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

FedNow Is Live

federalreserve.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 1001 posts

Re: FedNow Is Live

#551

Post by evantbyrne »

salawat wrote: post #528
evantbyrne wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I presume the system uses bank account and routing numbers? So besides concerns with sharing that information with the public, concerned citizens will figure out who they bank with, and will most likely be able to easily pressure the bank to drop them. Certain things should be difficult to accomplish in a functional society anyways, and administering a profitable hate group is one of those things. If not bankrupted b…

I'm sure British loyalists circa 1776 would have agreed with you.

Nonsense comparison. We're talking about business partnerships. If everyone with a shred of decency turns your organization away, that's a great litmus test for its existence. Worry about the next revolution being banked when that becomes a real concern, not over an online troll farm that tries to convince vulnerable people to end their lives.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#552

Post by [deleted] »

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #522
lmm wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A discussion forum similar to, say, Something Awful (or indeed HN), with a focus on mocking online misbehaviour and a reputation for unpopular political views.

>with a focus on mocking online misbehaviour and a reputation for unpopular political views. A less generous interpretation is that they coordinate harassment campaigns against transgender people and have caused at least three suicides.

[deleted]

Re: FedNow Is Live

#553

Post by cempaka »

evantbyrne wrote: post #515
634636346 wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are still almost 5k banks in the US. Unlike Zelle, if this opens to all of them, all you need is one bank.

I presume the system uses bank account and routing numbers? So besides concerns with sharing that information with the public, concerned citizens will figure out who they bank with, and will most likely be able to easily pressure the bank to drop them. Certain things should be difficult to accomplish in a functional society anyways, and administering a profitable hate group is one of those things. If not bankrupted b…

> they'll eventually run into legal troubles from the damage they cause to innocent people

Which is how this sort of thing ought to be handled, in stark contrast to "Chrystia Freeland sends an email to the heads of major banks to get troublemakers debanked with zero transparency or due process."

Re: FedNow Is Live

#554

Post by slily »

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #516
tombert wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think KiwiFarms is a cesspool and I think Null in particular is an extremely crappy human, but despite that I disagreed with the credit card processors pulling them, because they really did have a near-monopoly for online payments, meaning that this could be considered stifling of free speech. However, I think I'll have less of an issue for it if there's the government-backed means in which to send them money; at t…

This is a dramatic whitewashing of KiwiFarms. KiwiFarms was not deplatformed for wrongthink or because people disagreed with their ideas. They were deplatformed for coordinating harassment campaigns that resulted in at least three confirmed suicides. That is not protected speech.

Last I heard, at least one of those "confirmed suicides" failed to appear in government databases, which casts doubt on its legitimacy (I assume it is one of those counted as "confirmed"), and another was associated with outside harassment and falsely attributed to KF. I don't know what the third one is.

I dislike that site and the general behavior of its users too, obviously, but during that time when it was in the spotlight I saw plenty of evidence of egregious behavior and blatant lies from people campaigning to censor them, and much of it seemed to work. It's not hard to see how debanking could affect less "problematic" organizations or individuals through censorship campaigns (or government interference) regardless of your feelings about KF itself.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#555

Post by cj »

mattsan wrote: post #550
aidenn0 wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the eventual end-game that I can send money from my account at Bank A, to a friend's account at Bank B to split a check at dinner without using a third party like Venmo?

I had to read this twice - is it really not like in the UK? Is this the first US implementation of "Faster Payments"? Sure people in the UK sometimes use PayPal, Revolut, but most of the time its always just a friend gives (and you save on your banking app) their bank account number and sort code, and you instantly send it across. edit: with no fee

I can think of 0 occasions where I’ve given anyone my bank account info who isn’t a commercial organization (employer, electric company, etc).

I had no idea it was the opposite in the UK.

Edit: with the exception of writing physical checks, of course. I use those when the receiver doesn’t accept Venmo or Apple Pay.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#556

Post by polski-g »

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #522
lmm wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A discussion forum similar to, say, Something Awful (or indeed HN), with a focus on mocking online misbehaviour and a reputation for unpopular political views.

>with a focus on mocking online misbehaviour and a reputation for unpopular political views. A less generous interpretation is that they coordinate harassment campaigns against transgender people and have caused at least three suicides.

[flagged]

Re: FedNow Is Live

#557

Post by raincom »

cempaka wrote: post #425
634636346 wrote: post #340

It will be interesting to see how this affects "toxic," deplatformed, and to some degree debanked (at least from PayPal and CC processors) entities, like the KiwiFarms. While this page is somewhat vague about the private/public status of the Fed: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm it seems pretty well established that federally chartered corporations, like the USPS and Amtrak (e.g., https://en.wikipe…

Isn't it the case that you still have to have a relationship with a bank to have an account to transfer into or out of via FedNow in the first place? In that case I don't think this would change the picture at all. It's not the intention to help the unbanked pariahs, that's for sure.

Yes, one doesn't have an account with a participating bank in order to receive and send payments via FedNow. It is same with Zelle; with Zelle, one sends money to an email or a phone number of an intended recipient. Both senders and receivers of Zelle need to registered with Zelle from their banking apps. USBank and Chase are notorious to close accounts who use Zelle heavily, because they see such activities as nefarious. Maybe, other banks use Zelle transaction history as another point to in order to debank people.

I don't want my banks to know who I send money to via Zelle; but they do. If banks are happy with customers writing checks to 'problematic' people, why they think that frequent Zelle activity as source of risk, as long as customers are not depositing or withdrawing cash/money orders.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#558

Post by mistrial9 »

seany wrote: post #526
ke88y wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the very least, one would hope that credentials and perhaps also certain design documents such as threat models aren't public. There may also be implementation details or code which are subject to NDA, either from the Fed itself or from service providers such as IBM in this case. Sometimes you can get that info from a FOIA request, but that doesn't negate the fact that the employees working on the system are bound…

> threat models This is exactly the thing you _shouldn't_ put under NDA. What on earth?

guess -- knowing the currently discussed threat models is a competitive advantage for the dozen fintech security firms that are in on this, and a "moat" against the other four hundred fintech security firms that are frantically trying to find a way to get inside this obviously well-funded Big Gov project.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#559

Post by sjdmdlakziggy »

wslh wrote: post #538
aeyes wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there anything special about the IBM MQ implementation which makes it worth naming them? It looks like you can connect to it using AMQP so I wonder why they wouldn't just say something generic like "MQ" or "AMQP protocol".

Last time, a decade ago, I played with RabbitMQ and similar open source queue system they didn't handle congestion and rate limitation well (crashed). From my little experience with classical IBM systems like MQ they knew about that stuff.

I spent a couple years deploying and integrating IBM MQ, and I own a couple of services currently that interact with it. It was (just a couple years ago) and probably still is more robust than current open source solutions, as long as you weren't planning on forking the code for some very specific use case that requires heavy modification, or the more likely situation of just wanting to save money.

As far as message queues go for something like the federal reserve, IBM MQ is really the only option that wouldn't raise a lot of eyebrows in the industry. The Fed is not the kind of institution that I think people would be lenient on for being open and innovative with their software solutions, banks really need to know that this thing is going to work and they all run IBM MQ themselves already. Not to mention the integration possibilities with Db2 and IMS, which are both huge in finance.

My only complaint is that it is very expensive. That's the story with most of the kind of hardcore technical products IBM sells that are likely to wind up near mainframes. I'd imagine the Fed gets a sizeable discount though.

Re: FedNow Is Live

#560

Post by rootusrootus »

dboreham wrote: post #158
tjpnz wrote: post #149

I don't understand why FedNow and CBDC are such a big issue in the US. FedNow looks quite attractive from a fees perspective, especially when compared to PayPal and alike. Part of me wonders if the middlemen who stand to lose out might be trying to muddy the waters. It wouldn't be the first time.

The same thing happens when a town decides to string fiber on their utility poles and sell transit. All sorts of reasons why that's a terrible thing. Same for importing drugs from other countries. And on and on.

> a town decides to string fiber on their utility poles and sell transit

I dream of the day my municipality does this. The idea of buying service from whoever I want rather than be forced to use Comcast... -swoon-

Post reply on HN