Hacker News Reader

Comment by Sohcahtoa82 | Hacker News Reader

#2 doesn't scale. If you guarantee access to a human, the system will absolutely be effectively DoS'd by scammers trying to social engineer their way into access to someone's account.

View on HN

Not if you require physical presence. If you have to turn up in person at a local branch office with identifying documents, then you've greatly limited opportunities for scams. Fraud is still possible but it doesn't scale.

That sounds vastly more costly since they'd have to open local branch offices everywhere.

Users can travel themselves.

At least 1 would not be enough. So how many branches are enough? And what about people with less money and time available?

This is why banks have physical locations with live tellers. And also why I'll never open an account with a regulations-dodging "disruptor" banks where everything must be done through the app.

You are suggesting that companies be legally required to staff a "Complaint Bureau" where low-level employees must face, in person, the most disgruntled and potentially unstable 1% of the internet. This can only end well.

That actually sounds good to me.

If this place attracts violence, the company can afford bulletproof glass and an alarm button that alerts the police, and I'd rather have the unstable 1% remanded to police at the risk and cost of a rich company than to have them stab a rando on the street later.

Employee protection laws that mandate said bulletproof glass in certain situations already exist in civilized countries.

...for a Gmail account. Right.

No, for the key to being able to participate in modern society. Without a Google account, you can't use (standard) Android. Without either (standard) Android or iOS, you de facto can't use most banks, some public transit networks, and various other utility-level services.

You can have a Yahoo account, a Hotmail account, a ProtonMail account. You can go to your bank in person or without an app. I would be less surprised to learn that a bank does not have an app than I would be to learn they do not have a website.

The web site often requires an app for authentication. Some (not all) banks offer alternatives, which often come at a cost (either financial or time) that would, once you add all of the costs up, be catastrophic for the majority of people, because it's never one thing that is affected with these major gatekeepers.

They generally use SMS authentication. I have yet to see one that has a hard requirement for an app, let alone one that actually requires a Google account.

Regardless: The fact that a specific tool is the easiest way to do something doesn't grant you a "right" to that specific tool. For example, you have a right to seek transportation; you don't have a right to a specific 2025 Toyota Camry provided by a private company.

If the companies are too big to provide reasonable levels of support for their users, then the companies are simply too big.

A smaller company is even less able to deal with fraud. You wouldn't have the product at all.

Maybe, but I think that's probably okay.

You can't launch your boutique credit card and refuse to refund fraudulent charges with the excuse that you are too small to do so.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com