al3x
> "And how are we supposed to correct problems in society if we cannot talk honestly about them?"
Pick up a paper. Do you think our society lacks an ongoing discussion of the repercussions of racism? Moldbug has no place in this discussion because the views he's defending – that people of some ethnic backgrounds are subhuman and fit only for slavery – were roundly rejected by society decades ago. Including him would be pandering to a common denominator so low it barely even registers today.
> "Now maybe Alex wishes to cater to the more thin-skinned in his audience"
As I suggested to another commenter: why don't you take a look at who was asking Yarvin's dismissal on Twitter and inquire with them as to whether they would describe themselves as "thin-skinned". Better yet, try asking them in person the next time you cross paths at a tech event. It's easy to characterize the hypothetical "other" in your head. Why not test your own thick skin and look them in the eye when you call them cowards?
Who on the right today has been similarly "silenced"? If someone is called out for racism and then voluntarily chooses to exit public life or withdraw further commentary, that's their own cowardly choice. Being criticized does not "silence" anyone.
The right in America has a political and media apparatus that far outstrips that of the left in funding. Worry not: hate is no danger of being silenced in this country. Far-right demagogues continue to fill newspapers, magazines, think tank briefing, the Internet, and airwaves with their ideas despite decades of criticism from the left.
In particular, people who represent groups that Moldbug treats as subhuman in his writing expressed concern and dismay. Perhaps looking through their eyes for a moment might illuminate why a person would care.
1. Unless you're doing an absolute ton of spending on your rewards credit card, any fees you pay on your credit card probably wipe out any cash you're getting back. If you're not paying fees yourself, merchants or other institutions may be subsidizing your rewards in ways that aren't sustainable. Many rewards programs have been slashed during the financial crisis of the last several years.
2. Cash-back rewards make your personal accounting more complicated. If you really want to set and meet financial goals, you need to be keeping close tabs on what you spend on what card, how much you're getting back in rewards, what fees you're paying, and where those reward dollars are going so that you're actually accumulating wealth (saving account, brokerage account, etc.). Our model combines an interest-bearing account with the ability to easily track your financial goals. Keeping it all in one place is, in our experience, way easier.
We're not crazy about the idea of rewards programs, but it's also not something we've completely ruled out. If we can find a way to do a rewards program that has clear incentives for our customers, merchants, and our partner institutions, we'll explore that.
Some people are driven to change banks because of interest rates, but those people are not the majority. Most people change banks around major life events: moving, getting married, getting your first job, etc. Or, they change banks when they have an extremely negative experience with their current bank.
Either way, changing banks is a hassle, and we really have to make it easy and compelling. But interest/rewards aren't the only motivation, or even the primary motivation, for switching one's bank according to bank industry research.
We're also not super interested in getting into white labeling, but it's something we've thought about.
Like basically every US bank, we issue a debit card. That card needs to be on one of the card networks. We chose Visa for our cards.
What we're issuing is a debit card, not a credit card. It's standard practice for banks.
I don't think we're likely to allow customers to choose which partner bank holds their funds, but we do make that information transparent.
There's a ton about when and how and if we exit that's out of our control, and I wouldn't presume to predict exactly what's going to happen. But, please know that our goal is not to sell out to a big bank. We're building this because we want to use it, and part of what we want to use is a banking service that's provided by people who are acting in the best interests of their customers.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure that going with a smaller or local bank provides a more solid guarantee that you won't be banking with a giant down the road. The economic crisis of the past few years has seen a ton of consolidation in retail banking, and I think there's even more to come.
We're issuing checks, so you can always make a check out to "cash" and take that into any physical bank if need be. Over time, though, I expect products like Square to make it possible to transact with your Simple debit card in places that might have previously required cash or a check.
I think we're doing some stuff that's pretty different in terms of making your financial data easy to explore and helping you meet savings goals and automatically earn more interest. Those things might not be compelling to everyone, but a lot of people seem interested.
Basically, reimbursing ATM fees is an illusion. They charge you over here and reimburse you over there. No net win for most consumers, unfortunately.
1. We just aren't the right banking service for you. 2. We find out that a lot of people are interested in rewards programs, and we come up with a really compelling one. We've addressed that briefly in our FAQ, FWIW.
Either way, thanks for your feedback.
Banking with us does not obfuscate where your funds reside. It does, however, mean that you don't have to deal with a bank for support and technology issues. Instead, you get to deal with a company that's focused on those things rather than on managing a treasury, making loans, etc.
Do you have data on banks increasing fees to combat the expense of "cyber-theft"? That's a new one to me. Banks have mostly been raising fees because new legislation in the US has cut into their interchange revenue. Plus, the cost of building and maintaining physical branches remains high, and foot traffic to those branches is decreasing.
I'm not sure what you mean by "physical collateral", but we do take steps above and beyond what many banks offer to make our systems and our customers more secure. We're offering multi-factor authentication, and we participate in rigorous internal and third-party security audits.
In some ways, our partner-based model improves our security stance. Our systems never touch sensitive data like customer debit card numbers.
I appreciate your concerns about security. Please understand that it's a top priority for us.
This is a good point.
We think there's a difference between "simple" and "stark" or "minimalist". Our goal is to create an experience that's inviting, explorable, and clear. That doesn't necessarily mean doing away with all visual ornamentation.
Sure, plain text is "simple", but iconography, texture, and other design elements can contribute to that ideal as well. Thanks for your thoughts!
I don't know when we'll start publishing our interest rates, but we have some additional info about interest rates on our FAQ: https://www.simple.com/faq/
We're in the same position that your current bank is in when it comes to fraud and theft: we're insured for it, and we follow industry-standard practices when something bad happens.
Most likely, what would happen is:
1. You realize that your account has been compromised. 2. You call us up. 3. We investigate your claims with our partners. 4. You get reimbursed. 5. If there was a security flaw on our side that we can fix to prevent this from happening in the future, we do so.
We have a comprehensive security review process and participate in internal and external (third-party) security audits. We're also taking steps to make it more difficult for attackers to compromise your account through multi-factor authentication and other mechanisms.
If you have any other questions about our security practices, please contact us: [email protected] or [email protected].
Most banks do use "glorified IT systems". Very few of them develop their technology in-house.
Think about it this way: you can have a bank that buys their technology from another company, or you can have a technology, design, and customer service company that partners with banks. Both are viable options, but I think our approach is going to better for retail banking customers in the long run.
You're right that user experience is a primary concern for us. The interface that most people have their financial data is extremely poor. This makes answering questions about your financial life slow and clumsy, if it's even possible given the tools your bank provides. That keeps a lot of people from making the right financial decisions to stay debt-free and grow their savings.
To your point about your checking account: many checking accounts don't actually have simple terms. Increasingly, they're full of hidden fees and complex conditions.
More broadly, we're doing what we're doing because many banks aren't investing in design, technology, and customer service. Instead, they're investing in new ways to squeeze as much money as they can out of their customers without innovating. We're here to continuously experiment and improve. That may mean that we're not the right banking solution for everyone, but we think a lot of people are going to like what we've built.
We require a smartphone for more than just mobile check deposit. We want people to have our app installed so we can use it for multifactor authentication, for example. We also want to do rich push notifications of account activity, and SMS (the only viable non-smartphone option for that) isn't a great experience.
Today, there's still a bunch of people who don't have smartphones. But the previous generation of iPhone is now basically "free" at some carriers, as are many Android phones. By the time we're off our invite list and open to anyone who wants to sign up, it's going to seem crazy to support anything that isn't a smartphone.