No bitcoin was my suggestion, just worded smugly. Actually the answer is likely not bitcoin in its current form but bitcoin in principle. A decentralized system which is owned by no one where each "bank account" or wallet or whatever you want to call it is controlled by separate people.

Now there's no reason this would have to be tied to a smartphone. Sure that's one of the common ways of doing bitcoin transactions, but systems such has tokens have also been proposed. As for the fees, if you think that money doesn't have fees to keep it running you're only looking at part of the picture. Your taxes, and the general principle of printing money pay for the money to be printed and maintained. New currency is made, old one is destroyed or lost, all the while the value of your bank account drops by a few percent every year partially as a result of these "maintenance" activities, and partially as a result of government policy (quantitative easing anyone?).

Also cash is traceable. Take a look at the bill in your wallet and see the numbers? I guess you've never paid with a large bill and seen the cashier compare the number to a list, or you've never seen a bank validate the money you try to put in your account? The only difference between that and bitcoin is you can see the bitcoins change hands, whereas cash relies on people to look at the numbers, ... or just mark the bills like is often done in law enforcement.

Nope but not surprisingly it's actually quite common in the western world to pay small monthly fees on accounts.

One other thing to point out is that people by en-large don't seem to understand the difference between anonymity and trackability. Bitcoin can be tracked through the blockchain, but that doesn't make it any less anonymous. Just like right now I'm posting in a way that my activities can be tracked throughout the site, but I am still anonymous.

If you think that's not right you can prove your point quite easily by posting my personal information.

A bitcoin transaction is nothing more than a bunch of numbers. In addition there's no limit to the number of accounts I can have. Just like there's no limit to the number of Slashdot accounts I can create as the shills prove over and over again.

I wondered the same thing when credit cards came out. Also your engineering view of only the current and most expensive solution is a bit worrying. You do not need a smart phone to make bitcoin work. It just happens to be the current convenient way. Bit coin is a protocol, not a device. Why not work towards a solution to your smartphone problem.

Mind you I can't wait for the day that my wallet is made obsolete. Let's swipe my phone at the cashier instead. Then I have one less thing to carry around.

You mean the same cash that has a serial number on each bill? Is often marked and laced for use in law enforcement activities?

Which is all beside the point given that the primary concern with going cashless isn't a lack on anonymity but rather a lack of personal control and a requirement that your transaction be blessed and completed by a third party... For a fee of course.

Why blame the man working within the system for charges applied by someone completely different? Either the merchant should be happy to absorb the transaction cost, the merchant should specify the minimum cost, or the bank shouldn't charge the fees. But it most definitely is NOT the fault of the person simply buying something.

Now let's flip the thing around. For the few cents per transaction that end up going to the banks for small purchases how much could be potentially saved by not tallying up the register, not storing float offsite or managing a safe, not having to train staff to manage cash securely, not having to bank your earnings at the end of the day (that's a good expensive one there), and above all when the cash register disagrees with the paperwork not spending an hour trying to figure out where the money went.

There is a cost of doing business in cash. You just don't see it and point to credit fees instead. I for one pay an accountant to do my taxes because he's faster and cheaper than the time I'd spend doing it, so why not pay a bank to manage the money (if we went cashless).

To how many baskets should I pay a monthly fee so that I can ensure my money is safe?

Who said anything about a finance industry? It's almost like there needs to be a system of electronic money which can be transferd just by sending bits from one smartphone to another. These bits would be like coins. Ideally this system should be decentralised and not involve any financial institution.

These coinbits would seem to solve all of these problems. They just need a catchier name.

Bitcoin. No ok seriously Bitcoin itself may not be the answer, but the essence of any trade is that you trade something for something else. Cashless is definitely achievable if you have something with which to substitute said cash.

Right now we're living in a world where we have several options to pay for something without cash. I bought a friend's quadrocopter frame using Paypal since he didn't want cash. Australia had a system called Bartercard which is a barter trading exchange.

The only thing keeping us from going truly cash free is the cost of exchanging non-cash things of value, but even that cost is plummeting. Paypal charges only a couple of percent. You can get a EFTPOS system for your iPhone or iPad now and swipe other people's cards. Or failing all that you really could just send another participant some bitcoins.

Personally I helped a friend build a fence the other day and I got in exchange a case of beer. No cash required, and that case of beer was even less traceable than a piece of plastic (our paper money isn't paper money) with a serial number.

And yet we constantly hear of studies that show a high degree of constant mental activity is good for the physical condition of the brain and keeping it exercised reduces the risk of dementia.

In pretty much any physical or mental activity we do as people we gain some kind of benefit. Reading has a benefit, playing computer games has a benefit, solving Rubik's cubes has a benefit, and so does playing chess. I could think of worse things for teenagers to do than mentally stimulating their minds while competing with each other.

That depends on the device. The fact that you liken them to a $10 harddisk is a problem for your argument. A Galaxy S4 fetches some $300 used on ebay. A Galaxy S4 with a broken screen is still fetching some $150+

That's the value of a used device. Now take $300 in your hand right now, hold a lighter under it and ask yourself, would you light it up right now to maybe protect the data on your phone from the slight chance that someone wants the phone for your secrets rather than as a replacement for the one they dropped in the toilet? I wouldn't. I don't routinely burn money for slight maybe chances.

That said I don't have naked selfies on my phone either, or loan applications, and if I did they're on my external SD card which would not be going with the phone.

I have a better idea, just send me the $300, less waste that way.

Nothing structural needed to be changed in this phase.

Step one of the LibreSSL project is and always has been clean up the code to make it readable by mortals. An illegible clusterfuck does not attract volunteer developers to help audit. Heartbleed arose because OpenSSL was a perfect contradiction to the idea that "Because it's open source anyone can look at the code and therefore bugs get fixed quickly." Structural changes are still to come.

Also posting an about page from OpenSSL doesn't really mean all that much. Lets see some action thanks. Here we are 3 months after the Heartbleed fiasco and the LibreSSL team have forked and started a major cleanup, whereas the OpenSSL team have written an about page living up to their reputation as a bunch of consultants chasing government contracts.

Because on Slashdot we believe armchair engineers who think they know everything over those people who actually have a clue. Oh expect when it's peer reviewed. Oh and even then the peer review system is broken and the scientist is clearly fraudulent.

Slashdot is a self sustaining social media platform. Just like real media where alarmist and controversial stories sell papers, alarmist posts seem to attract mod points.

Only for your narrow view of audiophile. A true audiophile wouldn't consider any of Klipsch stuff off audiophile quality. There are 2 zeroes missing from the price tag.

Also no better is a matter of both subjective and objective opinion. Speakers are the one thing very easy to tell apart in a blind test. If you're going to build a proper sound system, spend thousands on speakers and hundreds on everything else.

Because you're not paying attention?

The Argentinians missed what looked like a great goal in the making yesterday except that it curved away from the goal.

Also the 2006 ball had physicists warning that the ball will behave more like a baseball and that it'll make quite nice curves while spinning, and act chaotically when not.