Slashdot Mirror


Small Bank In Kansas Creates the Bank Account of the Future

HughPickens.com writes Nathaniel Popper writes at the NYT that the Citizens Bank of Weir, Kansas, or CBW, has been taken apart and rebuilt, from its fiber optic cables up, so it can offer services not available at even the nation's largest bank. In the United States the primary option that consumers have to transfer money is still the ACH payment. Requests for ACH transfers are collected by banks and submitted in batches, once a day, and the banks receiving the transfers also process the payments once a day, leading to long waits. ACH technology was created in the 1970s and has not changed significantly since. The clunky system, which takes at least a day to deliver money, has become so deeply embedded in the banking industry that it has been hard to replace. CBW went to work on the problem by using the debit card networks that power ATM cash dispensers. Ramamurthi's team engineered a system so that a business could collect a customer's debit card number and use it to make an instant payment directly into the customer's account — or into the account of a customer of almost any other bank in the country. The key to CBW's system is real-time, payment transaction risk-scoring — software that can judge the risk involved in any transaction in real time by looking at 20 to 40 factors, including a customers' transaction history and I.P., address where the transaction originated. It was this system that Elizabeth McQuerry, the former Fed official, praised as the "biggest idea" at a recent bank conference. "Today's banks offer the equivalent of 300-year-old paper ledgers converted to an electronic form — a digital skin on an antiquated transaction process," says Suresh Ramamurthi. "We'll now be one of the first banks in the world to offer customers a reliable, compliant, safe and secure way to instantly send and receive money internationally."

41 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by teambpsi · · Score: 2

    This is the same tech refresh upgrade every big bank is in flight doing.

    --

    Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
    1. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not every bank. Unlike the US, banks in other parts of the world aren't in the dark ages. Sending and receiving money via your bank account can be done instantly, even from your smart phone (no Apple Pay or NFC software required, just email or whatever other system you choose to use from the various options the banks offer).

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re: Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Silly Americans making news amidst fanfare when one of their companies provides a service that was available elsewhere in the world for 5-10 years.

    3. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by jandersen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unlike the US, banks in other parts of the world aren't in the dark ages. Sending and receiving money via your bank account can be done instantly...

      All banks can do this, of course. However, when the money leaves an account, there is an interval when the interest on it can be harvested, legally, until it enters the target account. Given enough bank transfers every day, that adds up to enough profit to give a bank manager an erection (ie. more than $1), and that is why they keep pretending it has to take a whole day or whatever. It used to be the same in Europe, but the evil communists in government forced the banks to give it up.

    4. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by Spillman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I work on EFT processor software. This is not even news, nearly all the major national and regional networks have support for A2A (account to account) transfers, the thing is most of the small banks don't support it because it is cheaper to send transfers through ACH. Besides, most banks still use batch processing in their core, so even if a real-time transfer comes in it will only memo until it is hard posted later. Im guessing this bank wanted to make news so they are trying something new. The banking industry is super competitive.

      --
      sig?
    5. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unlike the US, banks in other parts of the world aren't in the dark ages.

      To the typical American, for whom a Caribbean cruise is exotic world travel, it is utterly unfathomable that we are a full ten years behind the rest of the developed world in banking and internet technology. It simply doesn't compute that the median American earns less and has less purchasing power than the median Canadian, Brit, or Norwegian. We just assume that if it's not available in the US, it doesn't exist. Tell them the number of people in the world with access to symmetric gigabit home internet for $50/month is now larger than the US population, and you'll just get a blank stare. It's like trying to explain indoor plumbing to someone who has never seen it.

    6. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unlike the US, banks in other parts of the world aren't in the dark ages. Sending and receiving money via your bank account can be done instantly...

      All banks can do this, of course. However, when the money leaves an account, there is an interval when the interest on it can be harvested, legally, until it enters the target account. Given enough bank transfers every day, that adds up to enough profit to give a bank manager an erection (ie. more than $1), and that is why they keep pretending it has to take a whole day or whatever. It used to be the same in Europe, but the evil communists in government forced the banks to give it up.

      Please read what I wrote again. The transfer between sender and recipient up here in Kanuckistan is a few seconds - not "all day", and the last time I looked at a map, Canada was not part of Europe. As others have pointed out, Mexico has the same thing, and they're also part of North America. Nor are we "evil communists."

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    7. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by Shakrai · · Score: 2

      With the exception of the person-to-person transfer I can do everything you just outlined with the app from my podunk small town community bank. None of what you've discussed is news to people living the States. We've had bill payer services for quite some time. Most venders will be paid electronically and those few that aren't configured for electronic payments will be mailed a physical check by the bill payer service.

      Person-to-person transfers aren't quite as seamless in the States but they're not exactly rocket science either. I so choose I can likewise avoid the physical bank; our silly paper checks have been able to be remotely deposited for some time now. I usually choose to walk them down to the bank, since it's an excuse to get out of the house and be sociable, but I can just as easily deposit them with my phone and the funds are available on the same schedule (next business day 99.9% of the time) as they would be if I presented the check in person.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    8. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by Shakrai · · Score: 2

      The "paying the babysitter" scenario was the one I conceded was easier in the EU than the States. It would be nice to have such functionality here but I hardly feel like I'm living the dark ages for not having it. It goes one of two ways:

      1) She gets cash. This is usually the preference in the States for such transactions because it's tax free income. I certainly prefer cash for the various side gigs I have.
      2) She gets a check. Funds are available next business day 99% of the time.

      As I said, it's not as sexy, but it gets the job done. Person-to-person payments are pretty low on the list of things I'd fix with regards to the American financial system. And yes, there are problems with paper checks, and they should go away, but on balance there's not a lot of fraud being committed with them. The bigger fraud issue is cloned credit cards, which I did point out. :)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    9. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by rickb928 · · Score: 2

      Wow. You don't understand what a payday loan is.

      The 'Payday' in payday loans describes both the method and timing of payments. Most people taking out payday loans do so intending to make payments when they get their money, which is usually payday. These are generally secured loans, title loans secured by the borrower's car most common, though some are not. The loan company regularly imposes limited payment options, for instance requiring payment in cash, in person, at the specified office. If your car breaks down, the traffic goes really bad for the first time in 2 years, or you get sick, you risk default. these companies are happy you default, as mostly these defaults occur well into the term of the loan, the usurious interest rates assure the principal has been paid, and the collateral is just more profit. It's a nasty business.

      For those who are essentially unbanked, this is one of few options for solving cash flow problems such as car repairs or a lost paycheck due to layoffs or any number of circumstances beyond their control.

      This short video further explores the problems of the unbanked.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    10. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by rickb928 · · Score: 2

      No, you had it right.

      I'm having a tiff with my tap-to-pay, prepaid card, and credit union all unable to offer me the services they each still advertise.

      My tap-to-pay app is linked to a prepaid card. This can be loaded by ACH, debit card, credit card, or cash. All of which worked until this fall.

      I noticed my automatic debit loads were failing, and asked my credit union. It took some time, and they initially pointed me to the prepaid card provider. Who claimed it was being declined, despite funds available. I checked, and eventually found that my debit card, from Visa, no longer permitted this 'merchant' to use a transaction code that is described as a 'Visa Money transaction'. The credit union says their hands are tied.

      The prepaid provider claims they were forced to recode these transactions as 'Visa Money', by, yes, Visa. Why? No answer but I have a theory:

      - Visa Money transactions earn discount and interchange fees like any debit transaction.
      - But debiting my account this way does earn the prepaid provider a discount fee when I withdraw the funds from there. (No interchange, so you know who this is)
      - However, if I were to load my prepaid card with a credit card, this becomes a cash advance. Which earns a higher interest rate in most cases. and is paid LAST by most banks if I pay off my balance. Actually, since I may never pay off the balance, these cash advances will forever be charging interest at that higher rate. Forever. Unless I do pay the balance to zero. I have to pay off the lower interest rate transactions FIRST before I can pay off the higher rate ones. Sharp practice.
      - So I cannot any more load from my debit card. Visa rejects the 'Visa Money' transaction for my debit card.

      Well, my prepaid provider is unwilling to change anything of this, my credit union is unwilling, possibly unable to, and I'm stubborn enough to cling to the prepaid despite the inconvenience of cash loads.

      ACH, you say?

      ACH takes 5 days to clear. It just does. This is mostly my prepaid provider's fault, I know, from research. No apologies. It just does. They use the float.

      Now, how does all this actually work out good for me?

      - I get promotional rebates for using tap-to-pay, which will expire. Then I will reassess the situation.
      - I also get promotional rebates from the prepaid card, those also will expire.
      - I get fees waived on the prepaid card, which I do not expect to expire any time soon. Free so far.
      - And cash loads are fee-free for now also.

      But the fees make the systems work. So fees it is. All the way down.

      Those of you who pay attention to the payments industry know the names of all the entities I;'d rather not expose explicitly. There are similar problems for every other, EVERY OTHER, institution. Fees drive the industry, and revenue is necessary to keep the servers on to do all this. I get it.

      But it's cheap to advertise you can, and then you won't. And to hide behind disclaimers and contractual language that clearly serves you, not your customers. that is the game, and I know it.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    11. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by Spillman · · Score: 2

      I don't work on ACH systems, but as I understand. the bank uses an ACH gateway to the Federal Reserve. they would just have to pay the gateway. If they are sending transactions over the EFT network they will have to pay interchange and gateway fees.

      Bank 1 Core -> Bank 1 gateway -> EFT network interchange -> EFT network interchange ->bank 2 gateway -> Bank 2 Core

      The number of EFT interchanges depends on the routing of the transaction's account number (the first six of the card number). So the routing may be more or less networks depending. It is similar to how traffic is routed between Autonomous Systems on the Internet. the thing is, everytime the transactions hits one of those interchange switches, the bank gets charged a fee, which is usually a percentage of the transaction. Very small, but it adds up.

      This is how the credit card companies make money even if you pay your bill on time, it's also why many merchants don't take American Express, they have really high interchange fees.

      --
      sig?
    12. Re: Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is just the tiniest fraction of what we can do with our banks over here; I just can't get over how backwards US banks are and how they can't seem to get into the modern world. Not only do we have instant free transfers (and to Americans: the ability to conveniently or easily pay absolutely anyone, anywhere, any time with just a computer or smartphone is a much bigger deal than you're thinking... it's so easy that it's to the point that when people want to collect money for a gift for a coworker, rather than going around asking for cash, they just put the destination account in the email).

      The banks are also connected more closely to other major billing systems. For example, there's a page in your bank account to let you add credit to pay-as-you-go phones. Not just your phones, but anyone's in the country, all in one system, so I can fill up a friend's phone or what not.

      All our bills come straight into our bank accounts. Not most of them - ALL of them, everything from rent to the gardener. All payable with a single select-and-submit interface (with delay pay options, of course). There's a page for charity listings, too, to make it easier to give - heck, there's even a stock trading section built in and the like.

        All of your documents associated with the bills are automatically filed into your bank account, you just click on the documents section and you can view, say, your wage slips or bills, from many years in the past if you want. Not like you typically need them, everything is automatically submitted through to our taxes - for most people, taxes are just a log-in to the tax site and click through a couple pages, and they're done, it just takes a couple minutes.

      Single system (despite competition in the banking industry). Everyone's on it. Everyone uses it. And it works really, really well. To give an example: checks have become so rare that cashiers in banks look at them funny and often have to get their managers to figure out what to do with them ;)

      --
      "We consider that six courts and an asylum claim are a rather odd way of returning to Sweden within a month."
    13. Re:Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by rwa2 · · Score: 2

      Eh, you're not on the hook for paying taxes with a babysitter if it's under $1900/yr. or $1000 per quarter
      http://www.forbes.com/sites/an...
      So I guess if you have a pool of different babysitters, you're all set.

      Though more likely what will happen is that we'll go back to the dark ages and live with family members who can take care of our kids for us instead of entrusting them to near-total strangers, and, like, maybe learn how to get along while living in close proximity of our in-laws and stuff. You know, like the way things work in the third world.

      Nah, I'm probably expecting too much from US society.

    14. Re: Unless it has support for Bitcoin... by azav · · Score: 2

      Over here? Where is it where your banks work so well?

      So much of America is in a legacy mode. And the false "we are #1" blind patriotism means that we're simply gonna stay there. Others leapfrog and innovate while 1/2 the country praises Jesus and corporate largess while denying scientific realities due to dogmatic and ignorant reasoning. Sometimes, it pays to be smaller and hungrier as opposed to being large and entrenched in old fashioned infrastructure.

      --
      - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
  2. Sounds like Interac in Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Except that Interac has been doing realtime debit transactions for many years, across all Canadian banks, both at point of sale and at ATMs. It's good news if the US is moving in this direction, because it is an excellent system, but it would be a stretch to call it the bank account of the future when it has existed for years.

    1. Re:Sounds like Interac in Canada by Nemosoft+Unv. · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Same goes for Europe. We've been working on SEPA for years now. I can already transfer money from my account to a different *country* in a matter of hours; within 2 years I should be able to pay online, with my own bank account, in a webstore in any SEPA country.

      However, as I have recently had to deal with some of the, uhm, idiosynchronies of the American banking system, I can see that this system sounds as a radical improvement. But it's not the future, it's already here. Sorry.

      --
      "Fix it? It has been disintegrated, by definition it cannot be fixed!" - Gru in Despicable Me.
    2. Re:Sounds like Interac in Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      SEPA is not the same. SEPA only guarantees international transfers in the SEPA area must be made in the same time frame as a national transfer. This is not instantly as the bank in the article is doing. For example here in Germany a transfer to another bank in Germany takes one day and usually the same to another SEPA country. Also, this is done on a batch basis. We check our accounts twice daily as transfers to us show up usually around the same time twice a day.

      While I agree that in general the European banking systems are more advanced in general regarding the aspect of transferring money this is a different case.

      My background, I'm an American who has lived the last 20+ years in Germany, Italy and the UK and I use SEPA for our international dealers on a daily basis. While better as a whole SEPA is not the same as what this bank is doing.

  3. Some parts Pickens missed ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The UK has Faster Payments processing across all its national banks, which allow instant payments between bank accounts. Maybe the US is married to a daily batch processing paradigm but CBW is most certainly not the first bank in the world to move away from it.

    But that's the national part. There is also a claim about instant international payments at the end, but this is done via Ripple.com which uses an internal pseudo-currency for operations, and is comparble enough to similar Bitcoin-based systems that maybe there's some "News for Nerds" here, but Pickens completely fails to mention this part at all, instead putting the glory onto a bank that uses Ripple.com.

    Overall, some very confused reporting; in future Mr Pickens might want to read all the links he's posted and then summarize them for the audience. C minus.

    1. Re:Some parts Pickens missed ... by Jdogatl · · Score: 2

      As you said, this is already common place in many European countries. I find it odd that America lags so far behind with these sort of things while many ideas come from there. 'meh.' *shrug*

  4. I find this odd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I live in Chile and we have free instantaneous wiretransfers which are required by law to be protected by 2 factor auth, Banks still make boatloads of money, not sure how the US can still be in the dark ages in this regard.

    1. Re:I find this odd by quonsar · · Score: 2

      I live in Chile and we have free instantaneous wiretransfers which are required by law to be protected by 2 factor auth, Banks still make boatloads of money, not sure how the US can still be in the dark ages in this regard.

      this is just the tip of the iceberg.

  5. Is IP address = SketchFactor? by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So is using the IP address the banking equivalent of the SketchFactor app? You just happen to have an ISP whose pool of addresses contains a bunch of scammers. Will this banking software decide that you too are also a scammer? What are the other "risk" factors? ACH made no judgements on the transaction.

    1. Re:Is IP address = SketchFactor? by omnichad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think they use multiple weighted factors. I doubt you'd get flagged on one factor alone unless it was a pretty severe anomaly.

  6. Do they tokenize account information? by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 2

    Hopefully they have some kind of one-time/vendor-specific account number rather than the actual account! Risk-based assessments are nothing new; hopefully knowing what the factors/algorithms are doesn't kill the effectiveness.

  7. Re:That's good by fisted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can sometimes spoof your IP address and when lucky have your ISP router forward them, but don't expect to get a reply. I presume making a transaction isn't going to work the one-packet fire-and-forget way.

  8. Congratulations you've invented the credit card! by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >> business could collect a...card number and use it to make an instant payment...real-time, payment transaction risk-scoring

    Congratulations you've invented the credit card!

  9. Welcome to the 21st century guys by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

    This sounds like it's till a bit hacked together (risk scoring?), and only available for business transactions, but it's a step in the right direction. Another ten or twenty years and you might be enjoying something like Europe and Australia's transfer system, or Canada's debit system.

  10. Re:Float? by RabidReindeer · · Score: 2

    The banks love float. That's why they had to be bludgeoned into shorter float times.

    Personal users, not so much. When I transfer money, I'm usually counting on the money to go where it needs to be ASAP rather than gumming up my accounts. If I wanted "float", I'd simply delay when I did the transfer.

  11. Re:That's good by NatasRevol · · Score: 3, Funny

    I learned all my skills from "Sneakers".

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  12. Re:That's good by Aereus · · Score: 2

    ...But my new computer has a 28.8k modem and an active matrix display!

  13. Misleading article - you must use ACH by quietwalker · · Score: 5, Informative

    Disclaimer: I used to write banking software for a living, including implementing ACH management on both the customer-facing and backend processing systems.

    The article is blatently misleading regarding realtime transfer of funds, but it takes some knowledge to understand why. Let's talk about ACH transactions.

    ACH, or Atomated Clearing House, is the network that the majority of electronic funds in the US use. As the article points out, it's ancient and horrible, basically a 1:1 translation of the paper funds reconciliation to electronic format. In essence, a customer creates an ACH transaction, which is sent to two endpoints; the federal reserve a.k.a. The Fed, and an ACH operator. Just like a credit processor, the ACH operator is then responsible for delivering the funds to the destination financial institution (FI) and they make their money by charging the originating FI. The transfer only goes through once both The Fed and the operator finalize the transaction, which can take a day or more, and most of them are held for additional days to provide for reversals (effectively, cancellations).

    Here's some important takeaways:
        - To perform bank-to-bank transfers, you must either engage a third-party processor, or you must have an agreement (and process) with each individual bank you wish to transfer to.
        - These transfers are subject to some very specific banking regulations, some of it relating to reporting to the Fed, who can block the transactions.
        - Laws provide for effective reversal (issuing a reciprocal transaction, not necessarily a reversal) for 2 days for corp-to-corp transaction (CCD) and up to 60 days for transactions involving people (PPD).
        - Just like most retailers, these are batch processed, not in real time, though the banks will reserve funds and adjust your balance accordingly. No one minds because legal protections result in at least a 2-day processing window anyway.

    Okay, so what do we need to perform this transfer in realtime? Well, first, you'd have to get every bank in the US and the federal reserve to switch to a new system that actually supports real time transfers, instead of the ACH. Then we'd have to completely overhaul the 40+ years of recent laws that were written with a batch-based system in mind, including removing many of the funds reservations activities (and the legal protections that require them) in favor of a realtime system.

    So how does this bank do it?

    Based on the info from the article, it sounds like the bank is managing two accounts per individual account; the customer-facing one which serves the 'realtime' aspect, and the actual one that is used for the ACH transaction. The risk comes in when the bank accepts a credit or debit prior to it being authorized and completed, and thus the need for 'risk management' software, identical to the sort that ATMs use, especially when configured as a local authorizer (for branches too far from the main branch and others).

    They just don't show the end user the reservation of funds like most FIs, and they assume the risk directly so there's no odd 'processing' credits or debits in their statement.

    So, it's just smoke and mirrors. They have to use ACH if they want to talk to other banks, and they're not doing manual wire transfers. They just aren't telling their customers. Though if they hit the anti-terrorist check (I wrote the software that matches against the government list too, at one time), their customer is going to find out really quickly that it's really just an ACH after all, and they ~don't~ have those funds - it's illegal for the bank to provide them!

    1. Re:Misleading article - you must use ACH by quietwalker · · Score: 4, Informative

      Side note: There are many other notes about realtime money transfers in other countries. In most cases, those are again, time delayed at some point, and subject to reversal, it's just hidden from the customer. In fact, even wire transfers/money orders are reversible! The countries involved simply have laws pushing the risk elsewhere than the customer - usually the FI, I'd bet. This is especially true of large international exchanges, like SWIFT. You might even be able to pay more to such an exchange to expedite your transfers, or even cover the risk - for a good customer.

      Though, that said, there's no reason a bank in country A might not have an agreement with country B, to automatically honor requests, assuming both countries have lax or non-existent financial regulation laws. In reality though, all countries have those laws, and that's why we have international exchanges.

      This is not just a semantic difference either; there appears to be no difference to the customer in most, but not all circumstances.

    2. Re:Misleading article - you must use ACH by quietwalker · · Score: 2

      I think the biggest obstacle is actually the bankers. They do not like adopting new functionality, especially new functionality that causes their processes to change. They have no problems with tech that lets them do exactly the same thing they were doing before, like say, mobile apps, but new = scary. For example, in the ACH file description, there are two file format types: One is called 'DISK' and the other is called 'LINE' - for dial up. They just send the disk format now, over the net.

      In short, they do not trust technology to get it right, and so will only accept a process that's modeled after their actual pen-and-paper model, so they can manually validate the results and understand exactly how it works. Then, once it works, they won't change it.

      You also have the additional barrier of existing legal structures in the US that force a 'float' time to all transactions, but that would change if the bankers (and I guess, the market) demanded it.

      It's all moot though. There's not a big need for minute to minute liquidity except among those who are very bad at managing finance, and they do not make for good customers. I honestly don't see a real market need for that sort of feature, nor people who'd pay for it, and so no real ROI on implementing it.

  14. Sigh. by ledow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Welcome to the 20th Century. Oops, we're not there any more!

    I deliberately wasted several hours of my bank manager's time once. When he sussed what I was doing, he asked why. Because it had taken four days for a cheque to clear - a cheque I had received every month from the exact same employer, for many years, and paid in immediately using their fast-track cheque machines that take a photo of the cheque for you, then wrap it in an envelope and send it on.

    And because of the delay, for a fraction of a second, my bank account went overdrawn by a few pounds even though the cheque was in the bank's possession. They delayed and delayed it, further than necessary or normal, in order to ENSURE I was charged for going overdrawn. The cheque was an amount enough to clear the transaction they bounced several hundred times over. They then charged me £50 on top as an administration fee.

    I'm an IT guy. I know that transaction takes milliseconds to process. The fraud selection? That's in place 24 hours a day on CC transactions anyway - there's nothing special about that. This is just an extension.

    The antiquated system of "it has to arrive at the other branch for the cheque to clear"? Nonsense and zero justification when you have the cheque in your possession. This stuff is chicken feed on the bottom of the banking balance sheets, but they can play it and make money by making it slow and cumbersome. Because most people will just keep quiet and pay it.

    The only question I really wanted an answer to? Has four hours of your time cost the bank more or less than the (unfair, I would posit) overdraft fee you charged? What about the loss of my banking business? How much has that cost you?

    Happened to run into the same guy at another branch when I was going in with my ex-wife to sort out her account. He ran a mile.

    Sorry, guys, you can make all the excuses you want, but that transaction system is slow BECAUSE YOU MAKE IT SO, not because it needs to do. The real-time clearing is already in place - try using a blocked credit card and see how long the gap is between you reporting it missing and all your vendors saying they couldn't charge you card for your usual monthly payments. The same applies to Direct Debits (in the UK) and myriad other banking technologies.

    I once recorded a 3 minute interval between my phoning my bank to cancel a Direct Debit and the company that it was paying phoning me up to threaten a lawsuit over non-payment (long story short, they "agreed to overlook the matter", including the complete refund they'd had forcibly taken from their bank account, after I offered to initiate the lawsuit for them).

    It's all nonsense. Banking systems do nothing special nowadays, especially not the personal / small business banking sector of the industry. They don't need tons of supercomputers and overnight batch processing - they just do that to eke out to the last second how long your money is with them.

    1. Re:Sigh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm an IT guy. I know that transaction takes milliseconds to process.

      And like a typical IT guy, what you "know" is beyond question. No way you could possibly be wrong.

      If, someday, you work with enterprise systems, you might come to realize that very large systems are often riddled with inefficiencies. When multiple parties are involved, or legal compliance, those inefficiencies can become powerfully entrenched.

      Take a look at some of the high rated comments on this article for explanations as to why and how banking is not as efficient as you imagine.

      Off topic, but related. When I first started in IT, we were given problems to solve. Now, we're given solutions to implement. Now you implement an idea that a middle manager came up with to solve a problem he (or she) will not tell you about in any detail. Their solution is generally out of date. So you write to their specification and it doesn't work. You, as the IT guy, are to blame--despite not being briefed on the problem to be solve.

      So when someone talks about inefficiencies, you have realize that nowadays everyone thinks they can design software. For the most part, that's why so much stuff is in IT is antiquated. How I miss working for people who had ideas that needed solutions.

  15. Bob is a Nigerian prince. real world fraud by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > and as a last step, they give the money to Bob (or his account) and I don't think either that for that it is neccessary or even helping, to check Bobs credit score or IP address. He is going to RECEIVE money.

    Remember we're trying to fight real-world fraud, where people do dumb things, malware exists, etc. There is a request to empty Alice's bank account and send all her money to Bob. We happen to know that Bob is a Nigerian prince. What are the odds that this transaction is fraudulent?

    The next day, April 15th, there is a request to send $1,200 from Alice to the IRS. What is the probability that this transaction is unauthorized?

    The likelihood that the recipient is a scammer is not just relevant, it's the crux of the issue. Even if Alice uses ten factor authentication, if "she" is sending money from her US account to a check-cashing store in Nigeria which is known for fraud , she's probably getting scammed. She might have even authorized the payment, but it's still fraud.

  16. Manifest silliness by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2

    I've often wondered how it is that banks get away with plastering account numbers on every check or who in their right mind would want a credit card tied directly to their bank account.

    Slowness of international transactions is a feature affording banks an excuse to sit on the money day(s), collect interest and then charge exorbitant wire fees on top. Who knows it might also give them some time to review transactions but I doubt it.

    The fundamental security problem with many electronic systems is they operate more like credit cards and less like paypal. Until the equation is changed such that only operation possible is "giving" rather than "taking" fraud detection algorithms don't have a prayer in hell and any "progress" is limited to deck chairs of the Costa Concordia.

  17. Re:Could be nice by kobaz · · Score: 2, Informative

    For this exact type of thing, check out Dwolla. Paypal-style transactions (unique id is your email, but that's where the similarities end). It's run by a REAL bank (Veridian Credit Union, that's been around since 1934), and they do bank to bank transactions for 25 cents.

    Disclaimer: I'm not in any way affiliated with Dwolla and don't gain anything by this post! Actually, as a business owner who accepts Dwolla payments, it would be nice to see this thing grow and become a standard thing people have to make it easier for everyone to pay each other, including me! :)

    --

    The goal of computer science is to build something that will last at least until we've finished building it.
  18. Re:That's good by PRMan · · Score: 2

    I learned from WarGames... Noob!

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  19. The current wire payment system is... by dskoll · · Score: 2

    ... I apologize for my somewhat undiplomatic language, but the current wire payment system is a cluster-fuck of fail.

    My company is based in Canada and accepts wire payments from Canada, the US, Europe, Australia, South Africa and the Middle East. Half the time, we see mysterious deposits appearing in our account without any useful identification. We ask our customers to specify invoice numbers when they make a payment. Sometimes that comes through. Mostly it does not. Sometimes we don't even get any indication as to who the money is from.

    So then we need to phone our bank and they take days to track down who just paid us. It's a total nightmare.

    I'd welcome wholeheartedly anything that can improve the situation.