8 ms·

My friend took a year, over 150 calls and legal intervention to get money back that HSBC stole. Obviously not the same but to say that banks are faultless just

My friend took a year, over 150 calls and legal intervention to get money back that HSBC stole. Obviously not the same but to say that banks are faultless just isn't true; their systems also have edge cases from which there is often little hope of return.

zelon88 4y ago
And in those cases you escalate or you lawyer up. You can't sue a typo.
- kwertyoowiyop 4y ago
  That is the best Web3 quote I’ve heard all year.
- fidrelity 4y ago
  But there is insurance for smart contract integrity already deployed and in use for a multitude of projects (see unslashed finance for example). I don't need to sue as long as I get my money back.
- caiomassan 4y ago
  it depends on the country u are in. in Brazil the law is a joke. I prefer to risk a typo then be entangle in any legal battle here. I know people that won cases 30 years ago, and are yet to see any money.
efitz 4y ago
I didn’t say banks were faultless. I didn’t say that any aspect of a fiat currency based system is perfect. I just said that redress works often enough that people don’t give up on it.
drdec 4y ago
I think that the point is not that non-crypto systems are perfect, but at least they do not have flaws which could make the reversal of a transaction a mathematical impossibility. In non-crypto systems if you convince the right humans, things can be reversed.
hderms 4y ago
But he got it back, right? P(recovery) = 0 is a whole different ball game than flip a coin and maybe the bank will relent
Veen 4y ago
The point is not that banks are faultless (no one claimed they were) but that remediation is possible, as you have just attested to: your friend got his/her money back. Your story shows the system is working—that's precisely what "legal intervention" is for.
- danamit 4y ago
  The issue with banks is that the battle is legal/social, for example as someone who get paid by international wires often let me tell you that sometimes (rare cases but when it happens it happen to many) the money just disappears for months, and there is no way to troubleshoot it as a normal individual, you just go to the bank and ask about your money and either they just deny there is anything they can do and blame it on the sender, or just give you looks and question the legitimacy of what you are doing. Sometimes banks freeze international wires until the government investigate the source of the funds to make sure they are not funding terrorism, this happen to any sum higher than $5k in my country for example. I just wish to never be in such a position.
  - bogota 4y ago
    Not to mention when doing large wires with countries that have to do exchanges through a national bank your third party can just forget to accept it. Then you get a wire reversed for a large amount in some cases and the bank freezes your assets because you just got a huge amount of money from some random place. The thin vail of freedom is quickly lifted whenever you want to do anything international from sending money to getting married. This happened to me when purchasing a house in another country.
  - thawaya3113 4y ago
    None of those issues are resolved by crypto. If crypto is to be legitimized, the government isn’t simply gonna say, too bad, the stuff we think is absolutely necessary to the point we suspended civil liberties for, that stuff we will ignore for you. Whether you agree with what the govt is doing or not, they aren’t gonna stop doing it because it’s crypto.
- aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
ineedasername 4y ago
They didn't say it was faultless. A year & 150 phones calls is a significant improvement on "nope, nope, not ever ever ever ever". Also the current system at least has the potential to be improved, maybe. While irreversibility is baked into the ideology of many (not all) proponents if crypto.
- danamit 4y ago
  You can implement irreversibility in a blockchain or a smart contract easily, many coins can freeze funds and issue funds, that's defacto irreversibility.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - azinman2 4y ago
    Seems this is a counter example.
  - lukeschlather 4y ago
    Only to the extent that the code doesn't have bugs and your algorithm has no design flaws. (All code has bugs and you should assume all algorithms have design flaws.)
  - ineedasername 4y ago
    >Irreversibility is both easy & often Did you mean reversibility? Because otherwise you're agreeing with me: I'm saying irreversibility is easy, often the default with crypto Yes, that is what I am saying. In traditional banking reversibility is easier, and (mostly) the norm for situations of standard human error. In the case of this particular contract a limited form of reversibility is even what was intended, but that doesn't matter. It's a system that doesn't allow for honest error. For some, that's a feature. For the vast majority required to take smart contracts mainstream, that is not a feature. Better error resistant reversibility can be built, and that's when things may become attractive to more people. But, again, many proponents view irreversibility as a feature so it's not primary consideration when building things.
jeroenhd 4y ago
That's terrible. I've only heard bad things about HSBC, although that's true of most banks to be honest. However, it's going to take more than 150 calls and a lawyer to hard fork the ethereum chain to roll back this contract. Perhaps a class action lawsuit can force the auctioneers to pay back the money despite not having access to it themselves. Either way, there's literally no way for the misdirected cryptocurrency to ever return.
wpietri 4y ago
> to say that banks are faultless You are replying to somebody who said literally the opposite: "They are not all perfect"
- aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
  Hey, are you still using Keybase?
  - efitz 4y ago
    No
  - wpietri 4y ago
    I am not! Once they got in bed with cryptocurrencies, I closed my account. But I forgot to delete it from my profile here, so thanks for mentioning it.

zelon88 4y ago

And in those cases you escalate or you lawyer up. You can't sue a typo.

kwertyoowiyop 4y ago
That is the best Web3 quote I’ve heard all year.
fidrelity 4y ago
But there is insurance for smart contract integrity already deployed and in use for a multitude of projects (see unslashed finance for example). I don't need to sue as long as I get my money back.
caiomassan 4y ago
it depends on the country u are in. in Brazil the law is a joke. I prefer to risk a typo then be entangle in any legal battle here. I know people that won cases 30 years ago, and are yet to see any money.

efitz 4y ago

I didn’t say banks were faultless. I didn’t say that any aspect of a fiat currency based system is perfect. I just said that redress works often enough that people don’t give up on it.

drdec 4y ago

I think that the point is not that non-crypto systems are perfect, but at least they do not have flaws which could make the reversal of a transaction a mathematical impossibility. In non-crypto systems if you convince the right humans, things can be reversed.

hderms 4y ago

But he got it back, right? P(recovery) = 0 is a whole different ball game than flip a coin and maybe the bank will relent

Veen 4y ago

The point is not that banks are faultless (no one claimed they were) but that remediation is possible, as you have just attested to: your friend got his/her money back. Your story shows the system is working—that's precisely what "legal intervention" is for.

danamit 4y ago
The issue with banks is that the battle is legal/social, for example as someone who get paid by international wires often let me tell you that sometimes (rare cases but when it happens it happen to many) the money just disappears for months, and there is no way to troubleshoot it as a normal individual, you just go to the bank and ask about your money and either they just deny there is anything they can do and blame it on the sender, or just give you looks and question the legitimacy of what you are doing. Sometimes banks freeze international wires until the government investigate the source of the funds to make sure they are not funding terrorism, this happen to any sum higher than $5k in my country for example. I just wish to never be in such a position.
- bogota 4y ago
  Not to mention when doing large wires with countries that have to do exchanges through a national bank your third party can just forget to accept it. Then you get a wire reversed for a large amount in some cases and the bank freezes your assets because you just got a huge amount of money from some random place. The thin vail of freedom is quickly lifted whenever you want to do anything international from sending money to getting married. This happened to me when purchasing a house in another country.
- thawaya3113 4y ago
  None of those issues are resolved by crypto. If crypto is to be legitimized, the government isn’t simply gonna say, too bad, the stuff we think is absolutely necessary to the point we suspended civil liberties for, that stuff we will ignore for you. Whether you agree with what the govt is doing or not, they aren’t gonna stop doing it because it’s crypto.
aaaaaaaaata 4y ago

ineedasername 4y ago

They didn't say it was faultless. A year & 150 phones calls is a significant improvement on "nope, nope, not ever ever ever ever". Also the current system at least has the potential to be improved, maybe. While irreversibility is baked into the ideology of many (not all) proponents if crypto.

danamit 4y ago
You can implement irreversibility in a blockchain or a smart contract easily, many coins can freeze funds and issue funds, that's defacto irreversibility.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- azinman2 4y ago
  Seems this is a counter example.
- lukeschlather 4y ago
  Only to the extent that the code doesn't have bugs and your algorithm has no design flaws. (All code has bugs and you should assume all algorithms have design flaws.)
- ineedasername 4y ago
  >Irreversibility is both easy & often Did you mean reversibility? Because otherwise you're agreeing with me: I'm saying irreversibility is easy, often the default with crypto Yes, that is what I am saying. In traditional banking reversibility is easier, and (mostly) the norm for situations of standard human error. In the case of this particular contract a limited form of reversibility is even what was intended, but that doesn't matter. It's a system that doesn't allow for honest error. For some, that's a feature. For the vast majority required to take smart contracts mainstream, that is not a feature. Better error resistant reversibility can be built, and that's when things may become attractive to more people. But, again, many proponents view irreversibility as a feature so it's not primary consideration when building things.

jeroenhd 4y ago

That's terrible. I've only heard bad things about HSBC, although that's true of most banks to be honest. However, it's going to take more than 150 calls and a lawyer to hard fork the ethereum chain to roll back this contract. Perhaps a class action lawsuit can force the auctioneers to pay back the money despite not having access to it themselves. Either way, there's literally no way for the misdirected cryptocurrency to ever return.

wpietri 4y ago

> to say that banks are faultless You are replying to somebody who said literally the opposite: "They are not all perfect"

aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
Hey, are you still using Keybase?
- efitz 4y ago
  No
- wpietri 4y ago
  I am not! Once they got in bed with cryptocurrencies, I closed my account. But I forgot to delete it from my profile here, so thanks for mentioning it.