[ExI] Banks (was Re: Doomsday Oil Price: (was RIP: Peak Oil))

spike spike66 at att.net
Thu Mar 8 02:49:31 UTC 2012

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes

>...Yes, some people prefer dealing with a human face, so tellers are

Ja, I don't see why the rest of us should subsidize that.  Consider, a low
level teller position pays about 40k, and there are costs associated with
any employee which double their salary at the lower end, so about 80k cost
per year to the bank per bio-teller.  Or would we call that a NTM, a
non-automated teller machine?  At current typical savings account rates, .75
percent, it requires over ten million dollars worth of savings to generate
the earnings of a single NTM.  There are plenty of us who do not ever want
to deal with a human face.  They are so... biological, eeewwww, gross.  All
that icky metabolism, I am so squicked.  

Actually I love bank tellers, for usually they are women under 35.  To most
men over about 50, nearly all women under 35 are beautiful.  Banks put their
nice, friendly ones out front.  But I still don't think I should be required
to pay their salaries, for I only see them once or twice a year.

>...Indeed, some banks tried replacing a certain part of the process that
legally can't - yet - be replaced by machines.
This is the "robo-signing" scandal.)

I don't see why there should be a legal prohibition against robo-signing.
What we need is a loan vending machine, or some completely automated process
which has some mysterious algorithm which determines if you get your loan or
not.  It has access to all your records, and digs around in ways only it's
programmer understands.  Clearly a machine would not be vulnerable to a
racism charge, for the machine wouldn't know or care what race the person
is.  It is also perfectly OK for it to robo-sign, being completely unable to
do otherwise.


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list