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

Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 127 posts

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#71

Post by usrusr »

andrewstuart2 wrote: post #27

As someone who works at a financial institution, it's news generally because money laundering activity tends to be highly profitable for banks, since they get to collect fees on those transactions. There are almost no incentives for us to flag transactions on our own (unless we're being super humanitarian) without legislation/regulation, because as long as they get their money there's no downside except for victims o…

Finance lobbying power must be weaker than popularly assumed if they failed to inspire a proportionate finder's fee that would make flagging worthwhile.

Of course, if I tune my cynicism level a bit darker that line of thought breaks down again, because then I start factoring in the possibility of "premium service tiers" with fees so high that a) no client in their right mind would ever consider them unless they have very pressing reasons to be friendly with the bank and b) no reasonable finder's fee could ever hope to win the bidding.

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#72

Post by notfromhere »

spikels wrote: post #16

This is news?! All software has bugs. NYTimes is taking advantage of the general public’s ignorance of this fact to imply something sinister. Without additional information - such as it specifically targeted certain transactions - that is misleading. Remember this when you read articles about subjects you are not knowledgeable about. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

DB has been caught laundering money multiple times over the years, is under a Treasury order to crack down on it, and has faced billions of dollars in fines over its money laundering activities.

You don't need to imply anything sinister, the sinister stuff is fact

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#73

Post by nostalgk »

usrusr wrote: post #71
andrewstuart2 wrote: post #27

As someone who works at a financial institution, it's news generally because money laundering activity tends to be highly profitable for banks, since they get to collect fees on those transactions. There are almost no incentives for us to flag transactions on our own (unless we're being super humanitarian) without legislation/regulation, because as long as they get their money there's no downside except for victims o…

Finance lobbying power must be weaker than popularly assumed if they failed to inspire a proportionate finder's fee that would make flagging worthwhile. Of course, if I tune my cynicism level a bit darker that line of thought breaks down again, because then I start factoring in the possibility of "premium service tiers" with fees so high that a) no client in their right mind would ever consider them unless they have…

Why would lobbyists work towards rewarding those who flag money laundering transactions when, presumably as presented by the parent comment, they make money off of these transactions? If anything, they would be lobbying against a finder's fee.

If we take the parent comment to be true, the fees levied against the institution for being caught (provided they can't worm their way out of it in the first place) are merely a slap on the wrist.

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#74

Post by notfromhere »

fareesh wrote: post #53
spikels wrote: post #16

This is news?! All software has bugs. NYTimes is taking advantage of the general public’s ignorance of this fact to imply something sinister. Without additional information - such as it specifically targeted certain transactions - that is misleading. Remember this when you read articles about subjects you are not knowledgeable about. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

It seems to me as an outsider that everyone's standard for honesty has been reduced because it's an acceptable sacrifice if it means sliming the opposing political party. This has undertones of conveying that the President "got away" with this activity, which is the intended takeaway from the article. The quality of journalism seems to have been hit hardest by this philosophy. For over a year all of us around the wor…

The report specifically didn't clear the president of anything; it does describe multiple instances of obstruction of justice, lying by Trump campaign associates, and destruction of evidence.

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#76

Post by fareesh »

notfromhere wrote: post #74
fareesh wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me as an outsider that everyone's standard for honesty has been reduced because it's an acceptable sacrifice if it means sliming the opposing political party. This has undertones of conveying that the President "got away" with this activity, which is the intended takeaway from the article. The quality of journalism seems to have been hit hardest by this philosophy. For over a year all of us around the wor…

The report specifically didn't clear the president of anything; it does describe multiple instances of obstruction of justice, lying by Trump campaign associates, and destruction of evidence.

I remember reading the report on the day of the release and its conclusion was written quite plainly that no American colluded with any foreign government. It was one of the principal conclusions.

As for the obstruction aspect - isn't that now a mere technicality? A man and his team have been falsely accused, he tried to get out of the burden of being politically undermined by the drama of an investigation that would clear him in the end, which it did, but not without massive damage to his political capital, which it did. I am sure other governments were also following this closely, and it most certainly would have had an effect on foreign relations.

That sounds exactly like what any innocent person would do. If the government in my country shows up at my door tomorrow with some incorrect charges, my first reaction is to get rid of the investigation by whatever means necessary because I don't want to go through the nightmarish ordeal.

What's being argued is that he tried to fire the guy who would end up proving he was innocent? Is that the level of partisanship that your country has reached today? It's really not helpful to any society when things get that bad. It's the same "get him by any means necessary" attitude that I referenced in my earlier comment. We couldn't get him on the original accusation so now let's get him on how he reacted when we accused him.

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#78

Post by fareesh »

sjg007 wrote: post #69
fareesh wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me as an outsider that everyone's standard for honesty has been reduced because it's an acceptable sacrifice if it means sliming the opposing political party. This has undertones of conveying that the President "got away" with this activity, which is the intended takeaway from the article. The quality of journalism seems to have been hit hardest by this philosophy. For over a year all of us around the wor…

The Mueller Report that totally exonerates the President and yet the President won't release it in full to Congress. The only one sliming the President is Trump himself.

Why would that affect the principal conclusions of the report? The conclusion can't change when the redacted portion is unredacted. The person who came to the conclusion did so after writing those redacted sections, right?

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#79

Post by Spooky23 »

spikels wrote: post #16

This is news?! All software has bugs. NYTimes is taking advantage of the general public’s ignorance of this fact to imply something sinister. Without additional information - such as it specifically targeted certain transactions - that is misleading. Remember this when you read articles about subjects you are not knowledgeable about. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

Consider that a former US state governor was pinched within hours by his bank transferring a few thousand bucks domestically to an escort service.

Mysterious "software bugs" that allow people to transfer millions of dollars to questionable characters in known corrupt countries are excuses, not defects. I guarantee that if you or your LLC wired >$5k regularly to somebody in the Ukraine every once in awhile, the best case for you would be your account being frozen.

Re: Deutsche Bank Says Software to Detect Money Laundering Had a Bug

#80

Post by mrfredward »

usrusr wrote: post #71
andrewstuart2 wrote: post #27

As someone who works at a financial institution, it's news generally because money laundering activity tends to be highly profitable for banks, since they get to collect fees on those transactions. There are almost no incentives for us to flag transactions on our own (unless we're being super humanitarian) without legislation/regulation, because as long as they get their money there's no downside except for victims o…

Finance lobbying power must be weaker than popularly assumed if they failed to inspire a proportionate finder's fee that would make flagging worthwhile. Of course, if I tune my cynicism level a bit darker that line of thought breaks down again, because then I start factoring in the possibility of "premium service tiers" with fees so high that a) no client in their right mind would ever consider them unless they have…

Is the idea of a finder's fee so negative? If banks regulators and the banks came up with a plan where sniffing out money laundering was rewarded and banks made extra money helping the justice system take on financial crime...isn't that the best possible outcome?

Of course the danger of such a system is banks would be overzealous in their reporting in the hopes of getting a lucky payout. That's another pitfall that would need to be addressed with fines or incentives. My point is that it's not inherently bad when businesses are rewarded for doing the right thing.

Post reply on HN