4 ms·

By putting the onus on the user to maintain access and security rather than the bank?

by cptskippy 4y ago

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
By making the loss irreversible.
toomim 4y ago
Yes, rather than a bank that loses zelle transfers.
- lanstin 4y ago
  I have five people in my household. Only one of them, not myself, doesn’t regularly loose important stuff. We are super adept at key replacement, Drivers License replacement, passport replacement, debit card replacement, etc. I travel with two phones, two laptops, and two kindles. At this point if I haven’t lost my debit card in six months, I will just report it lost to change the numbers. I have worked at financial institutions; while they are not infallible, they are all better at this stuff than my family, and usually work in teams for important stuff.
- krferriter 4y ago
  Zelle transfers into an institutionally insured checking/savings account at a major financial institution are pretty safe and people will get their money back. Zelle transfers from non-BoA accounts will have the records at the other banks to prove the transfers existed and they can be recovered that way. If BoA really lost the records and don't have backups and people lost transfers from BoA to BoA accounts and neither BoA account has a record of the transaction, it will just be a hassle for customers probably having to fill out some forms and wait a while.
Karunamon 4y ago
I trust my ability to keep a small file (or more realistically: 24 random words that can be committed to memory with some effort) secure more than I trust any corporate entity that treats the penalties for screwing their customers as a mere cost of doing business. Crypto has many failure cases but a generalized loss of all transfers for all wallets is simply not one of them.
- cptskippy 4y ago
  This isn't a defense of the corporate banking structure. The cognitive load necessary to grok crypto currencies doesn't displace that which is required to utilize existing financial solutions, it's just adds to it. It's also less forgiving and has fewer safe guards or regulations. For most people, crypto is just an added layer of obfuscation and complexity with some speculative gambling sprinkled on top. It benefits few and only when utilized by many. It's like cash, if cash were a bar of wet soap you had to hold onto while riding a roller coaster in the rain.
  - Karunamon 4y ago
    To grok something and to utilize something are two entirely different levels of understanding and it is not honest to conflate the two; most people don't grok the existing financial infrastructures either.
    - cptskippy 4y ago
      Grok was the wrong word then. I wasn't conflating the two but rather emphasizing that the amount of cognitive load needed to utilizing crypto in our society is far higher than what's needed to use a cash, bank card, or even credit.
      - Karunamon 4y ago
        I disagree. At least from the standpoint of the average end-user; sending or receiving a payment with a mainstream cryptocurrency is not meaningfully more difficult than doing that with something like PayPal or Cashapp. Different, but not more difficult. And this is with a wallet where you control your own keys. If you use a centralized site like Coinbase then is basically indistinguishable from something like those other apps.
  - idiotsecant 4y ago
    Crypto isn't terribly hard, depending on the exact context you have in mind when you say 'crypto'. It boils down to keeping your key safe and accessible, or in the custody of someone who can keep your keys safe and accessible. You can literally stamp your keys into some steel plate, bolt them somewhere safe in your house, and forget about them for 30 years. You use a hardware wallet for your day-to-day and a separate hardware wallet for your savings account and transfer between as needed. It's not for everyone, but it isn't hard - it's just new context.
sowbug 4y ago
By aligning the interests of the custodian and beneficiary.
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  Money loss of this kind does not happen because the interest of the custodian is misaligned. The bank does not make a profit if your money goes missing. Technical errors can happen regardless of what the custodian wants

By putting the onus on the user to maintain access and security rather than the bank?

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

By making the loss irreversible.

toomim 4y ago

Yes, rather than a bank that loses zelle transfers.

lanstin 4y ago
I have five people in my household. Only one of them, not myself, doesn’t regularly loose important stuff. We are super adept at key replacement, Drivers License replacement, passport replacement, debit card replacement, etc. I travel with two phones, two laptops, and two kindles. At this point if I haven’t lost my debit card in six months, I will just report it lost to change the numbers. I have worked at financial institutions; while they are not infallible, they are all better at this stuff than my family, and usually work in teams for important stuff.
krferriter 4y ago
Zelle transfers into an institutionally insured checking/savings account at a major financial institution are pretty safe and people will get their money back. Zelle transfers from non-BoA accounts will have the records at the other banks to prove the transfers existed and they can be recovered that way. If BoA really lost the records and don't have backups and people lost transfers from BoA to BoA accounts and neither BoA account has a record of the transaction, it will just be a hassle for customers probably having to fill out some forms and wait a while.

Karunamon 4y ago

I trust my ability to keep a small file (or more realistically: 24 random words that can be committed to memory with some effort) secure more than I trust any corporate entity that treats the penalties for screwing their customers as a mere cost of doing business. Crypto has many failure cases but a generalized loss of all transfers for all wallets is simply not one of them.

cptskippy 4y ago
This isn't a defense of the corporate banking structure. The cognitive load necessary to grok crypto currencies doesn't displace that which is required to utilize existing financial solutions, it's just adds to it. It's also less forgiving and has fewer safe guards or regulations. For most people, crypto is just an added layer of obfuscation and complexity with some speculative gambling sprinkled on top. It benefits few and only when utilized by many. It's like cash, if cash were a bar of wet soap you had to hold onto while riding a roller coaster in the rain.
- Karunamon 4y ago
  To grok something and to utilize something are two entirely different levels of understanding and it is not honest to conflate the two; most people don't grok the existing financial infrastructures either.
  - cptskippy 4y ago
    Grok was the wrong word then. I wasn't conflating the two but rather emphasizing that the amount of cognitive load needed to utilizing crypto in our society is far higher than what's needed to use a cash, bank card, or even credit.
    - Karunamon 4y ago
      I disagree. At least from the standpoint of the average end-user; sending or receiving a payment with a mainstream cryptocurrency is not meaningfully more difficult than doing that with something like PayPal or Cashapp. Different, but not more difficult. And this is with a wallet where you control your own keys. If you use a centralized site like Coinbase then is basically indistinguishable from something like those other apps.
- idiotsecant 4y ago
  Crypto isn't terribly hard, depending on the exact context you have in mind when you say 'crypto'. It boils down to keeping your key safe and accessible, or in the custody of someone who can keep your keys safe and accessible. You can literally stamp your keys into some steel plate, bolt them somewhere safe in your house, and forget about them for 30 years. You use a hardware wallet for your day-to-day and a separate hardware wallet for your savings account and transfer between as needed. It's not for everyone, but it isn't hard - it's just new context.

sowbug 4y ago

By aligning the interests of the custodian and beneficiary.

cuteboy19 4y ago
Money loss of this kind does not happen because the interest of the custodian is misaligned. The bank does not make a profit if your money goes missing. Technical errors can happen regardless of what the custodian wants