Our central bank is going to release a platform called PIX. Financial institutions with more than 500.000 clients are required to implement it. Finally we are going to have a standard across banks, and money transfers are going to be less complex, clunky and costly.
Of course, other apps have come before. We have apps like PicPay, PayPal and Nubank, just to name a few, that provide instant, free money transfers. Unsurprisingly, each one rolled out their own standard, but they had to register at the central bank as a financial institution. This means that, at least the popular ones, will have to provide compatibility with the central bank's platform.
This new WhatsApp feature, to me, looked like a bold attempt to kill PIX at launch. People wouldn't mind this new feature inside their banking app that already exists, for a few months, in the messaging app they're used to. If the average Brazilian user sees a QR code, is it a WhatsApp Pay QR code they see regularly? Or is it that obscure feature inside their banking app, which they didn't pay attention to? What would make more sense for businesses to adopt, for the sake of simplicity?
I'm glad Facebook will not get away with that one. If they're going to launch this feature, our central bank should make sure that it's compatible with the nationwide standard that's going to roll out. I'd rather not need Facebook to conveniently pay for my loaf of bread.
As a Brazilian, I am not pleased. This will become just another tool for the government to create artificial difficulties and sell solutions to its closest "friends". Standards have been created without any government's help since forever.
> This will become just another tool for the government to create artificial difficulties and sell solutions to its closest "friends".
What are those difficulties you are expecting?
It's absurd that most of the world is hostage of a few credit card operators to do any kind of business. Nearly all the problems one has to receive payment today are caused by those.
What's the alternative? leave facebook do exactly it instead of the government?
You speak like the free-for-all tax tools didn't work for you. Do you rather the US model? where you have to pay $100~300 every year for exactly the same tools from a single private company that has a de facto monopoly because of close ties to the government?
Also, in the US, a transfer from your checking account (where you get your paycheck) to your credit card account (where credit card purchases show up) to pay up your monthly credit card bill, in the same bank, same client, you literally see both on the same screen on your internet bank, takes two to FIVE business day. Let that sink in when talking about US banking being archaic.
The Canadian model of Interac e-Transfer works pretty nicely, and is (at worst) cheap or (increasingly) free depending on the exact bank accounts involved: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interac_e-Transfer it's pretty widely supported within Canada, both among banks and among real use cases like paying rent or moving companies as well as peer-to-peer reimbursements.
Transfer time for Interac e-Transfer ranges from instant to hours, in practice.
> What's the alternative? leave facebook do exactly it instead of the government?
Not only Facebook, but any company that wishes to offer this service. Private monopolies are usually the result of government policies. In Brazil, all monopolies are like that.
I think OP is talking about movement between banks. External transfer ( basically ACH ) between my banks is on average 5 days now. Last time I challenged them on this they used blanket 'fraud protection' as an excuse. When I started depositing cash as a way to deal with it, I got odd looks asking if the money is from my online business.
I dislike banking lately. And I used to be that annoying guy who goes into branch to do some transactions.
Point is, it really shouldn't take that long ( and I know for a fact it doean't ) to settle.
Brazilian here, he can't and for a good reason: The entire process for PIX, from initial engineering to final implementation is documented and made public.
The government is making this for the exact reason someone else mentioned: We're at the mercy for a handful of big players, and that's enough. One open standard for all is good. (Edit: It's also an "economy" controlling standard. Not aimed at end users. It's something for the Central Bank to keep notes on what's happening with the money going around.)
You can find more by looking on Google for: Banco Central PIX PDF
Personal note: A lot of people sadly still believe everything the government makes equals bad or equals to something that was idealized/created by the current president in office. It's not the case here by any means (the Brazilian Central Bank runs "independently") but unfortunately a lot of people see it that way.
That's not possible for products that rely on social networks. Facebook has a monopoly in communication in Brazil, and if they had to compete with Pix they'd win regardless of the product. Pix, however, means anyone can integrate the functionality in their application, making every service compatible with each other and increasing competitiviness.
Good. Then they can deploy their solution using a protocol available to all and not a closed platform made to lock the market. We've had enough of that, didn't we?
WhatsApp was always planning on implementing PIX. But PIX won't be available for at least another six months - so they went with the current system instead while they waited.
If this is about Pix, and I believe it is, Government is killing competitors. If Pix is better, people will choose Pix, if WhatsApp is better, people will use it. Let's not force people to use a solution and create a monopoly controlled by the Government, again.
PIX will not be a service to end-users, it'll create a standard where any service can offer instant payments and transfers.
It will increase competition in the long run because if you want to open a payments fintech, you don't need to go in every bank or other fintech to do agreements about how your app will communicate with then, you just use the PIX to communicate with everyone.
> PIX will not be a service to end-users, it'll create a standard where any service can offer instant payments and transfers.
Great. If that "standard" is something people want, it'll be able to succeed on its own merits, without having to block the competition.
What happens when someone wants to create something new and interesting that isn't supported by the "standard"? What happens when that standard lacks features people actually want? The danger of forcing everything to use a single underlying framework is that you prevent anyone from being able to do better and improve.
Sure, that's why I used the term "solution". I understand that PIX will be better than what we have today, but there's no reason to block other players and don't allow them to create their own payment solutions or products, based or not on PIX.
Sure there is. The government has the responsibility to create a free market. If a proprietary standard wins, you have a monopoly without competition. If the government standard wins that enables interoperability, no company can block other competitors.
> If a proprietary standard wins, you have a monopoly without competition
Maybe they should make their government standard good enough that it wins on its own merit then. Imo, the biggest thing this block does is essentially giving the government standard a license be as subpar as they want, because it isn't like a superior non-government standard is even allowed to compete with it anyway.
Ah, I see. There are a few banks that can decide to adopt or not a standard. Yeah, taking the choice from the government to those banks will certainly make everything better.
I don't think the Brazilian government has this responsibility as it is the most at fault for Brazil's lacking free market.
Maybe when it becomes a champion on that, removing barriers of entry, protectionism, subsidies and it's public companies monopolies, then it can be a fair judge on this issue.
The Brazilian Central Bank has authority on money transfers, so whatever regulation they want to arbitrarily impose regarding this matter, they can do.
Facebook is a registered company in Brazil, they were going to operate the payments platform through a card processor, etc, so directly or indirectly they are under the authority of the Central Bank.
EDIT: by the way, regular banks and fintechs already have to be a participant in the Central Bank's payments system in order to settle funds. PIX is (also) a 24x7 implementation of the existing electronic money transfer system which only is available on working days.
Facebook is a very unique position here, don't play it as "free market" when one player has control over more than 50% of the messaging communication going on in Brazil, Bacen is blocking the current implementation of WhatsApp Pay, doesn't mean if they integrate with PIX they won't be allowed. If they don't integrate with PIX then it's quite easy, given their position, to force users to stay only inside their platform, with PIX they are allowed to participate in the larger ecosystem, it's a better solution for all.
There is no competition when network effects take hold and create a de facto monopoly, like with messaging apps.
Facebook a multi hundred billion $ company vs much smaller companies in Brazil. I would think that the government here did the right thing. Let your home grown companies grow first, then let them compete openly with foreign companies.
If companies are people, then companies in many 3rd world countries are children. You don't let adults hit children until they grow to be adults.
GP's point (which I believe is naive, I suspect foul play from competitors, especially big banks) is that FB was trying to corner the market through network effects before an open standard took hold and the Central Bank acted to stop that from happening.
In Brazil, we have had same-day money transfer (normally it takes 15 min) among accounts in different banks. Same bank accounts have "instantaneous" money transfer. PIX will make it simpler for newcomers.
> If Pix is better, people will choose Pix, if WhatsApp is better, people will use it.
Yes, let Facebook and Apple invent their own internet too, with no compatibility between them. Let's also allow Ford / GM to create their own roads exclusively for Ford / GM vehicles. /s
This is not businesses we are talking about, it's public infrastructure. And banking is a public infrastructure.
No, thank you. I am from India, a country that lost its independence and was ruled and looted as a colony by a corporate called the East India Company. I have no faith in or trust in corporates.
In a healthy democracy, Government regulations and standards are a MUST to protect us from the greed of the corporates, and to create a level playing field.
Facebook is an american company and I applaud the wisdom of the Brazil policy makers to make it abide by their country's rules.
government standard for electronic wire transfers beats checks (duh) or private standards designed to extract money from the market. bank implements pix, another bank implements pix, customers are happy because they can transfer money securely to each other. at least that's how this works in the EU.
Oh, this would be a whole can of worms that Facebook would not want to open.
International transactions are very regulated in Brazil and certainly not only the Central Bank would be heavy with their hammer, but Receita Federal (tax authority) would also be very interested in this.
When PayPal started operating in Brazil, they had to convert all Brazilian accounts held in USD to BRL, and there are some restrictions on currency exchange operations that accounts registered in other countries don't have.
> This new WhatsApp feature, to me, looked like a bold attempt to kill PIX at launch.
I don't think so. FB is using UPI in India, they could have used PIX too. Looks like Brazilian government was just a bit late to the payment party and FB had already implemented something in-house in the meantime.
Even with all the economic struggles, Argentina was ahead many countries in the world regarding bank integrations. For years you can make immediate wire transfers between banks without any extra fee (beyond the taxes imposed by the state). If you want to create a digital wallet you don't need to be a bank, you can register as a payment processor and get virtual bank accounts (CVU) for every user which are compatible with the banking system. MercadoLibre/MercadoPago is one of the top players in this space and use a banking API (https://apibank.bind.com.ar/) behind the scene.
And you're 100% sure that this is not just currency controls because the Brazilian Real is getting killed? From what I can tell - Brazil is going to Argentina, quickly :(
I think this is what happens when you start to push for something without talking with local authorities, they need to remember that it's all about the politics and that's everywhere.
> money transfers are going to be less complex, clunky and costly.
You really think the Brazilian central bank is going to make a smooth, efficient, and cheap money transfer service? What reason do you have to expect that to work?
As a Brazilian living in the US I can tell you that the TED system is already a smooth, efficient, and cheap money transfer service compared to the solutions here in the US.
So I have total confidence that they are capable of creating a better yet version of it.
As a Brazilian living in Brazil I'm surprised that anyone would expect a service provided by the Brazilian government to be efficient, or even work at all.
This Pix thing seems to cover more than inter-bank transfers, people are expected to use it for QR code-based mobile payments for instance.
The HIV treatment program, provided by the brazilian government for free to everyone that needs it, has been very succesful and is a model to be followed. Not everything the government does is rotten, just a lot of it.
"Throughout the 1990s, when the annual cost of drugs for AIDS treatment often exceeded US$10,000 per patient, the World Bank and other development agencies discouraged developing countries from implementing treatment programs, favoring “cost-effective” prevention over costly treatment. Brazil challenged this conventional wisdom and, despite World Bank objections, has provided free universal access to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) for all people living with HIV/AIDS since 1996."
source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2782963/
What solutions have you tried in the US? Venmo and Cash App are both free and work up to like $2500, at which point you have to deal with government systems like ACH and it gets slow and expensive.
The US banking system is archaic compared to elegant systems like they have in Australia/New Zealand (and probably Europe). No malicious rent-seeking third parties needed in the transaction.
Perhaps you should do a little bit more research. Zelle allows payment between banks (almost) instantly. No fee, since it's a service owned by participating banks, practically all major banks in the US. Zelle processed $187 billion in 2019.
Perhaps you should do a little research and find that the rest of the world has been doing that between all banks for a decade or two.
Not mention its ubiquity that allows everyone from teens to grandparents to pay .25 for a cookie, to dropping a down payment, to paying bills, to filing taxes, to automating a weekly rent check. Basically an elegant single system required for modern life.
The fact zelle, launched in 2017, has a brand name, and competes for mindshare illustrates how they missed the target. In other countries it’s called banking.
Pretty sure you are viewing it from an American perspective. India has had a government created smooth efficient money transfer service for >17 years now. There are multiple systems - all created by the government - and they work perfectly almost all of the time.
I wouldn't say cheaply... Unless you have a digital-only account or has a high-class account (like VanGogh,Personalitté, etc) it's cost almost 9 BRL for a inter-bank transfer.
Do business accept Venmo (I know some do, though it seems Venmo is backed by a pre-paid card)? Can you pay your rent with it, for example? Tuition? Buy a car with it?
The payment methods I mentioned don't require people to install an app or enter an agreement, you have a bank account they're available to you. Sure, there's some typing of numbers (but that's pretty much a copy-paste today). Not to mention the privacy issues with Venmo.
You entered an agreement when you got a bank account in the first place...
These payment apps tend to work like another bank account in practice.
People use P2P apps when they want to casually send money to people they know. For merchants they get the square app and process credit cards directly. Venmo & friends tend not to be good for actual business for large transactions due to how bad chargebacks can be on it, so for large transactions you can use ACH which tends to be $0.25 for pretty much any money value, or free in many cases.
EU "faster payments" system. We don't quite have the last mile of hooking it up to apps with QR codes, though. To add another to the list, see Norway's VIPPS.
It is everywhere in Europe but there is a problem with IBAN transfers. It exposes a lot of details, like your name and your bank branch, to the receiver. And some sites accept IBAN numbers for small payments without any other kind of authentication.
It's an electronic version of the times when we used to mail transfer cards to do transfers, but this day and age needs a lot more privacy protection. Same with other old tech like the phonebook. Who gets themselves listed anymore? It leaves you open to way much spam and scammy crap calls.
We're also severely under-tested. Given our fickle social distancing and isolation, I highly doubt we "only" have 600K infected people. Our flagship universities (USP, UERJ) have already estimated that the real number can be up to 16 times higher.
The population is encouraged to reach out to the health service only when they have the most severe symptoms, since the public health service is at the edge of collapse in many states. The number of people dying at home, and dying from severe respiratory syndrome is abnormally high. It all adds up to an even grimier picture.
About our governors and mayors, I personally think most of them are doing what they possibly can do. They're facing an immense pressure to roll back lock-down measures in order to "save the economy" partly because of the finance minister's catastrophic failure. Businesses had a hard time getting credit, and the people in need were left scrambling for that ridiculous $120/month benefit.
I think Pop!_OS offers the most solid experience of Linux on desktops today. Apart from the lack of proprietary codecs by default (I know there are licensing issues, still I missed it), the default settings are pretty good. I reserved a whole day to set it up when I decided to install it, but right after the installation it felt ready to work, just needed to install some things and transfer my stuff.
Their decision to support Flatpak by default, to create a recovery partition which allows the user to reinstall the system without losing data (in a no-brainer way), and their overall attention to detail won me over. Kudos to the team for creating this distro and making it available for other computer brands.
There's a sentiment of flatpak being a community thing whereas snap being a case of Ubuntu NIH, but isn't flatpak as much a RedHat lock-in? Is there a technical reason to prefer flatpak over snap, or is the number/up-to-dateness of available apps a reason to prefer one over the other? The info at http://flatkill.org/ certainly is sobering with respect to actual security gained by application sandboxing.
I'd really hate into being drawn into another energy-consuming VHS-vs-Betamax or BD-vs-HDDVD drama. I'd much prefer a single statically linked binary if at all possible (though it may not be given that browsers or browser runtimes on which many modern "apps"/packages are based have accumulated way too much crap over the years, which I think is the actual problem).
There is a one big reason. Snaps are only designed to use one central repository and the only production one is from Canonical. The server is proprietary.
Flatpak allows anyone to run a repo and for users to track updates from several repos. The server is open source.
Except with Snaps its a pain in the absolute ass to give an application access to anything that it wasn't shipped with access to. The whole interface paradigm sucks. With flatpaks its easy. That being said, I still think both of them are not nearly as good as the old way of packaging-- I want software that doesn't hide all of its dependencies (and thus vulnerabilities) from me by default. If the linux world could pull their head out of their asses on the desktop environment wars, neither would even be needed. Though I wills say, both are better than electron apps.
If they raise prices then they invite an instant flood of competition and lose their monopoly. They have no power to raise prices and restrict competition. Their only competitive advantage is pricing. Amazon's only profitable products are AWS and its stock. The benefit of losing $2 billion a quarter doing retail is debatable. Would you prefer a world without amazon's subsidies given that they have no power to exploit anyone?
Your theory is that Amazon is spending $2 billion a quarter even though it gets them no long-term advantage?
If you're right, then capitalism is hopelessly bad at optimization and we should scrap it. But what I think is more likely here is that Amazon's execs understands the economics of their business way better than a zero-karma free-market fundamentalist whose pseudonym is a genitalia joke.
They get a long-term advantage in that their stock continues to rise. The stock is the product. And AWS enjoys having a household brand attached to it. And don't be mad that someone with a genitalia username is making a point your brain is incapable of making a cogent argument against, in spite of it eliciting a strong enough emotion for you to leave a comment.
Their stock will only rise if they eventually make more money. Meaning that investors expect them to be able to make that $8 billion/year up eventually. Presumably through pricing, because selling stuff at above-cost prices is where their money comes from.
Also, I only made fun of your username and your lack of karma because you were making absurd unevidenced claims like, "They have no power to raise prices and restrict competition." If you're going to say things like that, then it's not so much making a point as doing what Frankfurt calls bullshiting. [1] That combined with your very low karma suggests you're not really worth the time of a serious reply. Note the link in my bio: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19
And at least I don't resort ad hominem arguments. That's what happens when lower IQ individuals have nothing else to say and don't know how to deal with the cognitive dissonance that arises when truth clashes with their feelings. Feelings based on cartoons and TV shows that programmed you to viscerally react that way.
And what do you propose in place of capitalism? You sound like a child. Why would you want to force companies to make a profit on every product? There's something called a loss leader. How about just prohibiting all forms of charity? You make zero sense.
It's like they couldn't resist saying that those non-white students are inherently less performant. "They're condemned to failure if they get in (look at their slightly lower grades), so it's better not to give them an opportunity at all!"
Their barely contained despise, hatred and anger bleed through the lines. It's funny how decades of racial segregation were simply ignored, almost like diversity initiatives popped out of nowhere in a society that has always provided equal opportunities.
> They seem to go to great lengths to make sure that your results page has something on it by any means necessary
You just described how YouTube's search has been working lately. When you type in a somewhat obscure keyword - or any keyword, really - the search results include not only the videos that match, but videos related to your search. And searches related to your keywords. Sometimes it even shows you a part of the "for you" section that belongs to the home page! The search results are so cluttered now.
Searching gibberish to try to get as few results as possible.
I got down to one with "qwerqnalkwea"
"AEWRLKJAFsdalkjas" returns nothing, but youtube helpfully replaces that search with the likewise nonsensical "AEWR LKJAsdf lkj as" which is just full of content.
Our central bank is going to release a platform called PIX. Financial institutions with more than 500.000 clients are required to implement it. Finally we are going to have a standard across banks, and money transfers are going to be less complex, clunky and costly.
Of course, other apps have come before. We have apps like PicPay, PayPal and Nubank, just to name a few, that provide instant, free money transfers. Unsurprisingly, each one rolled out their own standard, but they had to register at the central bank as a financial institution. This means that, at least the popular ones, will have to provide compatibility with the central bank's platform.
This new WhatsApp feature, to me, looked like a bold attempt to kill PIX at launch. People wouldn't mind this new feature inside their banking app that already exists, for a few months, in the messaging app they're used to. If the average Brazilian user sees a QR code, is it a WhatsApp Pay QR code they see regularly? Or is it that obscure feature inside their banking app, which they didn't pay attention to? What would make more sense for businesses to adopt, for the sake of simplicity?
I'm glad Facebook will not get away with that one. If they're going to launch this feature, our central bank should make sure that it's compatible with the nationwide standard that's going to roll out. I'd rather not need Facebook to conveniently pay for my loaf of bread.
Edit: replaced "service" with "platform".