3 ms·

Yeah also that's not how the process of check clearing works (instant account-to-account payments). Banks batch checks payable to the same counterparty institut

by ellius 7y ago

Yeah also that's not how the process of check clearing works (instant account-to-account payments). Banks batch checks payable to the same counterparty institutions and then compare their liabilities against one another to transfer only the net. It's an extension of the historical process where banks would physically go to a clearing house with bundles of paper checks and tally the differences between institutions.

munk-a 7y ago
This is a laziness that really shouldn't exist anymore - it solved the problem of jim having to run over to that other bank twenty times a day, but now that jim is just electrons we should send him everywhere instantly.
- njharman 7y ago
  You say that like writing testing, integrating with existing systems and maintaining the software to do that. The additional hardware. The insurance to cover losses and lawsuits when new system breaks is hacked. All the managers, Lawyers and others needed to craft agreements and contracts between thousands of banks across jurisdictions. Is free. Protip, it costs a lot of money. More money than it is worth.
  - guntars 7y ago
    So let's not do it because it's hard? I think it's a ridiculous attitude. It's an instance of where people that have the ability to change things don't have the incentives to do so because they aren't the ones bearing the cost. This is one example where the government could do some good by creating a spec for an instant money transfer system and say that they'll accept it at all government institutions by some time in the future. I think people would then do the rest.
    - njharman 7y ago
      No, it's not do this because it has negative ROI. Who do you imagine the "us" is, in let's? It's not me and you, nor people in this forum. The banks that have negative financial incentive? The regulators who just caught this guy with the existing system as is and would never win the political battle to roll out this expensive system addressing a rare issue that already is handled? The average powerless citizen? Who will likely never be victim to this. Calls for pie in the sky actions don't stop being pie in the sky just because they are just, reasonable, "good" for society. We live in a greedy capitalist society. At the society scale. If it's not causing so much problems it can't be ignored or if it doesn't make someone money. It doesn't happen.

by ellius 7y ago

munk-a 7y ago

This is a laziness that really shouldn't exist anymore - it solved the problem of jim having to run over to that other bank twenty times a day, but now that jim is just electrons we should send him everywhere instantly.

njharman 7y ago
You say that like writing testing, integrating with existing systems and maintaining the software to do that. The additional hardware. The insurance to cover losses and lawsuits when new system breaks is hacked. All the managers, Lawyers and others needed to craft agreements and contracts between thousands of banks across jurisdictions. Is free. Protip, it costs a lot of money. More money than it is worth.
- guntars 7y ago
  So let's not do it because it's hard? I think it's a ridiculous attitude. It's an instance of where people that have the ability to change things don't have the incentives to do so because they aren't the ones bearing the cost. This is one example where the government could do some good by creating a spec for an instant money transfer system and say that they'll accept it at all government institutions by some time in the future. I think people would then do the rest.
  - njharman 7y ago
    No, it's not do this because it has negative ROI. Who do you imagine the "us" is, in let's? It's not me and you, nor people in this forum. The banks that have negative financial incentive? The regulators who just caught this guy with the existing system as is and would never win the political battle to roll out this expensive system addressing a rare issue that already is handled? The average powerless citizen? Who will likely never be victim to this. Calls for pie in the sky actions don't stop being pie in the sky just because they are just, reasonable, "good" for society. We live in a greedy capitalist society. At the society scale. If it's not causing so much problems it can't be ignored or if it doesn't make someone money. It doesn't happen.