• FrankTheHealer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    In Ireland, this is already a thing between two people who have an account with the same bank.

    Online banks like Revolut and N26 tend to be instant between each other too.

    Would be nice to have this between all banks in the EU though.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m pretty sure Dutch banks already have this with eachother, but it would be great to loop my German friend in too

  • BerührtGras@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Maybe make the bank Apps a little more intuitive to use and make it easier to send recurring payments to your friends and the monopoly of paypal in germany could disappear

    • bob_lemon@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah. It’s really a UI issue at this point. Just a simple frontend to facilitate SEPA transactions to contacts (which could just be a simple Name -> IBAN map stored locally)

      • gigachad@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        I could imagine something like an IBAN protocol - open an IBAN link as in iban://AB26374838388 directly with your banking app and auto fill the bank transfer menu. Only add the amount of money you want to transfer.

        No idea what other implications that would have e.g. for security though

          • sergih@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Idont’t think that’s a good idea, too many peoplr quickly pressing pay and then they tealizef only afyer paying thay there’s an extra 0

            • rentar42@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              I thought about that, but I think it’s actually more error prone, because people might just be setting ?amount=32 and leaving out currency which might lead to unexpected behaviour. Implementors tend to interpret this differently and one app might take the default currency and the other might fail to accept it, and that kind of different behaviour is a common source of security issues. Having a single unified parameter that must always contain the value and currency “solves” that issue.

              • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Makes it a bit more annoying to parse, though I definitely see your point.

                However, you’re still proposing a standard: “has to include both the currency and the amount in the parameter”, so why not split them up at that point?

        • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Main problem I see is that as it stands it’s insanely easy to forge a SEPA mandate. Ever had to fill one out? It’s literally just a piece of paper saying “I, John Doe, allow XXX to take money for services rendered from my acount AB1234. [signature]”. The wonder of legacy processes built for companies with fax-based workflows…

          I believe only some “trusted” commercial customers are authorized to turn in SEPA mandates (I know my ISP went into some bankruptcy proceedings and lost their ability to use their SEPA mandates for instance), but still, that makes me somewhat wary about who I give my IBAN to. I’d certainly not put it up online for anyone to see.

          • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Didn’t know it was this simple, that’s stupid.

            I believe though that in today’s day and and of banking apps this should be very easily solvable with inapp confirmations

            Let’s hope the old way dies

    • tetris11@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      I just want an easier way to give money to homeless people, without them having to depend on an electricity supply.

        • tetris11@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          There are penalties for carrying cash. One is the time burden of withdrawing it, the other is that if your bank has fees for more than X withdrawals a month then you will be deincentivized.

          • BerührtGras@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            how much money do you want to give to a homeless person for you needing to withdraw a high amount of cash each month?

            • mayonaise_met@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              I just don’t want to have cash on me. My wallet is already quite a stack of cards. Two debit cards, a credit card, two vehicle registration cards, a roadside assistance membership card, a driver’s license.

  • b0gl@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Sweden has Swish. Instant transfers, you can pay with it in some stores and you can request money from others. All you need is a phone number and a bank account.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I just wanted to add that you also need Bank-ID and that it works instantly regardless of what bank the receiver or sender uses.

      It’s also free for the user. The bank technically pays a small fee but I’m not a bank so I don’t care.

    • Eq0@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The Netherlands has Tikkie, same thing. And my bank has instantaneous transfers all across the EU… I’ll never change bank

  • Virkkunen@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Brazil has PIX: 24/7 instant (inter)bank transfers without any fees, you only need the money and the other person’s key (email, phone number, SSN, random key or QR code)

    • sim642@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      That’s the case for many counties but that’s only between the banks within that country because that’s all that one government can require banks to implement. The EU has to do something to get things moving between counties, otherwise nobody is going to agree on anything voluntarily.

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I do not understand how I can transfere money instantly theogu an app but the bank needs a few days to do so (unless I pay a fee for instant transfere). I can’t imagine it costing the more to transfere my money now than have it done during the night

    • Nobsi@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      It doesn’t. But at the same time the app you use doesn’t transfer money at all. It just shoves ious around.

  • PeWu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    In Poland there is BLIK, it’s well integrated, you can use it anywhere, you can pay, you can transfer, you can request, and it’s free.

  • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Man these bankers can’t even keep up. Bitcoin has been doing this for 15 years across all borders and the recent lightning upgrade makes it even better. It’s accessible to anybody with a cell phone in every country regardless of their credit history, the stability of their banking system, or the reliability of their national currency. And no government or politician can increase the supply thereby decreasing the portion of it you own. It does this 24/7 365 with zero downtime, no bank holidays, and for .1% of global electricity usage. Less than remittance services alone like Western Union use and mostly from renewables. It is the first truly international currency.

    You can send a million dollars for less than 50c in fees on the main chain or <1c in fees on lightning. Lightning transactions confirm in microseconds, main chain transactions confirm in seconds to minutes depending on block timing and how much security you want to guarantee.

    • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Main chain transactions should, on average, take around 6 minutes to confirm.

      It’ll be seconds only if you’re very lucky.

      Don’t wanna hate, crypto is hella cool, but overselling it won’t help anyone.

      Edit: oh yeah, and lightning won’t confirm in microseconds, you’ve got your scales mixed up mate, it’s gonna be tens to hundreds of milliseconds, simply of your wifi’s latency.

      • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        For everyday spending, I would consider “The tx is valid, signed, seen by nodes, and has a fee high enough to make it into the next couple blocks” as plenty of confirmation on main chain. That part takes seconds. Like if I’m splitting a bill w a friend a merchant selling somebody a coffee a double-spend attack is really not even in my realm of considerations, I don’t need it to make it into a block.

        • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Nobody serious is ever gonna sell you anything without a block confirmation, that’s just delusional.

          For a settlement with a friend, sure, but don’t tell me you believe you’ll walk out of a store before it hits at least 1 conf

          It’s not a double spend if it hasn’t been confirmed yet, you can always replace-by-fee before it even makes it onchain

          • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            A. Lightning solves this with their super fast confirmation times.

            B. Merchants do this regularly. The equivalent to a full block confirmation (the money is yours now and the transaction can’t be reversed) for credit cards is on the order of 30 days. Venmo and paypal have similar policies. Plus higher fees. Plus sometimes they charge or otherwise punish you even in the unlikely event you win the dispute.

            The risk of fraud is the cost of doing business and buyer-initiated fraud is rampant on these platforms. It’s why I don’t sell anything > $50 USD on ebay, because the buyer can just say it “doesn’t work” and get to keep the item and get their money back.

            • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              A. I’m not saying it doesn’t, I’m just disputing what you said about onchain txs.

              B. CCs are much less anonymous, making engaging in fraud much riskier. If you did this 10 times your bank would notice, adds up for you. If you do it with an anonymous system, you’re forgotten the second you walk out of the store (barring being caught on camera but you can solve that by wearing a mask or something).

              I do see your point, but I don’t think it’s an apples to apples comparison.