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

The new £1 Coin

thenewpoundcoin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 421 posts

Re: The new £1 Coin

#231

Post by jessriedel »

pdog wrote: post #213
wonderous wrote: post #131

For any interested in the related costs: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/mar/19/cost-new-pound... Seems like there are £45m worth of counterfeit coins in circulation, but the switch may cost over £100 million. ____ EDIT: The percent of fake coins in circulation appears to be in flux, which makes me wonder what methods they use to estimate the fakes in circulation, if they use controls like injecting known fake…

The societal cost of counterfeiting goes far beyond the nominal value of the fake coins in circulation (approximately one in thirty one pound coins is a counterfeit).

Yea, it would be a bit like conflating the nominal value of currency in circulation and the actual value to society of having physical currency at all. There are huge multiplier effects.

Re: The new £1 Coin

#232

Post by djsumdog »

mbrookes wrote: post #173
ardaozkal wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kinda hoped that they'd include something like an RFID chip with something like a certificate inside, signed by the royal mint (Turkish government recently switched IDs to something like that). That'd allow verifying every single new coin (unless it is damaged to the level of breaking the rfid chip, but I suppose that's not that easy). It'd also enable tracking. I kinda regret that idea now. BUT if used responsibly…

"Hidden high security feature – a high security feature is built into the coin to protect it from counterfeiting in the future." So you never know - but how would that work inside a metal coin?

Yea, when I heard that, I immediately wondered if there was a tracking _feature_ in the coin.

Re: The new £1 Coin

#233

Post by dan1234 »

beloch wrote: post #227

Canada has an 11-sided 1 dollar coin (the loonie) and a bimetallic 2 dollar coin (the toonie). This new £1 coin is basically a mash-up of the two. Fair warning: People are going to put these things in pneumatic presses, hit them with sledge-hammers, etc. and then claim their brand new £1 coins are defective and "just fell apart". You should probably ignore these people. I'd be very surprised if the Royal Mint hadn't…

The UK has been using bimetallic coins (£2 coin) since 1998.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_pounds_(British_coin)

Re: The new £1 Coin

#234

Post by djsumdog »

bigbugbag wrote: post #56
tonyonodi wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yesterday our home secretary said that WhatsApp's end-to-end encryption is "completely unacceptable". So we're a long way away from that.

Hasn't UK been fighting encryption since at least the 90's ?

So has the US:

https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/97690/MIT-CSA...

Re: The new £1 Coin

#235

Post by Reason077 »

belorn wrote: post #178
andy_ppp wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there was no point in doing it? This seems super weird for a financial institution that should be looking at hard data; maybe they did some analysis about the increasing ease of forgery?

Sweden is also replacing the coins with new ones and a major advantage I keep hearing is that their weight is lighter, which reduce transportation costs and makes it easier for bank. But I would guess from a public relation perspective, asking a whole population to replace their coins just to make it cheaper and easier for banks is a harder sell that arguing security.

It isn't really a cost/problem to "ask the whole population to replace their coins". Coins are constantly being circulated, with worn ones replaced by new ones anyway.

The cost of changing comes primarily from businesses having to update vending machines, coin counting machines, etc (as well as increased production costs due to the new security features.)

But this switch has been planned for many years, so businesses have had a long time to prepare.

Re: The new £1 Coin

#236

Post by blue1 »

nommm-nommm wrote: post #198
blue1 wrote: post #7

> Hidden high security feature – a high security feature is built into the coin to protect it from counterfeiting in the future. "security through obscurity" as a feature?

Security through obscurity is just fine as part of a layered approach.

I am not criticizing the concept, just that making an announcement of something hidden is somewhat paradoxical.

Re: The new £1 Coin

#237

Post by refurb »

chippy wrote: post #79
himlion wrote: post #2

Is counterfeiting coins very lucrative?

From my other comment above: We know 1 in 30 £1 coins are counterfeit. Take the amount of £1 coins in circulation. Sum the value. Divide by 30. Equals the market in counterfeit coins. From http://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/circulation-coin-... £1 are 1,671.328 £m / 30 = 55.71 £m The market in counterfeit coins is therefore over 55 million pounds. This is, however the cumulative, total value of the market and…

That doesn't really answer the question though. Is all the effort to create a fake 1 GBP coin worth it? Unless you have access to the right equipment, I can't imagine it is based on the effort to make each coin.

If you can make 8x1 GBP coins a hour, then you clear a cool 64 GBP each day. Better than nothing (and tax free!), but there are a lot of jobs that pay better than that.

Re: The new £1 Coin

#238

Post by djsumdog »

vidarh wrote: post #95
simonbarker87 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol, how is the UK close to falling apart? Do you mean literally that the union is falling apart or more figuratively speaking that the country is unravelling?

Odds are increased that Scotland will eventually go for independence. Northern Ireland is closer than ever to a Republican majority in Stormont and speculations are on the rise that a border poll might be on the table in the near future (as in within not too many years; it will still take time) and even some unionists appears to accept that there is a greater than ever chance of a unified Ireland. More importantly: a…

I honestly though Brexit was good for the EU and the rest of the world. The GBP was terribly overvalued. Why did the UK get a free pass on not implementing the Euro and not being a part of the Schengen Area?

It's been nine months and starting the article 50 process is suppose to happen soon, but I have a feeling the UK will negotiate its way into the Economic Zone instead, keeping trade and immigration without work visas, while forfeiting their place on the EU parliament. Either that or they'll just ignore the will of the people and never leave.

Re: The new £1 Coin

#239

Post by Reason077 »

coroxout wrote: post #85
mootothemax wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never spotted a fake - they must be very good Some regions seem to get more than others, I used to see large numbers in the change I got in London. The quickest "tell" for me is the lettering on the edge. Some of it is shockingly poor quality and almost looks like someone took a soldering iron to draw it on. The next time a machine rejects one of your pound coins, take another look at it, there's a good chance…

Interesting. Thanks for the links. I have indeed had some pound coins which were tatty round the edges and had to be pushed through a self-service checkout several times or wouldn't even go through at all. I still hadn't realised they might be fake, though. I have noticed that a lot of old 10p coins are noticeably a lot thinner (presumably worn down rather than starting out thinner) than new ones. Is this as it shoul…

I have noticed that a lot of old 10p coins are noticeably a lot thinner (presumably worn down rather than starting out thinner)

Prior to about 2010, 5p and 10p coins really were thinner. They were changed from copper/nickel alloy (Cupronickel) to nickel-plated steel to reduce costs. But in order to maintain the same weight, the coins had to be made thicker.

Re: The new £1 Coin

#240

Post by UweSchmidt »

ollie87 wrote: post #83
bigbugbag wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hasn't UK been fighting encryption since at least the 90's ?

Aye. We should just go back to using the Royal Mail.

Wouldn't be surprised if the surveillance infrastructure for physical mail started deteriorating already and a beautiful handcrafted, scented letter with calligraphy could fly under the radar.
Post reply on HN