Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Almighty Buck Security Technology

Big Banks Will Vie For Your Attention With Cardless ATMs and VR 76

tedlistens writes In the year that bitcoin began to grow up and Apple Pay was born—and massive cyberattacks—the country's largest financial institutions want you to imagine themselves as incubators. Three of the big banks opened up innovation labs to imagine what's next in mobile banking; some are starting their own accelerators. Meanwhile, the latest research estimates that U.S. mobile payments, currently at $3.7 billion, will grow to $142 billion within five years. Now an industry not exactly known for speed is approaching 2015 with an ethos that sounds more Silicon Valley than Wall Street, touting visions of fridges that shop for you, Google Glass and Oculus Rifts, and the kind of futuristic security they hope will inspire consumers to trust them and their technology in the first place. I like that both a local book shop, and the coffeehouse nearest my house, have bitcoin kiosks.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Big Banks Will Vie For Your Attention With Cardless ATMs and VR

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Yet they were among the first to adopt computers back in the 1950s.

    A little detail often overlooked by the rabid space fanbois.

    • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2014 @01:00PM (#48508271)

      Yet they were among the first to adopt computers back in the 1950s.

      Actually, that is the problem. Because they adopted computers so early, they are now stuck with slow legacy systems. It is similar to the situation with phone companies: America used to have the best in the world, because of investments in computers and automation. But today we have one of the worst telecom systems, because we are stuck with outdated systems, while other countries computerized with much newer technology.

      • by bws111 ( 1216812 )

        How did this get modded 'insightful'? It appears the mods, like the poster, know nothing about computing. Banks are not using 'slow legacy systems'. The only thing 'legacy' about them is that they CAN (but do not NEED to) run old programs. Banks (large ones anyway) are running the most advanced hardware out there.

      • Yet they were among the first to adopt computers back in the 1950s.

        Actually, that is the problem. Because they adopted computers so early, they are now stuck with slow legacy systems. It is similar to the situation with phone companies: America used to have the best in the world, because of investments in computers and automation. But today we have one of the worst telecom systems, because we are stuck with outdated systems, while other countries computerized with much newer technology.

        Are you telling me that these banks still use state of the art "Burroughs hardware and software"?

    • by Minwee ( 522556 )

      Yet they were among the first to adopt computers back in the 1950s.

      And they're still using the same ones.

  • Who do you suppose were the first businesses to use computers? Who were some of the first businesses with online presences?

    • And it seems they're still using those first computers sometimes.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by colinwb ( 827584 )

      "Who do you suppose were the first businesses to use computers?"

      Not the banks! Actually a British chain of tea shops! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Lyons_and_Co. [wikipedia.org]

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LEO_(computer) [wikipedia.org] The LEO I (Lyons Electronic Office I) was the first computer used for commercial business applications. Overseen by Oliver Standingford, Raymond Thompson of J. Lyons and Co.and and David Caminer, modelled closely on the Cambridge EDSAC. LEO I ran its first business application in 1951. In 1954 Lyons

      • It's not that quirky, in fact, it's a feature I rather miss. Back in my college days we had an IBM 1130. If you put a radio next to it you could hear it computing. The various sounds it made were a useful debugging tool. A steady tone meant your program was caught in a loop.

        But the 1130 was an aggressively single-tasking machine. The instruction set was such that it was not possible to write multi-tasking code for it. I doubt that the radio trick would produce any meaningful sounds on a modern, multit

  • by koan ( 80826 )

    Even though for most people the ROI on running their own Bitcoin mining hardware is in the past, it still fascinates me that I can make my own money and buy things with Bitcoin.

    • It's like being your own little federal government.

      • by TheCarp ( 96830 )

        Except without the ability to designate a group to invent money out of thin air by lending it to your friend's wives with no-recourse loans. I mean, you can still do that but, you have to actually get the bitcoins first before you can give out those no-recourse loans and, in the end, only you lose out when they don't pay you back, since you had to actually have the bitcoins to lend out in the first place.

        But other than that, yup exactly like it.

        • by Enry ( 630 )

          When you mine bitcoins you're pulling them out of thin air.

          • by TheCarp ( 96830 )

            No you are pulling them out of an agreement protocol by its rules. It may not seem like an important difference to you but, it does mean you can't pull out more of them than the protocol allows for based on how much you have participated.

            Even that however isn't the important part, the important part is that you can't just do it arbitrarily for arbitrary amounts.

            If you wanted, say, to give 10 million dollars to your friend by loaning it to his wife in a no recourse loan (which is a very accurate description

            • by Enry ( 630 )

              That doesn't change the fact that bitcoins come from nowhere.

              There's rules that govern how USD are created. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they're not being followed.

              • by TheCarp ( 96830 )

                Theres rules that govern how bitcoin are created as well. whether you like them or not, they are self-enforcing.

                I never once claimed the rules, as they are for US currency were not followed.... the whole point of pointing out what they are is because people deserve to know how corrupt the rules that are followed really are.

                Just because they are being followed, doesn't mean I have to like them; and I encourage others to learn about them and not like them either; because unless you are a billionaire, it reall

              • New ones don't come from nowhere. You trade an investment in compuing equipment and electric costs to mine the next bitcoin.
          • Nope. They require a considerable amount of energy to create, that of all the mining rigs combined. The energy is used to update the transaction history (block chain). One of the transactions adds 25 new bitcoins to the history, but that event can't happen without finding a hash value for the block. Finding the hash value requires all the mining rigs to search for it, using energy.

            • by Enry ( 630 )

              It comes from nowhere. The time it takes or energy invested in searching is as irrelevant as the effort needed to mine gold or the cloth and ink needed to print bills.

    • by vux984 ( 928602 )

      Even though for most people the ROI on running their own Bitcoin mining hardware is in the past, it still fascinates me that I can make my own money and buy things with Bitcoin.

      Dedicating capital and expending energy resulting in money. Is pretty much how we all make money.

      • Except that in normal systems the size of the money supply adjusts to the size of the economy. You do some work, produce something of value, and then the reserve banking system uses this to construct a corresponding amount of money (and then, 60 or so years later, people say 'OMG! Money is created from debt!' as if this is some awesome revelation and not simply the way that you move assets into the system where value is tracked by money). With Bitcoin, there is no correlation between the amount of Bitcoi
        • by vux984 ( 928602 )

          Except that in normal systems the size of the money supply adjusts to the size of the economy.

          As you yourself observed this "normal" system is only a very recent "innovation".

          With Bitcoin, there is no correlation between the amount of Bitcoin and the size of the economy and so the system is inherently unstable, just as gold-based currencies were.

          Which makes bitcoin more or a throw-back to the "old normal" rather than anything new.

          • As you yourself observed this "normal" system is only a very recent "innovation".

            Yes, an innovation by learning from past mistakes.

            Which makes bitcoin more or a throw-back to the "old normal" rather than anything new.

            Indeed. Innovation involves making new mistakes, not repeating old ones.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    "There’s still a lot of customers who don’t have debit cards..." Do these customers wait in line for a teller to withdraw cash? Why wait in line? Just go to the automated teller machine at the bank and withdraw cash. Most ATMs at the bank are outside the main business area and are also open 24 hours a day. Maybe I missed the explanation of why people don't have debit cards in the article.

    • "There’s still a lot of customers who don’t have debit cards..." Do these customers wait in line for a teller to withdraw cash? Why wait in line? Just go to the automated teller machine at the bank and withdraw cash.

      In all of the accounts I have held in the last 20 years, the Debit Card IS the ATM card. So if they don't have a Debit Card, they don't have an ATM card.

  • by jamesl ( 106902 ) on Tuesday December 02, 2014 @12:26PM (#48507787)

    The post says, " ... the latest research estimates that U.S. mobile payments, currently at $3.7 billion, will grow to $142 billion within five years."

    The Forrester research piece linked says, in fact ...
    Over the next five years, US mobile payments will grow from $52 billion in 2014 to $142 billion by 2019 with both national brands and local merchants.

  • I like that both a local book shop, and the coffeehouse nearest my house, have bitcoin kiosks.

    I like that none of the shops I frequent don't have them.

    How does it impact what banks are doing that the little book store and coffee shop near your house have a bitcoin kiosk? There is a shop near by where I work that will gladly barter with me over various other things I can bring in for trade or sale, big deal. There is a casino nearby too that now has slot machines that will dispense and accept tickets but no one cares other than the slot players who no longer have to lug around 50 lbs of nickles.

    • "none of the shops I frequent don't have them." Does this mean all of the shops you frequent have them?

      • "none of the shops I frequent don't have them." Does this mean all of the shops you frequent have them?

        I'm pretty sure that's exactly what he meant. Also, Grammar Nazi says that "none" is singular, so the quote should have read "none of the shops I frequent doesn't have them".

  • In the future - 2 or 3 days - an AI will be listening to all communication and take notes, answer questions etc. It's primary interface would be verbal, voice communications. It would have to know the voice and stress level of everyone in the house. Programmers could easily provide one voice recognition, and get money for each voice added to the repertoire This would be the beginnings of HAL or SkyNet depending... It would have to be aware of it's surroundings so as to not interrupt normal conversation or
  • Mobile payments are a bad idea. I can't believe anyone would buy something with their phone. The phone industry is regulated as a common carrier. They are not bound to the same regulations that a Bank or a Credit Card company has and therefore should never be trusted to perform a monetary transaction. There is no consumer protection and whereas Credit Card companies usually get 1 to 2% of a purchase price to perform a transaction, the mobile industry often gets up to 1/3 of a transaction. The more scammy th
    • Way to not read the article. "Mobile payments" has nothing to do with the carriers - their billing systems are not involved. Proper systems like Apple Pay and Google Wallet (and anything similar to them) are effectively just virtual credit cards.

    • by mccrew ( 62494 )

      Never ever link a credit card or a bank account to a mobile phone. Not until they are subject to the same rules and regulations as the banks and the Credit Card companies.

      Amen, brother. As an illustration of the problem, look at the ongoing issue with "slamming," where a shady company somehow gets ahold of your phone number and tells, er lies to, the phone company that you signed up for some dubious "information service." Shady operator collects fees, and can effectively intimidate customers because they stand on top of massive carrier billing and collections machine.

      I will never, ever link any payment to my phone bill.

  • Where do you live that the CoffeHouse and bookstore have bitCoin Kiosks??????

  • ...can suck my dick. I left Bank of America for Digital Credit Union and I would never, EVER go back. You call DCU on the phone and guess what? You talk to an actual human! And they're HELPFUL.
  • I find that rather hard to believe. I left my bank for a local Credit Union (best idea I've ever had) after finding out that a simple transfer from one account to another (both at the same bank) involved printing and mailing a check! When I asked why I couldn't just log in to my account and make the transfer electronically, they said it was too insecure. I pointed out that if a thief could get into my account, a simple electronic transfer wasn't even the best way to rob me, but all I got was some ignoran
  • About 90% of bitcoins are used to bankroll illegal activities...not sure anyone should support that system.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...