3 ms·
I am very worried when the government knows/governs money transfers; look at china.
by natas 3y ago
I am very worried when the government knows/governs money transfers; look at china.
- tedivm 3y agoThis is basically just replacing ACH with a faster system.
- atlgator 3y agoLike Apple photo scanning was basically just for CSAM detection, right?
- piperswe 3y agoWhat risks does FedNow have that FedACH doesn't have?
- riskable 3y agoI know you're making a point but there is a distinct difference in risk: FedNow transactions happen instantly, therefore fraud can take place faster. That's all though. That's not a good reason to stay on FedACH. For the HN crowd the best way to describe the difference between FedACH and FedNow is migrating from a batch-based system that settled transactions a few times/day to a real-time system. Just like such migrations developers and engineers encounter in many normal IT environments, real-time systems have their own issues but are also capable of so much more and are generally easier to improve/evolve. FedACH was made for big, one-time transfers between bank accounts where it wouldn't matter too much if settlement took a few days. FedNow was made for lots of small(er) instantaneous transactions. At first FedNow will likely be used as a simple replacement for ACH transfers but I suspect that it will eventually replace the back ends that handle debit card payments (because the prize--which would be taken from Visa, MasterCard, First Data, and similar--is too big to ignore).
- raincom 3y agoFeds already get money transfer data without warrants. Recently Chase closed my checking account because I use Zelle so often. Chase knows all Zelle records because they partially own Zelle. I would rather have Feds own the data, rather than banks. When banks own data, they make decisions to close people’s bank accounts without any proof of abuse.