deal" and even welcome the surveillance state.

I have a friend who's several years younger than me and he had an interesting perspective about lost privacy. His view was that privacy is an unnatural and possibly unhealthy human condition, that didn't exist in small tribes.

60 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve 5 Apr

10 years ago an acquaintance said the right to privacy violates the nonaggression principle.

Really ? Seriously?

I still don’t see it

15 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 5 Apr

I could imagine an argument along the lines "If you put your information where I can see it, then I have no obligation not to look."

50 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 5 Apr

But invasions of privacy are … invasive lol

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 5 Apr

The point would be that you can't require other people to avoid seeing your information, because you don't own them or their eyeballs.

If you keep your information hidden on your property, then no one would have a right to violate your privacy.

It just seems like an example of "All rights are property rights."

view replies

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @elvismercury 6 Apr

That's an interesting point. It's certainly true that the modern notion of privacy would have been nonsensical for most of human history, especially pre-agricultural history when humans evolved.

Not sure what to do with that knowledge, though.

37 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Apr

Yeah, me neither. It's not like there was some analogue of the modern panopticon back then, either.

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @Bell_curve 5 Apr

Crazy but logical

The keyword is tribe vs individual

I actually think it’s the opposite

What does your friend think of amendment 4?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 5 Apr

I imagine he's in favor, but it hasn't come up.

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 5 Apr

If they have pirated our privacy, we have to stick to the plan B.