Live data from Hacker News

Coin: A step in the wrong direction

techendo.co

21–30 of 193 posts

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#21
The easy first step to eliminating cards is to consolidate them into one device. Then make them completely swipe free etc. Square is doing something similar. Invent a small device to handle swipes and then move to Square Wallet. IMO Coin is on to something !

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#22
This article is ridiculous and doesn't even have anything to do with Coin.

The first half isn't even criticizing Coin at all -- it's just saying the author wishing there were even better things. The author says "The problem with these technologies is vendor adoption. It’s not here yet, but it’s on the way." Yeah, it's been on the way for the past 10 years, but nothing's changed yet! I don't see RFID/NFC anywhere I shop. But that's not any reason for Coin not to improve things in the here-and-now.

And the second half has nothing to do with Coin itself either, but is about Kickstarter charging in general.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#23
post #3

I dislike this article: it seems to suffer from 'perfect is the enemy of good'-itis and willful misunderstanding of how complex -- and difficult -- commerce can be. The author basically argues that things should be wonderful and easy and the service providers should handle it all (ignoring the difficulties of such a provision): I should use a plastic card, cheap, easily replaceable, low cost (free in most cases), and…

Agree completely. How did this manage to bubble up to the top of HN?

Just to be clear: you are asking how a negative, critical, "this is stupid" article made it to the top of Hacker News?

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#24

Two issues with Coin. One is this has been done before, exact same approach, and it did not work out because the card issuers didn't buy in (a credit card is also part of the issuing bank's brand). Maybe that's changed in the past few years, but I am skeptical. The second issue is it's solving a problem that isn't really a problem. I use two cards on a regular basis. I have others but rarely need to carry them with m…

Another point. If they opt to let consumers copy their own cards without the issuing bank's permission, I'd be very surprised if copying the mag strip is not a very big violation of TOS. If they go the guerrilla route, they'll basically be asking for legal trouble. I don't like to be critical, it's innovative, but I think they'll have a tough time.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#25
Coin is actually a step in the perfectly fine, sideways direction. It keeps everything on the credit card rail - something where there are fees so ridiculous that Congress actually PASSED legislation to limit them - that's amazing.

Stripe, Square, Coin, whatever - they all are just more convenient ways to make fee-based payments.

Why don't we just make payments from our banks directly? Did you know that's not only possible, but extremely easy now AND feeless? What if you didn't have to even give out your account number to merchants, what if you didn't even need to KNOW your account number to make them? What if I've been processing payments like this for 3 weeks now, have processed thousands of payments, and have done so without asking the user for anything they didn't know off the top of their head?

We don't need fees on our payments - if you agree and you're a developer who takes payments, email me @ tommy@thecityswig.com and let's talk. Not gonna try to sell you anything, I need your thoughts.

This is probably the first time you've heard me talk about this, but I'm starting in the comment section here on HN to start getting the pulse. I can't wait to discuss this hear in the coming months!

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#28

Two issues with Coin. One is this has been done before, exact same approach, and it did not work out because the card issuers didn't buy in (a credit card is also part of the issuing bank's brand). Maybe that's changed in the past few years, but I am skeptical. The second issue is it's solving a problem that isn't really a problem. I use two cards on a regular basis. I have others but rarely need to carry them with m…

> One is this has been done before, exact same approach, and it did not work out because the card issuers didn't buy in

The card issuers don't have to buy in to anything. You program the Coin yourself using your existing cards.

> I use two cards on a regular basis. I have others but rarely need to carry them with me. So I can reduce two slots in my wallet to one. Doesn't seem like enough of a benefit to me.

Ah, the old "It's of no use to me, so what's the point?" argument. You're not the person the Coin is targeting. It's for people who have more cards than they can comfortably carry in their wallet.

> Lastly, I can see all sorts of issues with merchants not knowing what these are, and being wary of accepting them due to perceived fraud risk.

I'll admit that I don't shop in many brick and mortar stores, but when I have, the cashiers have never so much as glanced at my cards. Most of the time, the scanner is out of their view anyway. I can see it possibly being a problem if they have to scan it for you (like at a restaurant or something), but I'd be willing to bet that most people just aren't going to care enough to make a fuss about it.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#30
post #3

I dislike this article: it seems to suffer from 'perfect is the enemy of good'-itis and willful misunderstanding of how complex -- and difficult -- commerce can be. The author basically argues that things should be wonderful and easy and the service providers should handle it all (ignoring the difficulties of such a provision): I should use a plastic card, cheap, easily replaceable, low cost (free in most cases), and…

Agree completely. How did this manage to bubble up to the top of HN?

I upvoted both the Coin link and the link against Coin. I find it's an interesting discussion either way.
Post reply on HN