
How We're Building a Better Bank: Negotiating Privacy & Utility - Q6T46nT668w6i3m
http://www.banksimple.net/blog/2010/08/11/negotiating-privacy-and-utility/
======
herf
This sounds related to the accounting method businesses call "accrual" as
opposed to "cash". <http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/article-29513.html>

I would also like to see one of these services predict periodic expenses
properly. e.g., I pay my car insurance once every six months, and I would love
to see this as an amortized expense (as if I'm "saving" monthly to pay this
expense when it comes due). Mint does not do anything like this.

------
alecco

      > We think it's in your interest as a customer to provide us relevant
      > behavioral information. 
    

No, thanks. My current banks (+PayPal/CC) already know too much about me.
Also, I wouldn't like to be patronized by a one-size-fits-all algorithm.

~~~
chc
I think that's the point. You're already being served by a one-size-fits-all
algorithm at any place that doesn't know you. Those places are guessing at how
to treat you based on how other people act en masse. By learning about you,
their algorithm can adapt so that it _isn't_ generic.

~~~
alecco

      > By learning about you, their algorithm can adapt so that it isn't generic.
    

It will still be the same algorithm, for everybody. Yes, it won't offer health
insurance to old people or viagra to youngsters. But it will be the same
recipe. Banks and credit cards already use sophisticated generic algorithms
for advertising. Just because an algorithm adapts to parameters doesn't mean
it isn't generic. (In fact, most algorithms "adapt" in some way.)

A cool idea instead would be giving control to the customer. Not just
configuration but allowing programming of some kind. People are not stupid (no
matter what your MBA course taught you.) Sure, humans have issues coordinating
and large groups tend to behave at their lowest common denominator, but this
isn't the case.

~~~
Unseelie
If the algorithm contains more pidgin holes, should it be judged based on the
fact that it is still an algorithm, or should we actually consider whether it
might be a better algorithm?

~~~
alecco
Almost every practical algorithm I know behaves differently based on input.
That doesn't mean it is a different algorithm every time.

------
alecco
That's a false dichotomy. We don't need to run things with our private data on
third party servers.

There is a way out: browsers have very powerful JS engines and it is possible
to do client-side processing and even store private data encrypted somewhat
securely without the service provider having access. But since this concept
doesn't lead to profits it is completely disregarded. There are many systems
using this approach, like password managers and secure email services. It's
not perfect but it's been out there for many years.

~~~
jacquesm
There even was an attempt at making a digital form of cash:
<http://cryptome.org/jya/digicrash.htm>

It preceded powerful browsers by a couple of years but the ideas were very
similar (I believe) to what you suggest.

------
thinkcomp
I'm confused. If BankSimple isn't a bank (it's not, right?), then why does it
have "bank" in its name and issue statements like "how we're building a better
bank?"

Be a bank or be something better that isn't a bank, but you can't have your
cake and eat it too.

------
kacy
Has anyone received an invite to the service yet? How do you like it?

~~~
i2pi
Kacy - We aren't currently issuing invites. There has been some confusion
about this, but we clarify this here
<http://banksimple.net/blog/2010/08/10/our-invite-process>

------
jrockway
_Whether in spendy behavior or overdraft fees, there's a reward in it for
them._

Where? Less money in your account = less money for the bank to loan out and
make money from. Also, in the US anyway, overdraft is "off by default", due to
new laws (and that banks realizing customers hate overdraft fees). If you
spend more money than you have, the transaction is declined.

If banks wanted you to spend money, they wouldn't give you fee waivers and
higher interest rates when your balance goes over a certain level.

(Credit cards are a whole other issue. They want you to spend up to your limit
and pay the minimum every month. But loans and deposit accounts are two very
different beasts.)

~~~
detst
_Less money in your account = less money for the bank to loan out and make
money from_

Not when it's in their pocket.

 _If banks wanted you to spend money, they wouldn't give you fee waivers
[...]_

Doesn't that just re-enforce the behavior of spending? Why worry about it when
it'll be waived?

 _[...] and higher interest rates_

Waiving fees and giving higher interest is out of fear of you taking your
money somewhere else.

~~~
jrockway
_Waiving fees and giving higher interest is out of fear of you taking your
money somewhere else._

Uh, exactly? When you buy useless crap from Walmart, that's bad for the bank.
When you save your money, that's good for the bank.

Yup, they make money off of your good habits _and_ bad habits. Hedging. :)

