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

The Long Shadow of Checks

bitsaboutmoney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 112 posts

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#41

Post by otteromkram »

tjader wrote: post #29
clintonb wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would be trivial to implement and make things much more secure… If it were truly trivial, this would have been implemented long ago. This isn’t a pure engineering problem as much as it’s a “convincing people to do it” problem.

It is implemented in most of the world outside of the US. It is scary that the info you need to deposit funds into an account in the US also allows you to withdraw funds from it.

With approval (eg - PIN or password) you might be able to withdrawal funds.

But, can't you say the same thing about a credit card? Heck, you don't even need a password for that; everything you need is right on the card.

Or, your mobile device (if you pay through near-field tech)?

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#42

Post by paulddraper »

clintonb wrote: post #24
sneed_chucker wrote: post #19

Honestly, I just hate how insecure and legacy everything involving banking in this country is. For example, payroll - there's literally no reason your employer needs to store your account and routing number as another piece of your personal info that they can lose when some hacker finds out their MySQL admin password is "admin" Like, the system should be that you give your employer your banks name, plus a UUID associ…

> It would be trivial to implement and make things much more secure… If it were truly trivial, this would have been implemented long ago. This isn’t a pure engineering problem as much as it’s a “convincing people to do it” problem.

OP clearly means "technically trivial"

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#43

Post by Keegs »

Klonoar wrote: post #35
spelunker wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, is there a particular reason he uses obscure words like "infelicity"? I'm a native English speaker and I think that is the first time I've heard that word used. Is it really that hard to just use "misfortune"?

There are more than a few people who value what he writes but find the overall "winding path" of style to be very grating to read.

I know it’s not the case but sometimes it feels like he’s trying to channel Matt Levine. Doesn’t matter, like you said his blog and now newsletter are fantastic.

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#44

Post by tjader »

otteromkram wrote: post #41
tjader wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is implemented in most of the world outside of the US. It is scary that the info you need to deposit funds into an account in the US also allows you to withdraw funds from it.

With approval (eg - PIN or password) you might be able to withdrawal funds. But, can't you say the same thing about a credit card? Heck, you don't even need a password for that; everything you need is right on the card. Or, your mobile device (if you pay through near-field tech)?

If you need PIN or password, why are people so scared of giving out account numbers?

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#45

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

I remember watching a show, which said that the Knights Templar actually ran one of the oldest banks, and "checks," were scripts that they wrote in France (or wherever the Crusader started from), to be delivered in Jerusalem, so the Crusader could get his money, there.

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#47

Post by Arrath »

dqv wrote: post #17

It's interesting to see this discussion about speeding up check processing, because it seems that a lot of people use checks to slow payments down . It's a convenient way to make it inconvenient for the receiving party! It works like this: receive invoice, wait until due date, write a check dated for the due date, wait a few days, send it through regular mail, and complain about the past due notices because "I've alr…

> It works like this: receive invoice, wait until due date, write a check dated for the due date, wait a few days, send it through regular mail, and complain about the past due notices because "I've already sent the payment!! Did you lose it or something?" Applying late fees doesn't work either, they'll just send a late payment again without the late fee included.

This certainly seems to be the standard accounting practice at most contractor's I've worked for. Including choice tidbits like "We know the due date was Thursday, but the only person our JV agreement allows to sign checks is out until next Tuesday, so your check will be on that run."

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#48

Post by timdev2 »

Scubabear68 wrote: post #27
timdev2 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's a fair reading. At most, the piece describes a common political rant, and then says "Phrased that way, it sounds almost fantastically unjust. And… it’s complicated." Your comment, in contrast, strikes me as being much closer to a reflexive political rant than the essay.

Actually my focus was less on poor people and more on the incorrect assumption in the article that true check fraud was non existent.

The article does acknowledge the existence of real fraud. It distinguishes it from honest errors. It goes on to point out that sometimes institutions (financial and state) sometimes fail to adequately distinguish the two.

Maybe it could have included more on bona fide fraud. But it doesn't contain an assumption that true check fraud is non existent. And it certainly doesn't devolve into any sort of rant.

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#49

Post by blacksmith_tb »

paulddraper wrote: post #40
lmz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non American, the idea of a bank account number being a kind of secret that is usable to pull money out of the account is the most curious thing to me. I guess something like this can only exist in a high trust environment.

As an American, I am perplexed by the fill-now-pay-after European gas pumps. I suppose something like that can only exist in a high trust environment.

Not trying to wade into a continental dispute, but weren't gas pumps in the US also fill-then-pay until maybe 10-15 yr ago? I find it strange that you now have to basically guess about how much it will cost and then authorize a purchase up to that amount, instead of, you know, paying for however much actually got pumped (at today's price).

Re: The Long Shadow of Checks

#50

Post by jrmg »

reaperducer wrote: post #13

The longer you live, and the more things you do, the more you realize that checks are still alive and well. You still need checks for: Charitable donations - Many charities maximize every penny, and electronic contributions eat into that. Paying my accountant - Good accountants make every penny count, and aren't interested in tithing from their revenue to credit card companies. Tipping the paper boy Tipping the doorm…

I have never considered tipping by check - and have occasionally stiffed people who deserved a tip because I didn’t have enough cash. Is using checks for this really a thing people do?

When doing this do you name of the person you’re tipping, or just give them a check with the first line blank?

Post reply on HN