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

161–170 of 607 posts

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

#161

Post by esseph »

hackyhacky wrote: post #130
aurareturn wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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

Speed, cost, security, job/task management

Next question

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

#162

Post by [deleted] »

danielbln wrote: post #113
havaloc wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My boomer dad does more things on his phone than I do and I'm Gen X. It's actually astonishing how much he does on his iPhone. I'm dragging out the laptop and he's on his iPhone happy as a clam.

I've heard that GenX/Millenials are in a sort of PC goldilocks zone. People older than that cohort don't know computers and therefore use phones for everything, people younger don't know computers and also use phones for everything.

[deleted]

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

#163

Post by cjbgkagh »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #143
cjbgkagh wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that simple. If a poor person makes zero dollars how much of the reduced cost item could they now afford? We have a massively distorted economy driven by debt financialization and legalised banking cartels. It leads to weird inversions. For example as long as housing gets increasingly expensive at a predictable rate the housing becomes more affordable instead of less as banks are more able to lend money. The…

Fwiw in places like parts of the midwest housing is below cost of labor and materials. An existing house might be $70k and several bedrooms at that. You just can’t get anything built for that even if you build it all yourself.

I intended to make a weaker claim of ‘in general long run / maintainable’ circumstances and should have done so.

Many low cost areas have bad crime problems, there is another little phenomenon where the wealthy by doing a poor job in governance can increase the price of their assets by making alternative assets (lower cost housing) less desirable due to the increase in crime.

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

#164

Post by win311fwg »

irjustin wrote: post #88
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…

> But will it? No, because if you think about Startrek the endgame is replicators. Well the concept that 100% of basic needs are met. At some point work becomes unnecessary for a society to function.

Does it? The Communist Manifesto famously hypothesized that those who have the replicators, so to speak, will not allow society to freely use them.

The future is anyone's guess, but it is certain that 100% of your needs being able to be met theoretically is not equivalent to actually having 100% of your needs met.

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

#165

Post by ghaff »

eloisant wrote: post #139
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?

No, the article is wrong about the iPhone. It's the Internet that killed bank tellers.

And you still need bank branches every now and then for various things. Still don't understand how various expansive bank branches are profitable.

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

#166

Post by zetanor »

empyrrhicist wrote: post #61
forinti wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One bank I work with seems to have all but given up on online banking and I just have to use their app because online banking will no longer work on Linux (although they don't openly admit it). I think Android and iOS are safer platforms than PCs and that's why banks want you to use your phone.

> online banking will no longer work on Linux How? Across multiple browsers? > I think Android and iOS are safer platforms than PCs and that's why banks want you to use your phone. This statement fills me with revulsion and rage lol. The only real "safety" involved here is the removal of user agency. I have a lot more trust in a machine I can actually control, secure, and monitor than the black box walled-garden of p…

Your bank's insurer trusts Google's security more than yours, and they must surely (and rightfully) believe that while Google would spy on you, they wouldn't steal your bank account.

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

#168

Post by charcircuit »

cjbgkagh wrote: post #103
alex_sf wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It's not that simple. If a poor person makes zero dollars how much of the reduced cost item could they now afford? We have a massively distorted economy driven by debt financialization and legalised banking cartels. It leads to weird inversions. For example as long as housing gets increasingly expensive at a predictable rate the housing becomes more affordable instead of less as banks are more able to lend money. The…

It depends. There are people and businesses today who even make negative dollars each month, but they still purchase things every month.

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

#169

Post by socalgal2 »

eloisant wrote: post #139
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?

No, the article is wrong about the iPhone. It's the Internet that killed bank tellers.

It's also not the iPhone given Europe is 60-70% Android

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

#170

Post by ghaff »

ahartmetz wrote: post #47
bluedino wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your grandma doesn't give you a $10 check for your birthday in Europe? What about manufacturer rebates?

Cash is still fairly common, and manufacturer rebates are basically not a thing. If they were, you'd send them an account number (IBAN = bank ID + account number at bank) to transfer the money to.

In fairness, manufacturer rebates have pretty much (mercifully) disappeared in the US as well as they were basically a scheme to mentally make you account for a lower price you wouldn't end up being rebated for various reasons.
Post reply on HN