4 ms·

> Everything about banking in the USA was seemingly decades behind my experiences in Northern Europe, so it may take a while for American banks to figure out cr

> Everything about banking in the USA was seemingly decades behind my experiences in Northern Europe, so it may take a while for American banks to figure out credit card 2FA… Having worked closely with multiple banks' credit card departments, this assertion is incorrect. American banks (and merchants) choose to not implement more security for card-not-present transactions because it meaningfully dents conversion rates for online commerce. Same goes for credit card PINs which are extremely common in Europe but rarely seen in the US. Most merchants and banks are okay with a non-zero level of fraud because stricter fraud prevention methods negatively impact user experience. Here's an article going into more depth about the tradeoffs involved: https://bam.kalzumeus.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fraud/ https://bam.kalzumeus.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fraud/

Youden 4y ago
You claim that the assertion is false but you've only looked at one aspect for why the parent might think the US banking system is behind. To put another one out there, there's no universal and practical way to electronically transfer money from one person to another. The only options are cash, checks, wire transfers and ACH. Wire transfers are expensive and ACH is difficult to use. In the SEPA area you can transfer money to anybody else within about a day for the cost of a local transfer (usually free) with nothing but an IBAN (which can be freely-given, unlike a US bank account number). Plus, the US has been behind for a long time for card-present transactions as well. Only in the past few years have chips started to see widespread use.
- sidpatil 4y ago
  > To put another one out there, there's no universal and practical way to electronically transfer money from one person to another. The only options are cash, checks, wire transfers and ACH. Wire transfers are expensive and ACH is difficult to use. The FedNow system, scheduled to roll out next year, is designed to fulfill this purpose. https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/fednow_about.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/fednow_about.h...
  - Youden 4y ago
    I've heard and it's a huge step forward but it's coming 15 years after SEPA.
- blueblisters 4y ago
  > To put another one out there, there's no universal and practical way to electronically transfer money from one person to another. The only options are cash, checks, wire transfers and ACH. Wire transfers are expensive and ACH is difficult to use. This is only true for retail banking, not business banking. The rule of thumb about the US financial system is that it goes out of its way to facilitate commerce between consumers and businesses (debit cards, credit cards), where intermediaries can take a cut of each transaction and the liability for fraud is clearly defined (merchants are generally liable for fraud and consumers have recourse in the form of chargebacks). Conversely, retail to retail customer transactions have higher likelihood of fraud, a costly chargeback or reversal process and hardly make any money for the banks.

Youden 4y ago

You claim that the assertion is false but you've only looked at one aspect for why the parent might think the US banking system is behind. To put another one out there, there's no universal and practical way to electronically transfer money from one person to another. The only options are cash, checks, wire transfers and ACH. Wire transfers are expensive and ACH is difficult to use. In the SEPA area you can transfer money to anybody else within about a day for the cost of a local transfer (usually free) with nothing but an IBAN (which can be freely-given, unlike a US bank account number). Plus, the US has been behind for a long time for card-present transactions as well. Only in the past few years have chips started to see widespread use.

sidpatil 4y ago
> To put another one out there, there's no universal and practical way to electronically transfer money from one person to another. The only options are cash, checks, wire transfers and ACH. Wire transfers are expensive and ACH is difficult to use. The FedNow system, scheduled to roll out next year, is designed to fulfill this purpose. https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/fednow_about.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/fednow_about.h...
- Youden 4y ago
  I've heard and it's a huge step forward but it's coming 15 years after SEPA.
blueblisters 4y ago
> To put another one out there, there's no universal and practical way to electronically transfer money from one person to another. The only options are cash, checks, wire transfers and ACH. Wire transfers are expensive and ACH is difficult to use. This is only true for retail banking, not business banking. The rule of thumb about the US financial system is that it goes out of its way to facilitate commerce between consumers and businesses (debit cards, credit cards), where intermediaries can take a cut of each transaction and the liability for fraud is clearly defined (merchants are generally liable for fraud and consumers have recourse in the form of chargebacks). Conversely, retail to retail customer transactions have higher likelihood of fraud, a costly chargeback or reversal process and hardly make any money for the banks.