Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Coin: A step in the wrong direction

techendo.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 193 posts

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#31

Post by kin »

I feel like some people on HN thrive so much on negativity. I don't even think this feedback is constructive.

Look, author has 1 or 2 cards. I have an Amazon card, a Target card, a Debit card, my FSA card, my Company credit card. I have rewards cards that I don't keep in my wallet because I like to keep my wallet thin.

Like it or not, Coin presents a hopeful solution to solving this for me. And don't go telling me I need to reduce the number of cards I have and simplify my life. I don't want to hear it. I just want Coin's product to exist and hopefully my pre-order is helping that.

On a side note, I'm not used to charge first ship later. Isn't Coin YC backed? I'm surprised they need to rely on pre-orders for funding unless that was their financial plan all along.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#32

Post by mmoriarty »

brianmcconnell wrote: post #24
brianmcconnell wrote: post #16

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.

Agreed -- they could get everything right technically; it's the legalities and the fine print that could be real issues here.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#33

Post by jack-r-abbit »

rickyc091 wrote: post #7
jmduke wrote: 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…

The one plastic card approach seemed to describe https://walla.by/the-wallaby-card

I remember looking into that one time. It seemed like a good idea but I don't recall why I never did it. Maybe because I mainly keep a small set of cards in rotation and don't really use different rewards cards at any given time. It is a nice concept though. I might need to look into it again.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#34

Post by martingordon »

jmduke wrote: 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…

Agreed.

While the ideal solution to this problem might be server side, as the author suggestions, that is in no way a feasible solution. The card networks are in direct competition with each other, so there's no way you could get a single card with Visa and Amex/MC on it, not to mention there's competition between issuers.

Heck, I can't even get my Chase credit account and checking account on the same physical card and those two are tied to the same user account at a single bank and go through a single credit card network.

I can't wait to get my Coin. I'll probably still carry around the Coin and a backup card, but that takes me down from 4 to 2.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#35

Post by dylanpyle »

fletchowns wrote: post #19
streblo wrote: post #10

> It stores data in plain text on your card So does your credit card

Yea but my credit card doesn't have a wireless radio built into it

As far as I can tell, the BLE radio in Coin is only used for detecting location, and doesn't expose any card details in any form.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#36

Post by samuelkadolph »

aclimatt wrote: post #8

To clarify about the pre-order issue: There's nothing inherently wrong with asking for funds to push the development of a product forward. Kickstarter has done a great job of promoting that model, and the world has seen a lot of good come out of it. However, Kickstarter has also done a lot of work to educate the public about the risk of this type of funding (certainly to their own legal benefit or otherwise), and thu…

Actually this is very much illegal. You cannot charge someone for a product and then not deliver it. Kickstarter doesn't charge you for a product, you pledge or donate to a project on Kickstarter and if it's successful, you get the item(s) for the level you pledged to for free.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#37

Post by socalnate1 »

bitops wrote: post #23
socalnate1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Hah. Fair point.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#38

Post by alexcroox »

samuelkadolph wrote: post #36
aclimatt wrote: post #8

To clarify about the pre-order issue: There's nothing inherently wrong with asking for funds to push the development of a product forward. Kickstarter has done a great job of promoting that model, and the world has seen a lot of good come out of it. However, Kickstarter has also done a lot of work to educate the public about the risk of this type of funding (certainly to their own legal benefit or otherwise), and thu…

Actually this is very much illegal. You cannot charge someone for a product and then not deliver it. Kickstarter doesn't charge you for a product, you pledge or donate to a project on Kickstarter and if it's successful, you get the item(s) for the level you pledged to for free.

I wonder if they get round that law because they don't ask for your shipping address until they ship the product meaning it's never a "properly completed order"

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#39

Post by chavesn »

It really seems like this author has some kind of bone to pick.

Banks aren't going away soon. Banks are not going to make it easy for third-parties to proxy transactions soon. NFC or other non-card POS technologies are not going to be everywhere soon.

Those are valid hopes or dreams, and I hope someone is working on it. But Coin promises to be a product that will reduce many cards to one now.

And arguing whether a "pre-order" scheme is legal or not is kind of a moot point: Pre-ordering customers show agree to the transaction, and show their intent give Coin their money now for something later -- even if it is forced by law to be done in a different matter.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#40

Post by dennisz »

I agree with the article in that non-card based payments methods (Square) are the future, but we've seen again and again that moving towards the future takes steps (look at tablets - we had so many iterations on tablet computing before we got to the iPad, and who knows if that's even the end all be all).

My point is that Coin is a much smaller stride for the typical consumer; only SV geeks (guilty) are as excited about NFC payments as HN is, and the typical person sees this aggregation of cards as 'technology' that they're much more familiar with. No surprise that it's blowing up.

Just my two cents.

Post reply on HN