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

ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

davidoks.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 607 posts

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#121

Post by ahartmetz »

mrweasel wrote: post #108
ahartmetz wrote: post #7

I do not get what's special about banking apps as opposed to online banking. I've been doing online banking in the browser on a PC since before apps and I'm still doing it because dealing with data on a phone is painful compared to a PC. Is an app really that much easier to use?

My bank decided that the online banking website needed to be more like the app, so now they are both terrible. Basically the entire site is white space on the computer, because everything is centred and dumb down. Input fields for numbers are invisible, they are just a label saying "Kr" and you're suppose to click it and the numerical keyboard on the phone pops up, except it obviously doesn't on the computer. Paying…

I've had the same thing happen. Huge buttons, a lot of whitespace, little functionality in the default web version. To deal with stocks and such, the old version is still available somewhere.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#122

Post by saltmate »

bdcravens wrote: post #2

That paired with an increasingly cashless society. (Which is also in large part to smart phones) Otherwise you'd still need more tellers to conduct transactions that exceed ATM limits.

In which way is the cashless society due to smartphones? Cards did that already before Apple/GooglePay were a thing.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#123

Post by ahartmetz »

moribvndvs wrote: post #105

This writing style where every section has multiple paragraphs of preamble, prolepsis, cold openers for cold openers, and tangents is infuriating. Get on to the point already.

In general, it's just multiple times as long as it should be.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#124

Post by karol »

idiotsecant wrote: post #115
alex_sf wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If goods aren't being sold, then the price will drop.

This and other fairytales. The only solution here is to stop tying people's value to their productivity. That makes a lot of sense in the 1900s but it makes a lot less sense when the primary faucet of productivity is automation. If you insist on tying a person's fundamental right to a decent and secure life to their productivity and then take away their ability to be productive you're left with a permenant and growin…

They key is to do it by setting up the right structure or end up with it naturally, not by laws and control, because then you end up in a oppressive nanny state at the very best.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#126

Post by marcosdumay »

alex_sf wrote: post #98
cjbgkagh wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I think it's likely that this is the first major productivity boom that won't be followed with a consumption boom, quite the opposite. It'll result in a far greater income inequality. Things will be cheaper but the poor will have fewer ways to make money to afford even the cheaper goods.

If goods aren't being sold, then the price will drop.

I don't know what economy you are looking at, because the opposite is usually true since humanity industrialized.

If goods aren't being sold, then the price will increase.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#127

Post by ghaff »

rkomorn wrote: post #90
simonw wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of interest, do you live in a country other than the USA? (I'm guessing you are because in the USA they spell it check, not cheque.) I asked because the USA still seems to be stubbornly check-focused.

Is it? I lived in the US for 20+ years until 2021 and, though there were definitely more checks than I see in Europe now, the frequency with which I used them was approaching zero, which definitely wouldn't qualify as "stubbornly check-focused".

I'm in the US and things are definitely less check-centric than they used to be but I still probably write or receive a couple a month.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#128

Post by hackyhacky »

karol wrote: post #124
idiotsecant wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This and other fairytales. The only solution here is to stop tying people's value to their productivity. That makes a lot of sense in the 1900s but it makes a lot less sense when the primary faucet of productivity is automation. If you insist on tying a person's fundamental right to a decent and secure life to their productivity and then take away their ability to be productive you're left with a permenant and growin…

They key is to do it by setting up the right structure or end up with it naturally, not by laws and control, because then you end up in a oppressive nanny state at the very best.

The key, as history teaches us, is guillotines.

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#129

Post by dehrmann »

danielbln wrote: post #55
dehrmann wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this is true, but for serious tasks, I need the screen real estate. I'm amazed at what some people can do from a phone, but also wonder if they're missing things, of if it's actually inefficient.

I'm going to bet that you are a millennial or older? We need our big screens for $IMPORTANT work (buying big things, money stuff, etc.). GenZ tends to be less bothered by it and just does it all on the tiny screen in their pocket. It's time to schedule a colonoscopy.

What if millennials are good at both and are choosing the right too for the job?

Re: ATMs didn’t kill bank teller jobs, but the iPhone did

#130

Post by hackyhacky »

aurareturn wrote: post #51
paxys wrote: post #35

One key line about ATMs is buried deep in the article: > the number of tellers per branch fell by more than a third between 1988 and 2004, but the number of urban bank branches (also encouraged by a wave of bank deregulation allowing more branches) rose by more than 40 percent So, ATMs did impact bank teller jobs by a significant amount. A third of them were made redundant. It's just that the decrease at individual b…

We're already seeing large software companies figure out that they don't need 5,000 developers. They probably only need 1,000 or maybe even fewer. However, the number of software companies being started is booming which should result in net neutral or net positive in software developer employment. Today: 100 software companies employ 1,000 developers each[0] Tomorrow: 10,000 software companies employ 10 developers ea…

> We're already seeing large software companies figure out that they don't need 5,000 developers. They probably only need 1,000 or maybe even fewer.

Long-term, they will need none. I believe that software will be made obsolete by AI.

Why use AI to build software for automating specific tasks, when you can just have the AI automate those tasks directly?

Why have AI build a Microsoft Excel clone, when you can just wave your receipts at the AI and say "manage my expenses"?

Enjoy your "AI-boosted productivity" while it lasts.

Post reply on HN