Live data from Hacker News

The Long Shadow of Checks

bitsaboutmoney.com

111–112 of 112 posts

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because cheques are unreliable, insecure, slow, inconvenient and expensive, and electronic bank transfers solve literally all of those issues. What kind of a stupid question is that? Do you think cheques are not processed by computers?

cheques are unreliable, insecure, slow, inconvenient and expensive, and electronic bank transfers solve literally all of those issues. I'll give you "slow," but it depends on how you define slow. Checks where I am often clear in a day. Rarely longer than two days. As for the rest, no, those problems are not solved by replacing checks with electronic transfers. They still exist, just in different forms. And I never sa…

> Checks where I am often clear in a day. Rarely longer than two days.

That's extremely slow. Electronic transfers are basically instant these days.

> I stated that replacing checks with computers adds more points of failure.

It literally doesn't. A cheque is one big point of failure that doesn't exist with electronic transfers.

> Or do you somehow not notice the litany of things that go wrong with computers every single day right on the front page of HN.

"Computers" aren't a single thing. Bank transfers are ridiculously reliable. Far more reliable than cheques. And as I've already explained, cheques are processed by computers too so you aren't somehow skipping the possibility of programming bugs by using them.

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#112
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Write newspeak for goodthink.

“Can you explain a hard idea using only the ten hundred most used words? It’s not very easy. Type in the box to try it out.” https://splasho.com/upgoer5/

An effort:

https://splasho.com/upgoer5/?i=Ez9loFOzo2kfo3qmVUEbMFOjo2yhq...

Post reply on HN