Snippings

xxx

However, very large online platforms identified under the Digital Services Act, like Google and Facebook, will have to support the wallet for logging into their service.

From EU institutions prepare to negotiate the European Digital Identity – EURACTIV.com:

xxx

 

xxx

The MEPs also clarified the relationship with the EU General Data Protection Regulation. They included the right for users to use pseudonyms to protect their personal data when there is no legal requirement for identification.

From EU institutions prepare to negotiate the European Digital Identity – EURACTIV.com:

xxx

Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI’s chief scientist and co-founder

“On the safety side, I would say that the safety side is not yet as salient a reason as the competitive side. But it’s going to change, and it’s basically as follows. These models are very potent and they’re becoming more and more potent. At some point it will be quite easy, if one wanted, to cause a great deal of harm with those models. And as the capabilities get higher it makes sense that you don’t want want to disclose them.”

From OpenAI co-founder on company’s past approach to openly sharing research: ‘We were wrong’ – The Verge:

xxx

xxx

But it remains the case that high street lenders are generally working with an older patchwork of systems than their neobank, fintech or digital-only competitors. “The IT systems at traditional banks tend to be old and they are often running multiple different platforms assembled through mergers and iterative developments,” says Amanda Gray, co-head of financial services at Addleshaw Goddard.

This is costly, inefficient and probably annoying for everyone involved. But it also presents a looming regulatory risk. From the beginning of July, UK banks will be subject to a new consumer duty — a broad requirement on financial services companies to prove they have acted in customers’ best interests and produced “good outcomes” for clients.

On a basic level, this requires you to be able to monitor what customers are doing with you, across different products and services, monitor how they’re faring, and produce evidence that all is well. This, at the risk of stating the obvious, is harder to do across six or seven old tech platforms that don’t talk to each other. The Financial Conduct Authority in January flagged that some firms hadn’t properly considered the data requirements of the new duty or were assuming they could simply repackage existing data. Other lenders have the data but aren’t necessarily able to use it.

From Why crummy bank IT is a looming regulatory risk | Financial Times:

xxx

The FCA has now published further portfolio letters setting out its expectations to support firms in implementing the Consumer Duty.

What are the key focus areas for payments firms?

The FCA has provided a list of focus areas for payments firms to consider in order to deliver consistently good consumer outcomes under the Duty. These include topics such as:

Distribution chains: The FCA has emphasized the importance of checking that distribution strategies are being followed, sharing all necessary information with other firms in the distribution chain, and using data and management information to monitor whether products and services continue to meet the needs of customers and contribute to good consumer outcomes.
Strong customer authentication: The FCA touches on strong customer authentication, noting that it “expect[s] payment service providers to develop strong customer authentication solutions that work for all groups of consumers”, including those with protected characteristics (under the Equality Act 2010). The FCA indicates that payments firms may need to provide several different methods of authentication to their customers, including methods that don’t rely on mobile phones, to cater to customers who don’t have or want to use a mobile phone or need to make payments in areas without mobile phone reception. This is a pointed reminder for digitally led firms on the potentially wide-reaching impact of the Duty on servicing channels.
Proportionate fees and charges: The FCA highlights that, in considering price and value, firms should be giving thought to both regular and contingent charges and fees, as well as fees and charges levied by agents or distributors. The FCA has also identified the need to ensure proportionate e-money redemption fees, and to assess the impact of fee structures on vulnerable customers, as key issues to consider.
Customer protections and use of third parties in chains: The FCA has emphasized the need to signpost differences in customer protections for different products and services (e.g. funds held by PIs and EMIs are safeguarded rather than subject to FSCS protection), provide clarity on which products are regulated, and ensure communications make clear the role played by agents and distributors in the delivery of products and services.
Channels and account freezing practices: The FCA has highlighted mobile/online access problems as well as fraud as examples of issues that customers might encounter that could require the use of additional and alternative servicing channels (e.g. for digital-only firms). As noted in the Retail Banking portfolio letter, the FCA is also concerned about account freezing practices and has reminded firms of their obligations under Regulation 71 of the Payment Services Regulations 2017. In essence, the FCA wants firms to freeze customer accounts less frequently and for shorter periods of time, and for communications relating to account freezing to be clearer and provided with appropriate customer service support (e.g. where account freezing could give rise to financial difficulties).

From UK Consumer Duty: FCA publishes further portfolio letters to help firms with implementation – Hogan Lovells Engage:

xxx

xxx

Consciousness is a liability and not an asset in an AI. It is distracting and dangerous. We want our AIs to just drive, and not get anxious. Many expensive AIs will be advertised as “consciousness-free.”

From Interview: Kevin Kelly, editor, author, and futurist:

xxx

xxx

Gen. James Hecker, the commander of US Air Forces in Europe. Hecker told reporters at the Air and Space Forces Association symposium that Russia’s larger air force still has jets it could devote to the war, as does Ukraine — but there is an issue.

“The problem is both of the Russian, as well as the Ukrainian success in integrated air and missile defense, have made much of those aircraft worthless. They’re not doing a whole lot because they can’t go over and do close air support,” Hecker said.

From Lack of Close Air Support Over Ukraine Is Sign of Future for US Troops:

xxx

xxx

Ultimately, then, the SVB crisis should make us ask: what is the point of banks? If providing safe storage of money for business depositors requires them to hold riskless assets with no effective duration, they may as well simply hold central bank reserves [so] what is gained by interposing private banks out to make profits on the intermediation?

From The Silicon Valley Bank fallout makes the case for digital currencies | Financial Times:

xxx

xxx

As Matthew Klein so memorably puts it, banks are “speculative investment funds grafted on top of critical infrastructure.

From The Silicon Valley Bank fallout makes the case for digital currencies | Financial Times:

xxx

xxx

Digital wallets are set for a meteoric rise this decade. While 40% of the world population used a digital wallet as of 2022, experts predict that nearly two-thirds — 65% — of global consumers will leverage them by 2030 for an annual growth rate of 8%. The United States is not far behind in growth at 7%, with digital wallet users expected to increase from 160 million to 260 million during that time.

From Millennials Are Demanding Real-Time Payments | PYMNTS.com:

xxx

The Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) published a 2022 report in their Future of Banking series on “Technology and Finance” in which they said that a crucial factor in the evolution of stablecoins may be whether fintechs are granted access to central bank settlement accounts. As they pointed out, non-bank entities issuing fiat stablecoins (such as a digital dollar) must guarantee the one-for-one convertibility with central back money. The lack of legal eligibility for non-bank payment providers to access to central bank accounts and liquidity facility services complicates such a guarantee, which threatens to jeopardise the stability of new digital payments as was indeed observed when Circle’s USDC dollar peg was broken after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) because a proportion of the dollars backing USDC were commercial deposits in SVB.