NatWest’s latest glitch is a perfect metaphor of problems facing UK banks

From The Telegraph -

“Last week Bloomberg published a superb article (although, at 38,000 words long, you could more accurately describe it as a book) about computer source code. This may be a subject that you – like me – have assiduously chosen to avoid. Well, more fool us, according to Bloomberg.

The premise of the article/essay/thesis is this: business executives should, regardless of their specific role, have at least a rough idea of how computers, websites and IT systems work. If you don’t, your ignorance will be used against you.

As Paul Ford, the author of the article, puts it: “For your entire working memory, some internet thing has come along every two years and suddenly hundreds of thousands of dollars (inevitably millions) must be poured into amorphous projects with variable deadlines … no matter how tightly you clutch the purse strings, software finds a way to pry open your fingers.”

In no other industry does this ring truer – does technology burn more cash and more frequently go haywire – than banking. Exhibit A: the Royal Bank of Scotland, whose gremlins are particular pernicious critters.”

Read more>> 

Mobile money stalls in SA

From IT Web –

“What are the factors that will influence the uptake of mobile in South African banking?

The cost-to-income ratio is debatably one of the most significant ratios in any bank's yearly reports. It indicates how much of every rand earned is used towards the payment of the running of the bank, and therefore, how proficient the bank is in the process of creating value for the shareholders.

One aspect the South African banks are focusing on in their pursuit to improve the ratio is to moderate customer dependence on branches and to urge customers to start using cheaper self-service delivery channels, like the Internet, cellphones, automated teller machines, and mobile money. The banking industry is looking at digital banking services as a resource of reduced operating costs and as an area to use to hold on to customers.”

Read more>>

What really is “digital banking”?

From Banking Exchange -

“Consensus on this oft-used term’s meaning eludes.

Most people in the banking industry agree that digital banking is the wave of the future. Indeed, many would contend that it’s already here.

Yet there’s not all that much agreement regarding what “digital banking” really means.

“Digital banking” often gets confused with mobile banking and online banking, and even omnichannel banking. True, all these involve digital applications in one form or another. But what constitutes “digital banking,” or even a “digital bank” has yet to gain overwhelming agreement.”

Read more>> 

Does the Device Make the Payment or the Payment Make the Device?

From Bank Innovation

“In payments, what comes after mobile?

Mobile may be all the rage now, but wearables are coming fast, and then there’s the Internet of Things, and there’s even that guy who embedded his bitcoin wallet in his hand — ouch!

It doesn’t matter, says Ed McLaughlin, MasterCard‘s chief emerging payments officer, who believes we’re all hung up on the form factor and are missing the real story. At a Citigroup financial technology conference yesterday, McLaughlin was asked to put digital payments in perspective, and he said, per Seeking Alpha”

read more>>

GCHQ Director Robert Hannigan Attacks Tech Giants For Being 'In Denial' Over Terrorism

From Huffpost Tech UK

‘The new head of Britain's electronic eavesdropping agency has accused internet firms of being "in denial" of the role their networks play in terrorism and demanded they open themselves up more to intelligence services.

GCHQ director Robert Hannigan said they had become the "command-and-control networks of choice" for a new generation of web-savvy criminals and extremists, such as Islamic State (IS) jihadists.

Better arrangements had to be developed to allow security and intelligence agencies to police online traffic, Hannigan said in an outspoken article for the Financial Times, warning firms that their users did not want their social networks used "to facilitate murder or child abuse".’

read more>>