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

121–130 of 193 posts

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#121

Post by frogpelt »

objclxt wrote: post #112
goshx wrote: post #57

So, this product is new. Nobody has used yet. However, it already got a bunch of bad reviews. Why try to put a not even born yet business down if you are not even competing against it in the first place? I'd be interested to see a business coming up from the article's author from the ideas he put in the article. But I guess writing a blog post is much easier than investing time and money to build up something new to…

> Why try to put a not even born yet business down if you are not even competing against it in the first place? Because if we all just blindly praised every new business that came along and never gave them our true opinions we'd have a lot more bankruptcies than you have now (and that's saying something). A large number of businesses fail because they have terrible ideas . If you think a business has a bad idea why s…

If you think your opinion on a message board carries 5 cents worth of weight to someone who has poured their heart and soul into a business idea, you're mistaken.

In other words, you or me calling an idea horrible on the Internet is not going to stop a bankruptcy. If Coin gets enough preorders they are going to build a product, whether it is a failure or not.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#122

Post by zacharycohn »

danudey wrote: post #93
bradgessler wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The product manages to create more headaches for the consumer I have 4 credit cards in my wallet. If this consolidates down to 1 then I don't care what else it does.

I'm curious what you need four credit cards for though. I can see maybe a personal one and a business one, but what are the others for?

I have a Delta AmEx that I use to get miles. This card also has my biggest limit. When people don't take AmEx, I use my older Discover card. This has my second biggest limit and second best rewards.

When they don't take that, I use my Chase Visa card, which has a pretty small limit and pretty crappy rewards. I also have my first card, a Capital One Visa card, which I keep around because there's a cool picture on it.

I also have a business credit card for work, and another for my personal LLC.

And there's my debit card I use for ATMs.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#123

Post by namuol »

danudey wrote: post #105
namuol wrote: post #65

Coin is absolutely a step in the right direction for one simple reason: it offers a convenient transition option. Its most immediate use is to consolidate physical cards into one, but its true killer feature is the ability to instantly act as a physical proxy to a digital account (i.e. BitCoin, Paypal). Do you own a Blu Ray player? It's more than likely to also play DVDs. If it takes a lot of time to get consumers to…

It can only act as a physical proxy to a digital account which uses magnetic stripes as its primary physical form of transaction.

The data on a magstripe is just that: data. I'm suggesting that digital services could offer you a digital "magstripe" without the need to ship cards.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#125

Post by ruswick »

Coin is a very neat idea that will be hampered by many practical limitations.

How durable will it be? I routinely neglect to take my wallet out of my pocket, and end up putting it through the wash. Can Coin survive total immersion in water for an hour? What happens when my dog invariably decides to chew up my wallet? What happens when I drop my Coin in sand?

Moreover, the cost of a Coin becoming inoperable is far greater than that of a traditional card. Worst case scenario, my bank will send me a new card within a few days, which will cost nothing because the cost of manufacturing plastic cards is negligible. If my Coin breaks, I have to shell out another $100. Unless Coin is as indestructible as plastic cards (which is highly doubtful simply because the mechanics and circuitry in Coin create a level of complexity far greater than that of a piece of solid plastic), It will end up costing me more in the long run.

What about security? If I were to lose a plastic card, the maximum risk I'm exposed to is a single account being defrauded. If my Coin falls into the wrong hands, the bad guy has absolutely everything.

In a perfect world, Coin would be great. Unfortunately, the limitations of modern life and commerce make Coin impractical and even dangerous.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#126

Post by couchand »

negrit wrote: post #87
lsh123 wrote: post #54

Plastic credit card costs next to nothing to manufacture, can be dropped from a 10 story building (good luck finding it afterwards though), can get wet with me in a heavy rain, can be replaced in 24 hours (at my bank) and I have $0 liability if I lose it or someone steals it from me. Compare this to Coin (or other solutions like phone based payments) and you will see that it is indeed a step in the wrong direction th…

Credit/Debit Card can be replaced on the spot at some bank.

But then I have to go to the bank.

I'd rather have a chip in my arm.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#127

Post by lowglow »

pg wrote: post #124

"Update: I've been currently gagged/banned from responding to HN comments. Sorry." For what it's worth, this is false.

Cool. I didn't know if it was a bug or I was actually gagged/filtered, but my reply button disappeared, then later reappeared. Glad I wasn't banned. :)

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#128

Post by Nursie »

stormbrew wrote: post #90
dsl wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of chips is they can't be cloned. This whole product works by cloning.

It's probably too strong to say that they can't be cloned, but I don't think the banks would be very happy at all with someone selling chip skimmers to end users. I'm not sure if users should be happy with that either.

There are a variety of theoretical attacks on EMV cards. Some involve compromised reader devices. Some involve ingenious card-like devices that talk wirelessly to a device containging the real card and change some of the data exchange going back and forth. This may allow some transactions to circumvent PIN or other validation but all requires the original, stolen card.

One I just read about (yescard) could allow you to clone a card and could be used (most likely) for a half dozen low-value offline transactions. But it has no keys so can't fool the bank.

You can get a card reader/writer on the open market for about $10. Writeable cards will cost you a little more. Problem is that the card you want to clone isn't going to give up the goods in terms of private keys, PIN validation data etc, so like the yescard, it's going to be of very limited use.

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#129

Post by kunai »

What the author of this article just doesn't get is that Coin isn't supposed to be a long-term solution (at least from my takeaway), nor is it something that is intended to completely redefine the vision of future payments. What Coin intends to do is provide a unified interface for payments right now, today. Credit/debit cards are so ubiquitous that it's only natural we unify them. It's 2013, and there's still no comprehensive NFC mobile payment solution. Google Wallet can't really be used on a practical basis, and doesn't give you much security – lose your phone, and you're pretty much screwed.

Coin is most definitely a step in the right direction, and it's a simple solution. One of the hallmark traits of great design is its obviousness -- and Coin's design is obvious. A credit card that can act as multiple credit cards. Who would have thought?

Re: Coin: A step in the wrong direction

#130

Post by xster »

Pretty link bait-y title. You'd expect an authoritative analysis of the product but half of the article is a Fox News-y "some people don't like pre-paying for pre-order" complain unrelated to the direction of payment systems. The other half is a subjective anecdotal nice to have wishlist on the payment industry. Sound shockingly contrarian and ride the popular topic, old trick in the book.
Post reply on HN